英语论文网

esent in large organizations. Even with a variety of structural mechanisms and the best of intentions, large organizations appear to fail more often than succeed in the industrial arena This leads us to the fact that larger the franchising firm, the less likely industrial strategies will be pursued, which means, the larger the firm, the greater the concern with stability. (Block and MacMillan 1993). The larger the firm, the less likely the organisation tends to make its strategies proactive. The larger the firm, the less likely it is to be aggressive. There is considerable evidence in the literature that innovation is more difficult for large firms than for small firms (Block and MacMillan 1993; Foster 1986; Hamel and Prahalad 1996). Although there are exceptions to this phenomenon, For Example, Apple thrives for innovation; most large firms have difficulty with innovation in terms of structuring, supporting, and rewarding the activity (Peters and Austin 1985; Venkataraman and Low 1994).

Small firms on the other hand have an advantage in the area of flexibility. They have a quick response time, because of their irregular structure, less number of decision making layers or small scale of operations and less risk A solution to the problem of innovation and size that the large organisations have sought is to set up a small sister concern and pursue innovation to avoid the bureaucratic constraints of the larger firm Another explanation for the effect of size on innovation is that due to the scale of operation managers in most large-established organizations have a good deal to lose financially from industrial activity (Block and MacMillan 1993). On the other hand, top level decision makers of small firms are viewed as having less to lose and therefore more to gain by operating with innovation and industrial activity (Geis 1989, p. 296). The survival of small firms may also depend on their capacity to innovate in order to achieve a competitive advantage (Hamel and Prahalad 1996). The assumption of a positive association between small size and innovation is supported by research that indicates small businesses contribute a disproportionate share of product and process innovations (Small Business Administration 1989). Thus, we hypothesize: H2: The larger the franchising firm, the lower the level of new product and technique innovation.

The research literature indicates that the effects of organization age on organization structure and the capacity for industrial activity in the form of innovation positively correlate to that of size. As organizations grow older there are more pressures, again similar to those exerted by size, to increase formalization and standardization to maintain internal consistency (Aldrich and Auster 1986). The industrial activity that characterizes new organizations tends to disappear as organizations grow older. It is the choice of leadership to recreate or protect adaptive processes to ensure systemic innovation (Kao 1989). Among the perils of organizational age are the learned capacity to focus on routine problems (Starbuck 1965), the use of ritualized programs to monitor problems (Meyer and Rowan 1977), ignoring critical external information, and the increasing detachment of upper management from those personally closely connected to the environment (Aldrich and Auster 1986). We assume that organizational age will exert similar effects on industrial a本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。