Strategic Theory Of The Firm Essay

  • Alchian, A. 1950. “Uncertainty, evolution, and economic theory.” Journal of Political Economy 58:211–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Alchian, A. 1987. “Property rights.” The New Palgrave 3:1031–1034.Google Scholar

  • Alchian, A., and Demsetz, H. 1972. “Production, information costs and economic organization.” The American Economic Review 69:777–795.Google Scholar

  • Alchian, A., and Woodward. 1988. “The firm is dead: long live the firm.” Journal of Economic Literature 26:65–79.Google Scholar

  • Bain, J.S. 1956. Barriers to new competition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Baumol, W.J. 1959. Business behavior, value, and growth. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar

  • Barnard, C. 1938. The functions of the executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Reprinted 1962.Google Scholar

  • Berle, A.A. Jr., and Means, G.C. 1932. The modern corporation and private property. New York: The Macmillan Co.Google Scholar

  • Coase, R.H. 1937. “The nature of the firm.” Economica 4.Google Scholar

  • Cohen, W.M., and D.A. Levinthal. 1990. “Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35:128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Coleman, J.S. 1988. “Social capital in the creation of human capital.” American Journal of Sociology Suppl. 94:95–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Coleman, J.S. 1990. Foundation of social theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Cyert, R., and March, J.G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Halljnc.Google Scholar

  • Demsetz, H. 1988. “The theory of the firm revisited.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 4:141–162.Google Scholar

  • Dosi, G., Teece, D. and Winter, S.G. 1992. “Toward a theory of corporate coherence: preliminary remarks.” Technology and Enterprise in a Historical Perspective, edited by Dosi, Giannetti, and Toninelli. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

  • Friedman, Milton. 1953. “The methodology of positive economics.” In M. Friedman (ed.), Essays in positive economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

  • Georgiou, P. 1973. “The goal paradigm and notes towards a counter paradigm.” Administrative Science Quarterly 18:291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Ghemawat, P., and Costa, J.E.R. 1993. “The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency.” Strategic Management Journal 14:59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Gifford, A., Jr. 1991. “A constitutional interpretation of the firm.” Public Choice 68:91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Kall, R.L., and Hitch, C.J. 1939. “Price theory and business behavior.” Oxford Economic Papers (2): 12–45.Google Scholar

  • Jensen, M. and Meckling, W. 1976. “Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and capital structure.” Journal of Financial Economics 3:305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Knudsen, C. 1995. “The competence view of the firm: What can modern economists learn from Philip Selznick’s sociological theory of leadership.” In W.R. Scott and S. Christensen (eds.), Advances in the Institutional Analysis of Organizations: International and Longitudinal Studies. London: SAGE.Google Scholar

  • Kreps, D.M. 1990. A course in microeconomic theory. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar

  • Langlois, R. 1984. “Internal organization in a dynamic context: some theoretical considerations.” In Jussawalla and Ebenfield (eds.), communication and information economics. Elsevier Science Publication: 23–49.Google Scholar

  • Levinthal, D.A and March, J.G. 1993. “The myopia of learning.” Strategic Management Journal 14:95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Machlup, F. 1967. “Theories of the firm: marginalist, managerial and behavioral. American Economic Review 57:1–33.Google Scholar

  • March, J.G. 1991. “Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning.” Organization Science 2:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Mayr, E. 1982. The growth of biological thought: diversity, evolution, and inheritance. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Morgan, G. 1986: Images of organizations. London: SAGE.Google Scholar

  • Nelson, R. 1991. “Why firms differ, and how does it matter?” Strategic Management Journal 12:61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Nelson, R., and Winter, S. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Penrose, E.T. 1952. “Biological analogies in the theory of the firm.” American Economic Review 52:804–819.Google Scholar

  • Penrose, E.T. 1955. “Limits to the growth and size of firms.” American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings: 531–543.Google Scholar

  • Penrose, E.T. 1959. The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Popper, K.R. 1963: Conjectures and refutations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Porter, M. 1980. Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

  • Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. 1988. “The core competence of the corporation.” Harvard Business Review 66:79–91.Google Scholar

  • Prescott and Visscher. 1980. “Organization capital.” Journal of Political Economy 80:446–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Quinn, J.B. 1980. Strategies for change. Homewood,Ill: IrwinGoogle Scholar

  • Saloner, G. 1991. “Modeling, game theory and strategic management.” Strategic Management Journal 12:119–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Schelling, T. 1984. Choices and consequences: perspectives of an errant economist. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Schumpeter, J.A. 1942. Capitalism, socialism and democracy. London: Unwin.Google Scholar

  • Selznick, P. 1957. Leadership in administration: a sociological interpretation. Berkeley: Harper and Row.Google Scholar

  • Selznick, P. 1969. Law, society and industrial justice. Berkeley: Russell Sage Foundation. With the collaboration of Philippe Nonet and Howard M. Vollmer.Google Scholar

  • Seth, A., and Thomas, H. 1994. “Theories of the firm: Implications for strategy research.” Journal of Management Studies 31:165–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Shapiro, C. 1989. “The theory of business strategy.” Rand Journal of Economics 20:125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Simon, H. 1983. Reasons in human affairs. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Strotz, R.H. 1956. “Myopia and inconsistencies in dynamic utility maximization.” Review of Economic Studies 23:165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Vanberg, V. 1992. “Organizations as constitutional systems.” Constitutional Political Economy, 3:223–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Veblen, T. 1899/1961. “Why economics is not an evolutionary science.” In The place of science in modern society. New York: Rusell and Rusell.Google Scholar

  • Whitley, R. 1984. The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

  • Williamson, O.E. 1964. The economics of discretionary behavior: managerial objectives in a theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

  • Williamson, O.E. 1975. Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

  • Williamson, O.E. 1981. “The modern corporation: origins, evolution, attributes.” Journal of Economic Literature 19:1537–1568.Google Scholar

  • Williamson, O.E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism: firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar

  • Williamson, O.E. 1991. “Strategizing, economizing, and economic organizations.” Strategic Management Journal 7: 159–187.Google Scholar

  • Winter, S.G. 1987. “Knowledge and competences as strategic assets.” In D.J. Teece (ed.), The competitive challenge: strategies for industrial innovation and renewal. Cambridge: Ballinger.Google Scholar

  • Winter, S.G. 1988. “On Coase, competence and corporation.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organizations 4:163–180.Google Scholar

  • Сьюзан понимала, что, по всей логике, именно ей предстояло решить эту задачу. Она вздохнула, надеясь, что ей не придется раскаиваться в том, чем она собиралась заняться. - Если все пойдет хорошо, то результат будет примерно через полчаса. - Тогда за дело, - сказал Стратмор, положил ей на плечо руку и повел в темноте в направлении Третьего узла. Над их головами куполом раскинулось усыпанное звездами небо.

    Comments

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *