This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Life-cycle literature suggests that business organizations evolve in consistent and predictable manners, implying that organizational structures and strategies evolve as firms move through growth stages. The sustainable growth of firms involves successful transitions between growth stages through managing different types of organizational growing pains and maintaining sustainable competitive positions, suggesting shifts in the strategic orientation of the firms as the firms grow. Based on this approach, this study proposes a holistic framework to account for linkages between determinants of a firm’s growing pains and key areas of organizational development, based on a synthesis of qualitative and quantitative findings. From statistical analyses, Korean firms are found to have proceeded through distinct stages of growing pains as they reached organizational sizes as follows: 20, 100, 300, and 500 million USD in sales revenue. Furthermore, qualitative findings suggest that business strategies evolve to deal with different types of growing pains in life-cycle stages from the systemization of management system to the revitalization process. Our results expect to provide extensive knowledge on the role of strategic management to deal with firm’s growing pains, considering both internal and external factors governing organizations. Furthermore, this study expects to provide an insightful and practical framework for managing organizational growing pains and transitions required to build sustainably successful organizations.
Yeongjun Yeo; Chansoo Park. Managing Growing Pains for the Sustainable Growth of Organizations: Evidence from the Growth Pathways and Strategic Choices of Korean Firms. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3824 .
AMA StyleYeongjun Yeo, Chansoo Park. Managing Growing Pains for the Sustainable Growth of Organizations: Evidence from the Growth Pathways and Strategic Choices of Korean Firms. Sustainability. 2018; 10 (10):3824.
Chicago/Turabian StyleYeongjun Yeo; Chansoo Park. 2018. "Managing Growing Pains for the Sustainable Growth of Organizations: Evidence from the Growth Pathways and Strategic Choices of Korean Firms." Sustainability 10, no. 10: 3824.
In this study, we analyzed the effects of electricity market reform on investment in generation facilities. We used the data of 27 OECD member countries and considered ownership structure, horizontal and vertical unbundling, change of transaction method, and government regulation as explanatory variables for market reform. We used four regression models, in which we examined the effects of market reform on the capacity of generation facilities, supply reserve ratio, total investment, and base-load share, respectively. For each panel regression model, we performed a Hausman test to identify the model between random effect and fixed effect. Based on the estimation results, we found that electricity market reform has a negative effect on generation facilities in most countries. Both privatization and regulation have negative impacts on the generation facility and base-load share. On the other hand, the level of liberalization of transactions have positive effects on the generation facility, supply reserve ratio, and base-load share. The empirical analysis also showed that horizontal unbundling does not have a meaningful effect on investment, but vertical unbundling contributes to increasing the supply reserve ratio.
Juyong Lee; Youngsang Cho; Yoonmo Koo; Chansoo Park. Effects of Market Reform on Facility Investment in Electric Power Industry: Panel Data Analysis of 27 Countries. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3235 .
AMA StyleJuyong Lee, Youngsang Cho, Yoonmo Koo, Chansoo Park. Effects of Market Reform on Facility Investment in Electric Power Industry: Panel Data Analysis of 27 Countries. Sustainability. 2018; 10 (9):3235.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJuyong Lee; Youngsang Cho; Yoonmo Koo; Chansoo Park. 2018. "Effects of Market Reform on Facility Investment in Electric Power Industry: Panel Data Analysis of 27 Countries." Sustainability 10, no. 9: 3235.