Organizational design implementations frequently fail, with existing dominant frameworks and tools, such as the ever-present maturity assessments, falling short in addressing the complex, nonlinear nature of socio-technical systems (STS). This paper introduces PhylOrg, a methodology leveraging phylogenetic analysis to guide organizational design by mapping evolutionary pathways of socio-technical traits (STTs). By identifying coherent and efficient sequences of change, PhylOrg minimizes resistance and aligns initiatives with organizational contexts. Grounded in theories of complex adaptive systems (CAS) and evolutionary processes, PhylOrg proposes to offer prescriptive, context-sensitive guidance to Organizational design leaders. A pilot study demonstrates PhylOrg’s potential, highlighting foundational evolutionary traits as prerequisites for more advanced capabilities.

Extant literature remains inconclusive with regard to optimal structural designs for sustaining effective knowledge flows, boosting innovativeness, and achieving superior performance in organizations. We contribute to the ongoing debate on formal, informal, and ambidextrous configurations in the specific context of small high-tech innovators. Adopting an inductive approach to theory building, we explore the factors that account for the variation in knowledge-focused designs across sample firms. In our study, innovative ventures rely on pure formal and informal organizational designs but also attempt to mix both, suggesting that gains from ambidexterity are not ubiquitous. Our analysis unveils that the pursuit of a given structural configuration results from a set of operating contingencies and a deliberate managerial effort to align firm idiosyncrasies with desired strategic outcomes. We advance a grounded theory of knowledge-focused organizational design in small high-tech innovators and formulate propositions that may be tested in future inquiries in the field.

In recent years design has had a renaissance in business and management research and practice. Several authors have discussed if management is a design practice and how far design ought to go to design behaviors. This article discusses, evaluates and explores organizational design as a human-centered design practice. Relevant theoretical concepts of organizational theory, design approaches and practices are discussed to evaluate gaps in management practices and potential opportunities for design practice. The study collected and analyzed data from two organizations. The researched revealed several propositions, which provide insights of the usefulness, appropriateness and value of a human-centered design practice to organizational design.

Although they have often been found to be technically inefficient, cooperatives not only have survived in the wine industry but continue to play major roles in most European countries. Because the specific advantages of their “organizational architecture” (resource pooling and decentralization) seem to outweigh the disadvantages (vaguely defined property rights and high monitoring costs), this paper discusses organizational measures to improve the performance of cooperatives by addressing three different aspects of “organizational design” (managing entry and exit, motivating members, and investing in corporate culture). (JEL Classifications: D22, D23, L14, L21, L31)