1314 
2843松散耦合理论为企业协调高度分散的组织单元提供了新的解决方案，近年来日益受到学者关注。其核心概念“松散耦合”旨在描述系统中的子单元既相互响应又保留了各自身份、在物理和逻辑上保持分离的现象。然而，现有文献仍存在内涵界定模糊、研究结论不一致和应用范围受限等问题，极大地限制了理论应用边界。本文回顾了1973—2023年的相关研究文献，基于多重视角对松散耦合的概念内涵、前因要素、作用后果以及边界条件进行了系统性归纳总结，提出一个跨组织边界和跨组织层次的整合性概念框架。针对现有研究的局限，本文从概念解构、机制挖掘、动态演化和情境拓展四个方向对未来研究进行展望，以期为进一步推动松散耦合理论在组织领域的应用提供参考。
松散耦合理论在组织领域的应用：回顾与展望
摘要
参考文献
1 党兴华, 张首魁. 模块化技术创新网络结点间耦合关系研究[J]. 中国工业经济, 2005, (12): 85-91. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-480X.2005.12.012
2 李会军, 席酉民, 葛京. 松散耦合研究对协同创新的启示[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2015, 36(12): 109-118.
3 彭新敏, 李佳楠, 张帆. 超越追赶阶段后发企业双元学习演进的驱动机制研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2022, 25(1): 116-123,134. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2022.01.012
4 魏江, 刘嘉玲, 刘洋. 新组织情境下创新战略理论新趋势和新问题[J]. 管理世界, 2021, 37(7): 182-197. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2021.07.013
5 魏江, 王诗翔. 从“反应”到“前摄”: 万向在美国的合法性战略演化(1994—2015)[J]. 管理世界, 2017, 33(8): 136-153,188. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2017.08.012
6 吴瑶, 夏正豪, 胡杨颂, 等. 基于数字化技术共建“和而不同”动态能力——2011~2020年索菲亚与经销商的纵向案例研究[J]. 管理世界, 2022, 38(1): 144-163,206. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2022.01.011
7 周超, 许冠南, 卢柯颖. 中国跨国企业母子公司结构的决策机制研究: 基于松散耦合理论视角[J]. 管理工程学报, 2024, 38(2): 21-34.
8 Acharya C, Ojha D, Patel P C, et al. Modular interconnected processes, fluid partnering, and innovation speed: A loosely coupled systems perspective on B2B service supply chain management[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2020, 89: 209-219. DOI:10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.05.007
9 Bahemia H, Sillince J, Vanhaverbeke W. The timing of openness in a radical innovation project, a temporal and loose coupling perspective[J]. Research Policy, 2018, 47(10): 2066-2076. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2018.07.015
10 Beekun R I, Ginn G O. Business strategy and interorganizational linkages within the acute care hospital industry: An expansion of the miles and snow typology[J]. Human Relations, 1993, 46(11): 1291-1318. DOI:10.1177/001872679304601102
11 Beekun R I, Glick W H. Organization structure from a loose coupling perspective: A multidimensional approach[J]. Decision Sciences, 2001, 32(2): 227-250. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2001.tb00959.x
12 Berente N, Yoo Y. Institutional contradictions and loose coupling: Postimplementation of NASA’s enterprise information system[J]. Information Systems Research, 2012, 23(2): 376-396. DOI:10.1287/isre.1110.0373
13 Boynton A C, Zmud R W. Information technology planning in the 1990’S: Directions for practice and research[J]. MIS Quarterly, 1987, 11(1): 59-71. DOI:10.2307/248826
14 Brusoni S, Prencipe A, Pavitt K. Knowledge specialization, organizational coupling, and the boundaries of the firm: Why do firms know more than they make?[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2001, 46(4): 597-621. DOI:10.2307/3094825
15 Burton N, Galvin P. When do product architectures mirror organisational architectures? The combined role of product complexity and the rate of technological change[J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 2018, 30(9): 1057-1069.
16 Chase R B, Tansik D A. The customer contact model for organization design[J]. Management Science, 1983, 29(9): 1037-1050. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.29.9.1037
17 Dubois A, Gadde L E. Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2002, 55(7): 553-560. DOI:10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00195-8
18 Firestone W A, Wilson B L. Using bureaucratic and cultural linkages to improve instruction: The principal’s contribution[J]. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1985, 21(2): 7-30. DOI:10.1177/0013161X85021002002
19 Frandsen S, Morsing M, Vallentin S. Adopting sustainability in the organization: Managing processes of productive loose coupling towards internal legitimacy[J]. Journal of Management Development, 2013, 32(3): 236-246. DOI:10.1108/02621711311318265
20 Furlan A, Cabigiosu A, Camuffo A. When the mirror gets misted up: Modularity and technological change[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2014, 35(6): 789-807. DOI:10.1002/smj.2138
21 Fusarelli L D. Tightly coupled policy in loosely coupled systems: Institutional capacity and organizational change[J]. Journal of Educational Administration, 2002, 40(6): 561-575. DOI:10.1108/09578230210446045
22 Glassman R B. Persistence and loose coupling in living systems[J]. Behavioral Science, 1973, 18(2): 83-98. DOI:10.1002/bs.3830180202
23 Hautala T, Helander J, Korhonen V. Loose and tight coupling in educational organizations–an integrative literature review[J]. Journal of Educational Administration, 2018, 56(2): 236-258.
24 Henderson R M, Clark K B. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990, 35(1): 9-30. DOI:10.2307/2393549
25 Hofman E, Halman J I M, Song M. When to use loose or tight alliance networks for innovation? Empirical evidence[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2017, 34(1): 81-100. DOI:10.1111/jpim.12325
26 Klein A, Sørensen C, de Freitas A S, et al. Understanding controversies in digital platform innovation processes: The Google Glass case[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2020, 152: 119883. DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119883
27 Kreye M E, Perunovic Z. Performance in publicly funded innovation networks (PFINs): The role of inter-organisational relationships[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2020, 86: 201-211. DOI:10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.11.018
28 Leo E. Toward a contingent model of mirroring between product and organization: A knowledge management perspective[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2020, 37(1): 97-117. DOI:10.1111/jpim.12515
29 Levinson N S, Moran D D. R&D management and organizational coupling[J]. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 1987, EM-34(1): 28-35. DOI:10.1109/TEM.1987.6498857
30 Li P P. Organizational resilience for a new normal: Balancing the paradox of global interdependence[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2020, 16(3): 503-509. DOI:10.1017/mor.2020.30
31 Liu Y, Huang Y, Luo Y D, et al. How does justice matter in achieving buyer–supplier relationship performance?[J]. Journal of Operations Management, 2012, 30(5): 355-367. DOI:10.1016/j.jom.2012.03.003
32 Luo Y D. How important are shared perceptions of procedural justice in cooperative alliances?[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2005, 48(4): 695-709. DOI:10.5465/amj.2005.17843946
33 MacCormack A, Baldwin C, Rusnak J. Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: A test of the “mirroring” hypothesis[J]. Research Policy, 2012, 41(8): 1309-1324. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.011
34 March J G. Ambiguity and accounting: The elusive link between information and decision making[J]. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 1987, 12(2): 153-168. DOI:10.1016/0361-3682(87)90004-3
35 Mayer M C J, Whittington R. Strategy, structure and ‘systemness’: National institutions and corporate change in France, Germany and the UK, 1950-1993[J]. Organization Studies, 1999, 20(6): 933-959. DOI:10.1177/0170840699206002
36 Meyer J W, Rowan B. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1977, 83(2): 340-363. DOI:10.1086/226550
37 Misangyi V F. Institutional complexity and the meaning of loose coupling: Connecting institutional sayings and (not) doings[J]. Strategic Organization, 2016, 14(4): 407-440. DOI:10.1177/1476127016635481
38 Najafi-Tavani Z, Robson M J, Zaefarian G, et al. Building subsidiary local responsiveness: (When) does the directionality of intrafirm knowledge transfers matter?[J]. Journal of World Business, 2018, 53(4): 475-492. DOI:10.1016/j.jwb.2018.01.004
39 Nambisan S, Luo Y D. Toward a loose coupling view of digital globalization[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2021, 52(8): 1646-1663. DOI:10.1057/s41267-021-00446-x
40 Nätti S, Ojasalo J. Loose coupling as an inhibitor of internal customer knowledge transfer: Findings from an empirical study in B-to-B professional services[J]. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 2008, 23(3): 213-223.
41 Newton J D, Ewing M T, Collier P M. Resolving contradictions in institutional demands through loose coupling[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2014, 43(5): 747-753. DOI:10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.04.004
42 Orton J D, Weick K E. Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization[J]. The Academy of Management Review, 1990, 15(2): 203-223. DOI:10.2307/258154
43 Pache A C, Santos F. Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2013, 56(4): 972-1001. DOI:10.5465/amj.2011.0405
44 Pajak E, Green A. Loosely coupled organizations, misrecognition, and social reproduction[J]. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 2003, 6(4): 393-413. DOI:10.1080/1360312032000150760
45 Pang N S K. Leadership forces in Hong Kong secondary schools[J]. School Leadership & Management, 2010, 30(4): 351-365.
46 Perrow C. Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies[M]. New York: Basic Books, 1984.
47 Raffaelli R, Glynn M A, Tushman M. Frame Flexibility: The role of cognitive and emotional framing in innovation adoption by incumbent firms[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2019, 40(7): 1013-1039. DOI:10.1002/smj.3011
48 Ramus T, Vaccaro A, Brusoni S. Institutional complexity in turbulent times: Formalization, collaboration, and the emergence of blended logics[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2017, 60(4): 1253-1284. DOI:10.5465/amj.2015.0394
49 Sahaym A, Steensma H K, Schilling M A. The influence of information technology on the use of loosely coupled organizational forms: An industry-level analysis[J]. Organization Science, 2007, 18(5): 865-880. DOI:10.1287/orsc.1070.0285
50 Shen J P, Gao X Y, Xia J G. School as a loosely coupled organization? An empirical examination using national SASS 2003-04 data[J]. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 2017, 45(4): 657-681.
51 Sinha P, Daellenbach U, Bednarek R. Legitimacy defense during post-merger integration: Between coupling and compartmentalization[J]. Strategic Organization, 2015, 13(3): 169-199. DOI:10.1177/1476127015580486
52 Snook S A. Friendly fire: The accidental shootdown of U. S. black hawks over northern Iraq[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000.
53 Spender J C, Grinyer P H. Organizational renewal: Top management’s role in a loosely coupled system[J]. Human Relations, 1995, 48(8): 909-926. DOI:10.1177/001872679504800805
54 Staber U, Sydow J. Organizational adaptive capacity: A structuration perspective[J]. Journal of Management Inquiry, 2002, 11(4): 408-424. DOI:10.1177/1056492602238848
55 Thompson J D. Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory[M]. New York: McGraw Hill, 1967.
56 Tsai W, Ghoshal S. Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1998, 41(4): 464-476. DOI:10.2307/257085
57 Weick K E. Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1976, 21(1): 1-19. DOI:10.2307/2391875
58 Weick K E. Management of organizational change among loosely coupled elements[A]. Goodman P S. Change in organizations: New perspectives on theory, research, and practice[M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982.
59 Wilkins S, Emik S. Institutional influences on firm strategy in authoritarian emerging economies: Multi-platform mass media companies in the UAE[J]. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 2021, 16(1): 7-24.
60 Zan A, Yao Y H, Chen H H. University–industry collaborative innovation evolutionary game and simulation research: The agent coupling and group size view[J]. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 2021, 68(5): 1406-1417. DOI:10.1109/TEM.2019.2908206
61 Zhou C, Xu G N, Sun C, et al. How do emerging multinationals achieve sustainable development globally? The enabling mechanism of headquarter-subsidiary structure in subsidiary sustainability[J]. Sustainable Development, 2024, 32(3): 2549-2564. DOI:10.1002/sd.2786
引用本文
周超, 杜健, 孙聪. 松散耦合理论在组织领域的应用：回顾与展望[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2025, 47(8): 68-85.
导出参考文献，格式为：
