Annalee Saxenian (1996) author of Regional Advantage: Culture
and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 argues: “[T] he industrial
structure of Route 128 was defined by the search for corporate self-sufficiency
or autarky” (p.69). Autarky is defined as the quality of being self-sufficient,
so the way I was able to understand her argument is that Route 128’s “Puritan
Industry” was governed by big, hierarchical, centralized organizations, whose
labor pool remained stable. They rarely communicated with one another and
creative as well as innovative approaches to business was amassed within the
company (p.60). This type of structure was the exact opposite of the Silicon
Valley pattern. Silicon Valley’s firm’s were small and ambitious. Saxenian
(1996) attests that “…[t] his decentralized and fluid environment accelerated
the diffusion of technological capabilities and know-how within the region”
(p.37).
While I
find the preceding work interesting, I was looking for more of an economic
analysis because I believe this reading was created to persuade the reader into
thinking about economic policy, in respect to a volatile information technology
industry. Equally important, was the seemingly unclear explanation of how the
two regions, Route 128 and the Silicon Valley, are explained in a scheme
related to manufacturing and technological history. Nevertheless, James Baron
and Michael Hannon (2002) authors of Organizational Blueprints for Success
in High-Tech Start-Ups: Lessons from the Stanford Projection Emerging Companies
argue that ‘“…[t] echnology companies apparently pay a significant and enduring
price for having altered the HR blueprint at an earlier point in time. On
balance, “staying the course” seems to be a winning HR strategy for technology
startups, particularly for firms founded along commitment model lines”’ (p.27).
Furthermore,
what I found interesting was Baron and Hannon’s (2002) employee relation model
analysis, where this bureaucratic and autocratic model, one in which employees
are managed by formal controls lead to a considerable failure, and low growth
rates in market capitalization’s. However, the “star” model, which recruits,
rewards and supports employees based on their talent—supports start-up success.
On the other hand, Baron and Hannon (2002) contend that when a company begins
to scale up—bureaucratic an autocratic models works best, but makes this
transition from a star or commitment model very difficult, and even disastrous.
Thus, Baron and Hannon indicated that it is vital to discern carefully,
regarding employee blueprints, from the beginning. I just wonder how the notion
of gender will play out in a bureaucratic and autocratic model? Will this model
affect gender equality in the workplace, which is an ongoing debate? In my
opinion, decentralizing decision-making, reducing rules, and flattening
hierarchy should be considered carefully at the beginning. This strategy can
create a shield of benefit, for organizational members who are women, from
informal male-dominated networks, and thus level the organizational playing
field.
Resources:
Baron, James et. al. (2002). Organizational Blueprints for Success in High-Tech Start-Ups: Lessons from the Stanford Projection Emerging Companies. California Management Review, Vol. 44, P. 27, Spring.
Saxenian, Annalee. (1996). Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Harvard University paperback edition. P. 37-69.
About the author:
Christopher Tillman Neal is a detail-oriented IT professional with 7+ years of experience. He is driven by the sociology of computer-mediated communication—skilled at operating in a wide range of platforms. Graduating from the University of California, Berkeley, Christopher has a diverse career portfolio, which consists of social media analytics, information technology, sales, marketing, and project management. Christopher received rigorous virtual community and social media training from Berkeley, and Stanford Professor Howard Rheingold who is one of the world’s foremost authorities on the social implications of technology.
If you have any questions, please email chris-neal@alumni.ls.berkeley.edu
Learn more at Berkeley profile https://cal.berkeley.edu/christopher Peeragogy.org http://goo.gl/O03Rp Howard Rheingold credits http://rheingold.com/credits/ Net Smart acknowledgments http://goo.gl/aigdD Peeragogy Handbook mention http://goo.gl/9lPYy Google + http://goo.gl/AMBbA or follow me on Twitter (@CNealUCB) and LinkedIn http://goo.gl/lyPFA. Go to link http://goo.gl/Aj9Fg to view online curriculum vitae.
