**6. Managerial implications**

The value of the survey to practitioners lies in the potential future findings from empirical research based on organizational coherent decisions. To the extent that business performance outcomes could be affected by the decision of choice between Onshore and Offshore, any findings which reveal the dimensions and coherency relations will be relevant to those managers involved in the organizational design and management of a coherent firm.

More specifically the managerial implications relate to the range of organizational dimensions included in the coherency survey. Thus, our survey provides guidance to

**96**

*Outsourcing and Offshoring*

those responsible for decide where to be: inshore or offshore. Finally, the survey's proposal that coherency will positively impact the achievement of firm objectives underlines its key relevance for managers as a critical link to performance outcomes.

**References**

[1] Cambridge Dictionary. Definition of "coherence". https://dictionary.camb ridge.org/dictionary/english/coherence.

*Onshore? Offshore? How about Firm Coherency? DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95807*

Management Journal, Vol. 18, No 7,

[10] Arraya, M. (2014). O efeito da alostasia nas organizações e no desempenho: O caso das organizações desportivas. Revista Intercontinental Gestão Desportiva, Vol. 4, No S1,

[11] Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, Vol. 17, No 1,

[12] Grant, R. M. (1991). The resourcebased theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, Vol. 33,

[13] Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?. Strategic management journal, *21*

[14] Day, G. S. (1994), "The capabilities of market-driven organizations", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, No 3, pp. 37–52.

[15] Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003). Strategic Management Journal,

[16] Cardeal, N. (2010). "PME's em "clusters": Desenvolvimento de vantagens competitivas em indústrias maduras, em mudança lenta. O caso da indústria portuguesa de calçado". Phd

[17] Zahra, S. A, Sapienza, H. J., and Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model, and research agenda. *Journal of Management Studies*, Vol. 43, No. 4,

[18] Weick, K. E. (1979). *The Social Psychology of Organizing*. 2nd ed. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Thesis, ISCTE IUL*,* Lisboa*.*

pp. 509–533.

pp. 13–70.

pp. 99–120.

No 3, pp. 114–135.

(10–11), 1105–1121.

*24*(10), 997–1010.

pp. 917–955.

[2] Doucet, G., Saha, J., Gøtze, P., and Bernard, S.A. (2008). Coherency management: Using enterprise

architecture for alignment, agility, and

[3] Hambrick, D. C. (1997). Corporate coherence and the TOP management team. Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 25,

[4] Leinwand, P. and Mainardi, C. (2011). *The Essential Advantage:* How to Win with Capabilities-Driven Strategy. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston,

[5] Teece, D. J. (2010). Business Models, Business Strategy and Innovation. Long Range Planning*,* Vol. 43, No 2–3,

[6] Dosi, G., Nelson, R. R., and Winter, S. G. (2000). *Introduction: The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities*, in Dosi, G., Nelson, R. R., and Winter, S. G. (eds.), The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities, Oxford: Oxford University

[7] Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel G. (1990).

Corporation. *Harvard Business Review*,

Management, Vol. 10, No A, pp.127–151.

[9] Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic

[8] Schulze, W. S. (1994). The two schools of thought in resource-based theory: Definitions and implications for

research. Advances in Strategic

The Core Competence of the

assurance. *Journal of Enterprise*

*Architecture*, May.

No 5, pp. 24–29.

Massachusetts.

pp. 172–194.

Press, pp. 1–22.

may–june, pp. 2–15.

**99**

Accessed October 11, 2020.
