Why Resource Dependence Theory Can Free Decision Makers—from a Trap Most Don’t See

Resource Dependence Theory, a staple of organizational behavior studies, radically re-frames who actually drives a company’s choices. It's tempting to believe that the CEO or strategic committee calls the shots on all big investments. In practice, the real authority often sits outside—not just inside—the organization. Customers and investors, by virtue of controlling key inflows (purchases, funding), wield hidden veto rights.

One manufacturing firm, for example, found that every time it tried to launch a service aimed at a small, emerging niche, the board and sales teams starved it of time and budget. Why? All systems rewarded pitching to top existing clients, not risky side bets. Over a decade, dozens of side ventures failed to get fuel, despite plenty of internal advocacy.

Accepting this power structure is not defeatist. Instead, smart managers learn to work with it: separating new-market initiatives to parts of the organization (sometimes legal spin-offs) with their own resource loops, goals, and customer-facing teams. Research proves that adjusting structure to match real control dramatically boosts innovation success, not by fighting inertia, but by sidestepping it.

Go back through your last few key decisions—who really influenced resource flow? Was it who you expected, or was hidden power at play? Notice where new ideas keep getting overruled or underfunded and ask yourself if their resource pipeline serves different masters. If so, consider giving your fresh bets or weirdest projects a space and decision path not dominated by your main stakeholders. You're not giving up; you're hacking the system in your favor. Try it on the next big initiative and see if the dynamic shifts.