[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssa/lemwps/2006-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Modeling Routines and Organizational Learning. A Discussion of the State-of-the-Art

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Dosi
  • Marco Faillo
  • Luigi Marengo
Abstract
This paper presents a critical overview of some recent attempts at building formal models of organizations as information-processing and problem-solving entities. We distinguish between two classes of models according to the different objects of analysis. The first class includes models mainly addressing information processing and learning and analyzes the relations between the structure of information flows, learning patterns, and organizational performances. The second class focuses on the relationship between the division of cognitive labor and search processes in some problem-solving space, addressing more directly the notion of organizations as repositories of problem-solving knowledge. Here the objects of analysis are the problem-solving procedures which the organization embodies. The results begin to highlight important comparative properties regarding the impact on problem-solving efficiency and learning of different forms of hierarchical governance, the dangers of lock-in associated with specific forms of adaptive learning, the relative role of “online” vs. “offline” learning, the impact of the “cognitive maps” which organizations embody, the possible trade-offs between accuracy and speed of convergence associated with different “decomposition schemes”. We argue that these are important formal tools towards the development of a comparative institutional analysis addressing the distinct properties of different forms of organization and accumulation of knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Dosi & Marco Faillo & Luigi Marengo, 2006. "Modeling Routines and Organizational Learning. A Discussion of the State-of-the-Art," LEM Papers Series 2006/10, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2006/10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lem.sssup.it/WPLem/files/2006-10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 290-311, March.
    2. Marengo, Luigi, et al, 2000. "The Structure of Problem-Solving Knowledge and the Structure of Organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(4), pages 757-788, December.
    3. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Faillo & Luigi Marengo, 2008. "Problem Solving and Governance in the Capability-based View of the Firm: The Roles and Theoretical Representations of Organizational Routines," Chapters, in: Markus C. Becker (ed.), Handbook of Organizational Routines, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Cohen, Michael D, et al, 1996. "Routines and Other Recurring Action Patterns of Organizations: Contemporary Research Issues," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(3), pages 653-698.
    5. Markus C. Becker, 2004. "Organizational routines: a review of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 13(4), pages 643-678, August.
    6. Sydney Winter & Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Interpreting Economic Change: Evolution, Structures and Games," LEM Papers Series 2000/08, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    7. Scott E. Page, 1996. "Two measures of difficulty (*)," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 321-346.
    8. Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Production," LEM Papers Series 2002/27, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    9. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
    10. Page, Scott E, 1996. "Two Measures of Difficulty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 321-346, August.
    11. Udo Zander & Bruce Kogut, 1995. "Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and Imitation of Organizational Capabilities: An Empirical Test," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 76-92, February.
    12. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Speed and Search: Designing Organizations for Turbulence and Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 101-122, April.
    13. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Hierarchies, Markets and Power: Some Foundational Issues on the Nature of Contemporary Economic Organizations," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 23, pages 669-688, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    15. Giovanni Dosi & Franco Malerba (ed.), 1996. "Organization and Strategy in the Evolution of the Enterprise," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-13389-5, March.
    16. Markus C. Becker, 2004. "Organizational routines : a review of the literature," Post-Print hal-00279010, HAL.
    17. Dopfer,Kurt (ed.), 2005. "The Evolutionary Foundations of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521621991, September.
    18. Marengo, L, 1992. "Coordination and Organizational Learning in the Firm," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 313-326, December.
    19. Giovanni Dosi & Luigi Marengo, 1999. "On the tangled discourse between transaction costs economics and competence-based views of the firms: Some comments," LEM Papers Series 1999/08, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    20. Keith Pavitt, 2002. "Innovating routines in the business firm: what corporate tasks should they be accomplishing?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(1), pages 117-133, February.
    21. Luigi Marengo, 1996. "Structure, Competence and Learning in an Adaptive Model of the Firm," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Giovanni Dosi & Franco Malerba (ed.), Organization and Strategy in the Evolution of the Enterprise, chapter 5, pages 124-154, Palgrave Macmillan.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. G. Dosi, 2012. "Economic Coordination and Dynamics: Some Elements of an Alternative “Evolutionary” Paradigm," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 12.
    2. Dehua Gao & Flaminio Squazzoni & Xiuquan Deng, 2018. "The Intertwining Impact of Intraorganizational and Routine Networks on Routine Replication Dynamics: An Agent-Based Model," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-23, November.
    3. Shenglan Huang & Zhi Chen, 2017. "The Effects of Social Capital on Innovation Performance: From Complex Adaptive System Perspective," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(3), pages 191-191, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Faillo & Luigi Marengo & Daniele Moschella, 2011. "Toward Formal Representations of Search Processes and Routines in Organizational Problem Solving. An Assessment of the State of the Art," LEM Papers Series 2011/04, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    2. Andreas Blume & April Mitchell Franco & Paul Heidhues, 2021. "Dynamic coordination via organizational routines," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(4), pages 1001-1047, November.
    3. Frenken, Koen, 2006. "A fitness landscape approach to technological complexity, modularity, and vertical disintegration," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 288-305, September.
    4. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Faillo & Luigi Marengo, 2003. "Organizational Capabilities, Patterns of Knowledge Accumulation and Governance Structures in Business Firms. An Introduction," LEM Papers Series 2003/11, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    5. Daniel A. Levinthal & Alessandro Marino, 2015. "Three Facets of Organizational Adaptation: Selection, Variety, and Plasticity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 743-755, June.
    6. Guo, Jingjing & Guo, Bin & Zhou, Jianghua & Wu, Xiaobo, 2020. "How does the ambidexterity of technological learning routine affect firm innovation performance within industrial clusters? The moderating effects of knowledge attributes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    7. Giovanni Dosi & Luigi Marengo, 2007. "Perspective---On the Evolutionary and Behavioral Theories of Organizations: A Tentative Roadmap," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 491-502, June.
    8. Juha Uotila, 2018. "Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 131-148.
    9. Koen Frenken & Stefan Mendritzki, 2012. "Optimal modularity: a demonstration of the evolutionary advantage of modular architectures," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 935-956, November.
    10. Giovanni Dosi & Daniel A. Levinthal & Luigi Marengo, 2003. "Bridging contested terrain: linking incentive-based and learning perspectives on organizational evolution," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(2), pages 413-436, April.
    11. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2007. "Patterned Interactions in Complex Systems: Implications for Exploration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1068-1085, July.
    12. Stephan Billinger & Nils Stieglitz & Terry R. Schumacher, 2014. "Search on Rugged Landscapes: An Experimental Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 93-108, February.
    13. Sai Yayavaram & Wei-Ru Chen, 2015. "Changes in firm knowledge couplings and firm innovation performance: The moderating role of technological complexity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 377-396, March.
    14. Giannoccaro, Ilaria, 2015. "Adaptive supply chains in industrial districts: A complexity science approach focused on learning," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PB), pages 576-589.
    15. Giannoccaro, Ilaria & Galesic, Mirta & Massari, Giovanni Francesco & Barkoczi, Daniel & Carbone, Giuseppe, 2020. "Search behavior of individuals working in teams: A behavioral study on complex landscapes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 507-516.
    16. Argouslidis, Paraskevas C. & Baltas, George & Mavrommatis, Alexis, 2015. "An empirical investigation into the determinants of decision speed in product elimination decision processes," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 268-286.
    17. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 14(2), pages 169-183, November.
    18. Massimo Egidi, 2002. "Biases in human behavior," CEEL Working Papers 0205, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    19. Carolina Castaldi & Giovanni Dosi, 2003. "The Grip of History and the Scope for Novelty: Some Results and Open Questions on Path Dependence in Economic Processes," LEM Papers Series 2003/02, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    20. Kerstin Press, 2006. "Divide to conquer? The Silicon Valley - Boston 128 case revisited," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 0610, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Dec 2006.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Division of labor; Mental models; Problem-solving; Problem decomposition.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2006/10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/labssit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.