IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v50y2004i11p1545-1560.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Volition in Organizational Learning: The Case of Automotive Product Recalls

Author

Listed:
  • Pamela R. Haunschild

    (McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712-0210)

  • Mooweon Rhee

    (Department of Management and Industrial Relations, College of Business Administration, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822)

Abstract

What is the role of volition in organizational learning? Do firms learn better in response to internal procedures or external mandates? Existing literature provides conflicting answers to this question, with some theories suggesting that volition is important for learning because autonomy increases commitment and problem analyses, whereas external mandates tend to produce defensive reactions that are not coupled to the organization in any useful way. Yet, other theories suggest that mandate is important for learning because external pressures act as jolts that help overcome organizational inertia, resulting in deep exploration of problems to prevent future surprises. We investigate this issue in the context of automakers learning from voluntary versus involuntary product recalls. Using data on all recalls experienced by automakers that sold passenger cars in the United States during the 1966--1999 period, we follow the learning-curve tradition in investigating the effects of voluntary and involuntary recalls on subsequent recall rates. We find that voluntary recalls result in more learning than mandated recalls when learning is measured as a reduction in subsequent involuntary recalls. This effect is at least partly because of shallower learning processes that result from involuntary recalls. The effect of volition, however, is different for generalist and specialist automakers. The results of this study suggest an important, yet understudied, determinant of the rate and effectiveness of learning---volition. The results also add to our knowledge of the different learning processes of generalist and specialist organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Pamela R. Haunschild & Mooweon Rhee, 2004. "The Role of Volition in Organizational Learning: The Case of Automotive Product Recalls," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1545-1560, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:50:y:2004:i:11:p:1545-1560
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1040.0219
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0219
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0219?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barber, Brad M & Darrough, Masako N, 1996. "Product Reliability and Firm Value: The Experience of American and Japanese Automakers, 1973-1992," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(5), pages 1084-1099, October.
    2. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    3. John Paul MacDuffie, 1997. "The Road to "Root Cause": Shop-Floor Problem-Solving at Three Auto Assembly Plants," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 479-502, April.
    4. Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 590-607, May.
    5. James G. March & Lee S. Sproull & Michal Tamuz, 1991. "Learning from Samples of One or Fewer," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, February.
    6. Joel A. C. Baum & Paul Ingram, 1998. "Survival-Enhancing Learning in the Manhattan Hotel Industry, 1898--1980," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(7), pages 996-1016, July.
    7. Alfred Marcus, 1989. "The deterrent to dubious corporate behavior: Profitability, probability and safety recalls," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(3), pages 233-250, May.
    8. Winter, Sidney G., 1981. "Attention allocation and input proportions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 31-46, March.
    9. William P. Barnett & Henrich R. Greve & Douglas Y. Park, 1994. "An Evolutionary Model of Organizational Performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 11-28, December.
    10. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    11. Radner, Roy & Rothschild, Michael, 1975. "On the allocation of effort," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 358-376, June.
    12. Van de Ven, Andrew R., 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Agricultural Research Policy Seminar 139708, University of Minnesota Extension.
    13. Alfred A. Marcus & Mary L. Nichols, 1999. "On the Edge: Heeding the Warnings of Unusual Events," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 482-499, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Haunschild, Pamela & Ni, Bilian, 2000. "Learning from Complexity: Effects of Accident/Incident Heterogenity on Airline Learning," Research Papers 1621, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    2. Sarooghi, Hessamoddin & Libaers, Dirk & Burkemper, Andrew, 2015. "Examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 714-731.
    3. Stephen J. Mezias & Mary Ann Glynn, 1993. "The three faces of corporate renewal: Institution, revolution, and evolution," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 77-101, February.
    4. Liu, Zhiqiang & Yan, Miao & Fan, Youqing & Chen, Liling, 2021. "Ascribed or achieved? The role of birth order on innovative behaviour in the workplace," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 480-492.
    5. Anil K. Gupta & Paul E. Tesluk & M. Susan Taylor, 2007. "Innovation At and Across Multiple Levels of Analysis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 885-897, December.
    6. Gopesh Anand & John Gray & Enno Siemsen, 2012. "Decay, Shock, and Renewal: Operational Routines and Process Entropy in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1700-1716, December.
    7. Céline Bérard & Christelle Bruyere & Séverine Saleilles, 2015. "Sustainability-driven and high-growth SMEs: A paradox approach [Las PYME de sostenibilidad impulsada y el alto crecimiento: Un enfoque por las paradojas]," Post-Print halshs-01354704, HAL.
    8. Birkinshaw, Julian & Ridderstråle, Jonas, 1999. "Fighting the corporate immune system: a process study of subsidiary initiatives in multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 149-180, April.
    9. Brion, Sébastien & Mothe, Caroline & Sabatier, Mareva, 2007. "What impacts more on innovation : Organizational context or individual competences ?," MPRA Paper 10595, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    11. Sébastien Brion & Caroline Mothe & Maréva Sabatier, 2010. "The Impact Of Organisational Context And Competences On Innovation Ambidexterity," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 151-178.
    12. Jan Mattsson & Helge Helmersson & Katarina Stetler, 2016. "Motivation Fatigue As A Threat To Innovation: Bypassing The Productivity Dilemma In R&D By Cyclic Production," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-23, February.
    13. Nerkar, Atul A. & McGrath, Rita Gunther & MacMillan, Ian C., 1996. "Three facets of satisfaction and their influence on the performance of innovation teams," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 167-188, May.
    14. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    15. Yuzhe Miao & Robert M. Salomon & Jaeyong Song, 2021. "Learning from Technologically Successful Peers: The Convergence of Asian Laggards to the Technology Frontier," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 210-232, January.
    16. David H. Hsu & Kwanghui Lim, 2014. "Knowledge Brokering and Organizational Innovation: Founder Imprinting Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1134-1153, August.
    17. Sandra Charreire, 2003. "Les rôles de la migration et de la légitimation des savoirs dans l'apprentissage organisationnel:études de cas," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 6(2), pages 115-153, June.
    18. Turner, Karynne L. & Monti, Alberto & Annosi, Maria Carmela, 2021. "Disentangling the effects of organizational controls on innovation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 57-69.
    19. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    20. Burgers, J. Henri & Jansen, Justin J.P. & Van den Bosch, Frans A.J. & Volberda, Henk W., 2009. "Structural differentiation and corporate venturing: The moderating role of formal and informal integration mechanisms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 206-220, May.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:50:y:2004:i:11:p:1545-1560. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.