IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v26y2015i4p1140-1161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perspective—The Flaring of Intellectual Outliers: An Organizational Interpretation of the Generation of Novelty in the RAND Corporation

Author

Listed:
  • Mie Augier

    (Graduate School of Business and Public Policy, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California 93943)

  • James G. March

    (Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305)

  • Andrew W. Marshall

    (Alexandria, Virginia 22314)

Abstract

Much of intellectual history is punctuated by the flaring of intellectual outliers, small groups of thinkers who briefly, but decisively, influence the development of ideas, technologies, policies, or worldviews. To understand the flaring of intellectual outliers, we use archival and interview data from the RAND Corporation after the Second World War. We focus on five factors important to the RAND experience: (1) a belief in fundamental research as a source of practical ideas, (2) a culture of optimistic urgency, (3) the solicitation of renegade ambition, (4) the recruitment of intellectual cronies, and (5) the facilitation of the combinatorics of variety. To understand the subsequent decline of intellectual outliers at RAND, we note that success yields a sense of competence, endurance in a competitive world, and the opportunity and inclination to grow. Self-confidence, endurance, and growth produce numerous positive consequences for an organization; but for the most part, they undermine variety. Outliers and the conditions that produce them are not favored by their environments. Engineering solutions to this problem involve extending time and space horizons, providing false information about the likelihoods of positive returns from exploration, buffering exploratory activities from the pressures of efficiency, and protecting exploration from analysis by connecting it to dictates of identities.

Suggested Citation

  • Mie Augier & James G. March & Andrew W. Marshall, 2015. "Perspective—The Flaring of Intellectual Outliers: An Organizational Interpretation of the Generation of Novelty in the RAND Corporation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 1140-1161, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:26:y:2015:i:4:p:1140-1161
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2014.0962
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0962
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2014.0962?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. Daniel Kahneman & Dan Lovallo, 1993. "Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 17-31, January.
    2. Nelson, Richard R. & Nelson, Katherine, 2002. "Technology, institutions, and innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 265-272, February.
    3. Thomas Heinze & Gerrit Bauer, 2007. "Characterizing creative scientists in nano-S&T: Productivity, multidisciplinarity, and network brokerage in a longitudinal perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 811-830, March.
    4. H. Kahn & A. W. Marshall, 1953. "Methods of Reducing Sample Size in Monte Carlo Computations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(5), pages 263-278, November.
    5. Charles Hitch, 1953. "Sub-Optimization in Operations Problems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 87-99, May.
    6. Paul S. Adler & Barbara Goldoftas & David I. Levine, 1999. "Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 43-68, February.
    7. B. O. Koopman, 1956. "Fallacies in Operations Research," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 422-430, August.
    8. R. L. Hall & C. J. Hitch, 1939. "Price Theory And Business Behaviour," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 0(1), pages 12-45.
    9. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    10. Jerker Denrell & James G. March, 2001. "Adaptation as Information Restriction: The Hot Stove Effect," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(5), pages 523-538, October.
    11. Heinze, Thomas & Shapira, Philip & Rogers, Juan D. & Senker, Jacqueline M., 2009. "Organizational and institutional influences on creativity in scientific research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 610-623, May.
    12. Thomas Heinze & Philip Shapira & Jacqueline Senker & Stefan Kuhlmann, 2007. "Identifying creative research accomplishments: Methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 125-152, January.
    13. Sakakibara, Mariko & Branstetter, Lee, 2001. "Do Stronger Patents Induce More Innovation? Evidence from the 1988 Japanese Patent Law Reforms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 77-100, Spring.
    14. Charles Hitch, 1955. "An Appreciation of Systems Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 466-481, November.
    15. Julius Margolis, 1970. "The Analysis of Public Output," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number marg70-1, March.
    16. Charles J. Hitch, 1996. "Management Problems of Large Organizations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 257-264, April.
    17. Alain C. Enthoven & Henry Rowen, 1961. "Defense Planning and Organization," NBER Chapters, in: Public Finances: Needs, Sources, and Utilization, pages 365-420, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Henry S. Rowen, 1970. "Assessing the Role of Systematic Decision Making in the Public Sector," NBER Chapters, in: The Analysis of Public Output, pages 219-230, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Denise Falchetti & Gino Cattani & Simone Ferriani, 2022. "Start with “Why,” but only if you have to: The strategic framing of novel ideas across different audiences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 130-159, January.
    2. Jiyang Dong & James G. March & Maciej Workiewicz, 2017. "On organizing: an interview with James G. March," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 6(1), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Turanay Caner & Susan K. Cohen & Frits Pil, 2017. "Firm heterogeneity in complex problem solving: A knowledge-based look at invention," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(9), pages 1791-1811, September.
    4. Harsh Ketkar & Maciej Workiewicz, 2022. "Power to the people: The benefits and limits of employee self‐selection in organizations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 935-963, May.

    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. Marios Kokkodis, 2023. "Adjusting Skillset Cohesion in Online Labor Markets: Reputation Gains and Opportunity Losses," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1245-1258, September.
    2. Marios Kokkodis & Sam Ransbotham, 2023. "Learning to Successfully Hire in Online Labor Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1597-1614, March.
    3. Ylenia Curci & Mireille Matt & Isabelle Billard & Thierry Burger-Helmchen, 2017. "Are the risks of being creative manageable? The case of public research in Hard Science," Working Papers of BETA 2017-30, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    4. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    5. Bent Flyvbjerg & Alexander Budzier & Jong Seok Lee & Mark Keil & Daniel Lunn & Dirk W. Bester, 2022. "The Empirical Reality of IT Project Cost Overruns: Discovering A Power-Law Distribution," Papers 2210.01573, arXiv.org.
    6. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    7. Jiewei Zu & Jianan Wang & Jun Ma, 2022. "Ambidexterity in a Rapidly Changing Environment of China: Top Management Team Decision Making and Sustained Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Adrian S. Choo & Kevin W. Linderman & Roger G. Schroeder, 2007. "Method and Psychological Effects on Learning Behaviors and Knowledge Creation in Quality Improvement Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 437-450, March.
    9. Sasanka Sekhar Chanda & Bill McKelvey, 2020. "Back to the basics: reconciling the continuum and orthogonal conceptions of exploration and exploitation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 175-206, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Vinit Parida & Tom Lahti & Joakim Wincent, 2016. "Exploration and exploitation and firm performance variability: a study of ambidexterity in entrepreneurial firms," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1147-1164, December.
    12. Hart E. Posen & Dirk Martignoni & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2013. "E Pluribus Unum: Organizational Size and the Efficacy of Learning," DRUID Working Papers 13-09, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    13. H. Spencer Banzhaf, 2014. "Retrospectives: The Cold-War Origins of the Value of Statistical Life," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(4), pages 213-226, Fall.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Silvestri, Daniela & Riccaboni, Massimo & Della Malva, Antonio, 2018. "Sailing in all winds: Technological search over the business cycle," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1933-1944.
    17. Christina Fang & Jeho Lee & Melissa A. Schilling, 2010. "Balancing Exploration and Exploitation Through Structural Design: The Isolation of Subgroups and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 625-642, June.
    18. Luciana D’Adderio, 2014. "The Replication Dilemma Unravelled: How Organizations Enact Multiple Goals in Routine Transfer," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1325-1350, October.
    19. 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.
    20. Dew, Nicholas & Read, Stuart & Sarasvathy, Saras D. & Wiltbank, Robert, 2008. "Outlines of a behavioral theory of the entrepreneurial firm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 37-59, April.

    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:ororsc:v:26:y:2015:i:4:p:1140-1161. 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.