IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v27y2016i3p698-721.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Dynamics of Interrelated Routines: Introducing the Cluster Level

Author

Listed:
  • Waldemar Kremser

    (School of Business and Economics, Freie Universität Berlin, 14195 Berlin, Germany)

  • Georg Schreyögg

    (School of Business and Economics, Freie Universität Berlin, 14195 Berlin, Germany)

Abstract

This paper explores interrelationships between organizational routines and their effect on routine dynamics. We introduce a more aggregate perspective on routines, the cluster level, and develop a theoretical framework that helps understanding the dynamics of routine clusters. The framework combines thoughts on the division of labor, modularity, and the consequences of complementarities. It explains why single routines are grouped into clusters and how complementarities between the specialized routines of a cluster will affect its evolution. It is the main argument of this paper that, in contrast to the expanding dynamics of single routines, which continuously bring about variations, the dynamics of clusters are restricting, amounting to a selection mechanism in organizational practice. To illustrate and substantiate our argument, we use a historical case study on CEWE, the European market leader in photofinishing. We analyze how the cluster for 35mm photofinishing—the core routines of the analog years—reacted to the upcoming digital revolution in the 1990s. Our paper offers three contributions: First, we theorize on the interrelationship between routines and the anatomy of clusters. Second, we provide a conceptual framework for analyzing the dynamics of routine clusters that builds on complementarities and the related misfit costs. Third, by elaborating on these dynamics, our findings contribute to a multilevel theory of organizational routines by adding the meso level of the routine cluster to the micro level of single routine dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • Waldemar Kremser & Georg Schreyögg, 2016. "The Dynamics of Interrelated Routines: Introducing the Cluster Level," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 698-721, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:27:y:2016:i:3:p:698-721
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2015.1042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.1042
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2015.1042?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. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. Dorothy Leonard-Barton, 1990. "A Dual Methodology for Case Studies: Synergistic Use of a Longitudinal Single Site with Replicated Multiple Sites," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 248-266, August.
    3. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1994. "The Division of Labor, Coordination Costs, and Knowledge," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, pages 299-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Mary J. Benner & Mary Tripsas, 2012. "The influence of prior industry affiliation on framing in nascent industries: the evolution of digital cameras," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 277-302, March.
    5. Brian T. Pentland & Martha S. Feldman & Markus C. Becker & Peng Liu, 2012. "Dynamics of Organizational Routines: A Generative Model," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(8), pages 1484-1508, December.
    6. Bénédicte Reynaud, 2005. "The void at the heart of rules: Routines in the context of rule-following," PSE Working Papers halshs-00590855, HAL.
    7. Reinhard H. Schmidt & Gerald Spindler, 2002. "Path Dependence, Corporate Governance and Complementarity," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 311-333, November.
    8. Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1995. "Dominant designs and the survival of firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(6), pages 415-430.
    9. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
    10. Martha S. Feldman & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2011. "Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1240-1253, October.
    11. Gersick, Connie J. G. & Hackman, J. Richard, 1990. "Habitual routines in task-performing groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 65-97, October.
    12. James M. Utterback & Happy J. Acee, 2005. "Disruptive Technologies: An Expanded View," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(01), pages 1-17.
    13. Burgelman, Robert A., 2002. "Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Co-evolutionary Lock-in," Research Papers 1745, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    14. Stene, Edwin O., 1940. "An Approach to a Science of Administration," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(6), pages 1124-1137, December.
    15. Schmidt, Reinhard H & Spindler, Gerald, 2002. "Path Dependence, Corporate Governance and Complementarity," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 311-333, Winter.
    16. 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.
    17. Alfred Kieser, 1994. "Why Organization Theory Needs Historical Analyses—And How This Should Be Performed," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 608-620, November.
    18. Jennifer A. Howard-Grenville, 2005. "The Persistence of Flexible Organizational Routines: The Role of Agency and Organizational Context," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 618-636, December.
    19. Jeremy P. Birnholtz & Michael D. Cohen & Susannah V. Hoch, 2007. "Organizational Character: On the Regeneration of Camp Poplar Grove," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 315-332, April.
    20. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    21. Scott F. Turner & Violina Rindova, 2012. "A Balancing Act: How Organizations Pursue Consistency in Routine Functioning in the Face of Ongoing Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 24-46, February.
    22. David, Paul A., 1994. "Why are institutions the 'carriers of history'?: Path dependence and the evolution of conventions, organizations and institutions," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 205-220, December.
    23. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, December.
    24. Andrew M. Pettigrew, 1990. "Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and Practice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 267-292, August.
    25. Kannan Srikanth & Phanish Puranam, 2014. "The Firm as a Coordination System: Evidence from Software Services Offshoring," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1253-1271, August.
    26. Nathalie Lazaric & Blandine Denis, 2005. "Routinisation and memorisation of tasks inside a workshop: the case of the introduction of ISO norms," Post-Print hal-00457079, HAL.
    27. Schmickl, Christina & Kieser, Alfred, 2008. "How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1148-1163, July.
    28. Weiss, Howard M. & Ilgen, Daniel R., 1985. "Routinized behavior in organizations," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 57-67.
    29. Mark J. Zbaracki & Mark Bergen, 2010. "When Truces Collapse: A Longitudinal Study of Price-Adjustment Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 955-972, October.
    30. Brian T. Pentland & Thorvald Hærem & Derek Hillison, 2011. "The (N)Ever-Changing World: Stability and Change in Organizational Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1369-1383, December.
    31. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1995. "Complementarities and fit strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 179-208, April.
    32. Martha S. Feldman, 2000. "Organizational Routines as a Source of Continuous Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(6), pages 611-629, December.
    33. Bill McKelvey, 1999. "Avoiding Complexity Catastrophe in Coevolutionary Pockets: Strategies for Rugged Landscapes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 294-321, June.
    34. George P. Huber & Danial J. Power, 1985. "Retrospective reports of strategic‐level managers: Guidelines for increasing their accuracy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(2), pages 171-180, April.
    35. Jochen Koch, 2008. "Strategic Paths and Media Management – a Path Dependency Analysis of the German Newspaper Branch of High Quality Journalism," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 60(1), pages 50-73, January.
    36. Paul S. Adler, 1995. "Interdepartmental Interdependence and Coordination: The Case of the Design/Manufacturing Interface," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 147-167, April.
    37. Bénédicte Reynaud, 2005. "The void at the heart of rules: routines in the context of rule-following. The case of the Paris Metro Workshop," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(5), pages 847-871, October.
    38. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal & Rishi R. Roy, 2008. "The Dual Role of Modularity: Innovation and Imitation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 939-955, May.
    39. Schmickl, Christina & Kieser, Alfred, 2008. "How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 473-491, April.
    40. Roger I. Hall, 1984. "The Natural Logic of Management Policy Making: Its Implications for the Survival of an Organization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(8), pages 905-927, August.
    41. Sidney G. Winter, 2003. "Understanding dynamic capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 991-995, October.
    42. Nathalie Lazaric & Blandine Denis, 2005. "Routinization and memorization of tasks in a workshop: the case of the introduction of ISO norms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(5), pages 873-896, October.
    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. D'Adderio, Luciana & Pollock, Neil, 2020. "Making routines the same: Crafting similarity and singularity in routines transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    2. Johann Fortwengel & Arne Keller, 2020. "Agency in the face of path dependence: how organizations can regain scope for maneuver," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 1169-1201, November.
    3. Arne Petermann & Georg Schreyögg & Daniel Fürstenau, 2019. "Can hierarchy hold back the dynamics of self-reinforcing processes? A simulation study on path dependence in hierarchies," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(2), pages 637-669, December.
    4. Lisa Balzarin & Francesco Zirpoli, 2021. "How organizational identity and organizational routines affect each other through agency," Working Papers 04, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    5. Sydow, Jörg & Schreyögg, Georg & Koch, Jochen, 2020. "Current interest in the theory of organizational path dependence: A short update on the occasion of the 2019 AMR Decade Award," Discussion Papers 2020/12, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    6. Dehua Gao & Aliakbar Akbaritabar, 2022. "Using agent-based modeling in routine dynamics research: a quantitative and content analysis of literature," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 521-550, February.
    7. Yutaka Yamauchi & Takeshi Hiramoto, 2020. "Performative Achievement of Routine Recognizability: An Analysis of Order Taking Routines at Sushi Bars," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(8), pages 1610-1642, December.
    8. Jie Wu & Jan-Erik Vahlne, 2022. "Dynamic capabilities of emerging market multinational enterprises and the Uppsala model," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(5), pages 690-714, November.
    9. Martha S. Feldman & Brian T. Pentland & Luciana D’Adderio & Nathalie Lazaric, 2016. "Beyond Routines as Things: Introduction to the Special Issue on Routine Dynamics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 505-513, June.
    10. Robert Charles Sheldon & Eric Michael Laviolette & Fabien Geuser, 2020. "Explaining the process and effects of new routine introduction with a notion of micro-level entrepreneurship," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 609-642, July.
    11. Dongil D. Keum, 2020. "Cog in the wheel: Resource release and the scope of interdependencies in corporate adjustment activities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 175-197, February.
    12. Siyuan Liu & Shaojie Tang & Jiangchuan Zheng & Lionel M. Ni, 2022. "Unsupervised Learning for Human Mobility Behaviors," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1565-1586, May.
    13. Omid Omidvar & Mehdi Safavi & Vern L. Glaser, 2023. "Algorithmic Routines and Dynamic Inertia: How Organizations Avoid Adapting to Changes in the Environment," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 313-345, March.

    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. Fleur Deken & Paul R. Carlile & Hans Berends & Kristina Lauche, 2016. "Generating Novelty Through Interdependent Routines: A Process Model of Routine Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 659-677, June.
    2. Katharina Dittrich & Stéphane Guérard & David Seidl, 2016. "Talking About Routines: The Role of Reflective Talk in Routine Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 678-697, June.
    3. Paul Spee & Paula Jarzabkowski & Michael Smets, 2016. "The Influence of Routine Interdependence and Skillful Accomplishment on the Coordination of Standardizing and Customizing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 759-781, June.
    4. Anja Danner-Schröder, 2021. "Without actors, there is no action: How interpersonal interactions help to explain routine dynamics," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 1913-1936, October.
    5. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    6. Martha S. Feldman & Brian T. Pentland & Luciana D’Adderio & Nathalie Lazaric, 2016. "Beyond Routines as Things: Introduction to the Special Issue on Routine Dynamics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 505-513, June.
    7. Philip Stiles & Jonathan Trevor & Elaine Farndale & Shad S. Morris & Jaap Paauwe & Guenter Stahl & Patrick Wright, 2015. "Changing Routine: Reframing Performance Management within a Multinational," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 63-88, January.
    8. Dehua Gao & Aliakbar Akbaritabar, 2022. "Using agent-based modeling in routine dynamics research: a quantitative and content analysis of literature," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 521-550, February.
    9. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1119-1154, September.
    10. 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.
    11. Anja Danner-Schröder & Daniel Geiger, 2016. "Unravelling the Motor of Patterning Work: Toward an Understanding of the Microlevel Dynamics of Standardization and Flexibility," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 633-658, June.
    12. Aura Parmentier-Cajaiba & Nathalie Lazaric & Giovany Cajaiba-Santana, 2021. "The effortful process of routines emergence: the interplay of entrepreneurial actions and artefacts," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 33-63, January.
    13. Kathrin Sele & Simon Grand, 2016. "Unpacking the Dynamics of Ecologies of Routines: Mediators and Their Generative Effects in Routine Interactions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 722-738, June.
    14. Neil M Kay, 2018. "We need to talk: opposing narratives and conflicting perspectives in the conversation on routines," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(6), pages 943-956.
    15. Gilstrap, J. Bruce & Hart, Timothy A., 2020. "How employee behaviors effect organizational change and stability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 120-131.
    16. Davies, Andrew & Frederiksen, Lars & Cacciatori, Eugenia & Hartmann, Andreas, 2018. "The long and winding road: Routine creation and replication in multi-site organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1403-1417.
    17. Stephanie Bertels & Jennifer Howard-Grenville & Simon Pek, 2016. "Cultural Molding, Shielding, and Shoring at Oilco: The Role of Culture in the Integration of Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 573-593, June.
    18. Arie Y. Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2011. "Microfoundations of Internal and External Absorptive Capacity Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 81-98, February.
    19. Paula A. Jarzabkowski & Jane K. Lê & Martha S. Feldman, 2012. "Toward a Theory of Coordinating: Creating Coordinating Mechanisms in Practice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 907-927, August.
    20. 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).

    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:27:y:2016:i:3:p:698-721. 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.