IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v28y2019i5p977-1009..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Architectural knowledge generation: evidence from a field study

Author

Listed:
  • Simge Tuna
  • Stefano Brusoni
  • Anja Schulze

Abstract

This article studies how a world-leading technology-intensive firm organized to renew its architectural knowledge (AK) to escape the mirroring trap. On the strength of a longitudinal, in-depth, qualitative study, we develop a process model that identifies the phases, learning modes, and core design decisions that led to new AK. The analysis of our case highlights that the development of architectural and component knowledge could not be perfectly separated. Further, we infer that the renewal of AK can be attained through partial mirroring and by dissolving extant technical and organizational boundaries. Finally, we show how resource constraints affect the extent of AK generation.

Suggested Citation

  • Simge Tuna & Stefano Brusoni & Anja Schulze, 2019. "Architectural knowledge generation: evidence from a field study," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(5), pages 977-1009.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:28:y:2019:i:5:p:977-1009.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dty041
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 1995. "Technological and organizational designs for realizing economies of substitution," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 93-109.
    2. Hobday, Mike, 1998. "Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 689-710, February.
    3. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    4. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    5. Dennis A. Gioia & Kumar Chittipeddi, 1991. "Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(6), pages 433-448, September.
    6. Jack A. Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2002. "Being Efficiently Fickle: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Choice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 547-566, October.
    7. Michael G. Jacobides & Stephan Billinger, 2006. "Designing the Boundaries of the Firm: From “Make, Buy, or Ally” to the Dynamic Benefits of Vertical Architecture," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 249-261, April.
    8. Timothy J. Sturgeon, 2002. "Modular production networks: a new American model of industrial organization," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 451-496, June.
    9. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    10. Hoegl, Martin & Schulze, Anja, 2005. "How to Support Knowledge Creation in New Product Development:: An Investigation of Knowledge Management Methods," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 263-273, June.
    11. Cabigiosu, Anna & Zirpoli, Francesco & Camuffo, Arnaldo, 2013. "Modularity, interfaces definition and the integration of external sources of innovation in the automotive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 662-675.
    12. Sawyer, John E., 1990. "Effects of risk and ambiguity on judgments of contingency relations and behavioral resource allocation decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 85-110, February.
    13. Nicolai J. Foss & Keld Laursen & Torben Pedersen, 2011. "Linking Customer Interaction and Innovation: The Mediating Role of New Organizational Practices," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 980-999, August.
    14. Lyra J. Colfer & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2016. "The mirroring hypothesis: theory, evidence, and exceptions," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(5), pages 709-738.
    15. Georg Von Krogh & Johan Roos & Ken Slocum, 1994. "An essay on corporate epistemology," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S2), pages 53-71, June.
    16. Philipp Tuertscher & Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 2014. "Justification and Interlaced Knowledge at ATLAS, CERN," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1579-1608, December.
    17. Amrit Tiwana, 2008. "Does technological modularity substitute for control? A study of alliance performance in software outsourcing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(7), pages 769-780, July.
    18. Prencipe, Andrea, 1997. "Technological competencies and product's evolutionary dynamics a case study from the aero-engine industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1261-1276, January.
    19. Michael G. Jacobides, 2006. "The architecture and design of organizational capabilities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 15(1), pages 151-171, February.
    20. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, December.
    21. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2006. "The Architecture of Participation: Does Code Architecture Mitigate Free Riding in the Open Source Development Model?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1116-1127, July.
    22. Langlois, Richard N. & Robertson, Paul L., 1992. "Networks and innovation in a modular system: Lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 297-313, August.
    23. Stefano Brusoni & Andrea Prencipe, 2006. "Making Design Rules: A Multidomain Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 179-189, April.
    24. Maurizio Zollo & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 339-351, June.
    25. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    26. von Hippel, Eric & Tyre, Marcie J., 1995. "How learning by doing is done: problem identification in novel process equipment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-12, January.
    27. Pisano, Gary P., 1996. "Learning-before-doing in the development of new process technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 1097-1119, October.
    28. Alan MacCormack & John Rusnak & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2006. "Exploring the Structure of Complex Software Designs: An Empirical Study of Open Source and Proprietary Code," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1015-1030, July.
    29. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    30. Akira Takeishi, 2002. "Knowledge Partitioning in the Interfirm Division of Labor: The Case of Automotive Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 321-338, June.
    31. Sendil K. Ethiraj, 2007. "Allocation of inventive effort in complex product systems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 563-584, June.
    32. Rahul Kapoor & Ron Adner, 2012. "What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1227-1248, October.
    33. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    34. Baldwin, Carliss & MacCormack, Alan & Rusnak, John, 2014. "Hidden structure: Using network methods to map system architecture," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1381-1397.
    35. Miller, Roger, et al, 1995. "Innovation in Complex Systems Industries: The Case of Flight Simulation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 4(2), pages 363-400.
    36. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    37. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    38. Anna Cabigiosu & Arnaldo Camuffo, 2012. "Beyond the “Mirroring” Hypothesis: Product Modularity and Interorganizational Relations in the Air Conditioning Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 686-703, June.
    39. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    40. Michael G. Jacobides & Sidney G. Winter, 2005. "The co‐evolution of capabilities and transaction costs: explaining the institutional structure of production," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 395-413, May.
    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. Krzywdzinski, Martin & Butollo, Florian, 2022. "Combining Experiential Knowledge and Artificial Intelligence. The Digital Transformation of a Traditional Machine-Building Company," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 33(2), pages 161-184.
    2. Krzywdzinski, Martin & Butollo, Florian, 2022. "Combining Experiential Knowledge and Artificial Intelligence. The Digital Transformation of a Traditional Machine-Building Company," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 33(2), pages 161-184.

    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. Stefano Brusoni & Lorenzo Cassi & Simge Tuna, 2021. "Knowledge integration between technical change and strategy making," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1521-1552, November.
    2. Mohsen Jafari Songhori & Madjid Tavana & Takao Terano, 2020. "Product development team formation: effects of organizational- and product-related factors," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 88-122, March.
    3. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    4. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2020. "Component complementarity and transaction costs: the evolution of product design," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 845-867, August.
    5. Jiang Wei & Yang Yang & Sali Li, 2021. "Mirror or no mirror? Architectural design of cross-border integration of Chinese multinational enterprises," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1399-1430, December.
    6. Luo, Jianxi, 2018. "Architecture and evolvability of innovation ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 132-144.
    7. Jaegul Lee & Nicholas Berente, 2012. "Digital Innovation and the Division of Innovative Labor: Digital Controls in the Automotive Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1428-1447, October.
    8. Stefano Brusoni & Andrea Prencipe, 2006. "Making Design Rules: A Multidomain Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 179-189, April.
    9. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2022. "The effect of technology and regulation on the co-evolution of product and industry architecture," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 1056-1085.
    10. Tee, Richard & Davies, Andrew & Whyte, Jennifer, 2019. "Modular designs and integrating practices: Managing collaboration through coordination and cooperation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 51-61.
    11. Li, Shenxue & Clark, Timothy & Sillince, John, 2018. "Constructing a strategy on the creation of core competencies for African companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 204-213.
    12. Sungyong Um & Bin Zhang & Sunil Wattal & Youngjin Yoo, 2023. "Software Components and Product Variety in a Platform Ecosystem: A Dynamic Network Analysis of WordPress," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1339-1374, December.
    13. Fabrizio Salvador & Juan Pablo Madiedo, 2021. "Enabling Globally Distributed Projects: Effects of Project Interface Match and Related Technical Experience," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(4), pages 1052-1081, April.
    14. Morita, Hodaka & Nakajima, Kentaro & Tsuru, Tsuyoshi, 2017. "Product Architecture and Intra-Firm Coordination: Theory and Evidence," Discussion Paper Series 659, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    15. Gang Zhang & Ruoyang Gao, 2010. "Modularity and incremental innovation: the roles of design rules and organizational communication," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 171-200, June.
    16. Pierre Barbaroux, 2009. "On the nature and logics of innovation capabilities within knowledge-intensive environments: a case study," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 169-188.
    17. Chila, Vilma, 2021. "Knowledge dynamics in employee entrepreneurship : Implications for parents and offspring," Other publications TiSEM a1f5d18c-783b-4af6-8414-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Ming Piao & Edward J. Zajac, 2016. "How exploitation impedes and impels exploration: Theory and evidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1431-1447, July.
    19. Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    20. Andreas Reinstaller, 2012. "Modularity and its Implications for the Theory of the Firm," Chapters, in: Michael Dietrich & Jackie Krafft (ed.), Handbook on the Economics and Theory of the Firm, chapter 32, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L20 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - General
    • L64 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Other Machinery; Business Equipment; Armaments

    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:oup:indcch:v:28:y:2019:i:5:p:977-1009.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.