IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jorgde/v5y2016i1d10.1186_s41469-016-0008-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Playfulness, ideology and the technology of foolishness in the creation of a novel market niche for distributed control: The case of iPLON

Author

Listed:
  • Annachiara Casalini

    (University of Bologna)

  • Guido Fioretti

    (University of Bologna)

  • Andreas Pyka

    (University of Hohenheim)

Abstract

Distributed control is a technology and a design philosophy that, albeit superior to centralized control, cannot spread because it would require restructuring existing industries. It survives, however, in specific market niches. In this case-study we report on a small firm creating a novel market niche for distributed control. It is an engineering firm, where commitment to a fascinating technology generates the ability to turn serendipitous encounters into business opportunities. Because of deep beliefs motivating people to commit their lives in spite of substantial difficulties, we speak of a technological ideology. We submit that, in this case, a technological ideology is key to explain the ability to explore novel possibilities, or the technology of foolishness according to James March.

Suggested Citation

  • Annachiara Casalini & Guido Fioretti & Andreas Pyka, 2016. "Playfulness, ideology and the technology of foolishness in the creation of a novel market niche for distributed control: The case of iPLON," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jorgde:v:5:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1186_s41469-016-0008-4
    DOI: 10.1186/s41469-016-0008-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s41469-016-0008-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s41469-016-0008-4?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. Dorthe Døjbak Håkonsson & Jacob Kjær Eskildsen & Linda Argote & Dan Mønster & Richard M. Burton & Børge Obel, 2016. "Exploration versus exploitation: Emotions and performance as antecedents and consequences of team decisions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 985-1001, June.
    2. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    3. Guido Fioretti & Alessandro Lomi, 2010. "Passing the buck in the garbage can model of organizational choice," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 113-143, June.
    4. Mark Dodgson & David M. Gann & Nelson Phillips, 2013. "Organizational Learning and the Technology of Foolishness: The Case of Virtual Worlds at IBM," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1358-1376, October.
    5. Olivier Barreteau, 2003. "Our Companion Modelling Approach," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 6(2), pages 1-1.
    6. Federica Rossi & Paolo Bertossi & Paolo Gurisatti & Luisa Sovieni, 2008. "Incorporating a new technology into agent-artifact space. The case of control systems automation," Department of Economics 506, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    7. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    8. James G. March, 1978. "Bounded Rationality, Ambiguity, and the Engineering of Choice," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 587-608, Autumn.
    9. James G. March & Zur Shapira, 1987. "Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1404-1418, November.
    10. Sarasvathy, Saras D. & Dew, Nicholas, 2005. "Entrepreneurial logics for a technology of foolishness," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 385-406, December.
    11. Ritter, Thomas & Gemunden, Hans Georg, 2004. "The impact of a company's business strategy on its technological competence, network competence and innovation success," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(5), pages 548-556, May.
    12. Izak, Michal, 2013. "The foolishness of wisdom: Towards an inclusive approach to wisdom in organization," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 108-115.
    13. Ritter, Thomas & Gemunden, Hans Georg, 2003. "Network competence: Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(9), pages 745-755, September.
    14. O'Reilly, Charles & Harreld, J. Bruce & Tushman, Michael L., 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: IBM and Emerging Business Opportunities," Research Papers 2025, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. Orton, James Douglas, 1997. "From inductive to iterative grounded theory: Zipping the gap between process theory and process data," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 419-438, December.
    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. Larsen, Bøje, 2020. "Whatever happened to “The Technology of Foolishness”? Does it have any potential today?," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(1).

    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. Caroline Danièle Mothe & Jean-Christophe Bogaert, 2019. "Adaptative ambidexterity and dynamic environment: a longitudinal study of an SME [Ambidexteridad adaptativa y entorno dinámico: un estudio longitudinal de una pequeña y mediana empresa]," Post-Print halshs-02376305, HAL.
    2. 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.
    3. Heracleous, Loizos & Papachroni, Angeliki & Andriopoulos, Constantine & Gotsi, Manto, 2017. "Structural ambidexterity and competency traps: Insights from Xerox PARC," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 327-338.
    4. William G. Egelhoff, 2020. "How a Flexible Matrix Structure Could Create Ambidexterity at the Macro Level of Large, Complex Organizations Like MNCs," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 459-484, June.
    5. Martin R. W. Hiebl & David I. Pielsticker, 2023. "Automation, organizational ambidexterity and the stability of employee relations: new tensions arising between corporate entrepreneurship, innovation management and stakeholder management," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1978-2006, December.
    6. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2023. "Facilitating and Inhibiting Effects of Organisational Ambidexterity in SME: an Analysis Centred on SME Characteristics," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(1), pages 35-64, March.
    7. David B. Audretsch & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "Is ambidexterity the missing link between entrepreneurship, management, and innovation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1891-1918, December.
    8. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.
    9. Priyanka, & Jain, Mahima & Dhir, Sanjay, 2022. "Antecedents of organization ambidexterity: A comparative study of public and private sector organizations," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    10. Christine Chou & Steven O. Kimbrough, 2016. "An agent-based model of organizational ambidexterity decisions and strategies in new product development," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 4-46, March.
    11. Sebastian Raisch & Michael L. Tushman, 2016. "Growing New Corporate Businesses: From Initiation to Graduation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1237-1257, October.
    12. Larsen, Bøje, 2020. "Whatever happened to “The Technology of Foolishness”? Does it have any potential today?," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(1).
    13. Saemundsson, Rögnvaldur & Candi, Marina & Sigurjonsson, Throstur Olaf, 2022. "The influence of performance feedback and top management team orientation on decisions about R&D in technology-based firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    14. Mark Ebers, 2017. "Organisationsmodelle für Innovation [Organizing for Innovation]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 81-109, March.
    15. Laurence Lehmann-Ortega & Gérald Naro, 2008. "Controle De Gestion, Capacites Dynamiques Et Strategies Emergentes Dans Les Organisations Entrepreneuriales : La Conception D'Un Balanced-Scorecard Comme « Levier De Controle Interactif »," Post-Print halshs-00525411, HAL.
    16. Vahlne, Jan-Erik & Jonsson, Anna, 2017. "Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability in the globalization of the multinational business enterprise (MBE): Case studies of AB Volvo and IKEA," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 57-70.
    17. Mario Le Glatin & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2018. "Can organisational ambidexterity kill innovation? A case for non-expected utility decision making," Post-Print hal-01808566, HAL.
    18. Freeman, Steven F., 1997. "Good decisions : reconciling human rationality, evolution, and ethics," Working papers WP 3962-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    19. Hu, Jing & Wang, Yilin & Liu, Shengnan & Song, Mingshun, 2023. "Mechanism of latecomer enterprises’ technological catch-up in technical standards alliances – An ambidextrous innovation perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    20. Kazadi, Kande & Lievens, Annouk & Mahr, Dominik, 2016. "Stakeholder co-creation during the innovation process: Identifying capabilities for knowledge creation among multiple stakeholders," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 525-540.

    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:spr:jorgde:v:5:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1186_s41469-016-0008-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.