IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v24y2013i1p99-115.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Microevolution of Routines: How Problem Solving and Social Preferences Interact

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph H. Loch

    (Cambridge Judge School of Business, Cambridge CB2 1AG, United Kingdom)

  • Kishore Sengupta

    (INSEAD, 77305 Fontainebleau Cedex, France)

  • M. Ghufran Ahmad

    (Suleman Dawood School of Business, Lahore University of Management Sciences, Lahore Cantt 54792, Pakistan)

Abstract

Routines are repetitive patterns of activity within a group, action patterns that help the group to solve problems and organize its way of functioning. Routines address issues of problem solving as well as issues of internal integration, such as regulating group identity, status distribution, and relationships. This study uses an experiment with three-person groups to examine how routines evolve in the interaction of problem-solving and internal integration dynamics. In line with previous work, we find that groups do indeed develop problem-solving routines over time and use them consistently. Furthermore, group members internalize and retain routines in their individual decisions. The formation and retention of these routines is, however, affected by social comparisons. Groups that have a strong sense of group identity use their problem-solving routines more consistently. Their members also better retain the routines in their individual decisions. In contrast, we find that differentiated status within a group distorts its problem-solving routines by overweighting the influence of the high-status member. Status also interferes with the formation and retention of routines, in that groups are relatively less consistent in using them and their members show lower retention of the routine in their individual decisions. Finally, a strong relationship between two of the three members in a group (leaving the third group member out) enables the two to engage in consistent problem solving, but concomitantly, the group as a whole is less able to apply its routines consistently, and group retention of routines also suffers.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph H. Loch & Kishore Sengupta & M. Ghufran Ahmad, 2013. "The Microevolution of Routines: How Problem Solving and Social Preferences Interact," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 99-115, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:24:y:2013:i:1:p:99-115
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1110.0719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0719
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.1110.0719?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. Thorstein Veblen, 1899. "Mr. Cummings's Strictures on "The Theory of the Leisure Class"," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 8, pages 106-106.
    2. Kane, Aimee A. & Argote, Linda & Levine, John M., 2005. "Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 56-71, January.
    3. Bester, Helmut & Guth, Werner, 1998. "Is altruism evolutionarily stable?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 193-209, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Melissa C. Thomas-Hunt & Tonya Y. Ogden & Margaret A. Neale, 2003. "Who's Really Sharing? Effects of Social and Expert Status on Knowledge Exchange Within Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 464-477, April.
    6. Roger E. Bohn, 1995. "Noise and Learning in Semiconductor Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 31-42, January.
    7. Hinsz, Verlin B., 1999. "Group Decision Making with Responses of a Quantitative Nature: The Theory of Social Decision Schemes for Quantities, , , , , , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 28-49, October.
    8. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    9. Veblen, Thorstein, 1899. "The Theory of the Leisure Class," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number veblen1899.
    10. Michael D. Cohen & Paul Bacdayan, 1994. "Organizational Routines Are Stored as Procedural Memory: Evidence from a Laboratory Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 554-568, November.
    11. Roberto A. Weber & Colin F. Camerer, 2003. "Cultural Conflict and Merger Failure: An Experimental Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 400-415, April.
    12. Christoph H. Loch & D. Charles Galunic & Susan Schneider, 2006. "Balancing cooperation and competition in human groups: the role of emotional algorithms and evolution," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2-3), pages 217-233.
    13. Christoph H. Loch & Yaozhong Wu, 2008. "Social Preferences and Supply Chain Performance: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1835-1849, November.
    14. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2003. "The nature of human altruism," Nature, Nature, vol. 425(6960), pages 785-791, 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. Andrea Furlan & Ambra Galeazzo & Adriano Paggiaro, 2019. "Organizational and Perceived Learning in the Workplace: A Multilevel Perspective on Employees’ Problem Solving," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 280-297, March.
    2. Quan Anh Nguyen & Gillian Sullivan Mort, 0. "Conceptualising organisational-level and microfoundational capabilities: an integrated view of born-globals’ internationalisation," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-23.
    3. 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.
    4. Quan Anh Nguyen & Gillian Sullivan Mort, 2021. "Conceptualising organisational-level and microfoundational capabilities: an integrated view of born-globals’ internationalisation," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1781-1803, December.
    5. 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.
    6. Christofi, Michael & Vrontis, Demetris & Cadogan, John W., 2021. "Micro-foundational ambidexterity and multinational enterprises: A systematic review and a conceptual framework," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1).
    7. Qingfeng Meng & Zhen Li & Jianguo Du & Huimin Liu & Xiang Ding, 2019. "Negotiation for Time Optimization in Construction Projects with Competitive and Social Welfare Preferences," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-13, January.
    8. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Jutta Wollersheim & Koen H. Heimeriks, 2016. "Dynamic Capabilities and Their Characteristic Qualities: Insights from a Lab Experiment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 233-248, April.
    3. Christoph H. Loch & Yaozhong Wu, 2008. "Social Preferences and Supply Chain Performance: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1835-1849, November.
    4. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    5. Henrik Bresman, 2010. "External Learning Activities and Team Performance: A Multimethod Field Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 81-96, February.
    6. Topi Miettinen & Olli Ropponen & Pekka Sääskilahti, 2020. "Prospect Theory, Fairness, and the Escalation of Conflict at a Negotiation Impasse," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(4), pages 1535-1574, October.
    7. Hermes, Henning & Huschens, Martin & Rothlauf, Franz & Schunk, Daniel, 2021. "Motivating low-achievers—Relative performance feedback in primary schools," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 45-59.
    8. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    9. Oindrila Dey & Swapnendu Banerjee, 2022. "Incentives, Status and Thereafter: A Critical Survey," South Asian Journal of Macroeconomics and Public Finance, , vol. 11(1), pages 95-115, June.
    10. Choi, Hoon-Seok & Thompson, Leigh, 2005. "Old wine in a new bottle: Impact of membership change on group creativity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 121-132, November.
    11. Chai Caichun & Zhu Hailong & Feng Zhangwei, 2018. "Evolutionary Stable Strategies for Supply Chains: Selfishness, Fairness, and Altruism," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 6(6), pages 532-551, December.
    12. Yaozhong Wu & Christoph H. Loch & Ludo Van der Heyden, 2008. "A Model of Fair Process and Its Limits," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 637-653, June.
    13. Matthias Sutter & Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler & Matthias Stefan & Markus Walzl, 2020. "Where to look for the morals in markets?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 30-52, March.
    14. Lewis, Kyle & Belliveau, Maura & Herndon, Benjamin & Keller, Joshua, 2007. "Group cognition, membership change, and performance: Investigating the benefits and detriments of collective knowledge," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 159-178, July.
    15. Tóbiás, Áron, 2023. "Rational Altruism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 50-80.
    16. Benno Torgler & Markus Schaffner & Bruno S. Frey & Sascha L. Schmidt & Uwe Dulleck, 2008. "Inequality Aversion and Performance in and on the Field," CREMA Working Paper Series 2008-18, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    17. Kangsik Choi & Jae-Joon Han & Minhwan Lee, 2018. "Peer Pressure with Inequity Aversion," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 34, pages 131-155.
    18. Hua, Shengya & Liu, Jingchen & Cheng, T.C.E. & Zhai, Xin, 2019. "Financing and ordering strategies for a supply chain under the option contract," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 100-121.
    19. Feng, Hairong & Zeng, Yinlian & Cai, Xiaoqiang & Qian, Qian & Zhou, Yongwu, 2021. "Altruistic profit allocation rules for joint replenishment with carbon cap-and-trade policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(3), pages 956-967.
    20. Linda Argote & Bill McEvily & Ray Reagans, 2003. "Managing Knowledge in Organizations: An Integrative Framework and Review of Emerging Themes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 571-582, 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:24:y:2013:i:1:p:99-115. 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.