IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssa/lemwps/2001-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bridging Contested Terrain: Linking Incentive-Based and Learning Perspectives on Organizational Evolution

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Dosi
  • Daniel Levinthal
  • Luigi Marengo

Abstract

In this paper we present a general model of organizational problem-solving in which we explore the relationship between problem complexity, decentralization of tasks and reward schemes. When facing complex problems which require the coordination of large numbers of interdependent elements, organization face a decomposition problem which has both a cognitive dimension and a reward and incentive dimension. The former relates to the decomposition and allocation of the process of generation of new solutions: since the search space is too vast to be searched extensively, organizations employ heuristics for reducing it. The decomposition heuristic takes the form of division of cognitive labor and determines which solutions are generated and become candidates for selection. The reward and incentive dimension defines the selection environment which chooses over alternative solutions. The model we present studies the interrelationships between these two dimensions, in particular we compare the problem solving performance of organizations characterized by various decompositions (of coarser of finer grain) and various reward schemes (at the level of the entire organization, team and individual). Moreover we extend our model in a still tentative fashion - in order to account for such power and authority relationships (giving some parts of the organization the power to stop changes in other parts), and to discuss the co-evolution of problem representations and incentive mechanisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Dosi & Daniel Levinthal & Luigi Marengo, 2001. "Bridging Contested Terrain: Linking Incentive-Based and Learning Perspectives on Organizational Evolution," LEM Papers Series 2001/20, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
  • Handle: RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2001/20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lem.sssup.it/WPLem/files/2001-20.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marengo, Luigi, et al, 2000. "The Structure of Problem-Solving Knowledge and the Structure of Organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 757-788, December.
    2. Scott E. Page, 1996. "Two measures of difficulty (*)," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 321-346.
    3. Radner, Roy, 1986. "The Internal Economy of Large Firms," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(380a), pages 1-22, Supplemen.
    4. 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, January.
    5. Winter, Sidney G, 1988. "On Coase, Competence, and the Corporation," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 163-180, Spring.
    6. Jean Tirole, 1999. "Incomplete Contracts: Where Do We Stand?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 741-782, July.
    7. Cohen, Michael D, et al, 1996. "Routines and Other Recurring Action Patterns of Organizations: Contemporary Research Issues," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 653-698.
    8. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-1171, September.
    9. Page, Scott E, 1996. "Two Measures of Difficulty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 321-346, August.
    10. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    -;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ssa:lemwps:2001/20. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/labssit.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.