Learning How to Govern and Learning How to Solve Problems: On the Co‐Evolution of Competences, Conflicts and Organizational Routines
Обучение управлению и обучение решению проблем: о коэволюции компетенций, конфликтов и организационных рутин
1999-09-23
SCID: 54.1/a9hw3kpp
Discuss with AI
competence specificitygovernance mechanismsorganizational competenciesorganizational routinesproblem-solving and learning
Figures from the paper
Abstract (AI)
Abstract Highlights the specificity of organizational competencies and their routinized, inertial, and conflictual properties from the perspective of the individual firm, arguing that persistent and distinctive variation among firms can best be understood by taking these properties into account, but only after also taking account of the pervasive influence of institutions in different countries. The role of organizational routines in explaining firm differences is addressed; with the critical competencies of firms embodied in the operational routines, they are difficult to copy and their evolution is constrained by both the characteristics of the firm itself and the environment of the firm. This is designated ‘competence specificity’, where competencies are seen not only as involving problem‐solving and learning skills, but also as including skills and rules governing firm internal relationships; hence, there is also a dual role of organizational routines—as problem‐solving procedures, and as governance devices or mechanisms for coordination. The firm is then interpreted as a behavioural entity that must compromise between several different functions and activities; this complex picture is not reducible to viewing a firm simply as a nexus of contracts, instead, competencies and routines are viewed as co‐evolving with the environment in which they are embedded. Inertia is thus ‘built into’ this concept of the firm, and in prying open this ‘organizational black box’, the authors also indicate several avenues for future research.
Key Findings
1
Competence specificity makes firms’ critical operational capabilities difficult to copy because their evolution is constrained by internal characteristics and environmental conditions.
2
Firms are behavioral entities that must compromise among competing functions; their competencies and routines co-evolve with the environments in which they are embedded.
3
Organizational inertia is built into firms because competencies and routines are path-dependent, internally constrained, and shaped by institutional contexts.
4
Organizational routines have a dual role: they function as problem-solving and learning procedures, while also governing internal relationships and coordinating activities.
5
Persistent and distinctive differences among firms are best explained by organizational competencies’ routinized, inertial, and conflictual properties, alongside country-specific institutional influences.
Research Object
organizational competencies and routines within individual firms, embedded in different institutional environments
Research Subject
the co-evolution, specificity, inertia, conflictual properties, and dual problem-solving and governance roles of organizational competencies and routines
Publication Details
Publication Date
1999-09-23
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Open access PDF
Access Type
Author Information
Download PDF
Subscribe to digest