Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T08:11:52.144Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part IV - Related Communities of Thought

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2021

Martha S. Feldman
Affiliation:
University of California, Irvine
Brian T. Pentland
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Luciana D'Adderio
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Katharina Dittrich
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
Claus Rerup
Affiliation:
Frankfurt School of Finance and Management
David Seidl
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Aggarwal, V. A., Posen, H. E. and Workiewicz, M. (2017). Adaptive capacity to technological change: A microfoundational approach. Strategic Management Journal, 38(6), 12121231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, M. H. and Lemken, R. K. (2019). An empirical assessment of the influence of March and Simon’s organizations: The realized contribution and unfulfilled promise of a masterpiece. Journal of Management Studies, 56(8), 15371569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Argote, L. (2013). Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge, 2nd edition, New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Argote, L. and Greve, H. R. (2007). A behavioral theory of the firm – 40 years and counting: Introduction and impact. Organization Science, 18, 337349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battilana, J. and D’Aunno, T. (2009) Institutional work and the paradox of embedded agency. In Lawrence, T. B., Suddaby, R. and Leca, B., eds., Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3158.Google Scholar
Cacciatori, E. (2012). Resolving conflict in problem-solving: Systems of artifacts in the development of new routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 15591585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohendet, P. S. and Simon, L. O. (2016). Always playable: Recombining routines for creative efficiency at Ubisoft Montreal’s video game studio. Organization Science, 27(3), 614632.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K. and Seidl, D. 2018. Emerging intentionality in routine dynamics: A pragmatist view. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 111138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2016). Routines as process: Past, present, and future. In Howard-Grenville, J. A., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: A Process Perspective. Perspectives on Process Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 2346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94118.Google Scholar
Ganz, S. C. (2018). Ignorant decision making and educated inertia: Some political pathologies of organizational learning. Organization Science, 29(1), 3957.Google Scholar
Gavetti, G., Greve, H. R., Levinthal, D. A. and Ocasio, W. (2012). The behavioral theory of the firm: Assessment and prospects. Academy of Management Annals, 6, 140.Google Scholar
Gavetti, G. Ocasio, W. and Levinthal, D. A. (2007). Neo-Carnegie: The Carnegie School’s past, present, and reconstructing for the future. Organization Science, 18(3), 523536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goh, K. T. and Pentland, B. T. (2019). From actions to paths to patterning: Toward a dynamic theory of patterning in routines. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 19011929.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. (2003). Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. (2008). Organizational routines and performance feedback. In Becker, M., ed., Handbook of Organizational Routines. Northampton, MA: Elgar, 187204.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. and Gaba, V. (2017). Performance feedback in organizations and groups: Common themes. In Argote, L. and Levine, J. M., eds., The Handbook of Group and Organizational Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hilligoss, B. (2020). Routines and Sensemaking: Strengthening Connections, Extending Theory. Winner, MOC Best Symposium Award, Academy of Management Conference.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. and Rerup, C. (2017). A process perspective on organizational routines. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Sage Handbook of Process Organizational Studies. London: Sage Publications, pp. 323339.Google Scholar
Kacperczyk, A. Beckman, C. M. and Moliterno, T. P. (2015). Disentangling risk and change: Internal and external comparisons in the Mutual Fund Industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60, 228262.Google Scholar
Kay, N. M. (2018). We need to talk: Opposing narratives and conflicting perspectives in the conversation on routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(6), 943956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koumakhov, R. and Daoud, A. (2017). Routine and reflexivity: Simonian cognitivism vs practice approach. Industrial and Corporate Change, 26, 727743.Google Scholar
Lazaric, N. and Raybaut, A. (2005). Knowledge, hierarchy and the selection of routines: An interpretative model with group interactions. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 15(4), 393421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinthal, D. A. and Marino, A. (2015). Three facets of organizational adaptation: Selection, variety, and plasticity. Organization Science, 26(3), 743755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinthal, D. A. and Rerup, C. (2006). Crossing an apparent chasm: Bridging mindful and less-mindful perspectives on organizational learning. Organization Science, 17(4), 502513.Google Scholar
Levinthal, D. A. and Rerup, C. (2021). The plural of goal: Learning in a world of ambiguity. Organization Science, 32(3), 527543.Google Scholar
Levitt, B. and March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 319–340.Google Scholar
Lindberg, A. (2020). Developing theory through integrating human and machine pattern recognitionJournal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(1), 7.Google Scholar
Lyytinen, K., Rose, G. and Yoo, Y. (2010). Learning routines and disruptive technological change: Hyper-learning in seven software development organizations during internet adoption. Information Technology & People, 23(2), 165192.Google Scholar
Maitlis, S. and Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8, 57125.Google Scholar
March, J. G. (1962). The business firm as a political coalition. Journal of Politics, 24(4), 662678.Google Scholar
March, J. G. and Simon, H. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
March, J. G., Sproull, L. S. and Tamuz, M. (1991). Learning from samples of one or fewerOrganization Science, 2(1), 113.Google Scholar
Mariano, S. and Casey, A. (2016). The dynamics of organizational routines in a startup: The Ereda model. European Management Review, 13(4), 251274.Google Scholar
Miller, K. D. Pentland, B. T. and Choi, S. (2012). Dynamics of performing and remembering organizational routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 15361558.Google Scholar
Nelson, P. R. and Winter, S. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Parmigiani, A. and Howard-Grenville, J. (2011). Routines revisited: Exploring the capabilities and practice perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 413453.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 793815.Google Scholar
Pentland, B., Feldman, T., Becker, M. S., M. C. and Liu, P. (2012). Dynamics of organizational routines: A generative model. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 14841508.Google Scholar
Pentland, B.T., Recker, J., Wolf, J. R. and Wyner, G. (2020). Bringing context into the analysis of process with digital trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(5), 12141236.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 484510.Google Scholar
Posen, H. E., Keil, T., Kim, S. and Meissner, F. (2018) Renewing research on problemistic search: A review and research agenda. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 208251.Google Scholar
Powell, W. W. and Rerup, C. (2017). Opening the black box: Microfoundations of institutions. In Greenwood, R. et al., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications, Chapter 12: 311337.Google Scholar
Prashantham, S. snd Floyd, S. W. (2012). Routine microprocesses and capability learning in international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(6), 544562.Google Scholar
Rerup, C. and Feldman, M. (2011). Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 577610.Google Scholar
Rerup, C. and Zbaracki, M. (in press). The politics of learning from rare events. Organization Science.Google Scholar
Royer, I. and Daniel, A. (2019). Organizational routines and institutional maintenance: The influence of legal artifacts. Journal of Management Inquiry, 28(2), 204224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2011). Beyond collective entities: Multi-level research on organizational routines and capabilities. Journal of Management, 37(2), 468490.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2018). Routine regulation: Balancing conflicting goals in organizational routines. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), 170209.Google Scholar
Seo, M. G. and Creed, W. E. D. (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27, 222247.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1964). On the concept of organizational goal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9(1), 122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Zbaracki, M. J. and Bergen, M. (2010). When truces collapse: A longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines. Organization Science, 21(5), 955972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zietsma, C. and Lawrence, T. B. (2010). Institutional work in the transformation of an organizational field: The interplay of boundary work and practice workAdministrative Science Quarterly, 55(2), 189221.Google Scholar

References

Ambrosini, V. and Bowman, C. (2009). What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct in strategic management? International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(1), 2949.Google Scholar
Ambrosini, V., Bowman, C. and Collier, N. (2009). Dynamic capabilities: An exploration of how firms renew their resource base. British Journal of Management, 20, S9S24.Google Scholar
Aroles, J. and McLean, C. (2016). Rethinking stability and change in the study of organizational routines: Difference and repetition in a newspaper-printing factoryOrganization Science, 27(3), 535550.Google Scholar
Barreto, I. (2010). Dynamic capabilities: A review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of Management, 36(1), 256280.Google Scholar
Berente, N., Lyytinen, K., Yoo, Y. and King, J. L. (2016). Routines as shock absorbers during organizational transformation: Integration, control, and NASA’s enterprise information systemOrganization Science, 27(3), 551572.Google Scholar
Bertels, S., Howard-Grenville, J. and Pek, S. (2016). Cultural molding, shielding, and shoring at Oilco: The role of culture in the integration of routinesOrganization Science, 27(3), 573593.Google Scholar
Bingham, C. B., Heimeriks, K. H., Schijven, M. and Gates, S. (2015). Concurrent learning: How firms develop multiple dynamic capabilities in parallel. Strategic Management Journal, 36(12), 18021825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S. L. and Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 134.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D. (2007). Reading Dewey: Reflections on the study of routine. Organization Studies, 28(5), 773786.Google Scholar
Cohendet, P. S. and Simon, L. O. (2016). Always playable: Recombining routines for creative efficiency at Ubisoft Montreal’s video game studioOrganization Science, 27(3), 614632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2014). The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5), 13251350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danneels, E. (2002). The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences. Strategic Management Journal, 23(12), 10951121.Google Scholar
Danneels, E. (2008). Organizational antecedents of second‐order competences. Strategic Management Journal, 29(5), 519543.Google Scholar
Danneels, E. (2011). Trying to become a different type of company: Dynamic capability at Smith Corona. Strategic Management Journal, 32(1), 131.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K., Guérard, S. and Seidl, D. (2016). Talking about routines: The role of reflective talk in routine changeOrganization Science, 27(3), 678697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, S., Meyer, K. and Day, M. (2014). Building dynamic capabilities of adaptation and innovation: A study of micro-foundations in a transition economy. Long Range Planning, 47(4), 186205.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. and Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 11051121.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B. T., D’Adderio, L. and Lazaric, N. (2016). Beyond routines as things: Introduction to the special issue on routine dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 505513.Google Scholar
Grand, S. (2016). Routines, Strategies and Management: Engaging for Recurrent Creation ‘At the Edge’. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Hayward, M. L. A. (2002). When do firms learn from their acquisition experience? Evidence from 1990–1995. Strategic Management Journal, 23(1), 2139.Google Scholar
Helfat, C. E. (1997). Know‐how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: The case of R&D. Strategic Management Journal, 18(5), 339360.Google Scholar
Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D. and Winter, S. G. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Helfat, C. E. and Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831850.Google Scholar
Helfat, C. E. and Winter, S. G. (2011). Untangling dynamic and operational capabilities: Strategy for the (N) ever‐changing world. Strategic Management Journal, 32(11), 12431250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heracleous, L. 2013. Quantum strategy at Apple Inc. Organizational Dynamics, 42(2), 9299.Google Scholar
Hodgkinson, G. P. and Healey, M. P. (2011). Psychological foundations of dynamic capabilities: Reflexion and reflection in strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 32(13), 15001516.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618636.Google Scholar
Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F. and Hall, R. J. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 195229.Google Scholar
Kremser, W. and Schreyögg, G. (2016). The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster levelOrganization Science, 27(3), 698721.Google Scholar
Lazaric, N. (2008). Routines and routinization: An exploration of some micro-cognitive foundations. In Becker, M. C., ed., Handbook of Organizational Routines. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 205227.Google Scholar
Lazaric, N. (2011). Organizational routines and cognition: An introduction to empirical and analytical contributions. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(2), 147156.Google Scholar
MacLean, D., MacIntosh, R. and Seidl, D. (2015). Rethinking dynamic capabilities from a creative action perspective. Strategic Organization, 13(4), 340352.Google Scholar
Martin, J. A. (2011). Dynamic managerial capabilities and the multibusiness team: The role of episodic teams in executive leadership groups. Organization Science, 22(1), 118140.Google Scholar
Michel, A. A. (2014). The mutual constitution of persons and organizations: An ontological perspective on organizational change. Organization Science, 25(4), 10821110.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.Google Scholar
Pandza, K. and Thorpe, R. (2009). Creative search and strategic sense-making: Missing dimensions in the concept of dynamic capabilities. British Journal of Management, 20(1), S118S131.Google Scholar
Parmigiani, A. and Howard-Grenville, J. (2011). Routines revisited: Exploring the capabilities and practice perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 413453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Feldman, M. S., Becker, M. C. and Liu, P. (2012). Dynamics of organizational routines: A generative model. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 14841508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peteraf, M., Di Stefano, G. and Verona, G. (2013). The elephant in the room of dynamic capabilities: Bringing two diverging conversations together. Strategic Management Journal, 34(12), 13891410.Google Scholar
Prange, C., Bruyaka, O. and Marmenout, K. (2018). Investigating the transformation and transition processes between dynamic capabilities: Evidence from DHL. Organization Studies, 39(11), 15471573.Google Scholar
Rerup, C. and Feldman, M. S. (2011). Routines as a source of change in organizational schema: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 577610.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. (1985). Issues of level in organizational research: Multilevel and cross-level perspectives. In Cummings, L. L. and Staw, B. M., eds., Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 7, 137.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. (2003). The role of micro‐strategies in the engineering of firm evolution. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 83108.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. (2009). Capabilities unveiled: The role of ordinary activities in the evolution of product development processes. Organization Science, 20(2), 384409.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2011). Beyond collective entities: Multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities. Journal of Management, 37(2), 468490.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2018). Routine regulation: Balancing conflicting goals in organizational routines. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), 170209.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Vassolo, R. (2018) The sources of dynamism in dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal (‘New theory in strategic management’ Special Issue), 39(6), 17281752.Google Scholar
Schilke, O., Hu, S. and Helfat, C. E. (2018). Quo vadis, dynamic capabilities? A content analytic review of the current state of knowledge and recommendations for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 390439.Google Scholar
Sele, K. and Grand, S. (2016). Unpacking the dynamics of ecologies of routines: Mediators and their generative effects in routine interactionsOrganization Science, 27(3), 722738.Google Scholar
Sonenshein, S. (2016). Routines and creativity: From dualism to dualityOrganization Science, 27(3), 739758.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 13191350.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 13951401.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. (2017). Towards a capability theory of (innovating) firms: Implications for management and policy. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 41(3), 693720.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. (2018). Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(3), 359368.Google Scholar
Teece, D. and Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(3), 537556.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509533.Google Scholar
Tippmann, E., Sharkey Scott, P. and Mangematin, V. (2014) Stimulating knowledge search routines and architecture competences: The role of organizational context and middle management. Long Range Planning, 47(4), 206223.Google Scholar
Tripsas, M. and Gavetti, G. (2000). Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10/11), 11471161.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. (2012). A balancing act: How organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change. Organization Science, 23(1), 2446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, K. S. R. and Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326349.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. (2000). The satisficing principle in capability learning. Strategic Management Journal, Special Issue, 21(10–11), 981996.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991995.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. (2008). Dynamic capability as a source of change. In Ebner, A. and Beck, N., eds., The Institutions of the Market. Organizations, Social Systems, and Governance. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 4065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J. and Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4), 917955.Google Scholar
Zbaracki, M. J. and Bergen, M. (2010). When truces collapse: A longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines. Organization Science, 21(5), 955972.Google Scholar
Zollo, M. and Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339351.Google Scholar
Zollo, M., Reuer, J. J. and Singh, H. (2002). Interorganizational routines and performance in strategic alliances. Organization Science, 13(6), 701713.Google Scholar

References

Aggerholm, H. K. and Asmuß, B. (2016). When ‘good’ is not good enough: Power Dynamics and Performative Aspects of Organizational Routines. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 140178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, T. and Chapman, C. S. (2006). Doing qualitative field research in management accounting: Positioning data to contribute to theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(8), 819841.Google Scholar
Aroles, J. and McLean, C. (2015). Becoming, assemblages and intensities: Re-exploring rules and routines. In de Vaujany, F.-X., Mitev, N., Lanzara, G. F. and Mukherjee, A., eds., Materiality, Rules and Regulation: New Trends in Management and Organization Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 177194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balogun, J., Best, K. and , J. (2015). Selling the object of strategy: How frontline workers realize strategy through their daily work. Organization Studies, 36(10), 12851313.Google Scholar
Balogun, J., Huff, A. S. and Johnson, P. (2003). Three responses to the methodological challenges of studying strategizing. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 197224.Google Scholar
Balogun, J. and Johnson, G. (2004). Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 523549.Google Scholar
Balogun, J. and Johnson, G. (2005) From intended strategies to unintended outcomes: The impact of change recipient sensemaking. Organization Studies, 26(11), 15731601.Google Scholar
Bapuji, H., Hora, M. and Saeed, A. M. (2012). Intentions, intermediaries, and interaction: Examining the emergence of routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 15861607.Google Scholar
Bapuji, H., Hora, M., Saeed, A. and Turner, S. (2019). How understanding-based redesign influences the pattern of actions and effectiveness of routines. Journal of Management, 45(5), 21322162.Google Scholar
Becker, M. C. (2005). The concept of routines: Some clarifications. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29(2), 249262.Google Scholar
Bertels, S., Howard-Grenville, J. and Pek, S. (2016). Cultural molding, shielding, and shoring at Oilco: The role of culture in the integration of routines. Organization Science, 27(3), 573593.Google Scholar
Birnholtz, J. P., Cohen, M. D. and Hoch, S. V. (2007). Organizational character: On the regeneration of Camp Poplar Grove. Organization Science, 18(2), 315332.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice (Original printing). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, A. D. and Thompson, E. R. (2013). A narrative approach to strategy-as-practice. Business History, 55(7), 11431167.Google Scholar
Bucher, S. and Langley, A. (2016). The interplay of reflective and experimental spaces in interrupting and reorienting Routine Dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 594613.Google Scholar
Campbell-Hunt, C. (2007). Complexity in practice. Human Relations, 60(5), 793823.Google Scholar
Champenois, C., Lefebvre, V. and Ronteau, S. (2020). Entrepreneurship as practice: Systematic literature review of a nascent field. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 32(3–4), 281312.Google Scholar
Chia, R. and Holt, R. (2006). Strategy as practical coping: A Heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 27(5), 635655.Google Scholar
Chia, R. and MacKay, B. (2007). Post-processual challenges for the emerging strategy-as-practice perspective: Discovering strategy in the logic of practice. Human Relations, 60(1), 217242.Google Scholar
Christianson, M. K., Farkas, M. T., Sutcliffe, K. M. and Weick, K. E. (2009). Learning through rare events: Significant interruptions at the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum. Organization Science, 20(5), 846860.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D. (2007). Reading Dewey: Reflections on the study of routine. Organization Studies, 28(5), 773786.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, A. L. (2015). Using ethnography in strategy-as-practice research. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 431446.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2008). The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routines dynamics. Research Policy, 37(5), 769789.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2011). Artifacts at the centre of routines: Performing the material turn in routines theory. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(2), 197230.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2014). The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5), 13251350.Google Scholar
Dameron, S., , J. K. and LeBaron, C. (2015). Materializing strategy and strategizing materials: Why matter matters. British Journal of Management, 26, S1S12.Google Scholar
Danner-Schröder, A. and Geiger, D. (2016). Unravelling the motor of patterning work: Toward an understanding of the microlevel dynamics of standardization and flexibility. Organization Science, 27(3), 633658.Google Scholar
Denis, J.-L., Langley, A. and Rouleau, L. (2007). Strategizing in pluralistic contexts: Rethinking theoretical frames. Human Relations, 60(1), 179215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dionysiou, D. and Tsoukas, H. (2013). Understanding the (re) creation of routines from within: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 181205.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K., Guérard, S. and Seidl, D. (2016). Talking about routines: The role of reflective talk in routine change. Organization Science, 27(3), 678697.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K. and Seidl, D. (2018). Emerging Intentionality in Routine Dynamics: A Pragmatist View. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 111138.Google Scholar
Ericson, M., Melin, L. and Popp, A. (2015). Studying strategy as practice through historical methods. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 506519.Google Scholar
Ezzamel, M. and Willmott, H. (2010). Strategy and strategizing: A poststructuralist perspective. In Baum, J. a. C. and Lampel, J., eds., Globalization of Strategy Research, vol. 27. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, pp. 75109.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611629.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2003). A performative perspective on stability and change in organizational routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(4), 727752.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2015). Theory of routine dynamics and connections to strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 317330.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2016). Routines as process: Past, present, and future. In Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 2346.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Orlikowski, W. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 12401253.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94118.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B. T., D’Adderio, L. and Lazaric, N. (2016). Beyond routines as things: Introduction to the special issue on Routine Dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 505513.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Rafaeli, A. (2002). Organizational routines as sources of connections and understandings. Journal of Management Studies, 39(3), 309331.Google Scholar
Fenton, C. and Langley, A. (2011). Strategy as practice and the narrative turn. Organization Studies, 32(9), 11711196.Google Scholar
Gao, D., Deng, X. and Bai, B. (2014). The emergence of organizational routines from habitual behaviours of multiple actors: An agent-based simulation study. Journal of Simulation, 8(3), 215230.Google Scholar
Gao, D., Squazzoni, F. and Deng, X. (2018). The role of cognitive artifacts in organizational routine dynamics: An agent-based model. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 24(4), 473499.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A. and Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 18801895.Google Scholar
Gherardi, S. (2009). Introduction: The critical power of the ‘practice lens’. Management Learning, 40(2), 115128.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Goh, K. T. and Pentland, B. T. (2019). From actions to paths to patterning: Toward a dynamic theory of patterning in routines. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 19011929.Google Scholar
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E. (2015). Introduction: What is strategy as practice? In Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 130.Google Scholar
Grand, S. (2016). Routines, Strategies And Management: Engaging For Recurrent Creation ‘At The Edge’. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Grand, S. and Bartl, D. (2019). Making new strategic moves possible: How executive management enacts strategizing routines to strengthen entrepreneurial agility. Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation, 61, 123151.Google Scholar
Healey, M. P., Hodgkinson, G. P., Whittington, R. and Johnson, G. (2015). Off to plan or out to lunch? Relationships between design characteristics and outcomes of strategy workshops. British Journal of Management, 26(3), 507528.Google Scholar
Hendry, J. (2000). Strategic decision making, discourse, and strategy as social practice. Journal of Management Studies, 37(7), 955978.Google Scholar
Hendry, J. and Seidl, D. (2003). The structure and significance of strategic episodes: Social systems theory and the routine practices of strategic change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 175196.Google Scholar
Herepath, A. (2014). In the loop: A realist approach to structure and agency in the practice of strategy. Organization Studies, 35(6), 857879.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618636.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. and Rerup, C. (2017). A process perspective on organizational routines. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Process Organizational Studies. London: SAGE, pp. 323339.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2003). Strategic practices: An activity theory perspective on continuity and change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 2355.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2004). Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use. Organization Studies, 25(4), 529560.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2005). Strategy as Practice: An Activity-Based Approach. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J. and Seidl, D. (2007). Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60(1), 527.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Bednarek, R. (2018). Toward a social practice theory of relational competing. Strategic Management Journal, 39(3), 794829.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Kaplan, S. (2015). Strategy tools-in-use: A Framework For Understanding ‘Technologies Of Rationality’ In Practice. Strategic Management Journal, 36(4), 537558.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Kaplan, S., Seidl, D. and Whittington, R. (2016). On the risk of studying practices in isolation: Linking what, who, and how in strategy research. Strategic Organization, 14(3), 248259.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Le, J. and Balogun, J. (2019). The social practice of coevolving strategy and structure to realize mandated radical change. Academy of Management Journal, 62(3), 850882.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. A., , J. K. and Feldman, M. S. (2012). Toward a theory of coordinating: Creating coordinating mechanisms in practice. Organization Science, 23(4), 907927.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Seidl, D. (2008). The role of meetings in the social practice of strategy. Organization Studies, 29(11), 13911426.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Spee, A. P. (2009). Strategy-as-practice: A review and future directions for the field. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(1), 6995.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Whittington, R. (2008). A strategy-as-practice approach to strategy research and education. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 282286.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L. and Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy as Practice: Research Directions and Resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Melin, L. and Whittington, R. (2003). Micro strategy and strategizing: Towards an activity-based view. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 322.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Prashantham, S., Floyd, S. W. and Bourque, N. (2010). The ritualization of strategy workshops. Organization Studies, 31(12), 15891618.Google Scholar
Knights, D. and Morgan, G. (1991). Corporate strategy, organizations, and subjectivity: A critique. Organization Studies, 12(2), 251273.Google Scholar
Korkman, O., Storbacka, K. and Harald, B. (2010). Practices as markets: Value co-creation in e-invoicing. Australasian Marketing Journal, 18(4), 236247.Google Scholar
Kornberger, M. and Clegg, S. (2011). Strategy as performative practice: The case of Sydney 2030. Strategic Organization, 9(2), 136162.Google Scholar
Kozica, A., Kaiser, S. and Friesl, M. (2014). Organizational routines: Conventions as a source of change and stability. Schmalenbach Business Review, 66(3), 334356.Google Scholar
Kremser, W. and Schreyögg, G. (2016). The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster level. Organization Science, 27(3), 698721.Google Scholar
Laamanen, T., Reuter, E., Schimmer, M., Ueberbacher, F. and Guerra, X. W. (2015). Quantitative methods in strategy-as-practice research. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 520544.Google Scholar
Langley, A. (2015). The ongoing challenge of developing cumulative knowledge about strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D. and Rouleau, L., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 111127.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor- Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
, J. and Spee, P. (2015). The role of materiality in the practice of strategy. In Golsorkhi, D., Seidl, D., Vaara, E. and Rouleau, L., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 582597.Google Scholar
LeBaron, C., Christianson, M. K., Garrett, L. and Ilan, R. (2016). Coordinating flexible performance during everyday work: An ethnomethodological study of handoff routines. Organization Science, 27(3), 514534.Google Scholar
Luedicke, M. K., Husemann, K. C., Furnari, S. and Ladstaetter, F. (2017). Radically open strategizing: How the premium cola collective takes open strategy to the extreme. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 371384.Google Scholar
Luoma, J., Laamanen, T. and Lamberg, J. A. (forthcoming). Toward a routine-based view of interfirm rivalry. Strategic Organization.Google Scholar
Mantere, S. (2013). What is organizational strategy? A language-based view. Journal of Management Studies, 50(8), 14081426.Google Scholar
Mantere, S. and Vaara, E. (2008). On the problem of participation in strategy: A critical discursive perspective. Organization Science, 19(2), 341358.Google Scholar
Miettinen, R., Samra-Fredericks, D. and Yanow, D. (2009). Re-turn to practice: An introductory essay. Organization Studies, 30(12), 13091327.Google Scholar
Miller, K. D., Pentland, B. T. and Choi, S. (2012). Dynamics of performing and remembering organizational routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 15361558.Google Scholar
Mutch, A. (2016). Bringing history into the study of routines: Contextualizing performance. Organization Studies, 37(8), 11711188.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398427.Google Scholar
Parmigiani, A. and Howard-Grenville, J. (2011). Routines revisited: Exploring the capabilities and practice perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 413453.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 793815.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2007). Narrative networks: Patterns of technology and organization. Organization Science, 18(5), 781795.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2008). Designing routines: On the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of action. Information and Organization, 18(4), 235250.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Feldman, M. S., Becker, M. C. and Liu, P. (2012). Dynamics of organizational routines: A generative model. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 14841508.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Hærem, T. and Hillison, D. (2010). Comparing organizational routines as recurrent patterns of action. Organization Studies, 31(7), 917940.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Hærem, T. and Hillison, D. (2011). The (n) ever-changing world: Stability and change in organizational routines. Organization Science, 22(6), 13691383.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 484510.Google Scholar
Raff, D. M. and Scranton, P. (2017). The Emergence of Routines: Entrepreneurship, Organization, and Business History. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rasche, A. and Chia, R. (2009). Researching strategy practices: A genealogical social theory perspective. Organization Studies, 30(7), 713734.Google Scholar
Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243263.Google Scholar
Rerup, C. and Feldman, M. S. (2011). Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 577610.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. (2009). The contribution of event-sequence analysis to the study of organizational routines. In Becker, M. C. and Lazaric, N., eds., Organizational Routines: Advancing Empirical Research. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 68102.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2017). Routine regulation: Balancing conflicting goals in organizational routines. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), 170209.Google Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2003). Strategizing as lived experience and strategists’ everyday efforts to shape strategic direction. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 141174.Google Scholar
Schad, J., Lewis, M. W. and Smith, W. K. (2019). Quo vadis, paradox? Centripetal and centrifugal forces in theory development. Strategic Organization, 17(1), 107119.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R., Knorr Cetina, K. and Savigny, E. von, eds. (2001). The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. (2007). General strategy concepts and the ecology of strategy discourses: A systemic-discursive perspective. Organization Studies, 28(2), 197218.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. and Werle, F. (2018). Inter‐organizational sensemaking in the face of strategic meta‐problems: Requisite variety and dynamics of participation. Strategic Management Journal, 39(3), 830858.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. and Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the strategy-as-practice research agenda: Towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies, 35(10), 14071421.Google Scholar
Sele, K. and Grand, S. (2016). Unpacking the dynamics of ecologies of routines: Mediators and their generative effects in routine interactions. Organization Science, 27(3), 722738.Google Scholar
Smets, M., Greenwood, R. and Lounsbury, M. (2015). An institutional perspective on strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 283300.Google Scholar
Smets, M., Morris, T. and Greenwood, R. (2012). From practice to field: A multilevel model of practice-driven institutional change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 877904.Google Scholar
Sonenshein, S. (2016). Routines and creativity: From dualism to duality. Organization Science, 27(3), 739758.Google Scholar
Spee, P., Jarzabkowski, P. and Smets, M. (2016). The influence of routine interdependence and skillful accomplishment on the coordination of standardizing and customizing. Organization Science, 27(3), 759781.Google Scholar
Swan, J., Robertson, M. and Newell, S. (2016). Dynamic in-capabilities: The paradox of routines in the ecology of complex innovation. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 203222.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. (2015). Making strategy: Meta-theoretical insights from Heideggerian phenomenology. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 5877.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. (2012). A balancing act: How organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change. Organization Science, 23(1), 2446.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. P. (2018). Watching the clock: Action timing, patterning, and routine performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 12531280.Google Scholar
Vaara, E., Kleymann, B. and Seristö, H. (2004). Strategies as discursive constructions: The case of airline alliances. Journal of Management Studies, 41(1), 135.Google Scholar
Vaara, E. and Lamberg, J.-A. (2016). Taking historical embeddedness seriously: Three historical approaches to advance strategy process and practice research. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 633657.Google Scholar
Vaara, E., Sorsa, V. and Pälli, P. (2010). On the force potential of strategy texts: A critical discourse analysis of a strategic plan and its power effects in a city organization. Organization, 17(6), 685702.Google Scholar
Vaara, E. and Whittington, R. (2012). Strategy-as-practice: Taking social practices seriously. The Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 285336.Google Scholar
Van Aaken, D., Kirsch, W. and Seidl, D. (2015). Gesetzmäßigkeiten in der Unternehmensführung?–Unternehmensführung als das Verfügen über Notwendigkeiten. Die Unternehmung, 69(1), 5466.Google Scholar
Werle, F. and Seidl, D. (2015). The layered materiality of strategizing: Epistemic objects and the interplay between material artefacts in the exploration of strategic topics. British Journal of Management, 26, S67S89.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29(5), 731735.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27(5), 613634.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy practice and strategy process: Family differences and the sociological eye. Organization Studies, 28(10), 15751586.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2011). The practice turn in organization research: Towards a disciplined transdisciplinarity. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36(3), 183186.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2015). Giddens, structuration theory and strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 145164.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2019). Opening Strategy: Professional Strategists and Practice Change, 1960 to Today. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Jarzabkowski, P., Mayer, M., Mounoud, E., Nahapiet, J., et al. (2003). Taking strategy seriously: Responsibility and reform for an important social practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(4), 396409.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Yakis‐Douglas, B. and Ahn, K. (2016). Cheap talk? Strategy presentations as a form of chief executive officer impression management. Strategic Management Journal, 37(12), 24132424.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Yakis-Douglas, B., Ahn, K. and Cailluet, L. (2017). Strategic planners in more turbulent times: The changing job characteristics of strategy professionals, 1960–2003. Long Range Planning, 50(1), 108119.Google Scholar
Yamauchi, Y. and Hiramoto, T. (2016). Reflexivity of routines: An ethnomethodological investigation of initial service encounters at sushi bars in Tokyo. Organization Studies, 37(10), 14731499.Google Scholar
Zbaracki, M. J. and Bergen, M. (2010). When truces collapse: A longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines. Organization Science, 21(5), 955972.Google Scholar

References

Aaltonen, K., Ahola, T. and Artto, K. (2017). Something old, something new: Path dependence and path creation during the early stage project. International Journal of Project Management, 35, 749762.Google Scholar
Antonelli, C. (1999). The economics of path-dependence in industrial organization. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 15, 643675.Google Scholar
Arthur, W. B., ed. (1994). Increasing Returns and Path Dependency in the Economy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Becker, M. (2004). Organizational routines: A review of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13, 643678.Google Scholar
Berends, H. and Sydow, J. (2019). Introduction: Process views on inter-organizational collaborations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 64, 110.Google Scholar
Birnholtz, J. P., Cohen, M. D. and Hoch, S. V. (2007). Organizational character: On the regeneration of camp polar grove. Organization Science, 18(2), 315332.Google Scholar
Bucher, S. and Langley, A. (2016). The interplay of reflective and experimental spaces in interrupting and reorienting routine dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 594613.Google Scholar
Burger, M. and Sydow, J. (2014). How inter-organizational networks can become path-dependent: Bargaining practices in the photonics industry. Schmalenbach Business Review, 66(1), 7399.Google Scholar
Collinson, S. and Wilson, D. C. (2006). Inertia in Japanese organizations: Knowledge management routines and failure to innovate. Organization Studies, 27(9), 13591387.Google Scholar
Crozier, M. (1964). The Bureaucratice Pheonomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2011). Artifacts at the centre of routines: Performing the material turn in routines theory. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(2), 197230.Google Scholar
Danneels, E., Verona, G. and Provera, B. (2018). Overcoming the inertia of organizational competence: Olivetti’s transition from mechanical to electronic technology. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(3), 595618.Google Scholar
David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, 75(2), 332337.Google Scholar
Dobusch, L. and Schüßler, E. (2013). Theorizing path dependence: A review of positive feedback mechanisms in technology markets, regional clusters, and organizations. Industrial and Corporate Change, 22(3), 617647.Google Scholar
Emery, F. E. and Trist, E. L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18, 2132.Google Scholar
Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 202225.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organizational Science, 11, 611629.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2004). Resources in emerging structures and processes of change. Organization Science, 15(3), 295309.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2016). Routines as process: Past, present, and future. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 2346.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Orlikowski, W. J. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 12401253.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94118.Google Scholar
Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A. and Karnøe, P. (2010). Path dependence or path creation? Journal of Management Studies, 47(4), 760774.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Gilbert, C. (2005). Unbundling the structure of inertia: Resource versus routine rigidity. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 741763.Google Scholar
Hannan, M. T. and Freeman, J. H. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929964.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and context. Organization, 16(6), 618636.Google Scholar
Jing, R. and Benner, M. (2016). Institutional regime, opportunity space and organizational path constitution: Case studies of the conversion of military firms in China. Journal of Management Studies, 53(4), 552579.Google Scholar
Kay, N. M. (2018). We need to talk: Opposing narratives and conflicting perspectives in the conversation of routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(6), 943956.Google Scholar
Koch, J. (2011). Inscribed strategies: Exploring the organizational nature of strategic lock-in. Organization Studies, 32, 337363.Google Scholar
Kremser, W. and Schreyögg, G. (2016). The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster level. Organization Science, 27(3), 698721.Google Scholar
Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H. (2010). Introducing ‘Perspectives on Process Organization Studies’. In Hernes, T. and Maitlis, S., eds., Process, Sensemaking, and Organizing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 126.Google Scholar
Levitt, M. R. and March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319340.Google Scholar
March, J. G. and Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice Theory, Work, and Organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parmigiani, A. and Howard-Grenville, J. (2011). Routines revisited: Exploring the capabilities and practice perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 413453.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Feldman, M. S., Becker, M. C. and Liu, P. (2012). Dynamics of organizational routines: A generative model. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 14841500.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Jung, E. J. (2016). Evolutionary and revolutionary change in path-dependent patters of action. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 96113.Google Scholar
Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94, 251267.Google Scholar
Putnam, L. L., Fairhurst, G. T. and Banghart, S. (2016). Contradictions, dialectics and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 65171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rerup, C. and Feldman, M. S. (2011). Routines as source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 577610.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2011). Beyond collective entities: Multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities. Journal of Management, 37(2), 468490.Google Scholar
Schmidt, T. and Braun, T. (2015). When cospecialization leads to rigidity: Path dependence in successful strategic networks. Schmalenbach Business Review, 67, 489515.Google Scholar
Schulz, M. (2008). Staying on track: A voyage to the internal mechanisms of routine reproduction. In Becker, M. C., ed., Handbook of Organizational Routines. Cheltenham: Elgar, pp. 228255.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. and Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the strategy-as-practice research agenda: Towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies, 35(10), 14071421.Google Scholar
Sele, K. and Grand, S. (2016). Unpacking the dynamics of ecologies of routines: Mediators and their generative effects in routine interaction. Organization Science, 27(3), 722738.Google Scholar
Singh, F., Mathiassen, L. and Mishra, A. (2015). Organizational path constitution in technological innovation: Evidence from rural telehealth. MIS Quarterly, 39(3), 643665.Google Scholar
Suarez, F. F. and Montes, J. S. (2019). An integrative perspective of organizational responses: Routines, heuristics, and improvisations in a mount Everest expedition. Organization Science, 30(3), 573599.Google Scholar
Sydow, J., Lerch, F. and Staber, U. (2010). Planning for path dependence? The case of a network in the Berlin-Brandenburg optics cluster. Economic Geography, 86(2), 173195.Google Scholar
Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G. and Koch, J. (2009). Organizational path dependence: Opening the black box. Academy of Management Review, 34(4), 689709.Google Scholar
Sydow, J., Windeler, A., Schubert, C. and Möllering, G. (2012). Organizing R&D consortia for path creation and extension: The case of semiconductor manufacturing technologies. Organization Studies, 33(7), 907936.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509533.Google Scholar
Thelen, K. (1999). Historical institutionalism and comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 369404.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. and Chia, R. (2002). On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567582.Google Scholar
Vergne, J. P. and Durand, R. (2011). The path of most persistence: An evolutionary perspective on path dependence and dynamic capabilities. Organization Studies, 32(3), 365382.Google Scholar
Zollo, M., Reuer, J. J. and Singh, H. (2002). Interorganizational routines and performance in strategic alliances. Organization Science, 13(6), 701713.Google Scholar

References

Alter, S. (2014). Theory of workarounds. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 34, 10411066.Google Scholar
Altinkemer, K., Ozcelik, Y. and Ozdemir, Z. D. (2011). Productivity and performance effects of business process reengineering: A firm-level analysis. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(4), 129162.Google Scholar
Becker, M. C. (2004). Organizational routines: A review of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(4), 643677.Google Scholar
Berente, N., Lyytinen, K., Yoo, Y. and King, J. L. (2016). Routines as shock absorbers during organizational transformation: Integration, control, and NASA’ s Enterprise Information System. Organization Science, 27(3), 551572.Google Scholar
Berente, N., Seidel, S. and Safadi, H. (2019). Data-driven computationally-intensive theory development. Information Systems Research, 30(1), iiiviii.Google Scholar
Beverungen, D. (2014). Exploring the interplay of the design and emergence of business processes as organizational routines. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 6(4), 191202.Google Scholar
Birnholtz, J. P., Cohen, M. D. and Hoch, S. V. (2007). Organizational character: On the regeneration of Camp Poplar Grove. Organization Science, 18(2), 315332.Google Scholar
Bose, R. P. J. C., van Der Aalst, W. M. P., Žliobaite, I. and Pechenizkiy, M. (2011). Handling concept drift in process mining. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 6741 LNCS, 391–405.Google Scholar
Bucher, S. and Langley, A. (2016). The interplay of reflective and experimental spaces in interrupting and reorienting Routine Dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 594613.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2011). Artifacts at the centre of routines: Performing the material turn in routines theory. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(2), 197230.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K., Guérard, S. and Seidl, D. (2016). Talking about routines: The role of reflective talk in routine change. Organization Science, 27(3), 678697.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K. and Seidl, D. (2018). Emerging intentionality in routine dynamics: A pragmatist view. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 111138.Google Scholar
Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J. and Reijers, H. A. (2018). Fundamentals of Business Process Management, 2nd ed. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94118.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B. T., D’Adderio, L. and Lazaric, N. (2016). Beyond routines as things: Introduction to the special issue on Routine Dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 505513.Google Scholar
Figl, K., Mendling, J. and Strembeck, M. (2013). The influence of notational deficiencies on process model comprehension. Journal of the Association of Information Systems, 14(6), 312338.Google Scholar
Gaskin, J., Berente, N., Lyytinen, K. and Yoo, Y. (2014). Toward generalizable sociomaterial inquiry: A computational approach for zooming in and out of sociomaterial routines. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 38(3), 849871.Google Scholar
Goh, K. T. and Pentland, B.T. (2019). From actions to paths to patterning: Toward a dynamic theory of patterning in routines. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 19011929.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Lopez, F. and Bustos, G. (2019). Business process architecture design methodologies: A literature review. Business Process Management Journal, 25(6), 13171334.Google Scholar
Grisold, T., Wurm, B., Mendling, J. and vom Brocke, J. (2020). Using process mining to support theorizing about change in organizations. In 53rd Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2020).Google Scholar
Grover, V., Teng, J., Segars, A. H. and Fiedler, K. (1998). The influence of information technology diffusion and business process change on perceived productivity: The IS executive’s perspective. Information & Management, 34(3), 141159.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Hammer, M. and Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Hompes, B. F. A., Buijs, J., van der Aalst, W. M. P., Dixit, P. M. and Buurman, J. (2015). Discovering Deviating cases and process variants using trace clustering. In 27th Benelux Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC).Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. and Rerup, C. (2017). A process perspective on organizational routines. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., The Sage Handbook of Process Organization Studies. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore,Washington DC, Melbourne: Sage, pp. 323339.Google Scholar
Kettinger, W. J., Teng, J. T. C. and Guha, S. (1997). Business process change: A study of methodologies, techniques, and tools. MIS Quartely, 21(1), 5580.Google Scholar
Kremser, W. and Schreyögg, G. (2016). The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster level. Organization Science, 27, 698721.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kummer, T. F., Recker, J. and Mendling, J. (2016). Enhancing understandability of process models through cultural-dependent color adjustments. Decision Support Systems, 87, 112.Google Scholar
Laguna, M. and Marklund, J. (2013). Business Process Modeling, Simulation and Design. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Leonardi, P. M. (2011). When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 147167.Google Scholar
Lindberg, A., Berente, N., Gaskin, J. and Lyytinen, K. (2016). Coordinating interdependencies in online communities: A study of an open source software project. Information Systems Research, 27(4), 751772.Google Scholar
Mendling, J. (2016). From scientific process management to process science: Towards an empirical research agenda for Business Process Management. In Hochreiner, C. and Schulte, S., (eds.), 8th ZEUS Workshop (ZEUS 2016).Google Scholar
Mendling, J., Berente, N., Seidel, S. and Grisold, T. (2021). Pluralism and pragmatism in the information systems field: The case of research on business processes and organizational routines. The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 52(2), 127140.Google Scholar
Miller, K. D., Pentland, B. T. and Choi, S. (2012). Dynamics of performing and remembering organizational routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 15361558.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. and Scott, S. V (2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organizing. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 433474.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 793815.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2008). Designing routines: On the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of action. Information and Organization, 18(4), 235250.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 484510.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Vaast, E. and Wolf, R. (2021). Theorizing process dynamics with directed graphs: A diachronic analysis of digital trace data. MIS Quartely, 45(2), 967984.Google Scholar
Polyvyanyy, A., Solti, A., Weidlich, M., Di Ciccio, C. and Mendling, J. (2018). Behavioural quotients for precision and recall in process mining. Technical Report, (March), 1–19.Google Scholar
Recker, J. (2014). Suggestions for the next wave of BPM research: Strengthening the theoretical core and exploring the protective belt. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 15(2), 520.Google Scholar
Recker, J. (2015). Evidence-based Business Process Management: Using digital opportunities to drive organizational innovation. In vom Brocke, J. and Schmiedel, T., eds., BPM-Driving Innovation in a Digital World. Cham: Springer, pp. 129143.Google Scholar
Recker, J. and Mendling, J. (2016). The state of the art of Business Process Management research as published in the BPM Conference: Recommendations for progressing the field. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 58(1), 5572.Google Scholar
Reijers, H. A. and Mansar, L. S. (2005). Best practices in business process redesign: An overview and qualitative evaluation of successful redesign heuristics. Omega, 33(4), 283306.Google Scholar
Rosemann, M. and vom Brocke, J. (2010). The six core elements of Business Process Management. In vom Brocke, J. and Rosemann, M., eds., Handbook on Business Process Management 1. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 107122.Google Scholar
Speer, S. A. (2002). ‘Natural’ and ‘contrived’ data: a sustainable distinction? Discourse Studies, 4(4), 511525.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. and Chia, R. (2002). On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567582.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. P. (2018). Watching the clock: Action timing, patterning, and routine performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 12531280.Google Scholar
van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2002). Making work flow: On the application of Petri Nets to Business Process Management. In Esparza, J. and Lakos, C.,eds., Application and Theory of Petri Nets 2002. ICATPN 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2360. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 122.Google Scholar
van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2011). Process Mining: Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes, 2nd ed. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2013). Business Process Management: A Comprehensive Survey. ISRN Software Engineering, 1–37.Google Scholar
van der Aalst, W. M. P., Adriansyah, A., De Medeiros, A. K. A., Arcieri, F., Baier, T., Blickle, T.Wynn, M. (2011). Process mining manifesto. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2011) (pp. 169–194).Google Scholar
van der Aalst, W. M. P., ter Hofstede, A. H. and Weske, M. (2003). Business Process Management: A Survey. In International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2003).Google Scholar
Volkoff, O., Strong, D. M. and Elmes, M. B. (2007). Technological embeddedness and organizational change. Organization Science, 18(5), 832848.Google Scholar
vom Brocke, J. and Mendling, J., eds. (2018). Business Process Management Cases. Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
vom Brocke, J., Zelt, S. and Schmiedel, T. (2016). On the role of context in Business Process Management. International Journal of Information Management, 36(3), 486495.Google Scholar
Wurm, B. (2018). Patterns of stability and change in business processes. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Enterprise Modeling and Information Systems Architectures (EMISA 2018), pp. 21–28.Google Scholar
Wurm, B., Goel, K., Bandara, W. and Rosemann, M. (2019). Design patterns for business process individualization. In 17th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2019), pp. 370–385.Google Scholar
Wurm, B., Schmiedel, T., Mendling, J. and Fleig, C. (2018). Development of a Measurement Scale for Business Process Standardization. In 26th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2018).Google Scholar
Yeshchenko, A., Di Ciccio, C., Mendling, J. and Polyvyanyy, A. (2019). Comprehensive process drift detection with visual analytics. In Laender, A., Pernici, B., Lim, E. and de Oliveira, J., eds., International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2019). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11788. Cham: Springer, pp. 119135.Google Scholar