PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
Czasopismo
2015 | nr 9 (CD) | 612--624
Tytuł artykułu

Rutyna relacyjna w świetle podejścia ewolucyjnego i relacyjnego

Warianty tytułu
Relational Routine in the Light of Evolutionary and Relational View
Języki publikacji
PL
Abstrakty
W artykule na bazie studiów literatury dotyczących rutyn oraz podejścia relacyjnego poczyniono ustalenia dotyczące cech charakterystycznych rutyn międzyorganizacyjnych. W efekcie ustalono, że rutyna relacyjna, powstaje w relacji, jest specyficzna dla ściśle określonych partnerów, jest specyficzna dla kontekstu, jest efektywna, jeśli dochodzi do powtarzających się interakcji, ma niejawną naturę, a 'właścicielem' rutyny relacyjnej jest relacja. (abstrakt oryginalny)
EN
On the basis of literature studies on routines and relational approach we arrived at findings presented in the article concerning the inter-organizational routines' characteristics. As a result, it was found that relational routine arises in the relationship, that it is specific to the strictly identified partners, specific to the context, it is effective when it comes to repeated interactions, implicit in nature, and that the relationship constitutes the 'owner' of the relational routine. (original abstract)
Słowa kluczowe
Czasopismo
Rocznik
Numer
Strony
612--624
Opis fizyczny
Twórcy
  • Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wrocławiu
Bibliografia
  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, (17), 99-120.
  • Becker, M.C. (2002). The concept of routines twenty years after Nelson and Winter (1982). A review of the literature. DRUID Working Paper, nr 03-06.
  • Becker, M.C. (2004). Organizational routines: A review of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(4), 643-677.
  • Becker, M.C., Salvatore, P. i Zirpoli, F. (2005). The impact of virtual simulation tools on problem-solving and new product development organization. Research Policy, 34(9), 1305-1321.
  • Becker, M., Lazaric, N., Nelson, R.R. i Winter, S. (2005). Applying organizational routines in understanding organizational change. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 775-791.
  • Bengtsson, M. i Kock, S. (2000). "Coopetition" in business networks, to cooperate and compete simultaneously. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(4), 411-426.
  • Brennan, R. (2006). Evolutionary economics and the markets-as-networks approach. Industrial Marketing Management, (35), 829-838.
  • Breslin, D. (2010). A Critical Review of the Universal Darwinist Approach to Studying Organisations. EURAM. Rzym.
  • Breslin, D. (2011). Interpreting futures through the multi-level co-evolution of organizational practices. Futures, 43(9), 1020-1028.
  • Cantwell, J. A., Dunning, J. H. i Lundan, S. M. (2010). An Evolutionary Approach to Understanding International Business Activity: The Co-Evolution of MNEs and the Institutional Environment. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4), 567-86.
  • Castaldo, S. i Dagnino, G.B. (2009). Trust and Coopetition: The Strategic Role of Trust in Interfirm Coopetitive Dynamics. W: S. Castaldo, G.B. Dagnino, G.B. Dagnino i E. Rocco (red.), Coopetition Strategy: Theory Experiments and Cases (74-100). Londyn: Routledge.
  • Cheng, J.-H. (2011). Inter-organizational Relationships and Information Sharing in Supply Chains. International Journal of Information Management, 31(4), 374-384.
  • Cheng, J.-H. i Fu, Y.-C. (2013). Inter-organizational relationships and knowledge sharing through the relationship and institutional orientations in supply chains. International Journal of Information Management, (33), 473-484.
  • Dahl, J. (2014). Conceptualizing coopetition as a process: An out-line of change in cooperative and competitive interactions. Industrial Marketing Management, (43), 272-279.
  • Dyer, J.H. i Hatch, N.W. (2006). Realtion-specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge transfers: creating advantage through network relationships. Strategic Management Journal, (27), 701-719.
  • Dyer, J.H. i Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660-679.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M. i Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.
  • Feldman, M.S. i Pentland, B.T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, (48), 94-118.
  • Forkmann, S., Ramos, C., Henneberg, S. i Mitrega, M. (2012). Strategic decision making in business relationships: A dyadic agent-based simulation approach. Industrial Marketing Management, 20, 816-830.
  • Gnyawali, D.R. i Park, B.-J. R. (2011). Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with Competitors for Technological Innovation. Research Policy, 40(5), 650-663.
  • Gupta, S. i Polonsky, M. (2014, April). Inter-firm learning and knowledge-sharing in multinational networks: An outsourced organization's perspective. Journal of Business Research, 67(4), 615-622.
  • Hannan, M.T. i Freeman, J. (1989). Organizational Ecology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Hatani, F. i McGaughey, S.L. (2013). Network cohesion in global expansion: An evolutionary view. Journal of World Business, 48, 455-465.
  • Hodgson, G.M. i Knudsen, T. (2006). Dismantling Lamarckism: Why Descriptions of Socio-Economic Evolution as Lamarckian are Misleading. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 16(4), 343-366.
  • Johansson, T. i Kask, J. (2013). On the promise and premises of a Darwinian theory in research on business relationships. Industrial Marketing Management, 42, 306-315.
  • Kale, P. i Singh, H. (2007). Building firm capabilities through learning: The role of the alliance learning process in alliance capability and firm-level alliance success. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 981-1000.
  • Kale, P., Dyer, J.H. i Singh, H. (2002). Alliance capability, stock market response, and longterm alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 747-767.
  • Kohtamäki, M., Partanen, J. i Möller, K. (2013). Non-linear relationship between industrial service offering and sales growth: The moderating role of network capabilities. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(8), 1374-1385.
  • Lewin, J. i Sager, J. (2009). An investigation of the influence of coping resources insalespersons' emotional exhaustion. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(7), 796-805.
  • Luo, Y. (2007). Coopetition perspective of Global Competition. Journal of World Business, 42, 133.
  • Mesquita, L.F., Anand, J. i Brush, T. (2008). Compering the Resource-Based and Relational views: Knowledge transfer and spillover in vertical alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 913-941.
  • Murmann, J.P. (2003). Knowledge Competitive Advantage: The Coevolution of Firms, Technology, and National Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nelson, R.R. i Winter, S.G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge: Belknap Press.
  • Reuer, J.J. i Zollo, M. (2002). Termination outcomes of high-tech alliances. W: A. Lewin i M. Koza (red.), Strategic Alliances and Firm Adaptation: A Coevolution Perspective. Nowy Jork: M.E. Sharpe.
  • Reuer, J.J., Zollo, M. i Singh, H. (2002). Post-formation dynamics in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 23(2), 135-151.
  • Ritala, P., Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. i Blomqvist, K. (2009). Innovation orchestration capability-Defining the organizational and individual level determinants. International Journal of Services Technology and Management, 13(4), 569-591.
  • Schilke, O. (2014). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: the nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 179-203.
  • Stańczyk-Hugiet, E. (2013). Dynamika strategiczna w ujęciu ewolucyjnym. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu.
  • Stańczyk-Hugiet, E. (2015). Wielopoziomowa selekcja jako optyka organizacyjnej (ko)ewolucji. Prace Naukowe, str. w druku.
  • Stańczyk-Hugiet, E., Piórkowska, K., i Stańczyk, S. (2015). Routines. To everything there is a season. EURAM.
  • Wagner, S. M., Eggert, A. i Lindemann, E. (2010). Creating and appropriating value in collaborative relationships. Journal of Business Research, (63), 840-848.
  • Walter, A., Auer, M. i Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 541-567.
  • Winter, S.G. (1995). Four R's of profitability: rents, resources, routines and replication. W: C. Montgomery (red.), Resource-Based and Evolutionary Theories of the Firm: Towards a Synthesis (147-158). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Zollo, M., Reuer, J. J. i Singh, H. (2002). Interorganizational Routines and Performance in Strategic Alliances. Organization Science, 13(6), 701-713.
  • Zollo, M. i Winter S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339-353.
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171403997

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.