The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Organizational Differences in Rates of Learning: Evidence from the Adoption of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery
Abstract
This paper examines learning curves in the health care setting to determine whether organizations achieve performance improvements from cumulative experience at different rates. Although extensive research has shown that cumulative experience leads to performance improvement across numerous contexts, the question of how much of this improvement is due to mere experience and how much is due to collective learning processes has received little attention. We argue that organizational learning processes may allow some organizations to benefit more than others from equivalent levels of experience. We thus propose that learning curves can vary across organizations engaged in the same “learning task,” due to organizational learning effects. To investigate this proposition, we investigate cardiac surgery departments implementing a new technology for minimally invasive cardiac surgery. Data on operative procedure times from a sample of 660 patients who underwent the new operation at 16 different institutions are analyzed. The results confirm that cumulative experience is a significant predictor of learning, and further reveal that the slope of the learning curve varies significantly across organizations. Theoretical and practical implications of the work are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1997) · Reis · doi:10.2307/40183951 · Cited by 11,113 · cited 3×
“Experience may provide the opportunity to learn, but a range of factors has been posited as influences on whether this opportunity is actually exploited (Senge 1990, Argyris and Schon 1978, Duncan and Weiss 1979, Dutton and Thomas 1984).”
BackgroundAdverse Cerebral Outcomes after Coronary Bypass Surgery
Roach, G. W., Kanchuger, M., Mangano, C. M., Newman, M., Nussmeier, N., Wolman, R., Aggarwal, A., Marschall, K., Graham, S. H., Ley, C., et al. (1996) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199612193352501 · Cited by 1,860
Rosenberg, N. (1976) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511561313 · Cited by 1,185
Cited by
Ericsson, K. A. (2004) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200410001-00022 · Cited by 2,988
Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge
Argote, L., & Miron-Spektor, E. (2011) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0621 · Cited by 1,917
Best care at lower cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America
(2014) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.51-3277 · Cited by 1,363
The Effect of General and Partner-Specific Alliance Experience on Joint R&D Project Performance
Hoang, H., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2005) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2005.16928417 · Cited by 784
A Behavioral Theory of the Firm—40 Years and Counting: Introduction and Impact
Argote, L., & Greve, H. R. (2007) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0280 · Cited by 606
Metadata
- Authors
- Pisano, G. P., Bohmer, R. M. J., & Edmondson, A. C.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2001-06
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 752-768
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2079691561
- Cited by
- 565
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 32.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Organizational Differences in Rates of Learning: Evidence from the Adoption of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.47.6.752.9811
- The paper
- Pisano, G. P., Bohmer, R. M. J., & Edmondson, A. C. (2001). Organizational Differences in Rates of Learning: Evidence from the Adoption of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.6.752.9811
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.