Cited by 137Management and Organizational StudiesOrganizational Management and ChangeOrganizational Change and Leadership

Structural Evolution Through Idiosyncratic Jobs: The Potential for Unplanned Learning

Miner, Anne S.·1990·Organization Science

Abstract

This paper describes an evolutionary model of organizational change through the selective retention of jobs. This type of change can operate in addition to top-down planned organizational change, providing “another engine” of organizational transformation over time. All evolutionary change processes require that there be a system for replicating activities over time, a source of variation in activities, and mechanisms which permit some activities to persist while others do not. In this model, formalized job systems and related management practices provide the mechanism for the replication of job activities. Idiosyncratic jobs—or jobs created around particular people rather than in the abstract—serve as a mechanism for unplanned variation in sets of job duties. Finally managerial actions such as layoffs, reorganizations, budget changes and copying jobs from other areas lead to the selective retention of some sets of job activities over others. The organizational change created by these processes may or may not be adaptive for the organization. The outcome will depend on such factors as the birth, death and imitation rates for idiosyncratic and other jobs, as well as the criteria used for job birth and job termination. Adaptation is possible, but is a function of complex, nonlinear constraints. Specific organizational processes that determine these factors are discussed. The model implies that adaptive change can occur in the absence of clear and consistent goals. Thus, the mod…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.1.2.195

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The premise of the traditional story is contradicted by observational data: organizational routines are repetitive but not necessarily fixed or unchanging.

    “Another problem is that the premise of the traditional story is contradicted by observational data. Organizational routines are certainly repetitive, but they are not necessarily fixed or unchanging.”
  • Many scholars have provided empirical evidence of both change and variability in organizational routines.

    “Many scholars have provided empirical evidence of both change and variability in organizational routines (e.g., Suchman, 1983; Miner, 1990; Pentland and Rueter, 1994; Feldman, 2000; Naduzzo, Rocco, and Warglien, 2000; Edmondson, Bohmer, and Pisano, 2001; Pentland, 2003).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miner, A. S.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Miner, Anne S.
Venue
Organization Science
Published
1990-05
Volume
1
Issue
2
Pages
195-210
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
OpenAlex
W2140004513
Cited by
137
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Organization Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Management and Change
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Change and Leadership
Keywords
organizational change, evolutionary change, job retention, job replication, formalization, organizational adaptation, trial-and-error learning, institutional memory, structural contingency theory, organizational learning

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