The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Adapting to Unfamiliar Environmental Events: A Look at the Evolution of Interpretation and Its Role in Strategic Change
Abstract
This paper argues that a key component in a firm's strategic response to unfamiliar environmental events is the interpretations managers develop about the event itself and about key dimensions of their strategy. Using historical data from the pharmaceutical industry, the revealed interpretations of top management from six firms over a ten-year period are analyzed and are compared to the timing and content of the changes in strategy each firm undertook following a significant change in regulation. The results reveal two distinct patterns of interpretation development that appear to be linked to whether or not the target of interpretation is familiar. Further, interpretations appear to be linked both temporally and in terms of content to the strategic change undertaken by each firm. Both sets of results suggest that the interpretations of managers are linked to organizational actions.
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
Cited by
Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward
Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2014.873177 · Cited by 1,764
Eggers, J. P., & Kaplan, S. (2009) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0401 · Cited by 774
Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change
Kaplan, S., & Tripsas, M. (2008) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.002 · Cited by 661
Sarta, A., Durand, R., & Vergne, J.-P. (2021) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206320929088 · Cited by 264
Metadata
- Authors
- Barr, P. S.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 1998-12
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 644-669
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W1966436053
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.07
- 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
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.
