Cited by 24Organizational Learning and LeadershipManagement and Organizational StudiesComplex Systems and Decision Making

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Forgotten Function of Forgetting: Revisiting Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning

Blaschke, Steffen, Schoeneborn, Dennis·2006·Soziale Systeme

Abstract

Zusammenfassung Die computerbasierte Simulation ist zu einer weithin akzeptierten Methodik in den Sozialwissenschaften avanciert, insbesondere in der Organisationsforschung. In diesem Beitrag replizieren wir zunächst eine computerbasierte Simulation aus dem Bereich des organisationalen Lernens von James G. March. Im Anschluss daran modifizieren und erweitern wir die Replikation unter Rückgriff auf die Theorie sozialer Systeme Niklas Luhmanns. Während Marchs ursprüngliches Simulationsmodell vor allem die Konzepte Wissen und Lernen in den Blick nimmt, ergänzen wir das Modell um das Luhmannsche Konzept des Gedächtnisses, hier verstanden als ein fortlaufendes Diskriminieren zwischen Vergessen und Erinnern. Im Lichte dessen kann gezeigt werden, dass Vergessen für Organisationen als Quelle dynamischer Instabilität dient. Es verhindert die Lähmung aufgrund einer inkonsistenten Organisationsgeschichte und wird somit zur ermöglichenden Bedingung neuer Irritabilität und folglich Lernens.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1515/sosys-2006-0107

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

  • Social actors need to forget in order to deal with new events.

    “In order to deal with new events, social actors need to forget (e.g., Blaschke & Schoeneborn, 2006).”

    From Timely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication (2020) · cites this paper as Blaschke & Schoeneborn, 2006

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Blaschke, S., & Schoeneborn, D.
Affiliations
Copenhagen Business School (DK)
Corresponding author
Schoeneborn, Dennis
Venue
Soziale Systeme
Published
2006-05-01
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
100-120
ISSN
  • 0948-423X (ISSN-L)
  • 2366-0473
OpenAlex
W118528356
Cited by
24
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Soziale Systeme (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Learning and Leadership
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Complex Systems and Decision Making
Keywords
forgetting, organizational learning, exploration and exploitation, James G. March, Niklas Luhmann, systems theory, memory, discrimination, organizational instability, organizational history

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