Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change

In the paper

“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).”

What the sources say

• Partly supported

  Section 2 describes an empirical case study of office work, and section 4 concludes that workers determine a procedure’s meaning according to the particulars of each case. This supports variability in how routines are carried out. The paper does not provide empirical evidence that organizational routines change over time. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  cites Suchman, 1983 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Miner, 1990 source
• Supported

  In the Introduction (page not provided), Feldman reports field observations in which most studied routines underwent substantial change. She also says her observations found variation to be a common part of organizational routines. This paper therefore serves as an empirical example of both change and variability. (LLM, conf=0.93)

  cites Feldman, 2000 source

In the paper

“But routines also change in old, established organizations in stable environments (Feldman, 2000).”

What the sources say

• Partly supported

  The Introduction reports substantial change in routines observed in a large state university’s student housing department. It does not establish that the organization was old or that its external environment was stable. The Conclusion instead notes that the organizational context encouraged and allowed change. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  cites Feldman, 2000 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured

In the paper

“Some variations will be intentional, in the sense that the participants want to change the ostensive aspect of the routine in order to alter the way they do their jobs (Feldman, 2000).”

What the sources say

• Partly supported

  The Dynamics of Routines section says participants intentionally alter routines to do their jobs in ways that seem better to them. But the Performative Routines section distinguishes an ostensive definition, which exists in principle, from a performative one created through practice; it does not say participants seek to change the ostensive aspect to alter how they work. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  cites Feldman, 2000 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured

In the paper

“In all three metaphors (programs, habits, and genes), we have an image of routines as relatively fixed, unchanging objects.”

In the paper

“We refer here to something more basic: the inherent capability of every organizational routine to generate change, merely by its ongoing performance.”

In the paper

“The traditional explanation of organizational routines as a source of cognitive efficiency tends to reinforce the absence of agency within the routine itself.”

In the paper

“The ostensive aspect of the routine gains in apparent objectivity and concreteness as the views of different participants come into alignment.”

In the paper

“This ontology builds on the idea that routines, like other social phenomena, embody a duality of structure and agency (Giddens, 1984; Bourdieu, 1977, 1990).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Giddens, 1984
• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Bourdieu, 1977, 1990

In the paper

“For these reasons, the performative aspect of routines can best be understood as inherently improvisational.”

In the paper

“In work settings with detailed descriptions of the expected sequence of steps in a procedure, for instance, participants introduce variations (Roy, 1959; Victor, Boynton, and Stephens-Jahng, 2000; Narduzzo, Rocco, and Warglien, 2000).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Roy, 1959 source
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Victor, Boynton, and Stephens-Jahng, 2000 source
• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Narduzzo, Rocco, and Warglien, 2000

In the paper

“In this sense, the significance of a rule, or of the ostensive aspect of a routine, becomes apparent only in its performance.”

In the paper

“While organizational routines are commonly portrayed as promoting cognitive efficiency, they also entail self-reflective and other-reflective behavior.”

In the paper

“There are always contextual details that remain open—and that must remain open—for the routine to be carried out.”

In the paper

“Each participant's understanding of a routine depends on his or her role and point of view.”

In the paper

“They can still be defined as repetitive, recognizable patterns of interdependent actions, but they cannot be understood as static, unchanging objects.”

In the paper

“The specific arrangements made have implications for the future, as they set precedents and establish expectations for what actions can be taken in future hiring situations.”

In the paper

“Each of these metaphors, however, tends to reinforce our understanding of routines as unitary and unchanging.”

In the paper

“The ostensive aspect of the routine cannot encompass specific performances because it is impossible to specify any routine in sufficient detail that it could actually be carried out.”

In the paper

“Understanding the interactions between these two aspects is necessary for us to appreciate the potential of organizational routines as a source of change.”

In the paper

“Unreflective, habitual action is certainly possible, but even in highly constrained situations, participants engage in reflective self-monitoring in order to see what they are doing (Giddens, 1984).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Giddens, 1984

In the paper

“As a result of the movement among these aspects, organizational routines are inherently capable of endogenous change.”

In the paper

“To explain these observations, a new understanding of organizational routines is needed.”

In the paper

“What has been omitted are considerations of agency—people perform the routines—and observational data that evidence flexibility and change, rather than stability and inertia.”

In the paper

“As with musical improvisation, the degree of divergence from the score may vary considerably, from minor adjustments to cadence and dynamics to near total re-invention (Weick, 1998).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Weick, 1998 source

In the paper

“For all the reasons discussed earlier, performances of the hiring routine generate a constant stream of variations and exceptions as the performers accommodate and innovate.”

In the paper

“As Wittgenstein (1958) argued, no amount of rules is sufficient to specify a pattern of behavior fully, because the interpretation of any rule, or any part of a rule, requires more rules.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Wittgenstein, 1958

In the paper

“Conceptualizing organizational routines as habits, programs, or genes severely limits the role of human agency.”

In the paper

“In his theory of practice, Bourdieu (1977, 1990) argued that practice is inherently improvisational.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Bourdieu, 1977, 1990

In the paper

“And just as musical improvisation involves listening to what others are playing, improvisation in organizational routines involves attending to the actions taken by relevant others and the details of the situation (Moorman and Miner, 1998a, 1998b; Feldman and Rafaeli, 2002).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Moorman and Miner, 1998a, 1998b
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Feldman and Rafaeli, 2002 source

In the paper

“In a sense, our subjective understanding and interpretation is the glue that binds the actions into the patterns we recognize as the routine.”

In the paper

“Because the actions within a routine are interdependent, individual agency is moderated or attenuated to some extent.”

In the paper

“Agency is always enacted in the context of organizational and institutional structures that define a set of possibilities for the participants (Pentland and Rueter, 1994).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pentland and Rueter, 1994 source

In the paper

“The social stock of knowledge required to perform the routine will be unevenly distributed (Berger and Luckmann, 1966; Schutz, 1967).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Berger and Luckmann, 1966
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schutz, 1967 source

In the paper

“Objective and subjective aspects are inseparable because the objectified summaries of routines (the artifacts) are constructed from our subjective perceptions of them.”

In the paper

“The “hiring” routine has a powerful effect on behavior for both the people doing the hiring and the people wanting to be hired, as evidenced by the difference between the trips that academics make to universities for hiring purposes and for the purpose of presenting research.”

In the paper

“The next time the routine is performed, each participant may face a different set of possibilities, based on the actions of others.”

In the paper

“The collective and interdependent nature of performance in organizational routines makes it difficult to say exactly which possibilities will really be feasible when the time comes to act.”

In the paper

“Understanding this relationship is important, as it can help us understand the role of variation in organizational routines and the interplay between variability and stability.”

In the paper

“As a result of these factors, their subjective interpretations of the appropriate course of action will differ.”

In the paper

“Referring is essential to complex organizations (Arrow, 1974) because it allows organizational members to engage in activities that we do not fully understand.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Arrow, 1974

In the paper

“The involvement of multiple individuals inevitably introduces diversity in the information, interpretive schemes, and goals of the participants.”

In the paper

“The ostensive aspect of a routine is also useful in that it helps us describe what we are doing in ways that make sense of our activities.”

In the paper

“Interdependence is not limited to the immediate actions of the participants. The parts of any routine are enmeshed in far-reaching, complex, tangled webs of interdependence.”

In the paper

“People may be unaware of others' actions because they see only the artifacts of these actions. They do not see the process of creating an ad for a position; they see only the ad (Rafaeli and Oliver, 1998).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Rafaeli and Oliver, 1998 source

In the paper

“This irreducible element of agency requires reflexive self-monitoring (Giddens, 1984), in the sense that we may use the ostensive aspect of routines to check up on ourselves (or others) as we go about our activities.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Giddens, 1984

In the paper

“Guiding, accounting, and referring enable us to exert power over our own and other people's performances through the ability both to signify that some performances are part of a recognizable routine and to legitimate some performances as appropriate to that routine.”

In the paper

“The interdependence of actions can set practical constraints on individuals that are unique to particular performances.”

In the paper

“The intent and motivation of people performing a hiring routine is not to create, maintain, or modify the ostensive aspect of the routine but to try to hire someone.”

In the paper

“Thus, ironically, routines exist as objects because of our subjective understandings of them.”

In the paper

“While organizational routines are clearly repetitive, these defining features ensure that they cannot simply be repeated.”

In the paper

“These kinds of constraints operate within the context of specific performances.”

In the paper

“This opaqueness of the performance of the routine provides opportunities for different interpretations of what the routine “actually” is.”

In the paper

“That people perform organizational routines across time and space adds to the opportunities for different understandings of the actions people have taken as well as the appropriate next action.”

In the paper

“The involvement of multiple participants ensures that the ostensive aspect of a routine—its structural aspect—cannot be monolithic or undifferentiated, except perhaps in trivial cases.”

In the paper

“The approach that we propose recognizes that this duality is an essential part of every organizational routine.”

In the paper

“The ostensive aspect of a routine can serve as a template for behavior or a normative goal. This is what Nelson and Winter (1982) called the “routine as target” and why routines are sometimes likened to scripts.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Nelson and Winter (1982)

In the paper

“Like dancers, participants in an organizational routine must adjust to each other's actions (Feldman and Rafaeli, 2002).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Feldman and Rafaeli, 2002 source

In the paper

“As practiced, objective and subjective dimensions are mutually constitutive (Bourdieu, 1990).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bourdieu, 1990 source

In the paper

“The ostensive aspect of the routine allows us to refer to and make sense of a sea of activities that could otherwise be overwhelming.”

In the paper

“It helps us decide what aspects of our performances we should report or conceal and, in doing so, what we should say about them.”

In the paper

“People can also use the ostensive aspect of routines to signify or refer to what is similar about a set of performances and thereby create routines.”

In the paper

“In spite of the endless variation in organizational routines that we have described, organizational members would generally have no trouble describing the hiring routine in their organization to an outsider.”

In the paper

“Participants cannot just act as they please, because the actions of others can create or close off alternatives.”

In the paper

“Nonetheless, an important outcome of engaging in actions is their effect on the structures that constrain and enable further action, and three closely related effects are the creation, maintenance, and modification of organizational routines.”

In the paper

“When someone challenges our actions, the ostensive aspect of the routine provides a ready-made justification.”

In the paper

“We can invoke the “hiring” routine without being aware of all the details of how it will be accomplished and what, exactly, engaging in it will entail for us.”

In the paper

“Nonetheless, an important outcome of engaging in actions is their effect on the structures that constrain and enable further action, and three closely related effects are the creation, maintenance, and modification of organizational routines.”

In the paper

“The performative aspect of routines is essential for the creation, maintenance, and modification of the ostensive aspect in much the same way that speaking creates, maintains, and alters a language.”

In the paper

“Our attention to the role of performance in the creation, maintenance, and modification of routines leads us to expand this agency to all participants in organizational routines.”

In the paper

“Then, from among the variations that are produced both intentionally and unintentionally, people interpret some as the ostensive aspect of the routine.”

In the paper

“The tendency of a routine to change or remain the same depends on the processes of variation, selection, and retention that take place between the ostensive and performative aspects of the routine.”

In the paper

“The creation and enforcement of organizational routines can be viewed as a primary mechanism for the domination of labor by management (Braverman, 1974; Burawoy, 1979).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braverman, 1974 source
• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Burawoy, 1979

In the paper

“Endogenous change in routines is possible because of their agentic quality (Emirbayers and Mische, 1998).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Emirbayers and Mische, 1998

In the paper

“First, as discussed above, people will sometimes vary the performances that the ostensive aspect of the routine guides, refers to, and accounts for.”

In the paper

“The model of variation and selective retention articulated by Campbell (1965) is useful in explaining change within organizational routines.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Campbell (1965)

In the paper

“Specifically, performances are variations that are selectively retained in the ostensive aspect of the routine.”

In the paper

“Our theory draws attention to the inevitable importance of power in organizational routines.”

In the paper

“Also, to the extent that individuals or groups can generate novel performances, they can influence the future direction of the routine.”

In the paper

“Variations are often necessary to manage unexpected contingencies and exceptions (Perrow, 1967); the ability to improvise an effective variation is likely to be a valued skill.”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Perrow, 1967 source

In the paper

“In this paper, we have emphasized that the ostensive and performative aspects of routines are mutually necessary.”

In the paper

“recognizing the dual nature of organizational routines provides us with a way of conceptualizing change that comes from within organizational routines: change that is a result of engagement in the routine itself.”

In the paper

“In drawing on the variation and selective retention framework, we are not suggesting that routines are necessarily functionally adaptive.”

In the paper

“By directing attention to the performative, improvisational aspect of routines, our theory emphasizes the contingent and potentially contested nature of routines as a source of their variability.”

In the paper

“Thus, variations can be viewed as evidence of resistance (Leidner, 1993).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Leidner, 1993

In the paper

“The performative aspect confers power in other ways that are not adequately expressed by the notion of resistance.”

In the paper

“In her research, Feldman (2000, 2003) found that some routines in the same organization changed readily, while others did not.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Feldman (2000, 2003)

In the paper

“Our theory further suggests that the explanatory factors may be at the level of the routine rather than at the level of the organization.”

In the paper

“Pentland (2003) argued that our traditional measures of task variety (Withey, Daft, and Cooper,1983) are more indicative of variations in the content of work, not variations in the pattern of actions used to accomplish the work.”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pentland (2003) source
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Withey, Daft, and Cooper,1983 source

In the paper

“Performances that are more visible, or more recognizable, may be more influential.”

In the paper

“Because routines have been treated as fixed, unified entities, change has been conceived of as driven by exogenous forces such as market changes or new technologies (Tushman and Romanelli, 1985; Barley, 1986, 1990; Gersick and Hackman, 1990; Orlikowski, 1992; Edmondson, Bohmer, and Pisano, 2001).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Tushman and Romanelli, 1985
• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Barley, 1986, 1990
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Gersick and Hackman, 1990 source

In the paper

“Indeed, the performative aspect of routines has been seen as a primary source of power for non-managerial employees (Crozier, 1964).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Crozier, 1964

In the paper

“Our theory suggests that many different actors can be sources of variation and selection.”

In the paper

“Understanding how change can occur within organizational routines enables us to shed new light on the debate about whether organizational change is episodic or continuous (Tushman and Romanelli, 1985; Gersick, 1991; Weick and Quinn, 1999).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Tushman and Romanelli, 1985
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Gersick, 1991 source
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Weick and Quinn, 1999 source

In the paper

“But power permeates the interaction between the performative and ostensive aspects of organizational routines in other ways, as well.”

In the paper

“Understanding that organizational routines are not unitary entities enables us to use variation and selective retention as a framework to understand change within routines, as well.”

In the paper

“The differences in the adoption of change appear to have more to do with the internal dynamics of the routine than with organizational variables such as whether the participants thought the routine was functional and contributed to organizational goals, whether the managers supported the change, or which organizational units and cross-functional teams were involved.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Feldman (2000, 2003)

In the paper

“in a study of customer service routines at a large bank, Pentland (2003) found that standard survey measures of task variety produced opposite results from measures based on observed sequences of behavior.”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pentland (2003) source

In the paper

“And if consistent, effective selection criteria are in place, variation and selective retention can lead to functional adaptations.”

In the paper

“Failure to make a clear distinction can have direct consequences for empirical research.”

In the paper

“In situations in which there is sequential interdependence, the choices of “downstream” actors are constrained by the choices of the “upstream” actors.”

In the paper

“people who are looking from the outside of the routine, such as hierarchical superiors or researchers, at times will be more likely to describe the ostensive aspect of the routine, while people who are actually engaged in the routine may be more likely to describe what they do, or the performative aspect.”

In the paper

“Selection within organizational routines occurs in two ways.”

In the paper

“For instance, in the movement from the performative to the ostensive, whereby variations may or may not get incorporated into the recognized routine, what becomes (or does not become) a recognized part of the ostensive aspect of the routine depends on the power of particular individuals or groups to anoint performances as legitimate or appropriate.”

In the paper

“Through this selection of variations, the ostensive aspect of the routine is created, maintained, and modified.”

In the paper

“For these reasons, organizational routines always have the potential for change.”

In the paper

“This movement between performative and ostensive provides many opportunities for people to produce variations on a routine, to select these variations, and to retain them as what it means to do this particular routine.”

In the paper

“Because routines are enacted by many people, there are many actors who influence the process of variation and selection.”

In the paper

“Endogenous change can occur simply as a result of engaging in the routine.”

• Also stated in: § Endogenous Change in Organizational Routines · p. 21 · plain

  “Thus, simply doing the routine in the various circumstances in which it must be performed can bring about change in the routine.”

In the paper

“Retention within organizational routines occurs when people turn a variation into part of the story about how they do hiring.”

In the paper

“The mechanisms of guiding, referring, and accounting enable participants in routines to create variations that other participants recognize as legitimate instances of the ostensive aspect of the routine.”