Organizational routines in Russian companies: Review of practices

  • Olga Vladimirovna Valieva Institute of Economic and Industrial Engineering Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Science, Novosibirsk, Russia Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/sjm9-6362

Sažetak


Results of the first stage of the researches conducted in 2012-2013 are presented in the article. Researches are connected with studying of transformational processes intra corporate administrative the practices in the Russian companies and their subsequent institutionalization. Preliminary results showed that depending on time of existence of the enterprise the practices connected with adaptation of the enterprise to environmental conditions change only. Intra corporate forms of interaction thus remain invariable. The factorial analysis revealed six types of the routines influencing activity of the companies. The analysis showed the importance of adaptive type of organizational structures in management and functioning of the companies, progressive methods of processing of information flows, and also the principles of group decision-making and the power of the founder in Russian companies.

Biografija autora

Olga Vladimirovna Valieva, Institute of Economic and Industrial Engineering Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Science, Novosibirsk, Russia Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia

Candidate of Economic Sciences, senior reseacher, Institute of Economic and Industrial Engineering Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Science

associate professor Economics department Novosibirsk State University

Reference

Abell, P., Felin, T. & Foss, N. J. (2008).Building micro-foundations for the routines, capabilities, and performance links.Managerial and Decision Economics, 29: 489–502.

Adizes,I.(2008).Managing Corporate Lifecycles.AdizesInstitute.

Becker, M. C. (2005). A Framework for Applying Organizational Routines in Empirical Research: Linking Antecedents, Characteristics and Performance Outcomes of Recurrent Interaction Patterns. Industrial and Corporate Change (14:5): 817-846.

Gioia, D. A., & Poole, P. P. (1984). Scripts in Organizational Behavior. Academy of Management Review (9:3): 449-459.

Greif, A. (2006). Institutions and the Path to the Modern Economy: Lessons from Medieval Trade. Cambridge University Press.

Coase, R.H. (1937). The Nature of the Firm // Economica. Vol. 4: 386-405.

Cohen, M. D., &Bacdayan, P. (1994). Organizational Routines Are Stored as Procedural Memory: Evidence from a Laboratory Study. Organization Science (5:4): 554-568.

Feldman, M. S. &Pentland, B. T. (2003).Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 94–118.

Felin, T. &Hesterly, W. S. (2007).The knowledge-based view, nested heterogeneity, and new value creation: philosophical considerations on the locus of knowledge. Academy of Management Review, 32: 195–218.

Felin, T., Foss, N.J., Heimeriks, K.H., &Madsen T.L. (2012).Microfoundations of Routines and Capabilities: Individuals, Processes, and Structure. Journal of Management Studies 49:8 December: 1351-1374.

Friesl, M. &Larty, J. (2013). Replication of Routines in Organizations: Existing Literature and New Perspectives. International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 15: 106–122.

Helfat, C., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D. J. &Winter, S. G. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities.Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Blackwell: Cambridge, MA.

Lester, D.L., Parnell,J.A., &Carraher, S. (2003). Organizational Life Cycle: a five-stage empirical scale. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis. Vol.11 (4): 339-354.

Limayem, M., Hirt, S. G., & Cheung, C. M. K. (2007). How Habit Limits the Predictive Power of Intention: The Case of InformationSystems Continuance. MIS Quarterly (31:4): 705-737.

Meyer, J.W., &Rowan, B. (1977).Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony / American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 83 (2): 340-363.

Meyer, J.W. (2008). Reflections on Institutional Theories of Organizations / The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism - SAGE Publications Ltd.

Nelson, R. R., &Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Ortiz de Guinea, A., & Markus, M. L. (2009).Why Break the Habit of a Lifetime? Rethinking the Roles of Intention, Habit, and Emotion in Continuing Information Technology Use. MIS Quarterly (33:3): 433-444.

Pentland, B.T., Feldman, M.S., Becker, M.C. & Liu P. (2012). Dynamics of Organizational Routines: A Generative Model. Journal of Management Studies 49:8, December: 1484-1508.

Teece, D. J. (2012).Dynamic capabilities: routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49: 1395–401.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. &Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management.Strategic Management Journal, 18; 509–33.

Tolbert, P. S., &Zucker, L. G. (1983).Institutional sources of change in organizational structure: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. / Admin. Sci. Q. Vol. 28: 22-39.

Verplanken, B., &Aarts, H. (1999). Habit, Attitude, and Planned Behaviour: Is Habit an Empty Construct or an Interesting Case of Automaticity?.European Review of Social Psychology (10): 101-134.

Winter, S. G. (2003).Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24: 991–5.

Winter, S. G.(2013). Habit, Deliberation, and Action: Strengthening the Microfoundations of Routines and Capabilities. The Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 27, No. 2: 120–137.

Williamson, O.E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism - N.Y.: Free Press.

Williamson, O.E. (2000).The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead // Journal ob Economic Literature. Vol. 38 (Sept.): 595-613.

Wood, W., & Neal, D. T. (2007). A New Look at Habits and the Habit-Goal Interface. Psychological Review (114:4): 843-863.

Zucker, L. G. (1987). Institutional Theories of Organization. / Ann. Rev. Sociol. Vol. 13: 443-464.

Zucker, L. G. (1983). Organizations as Institutions. / In Advances in Organizational Theory and Research, ed. S. B. Bacharach. – Greenwich, Vol. 2: 1-43.

Objavljeno
2014/06/17
Broj časopisa
Vol. 9 Br. 2 (2014): Serbain Journal of Management
Rubrika
Originalni naučni članak

The Author wishes to submit the Work to SJM for publication. To enable SJM to publish the Work and to give effect to the parties’ intention set forth herein, they have agreed to cede the first right to publication and republication in the SJM Journal.

 

Cession

 

The Author hereby cedes to SJM, who accepts the cession, to the copyright in and to the paper.

 

The purpose of the cession is to enable SJM to publish the Work, as first publisher world-wide, and for republication in the SJM Journal, and to grant the right to others to publish the Work world-wide, for so long as such copyright subsists;

 

SJM shall be entitled to edit the work before publication, as it deems fit, subject to the Authors approval

 

The Author warrants to SJM that:

 

- the Author is the owner of the copyright in the Work, whether as author or as reassigned from the Author’s employee and that the Author is entitled to cede the copyright to SJM;

 

- the paper (or any of its part) is not submitted or accepted for publication in any other Journal;

 

- the Work is an original work created by the Author;

 

- the Author has not transferred, ceded, or assigned the copyright, or any part thereof, to any third party; or granted any third party a licence or other right to the copyright, which may affect or detract from the rights granted to SJM in terms of this agreement.

 

The Author hereby indemnifies the SJM as a body and its individual members, to the fullest extent permitted in law, against all or any claims which may arise consequent to the warranties set forth.

 

No monetary consideration shall be payable by SJM to the Author for the cession, but SJM shall clearly identify the Author as having produced the Work and ensure that due recognition is given to the Author in any publication of the Work.

 

Should SJM, in its sole discretion, elect not to publish the Work within 1 year after the date of this agreement, the cession shall lapse and be of no further effect. In such event the copyright shall revert to the Author and SJM shall not publish the Work, or any part thereof, without the Author’s prior written consent.