IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jomstd/v40y2003i2p513-541.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Uncertainty and Product–Process Life Cycles: A Multi‐level Interpretation of Change Over Time

Author

Listed:
  • Caron H. St John
  • Richard W. Pouder
  • Alan R. Cannon

Abstract

ABSTRACT Product‐process life cycle models are often used to describe long‐term change in organizations. Such models generally assume a deterministic trajectory of long‐run industry evolution and production core transformation that lead to standardization over time. Typical interpretations of these models do not explain the short and intermediate term choices and competitive dynamics that lead to the longer‐term changes, or explain viable ‘off‐trajectory’ positions and post‐stabilization complications that can arise. In this paper, we use multiple theory streams to augment discussions of product‐process life cycle models in ways that allow interpretation of the role of uncertainty and management decision‐making for the typical trajectory of standardization as well as off‐trajectory and post‐standardization phases.

Suggested Citation

  • Caron H. St John & Richard W. Pouder & Alan R. Cannon, 2003. "Environmental Uncertainty and Product–Process Life Cycles: A Multi‐level Interpretation of Change Over Time," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 513-541, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:40:y:2003:i:2:p:513-541
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-6486.00349
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00349
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-6486.00349?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    2. Robert A. Burgelman, 1991. "Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Field Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 239-262, August.
    3. Zan, Luca, 1990. "Looking for theories in strategy studies," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 89-108.
    4. Arie Y. Lewin & Henk W. Volberda, 1999. "Prolegomena on Coevolution: A Framework for Research on Strategy and New Organizational Forms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(5), pages 519-534, October.
    5. Paul M. Swamidass & William T. Newell, 1987. "Manufacturing Strategy, Environmental Uncertainty and Performance: A Path Analytic Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 509-524, April.
    6. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    7. Andrew H. Van de Ven & Douglas Polley, 1992. "Learning While Innovating," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 92-116, February.
    8. Raymond Vernon, 1966. "International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 80(2), pages 190-207.
    9. James P. Walsh, 1995. "Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 280-321, June.
    10. Deborah Dougherty & Trudy Heller, 1994. "The Illegitimacy of Successful Product Innovation in Established Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 200-218, May.
    11. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1992. "The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 398-427, August.
    12. Deborah Dougherty, 1992. "Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 179-202, May.
    13. Clark, Kim B., 1985. "The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 235-251, October.
    14. Marcie J. Tyre & Oscar Hauptman, 1992. "Effectiveness of Organizational Responses to Technological Change in the Production Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 301-320, August.
    15. Theresa K. Lant & Stephen J. Mezias, 1992. "An Organizational Learning Model of Convergence and Reorientation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 47-71, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cannon, Alan R., 2008. "Inventory improvement and financial performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 581-593, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Papachristos, George & Papadonikolaki, Eleni & Morgan, Bethan, 2024. "Projects as a speciation and aggregation mechanism in transitions: Bridging project management and transitions research in the digitalization of UK architecture, engineering, and construction industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    2. Birkinshaw, Julian & Ridderstråle, Jonas, 1999. "Fighting the corporate immune system: a process study of subsidiary initiatives in multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 149-180, April.
    3. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    4. Clayton M. Christensen & Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1998. "Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-2), pages 207-220, December.
    5. Markus Reihlen & Jan‐Florian Schlapfner & Monika Seeger & Hannah Trittin‐Ulbrich, 2022. "Strategic Venturing as Legitimacy Creation: The Case of Sustainability," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 417-459, March.
    6. Ravasi, Davide & Turati, Carlo, 2005. "Exploring entrepreneurial learning: a comparative study of technology development projects," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 137-164, January.
    7. Marco Iansiti, 2000. "How the Incumbent Can Win: Managing Technological Transitions in the Semiconductor Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 169-185, February.
    8. Peine, Alexander, 2008. "Technological paradigms and complex technical systems--The case of Smart Homes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 508-529, April.
    9. Caroline A. Bartel & Raghu Garud, 2009. "The Role of Narratives in Sustaining Organizational Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 107-117, February.
    10. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    11. Christensen, Clayton M. & Suárez, Fernando F., 1960- & Utterback, James M., 1941-, 1996. "Strategies for survival in fast-changing industries," Working papers #152-96. Working paper (S, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Clark G. Gilbert, 2006. "Change in the Presence of Residual Fit: Can Competing Frames Coexist?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 150-167, February.
    13. Utterback, James M., 1941- & Suárez, Fernando F., 1960-, 1992. "Patterns of industrial evolution, dominant designs, and firms' survival," Working papers #79-92. Working paper (Sl, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    14. Saerom Lee & Felipe A. Csaszar, 2020. "Cognitive and Structural Antecedents of Innovation: A Large-Sample Study," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 71-97, June.
    15. Michael A. Cusumano & Steven J. Kahl & Fernando F. Suarez, 2015. "Services, industry evolution, and the competitive strategies of product firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 559-575, April.
    16. James B. Thomas & Stephanie Watts Sussman & John C. Henderson, 2001. "Understanding “Strategic Learning”: Linking Organizational Learning, Knowledge Management, and Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 331-345, June.
    17. Natalya Vinokurova & Rahul Kapoor, 2020. "Converting inventions into innovations in large firms: How inventors at Xerox navigated the innovation process to commercialize their ideas," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(13), pages 2372-2399, December.
    18. Victor P. Seidel & Siobhán O’Mahony, 2014. "Managing the Repertoire: Stories, Metaphors, Prototypes, and Concept Coherence in Product Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 691-712, June.
    19. repec:use:tkiwps:1818 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Maggie Chuoyan Dong & Yulin Fang & Detmar W. Straub, 2017. "The Impact of Institutional Distance on the Joint Performance of Collaborating Firms: The Role of Adaptive Interorganizational Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 309-331, June.
    21. Pinar Ozcan & Douglas Hannah, 2020. "Social Origins of Great Strategies Advertising Suppliers to Realize Disruptive Social Media Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 193-217, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:40:y:2003:i:2:p:513-541. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-2380 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.