IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jchals/v15y2024i1p9-d1343260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Untangling the Processes of Bitcoin: An Organizational Learning Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Rupert L. Matthews

    (Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham NG1 4FQ, UK)

Abstract

Bitcoin is a complex phenomenon, whether in terms of the macro factors affecting its price or its role in the global energy infrastructure. However, extant literature pays too little attention to exploring the internal mechanisms of the protocol to be able to link them to how they affect the visible characteristics of Bitcoin. This paper uses secondary data from highly reputable Bitcoin-focused sources to systematically map the processes that enable Bitcoin to function as a peer-to-peer cash system. Novelty is achieved by applying the established and versatile “4I” organisational learning framework to provide a new lens through which to understand how the processes within Bitcoin enable and facilitate different types of changes to the protocol. Further insights are provided to organisational learning from Bitcoin, in relation to managing mission-critical changes to organisational systems. In addition, it presents an option for dealing with irreconcilable internal differences to “hard-fork” part of the organisation. While the scope of this paper is limited to secondary data, opportunities for further research, including primary data collection, are outlined to explore how Bitcoin knowledge disseminates within communities or companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Rupert L. Matthews, 2024. "Untangling the Processes of Bitcoin: An Organizational Learning Perspective," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:15:y:2024:i:1:p:9-:d:1343260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/15/1/9/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/15/1/9/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    3. Wai Fong Boh & Sandra A. Slaughter & J. Alberto Espinosa, 2007. "Learning from Experience in Software Development: A Multilevel Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1315-1331, August.
    4. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    5. Nick Bontis & Mary M. Crossan & John Hulland, 2002. "Managing An Organizational Learning System By Aligning Stocks and Flows," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 437-469, June.
    6. Mary M. Crossan & Iris Berdrow, 2003. "Organizational learning and strategic renewal," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(11), pages 1087-1105, November.
    7. Mikael Holmqvist, 2004. "Experiential Learning Processes of Exploitation and Exploration Within and Between Organizations: An Empirical Study of Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 70-81, February.
    8. Akdoğu, Evrim & Simsir, Serif Aziz, 2023. "Are blockchain and cryptocurrency M&As harder to close?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    9. Juan Ignacio Ibañez & Alexander Freier, 2023. "Bitcoin’s Carbon Footprint Revisited: Proof of Work Mining for Renewable Energy Expansion," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, August.
    10. Murray A. Rudd, 2023. "Bitcoin Is Full of Surprises," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-14, May.
    11. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    2. Ming Piao & Edward J. Zajac, 2016. "How exploitation impedes and impels exploration: Theory and evidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1431-1447, July.
    3. Samina Karim & Aseem Kaul, 2015. "Structural Recombination and Innovation: Unlocking Intraorganizational Knowledge Synergy Through Structural Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 439-455, April.
    4. Sirén, Charlotta & Kohtamäki, Marko, 2016. "Stretching strategic learning to the limit: The interaction between strategic planning and learning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 653-663.
    5. Pettus, Michael L. & Kor, Yasemin Y. & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2007. "A Theory of Change in Turbulent Environments: The Sequencing of Dynamic Capabilities Following Industry Deregulation," Working Papers 07-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    6. Pedota, Mattia & Cicala, Francesco & Basti, Alessio, 2024. "A Wild Mind with a Disciplined Eye: Unleashing Human-GenAI Creativity Through Simulated Entity Elicitation," OSF Preprints 3bn95, Center for Open Science.
    7. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2019. "Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1319-1348, November.
    8. Ruiz-Mercader, Josefa & Meroño-Cerdan, Angel Luis & Sabater-Sánchez, Ramón, 2006. "Information technology and learning: Their relationship and impact on organisational performance in small businesses," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 16-29.
    9. Paul E. Bierly III & Paula S. Daly, 2007. "Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(4), pages 493-516, July.
    10. Lam, Alice, 2004. "Organizational Innovation," MPRA Paper 11539, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Nancy Vargas & M. Begoña Lloria & Salvador Roig-Dobón, 2016. "Main drivers of human capital, learning and performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 961-978, October.
    12. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann, 2019. "Polytope Conditioning and Linear Convergence of the Frank–Wolfe Algorithm," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 1319-1348, February.
    13. Tracy A. Jenkin, 2013. "Extending the 4I Organizational Learning Model: Information Sources, Foraging Processes and Tools," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-14, August.
    14. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Nick von Tunzelmann, 2013. "Alignment of Innovation Policy Objectives: a demand side perspective," DRUID Working Papers 13-02, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    15. Jiménez-Jiménez, Daniel & Sanz-Valle, Raquel, 2011. "Innovation, organizational learning, and performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 408-417, April.
    16. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2002. "Knowing in Practice: Enacting a Collective Capability in Distributed Organizing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 249-273, June.
    17. Bernardo Batiz-Lazo & Jorge Gomes & Maria Mendes, 2002. "New Product Development & Management Of Knowledge In Portuguese Higher Education," Industrial Organization 0211019, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    19. Meier, Matthias & Weller, Ingo, 2010. "Wissensmanagement und unternehmensinterner Wissenstransfer," Discussion Papers 2010/16, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    20. Yasser Alizadeh & Antonie J. Jetter, 2019. "Pathways for Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Innovations: A Review and Expansion of Ambidexterity Theory," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1-33, August.

    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:gam:jchals:v:15:y:2024:i:1:p:9-:d:1343260. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.