IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v16y2005i4p422-433.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying Situated Cognition in Organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Kimberly D. Elsbach

    (Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, California 95616)

  • Pamela S. Barr

    (J. Mack Robinson College of Business, Georgia State University, Suite 1015 RCB Building, 35 Broad Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303)

  • Andrew B. Hargadon

    (Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, California 95616)

Abstract

Using the established definition of situated cognition in organizations as “the interaction of cognitive schemas and organizational context” (Lant 2002), we examine empirical case studies from the last 15 years to illustrate what situated cognitions in organizations might actually look like. Grounded in this research, we develop a framework that identifies how some specific forms of cognitive schemas (i.e., rule schemas, event schemas, person schemas) and specific contexts (e.g., physical contexts, institutional contexts) interact during sensemaking processes to give rise to momentary perceptions that we call situated cognitions. We present evidence that common patterns of interaction between schemas and context may occur during sensemaking in organizations. In terms of theoretical implications, our framework focuses attention on the specific interactions between context and cognition (rather than on context or cognition alone) that comprise situated cognitions, and helps to more concretely define situated cognitions as momentary or temporally bounded perceptions. We offer several practical implications of this framework for managers and suggest avenues for further elaboration on our ideas through research.

Suggested Citation

  • Kimberly D. Elsbach & Pamela S. Barr & Andrew B. Hargadon, 2005. "Identifying Situated Cognition in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 422-433, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:16:y:2005:i:4:p:422-433
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0138
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.1050.0138?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. 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. Raghu Garud & Michael A. Rappa, 1994. "A Socio-Cognitive Model of Technology Evolution: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 344-362, August.
    3. Walsh, James P. & Henderson, Caroline M. & Deighton, John, 1988. "Negotiated belief structures and decision performance: An empirical investigation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 194-216, October.
    4. Andrew Hargadon & Angelo Fanelli, 2002. "Action and Possibility: Reconciling Dual Perspectives of Knowledge in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 290-302, June.
    5. Marcie J. Tyre & Eric von Hippel, 1997. "The Situated Nature of Adaptive Learning in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 71-83, February.
    6. Pamela S. Barr, 1998. "Adapting to Unfamiliar Environmental Events: A Look at the Evolution of Interpretation and Its Role in Strategic Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(6), pages 644-669, December.
    7. Scott D. N. Cook & John Seely Brown, 1999. "Bridging Epistemologies: The Generative Dance Between Organizational Knowledge and Organizational Knowing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 381-400, August.
    8. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    9. C. Marlene Fiol, 1994. "Consensus, Diversity, and Learning in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 403-420, August.
    10. Stephen J. Carson & Anoop Madhok & Rohit Varman & George John, 2003. "Information Processing Moderators of the Effectiveness of Trust-Based Governance in Interfirm R&D Collaboration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 45-56, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Michael D. Cohen & Paul Bacdayan, 1994. "Organizational Routines Are Stored as Procedural Memory: Evidence from a Laboratory Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 554-568, November.
    13. Herbert A. Simon, 1991. "Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 125-134, February.
    14. Giuseppe Labianca & Barbara Gray & Daniel J. Brass, 2000. "A Grounded Model of Organizational Schema Change During Empowerment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 235-257, April.
    15. Don Knight & Craig L. Pearce & Ken G. Smith & Judy D. Olian & Henry P. Sims & Ken A. Smith & Patrick Flood, 1999. "Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(5), pages 445-465, May.
    16. Marc J. Dollinger & Peggy A. Golden & Todd Saxton, 1997. "The Effect Of Reputation On The Decision To Joint Venture," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 127-140, February.
    17. Moreland, Richard L. & Myaskovsky, Larissa, 2000. "Exploring the Performance Benefits of Group Training: Transactive Memory or Improved Communication?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 117-133, May.
    18. Catherine Durnell Cramton, 2001. "The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 346-371, June.
    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. Beth A. Bechky, 2003. "Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 312-330, June.
    2. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    3. Ng, Desmond W., 2011. "Thinking Outside the Box: An Absorptive Capacity Approach to the Product Development Process," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 14(3), pages 1-28, September.
    4. Miles M Yang & Feifei Yang & Tingru Cui & Ying-Chu Cheng, 2019. "Analysing the dynamics of mental models using causal loop diagrams," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(3), pages 495-512, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Edward G. Anderson & Kyle Lewis, 2014. "A Dynamic Model of Individual and Collective Learning Amid Disruption," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 356-376, April.
    7. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    8. Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2020. "Analogical reasoning, cognition, and the response to technological change: Lessons from mobile communication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    9. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    10. Dena Lawrence & Federica Pazzaglia & Karan Sonpar, 2011. "The Introduction of a Non-Traditional and Aggressive Approach to Banking: The Risks of Hubris," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 401-420, September.
    11. Anne Kokkonen & Pauli Alin, 2015. "Practice-based learning in construction projects: a literature review," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(7), pages 513-530, July.
    12. Chris Kimble, 2013. "Knowledge management, codification and tacit knowledge," Post-Print halshs-00826911, HAL.
    13. Sung‐Choon Kang & Scott A. Snell, 2009. "Intellectual Capital Architectures and Ambidextrous Learning: A Framework for Human Resource Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 65-92, January.
    14. Michael G. Jacobides, 2007. "The Inherent Limits of Organizational Structure and the Unfulfilled Role of Hierarchy: Lessons from a Near-War," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 455-477, June.
    15. Alva Taylor & Constance E. Helfat, 2009. "Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 718-739, August.
    16. Giovanni Gavetti & Jan W. Rivkin, 2007. "On the Origin of Strategy: Action and Cognition over Time," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 420-439, June.
    17. Agulles, Remei & Prats, Mª Julia, 2011. "Learning in practice: What organizational and management literature can contribute to professional and occupational development," IESE Research Papers D/938, IESE Business School.
    18. Florence Allard-Poesi, 1998. "Representations And Influence Processes In Groups: Towards A Socio-Cognitive Perspective On Cognition In Organization," Post-Print hal-01490579, HAL.
    19. Mark DesJardine & Pratima Bansal, 2019. "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: How Negative External Evaluations Can Shorten Organizational Time Horizons," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 761-780, July.
    20. Lo, Jade Y. & Nag, Rajiv & Xu, Lei & Agung, Shanti D., 2020. "Organizational innovation efforts in multiple emerging market categories: Exploring the interplay of opportunity, ambiguity, and socio-cognitive contexts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).

    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:inm:ororsc:v:16:y:2005:i:4:p:422-433. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.