IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/comaot/v23y2017i1d10.1007_s10588-016-9214-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Tangled Nature Model for organizational ecology

Author

Listed:
  • Rudy Arthur

    (University of Southern Denmark)

  • Arwen Nicholson

    (University of Southern Denmark)

  • Paolo Sibani

    (University of Southern Denmark)

  • Michael Christensen

    (University of Southern Denmark)

Abstract

The Tangled Nature Model—a biologically inspired model of evolutionary ecology—is described, simulated, and analyzed to show its applicability in organization science and organizational ecology. It serves as a conceptual framework for understanding the dynamics in populations of organizations. A salient dynamical feature of this model is the spontaneous generation of a symbiotic group of core organizations. This core, consisting of several dominating species, introduces a mesoscopic level between that of the individual and the whole system. Despite prolonged periods of stability, this core is disrupted at random by parasitic interactions causing sudden core rearrangements. The size distribution of the core organizations is log-normal as predicted by theory and supported by empirical findings. As a simple application of the model, we study the adaptation of organizations to changes in resource availability in terms of population size, population diversity, and ecological efficiency. We find evidence that a temporary reduction in resources forces a consolidation resulting in a sustained increase in overall efficiency, suggesting that such reductions can be applied strategically to drive incremental improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Rudy Arthur & Arwen Nicholson & Paolo Sibani & Michael Christensen, 2017. "The Tangled Nature Model for organizational ecology," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:23:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s10588-016-9214-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10588-016-9214-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10588-016-9214-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10588-016-9214-4?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robalino, Juan David & Jensen, Henrik Jeldtoft, 2013. "Entangled economy: An ecosystems approach to modeling systemic level dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(4), pages 773-784.
    2. Luís M B Cabral & José Mata, 2003. "On the Evolution of the Firm Size Distribution: Facts and Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1075-1090, September.
    3. Steven Klepper, 2002. "Firm Survival and the Evolution of Oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(1), pages 37-61, Spring.
    4. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    5. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    6. Alessandro Lomi & Erik R. Larsen & John H. Freeman, 2005. "Things Change: Dynamic Resource Constraints and System-Dependent Selection in the Evolution of Organizational Populations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(6), pages 882-903, June.
    7. Shalit, Sol S & Sankar, Ulaganathan, 1977. "The Measurement of Firm Size," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(3), pages 290-298, August.
    8. Jan W. Rivkin, 2000. "Imitation of Complex Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 824-844, June.
    9. Anderson, Philip & Tushman, Michael L, 2001. "Organizational Environments and Industry Exit: The Effects of Uncertainty, Munificence and Complexity," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(3), pages 675-711, September.
    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. Giovanni Gavetti & Constance E. Helfat & Luigi Marengo, 2017. "Searching, Shaping, and the Quest for Superior Performance," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 194-209, September.
    2. Xia Cao & Dan Lv & Zeyu Xing, 2020. "Innovative Resources, Promotion Focus and Responsible Innovation: The Moderating Roles of Adaptive Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Xu, Jin & Peng, Biyu & Cornelissen, Joep, 2021. "Modelling the network economy: A population ecology perspective on network dynamics," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    4. Xuefeng Liu & Hanzhi Yu & Guowei Lai & Shuxiao Wang & Yuying Xie, 2022. "Imitation or Innovation? Research on the Path Selection of Enterprise Performance Improvement from the Perspective of Organizational Ecology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Sunil K. Dixit & Murali Sambasivan, 2020. "An Integrated Multitheoretical Perspective of Public Healthcare Services Delivery Organizations," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 319-335, June.

    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. Myong-Hun Chang, 2009. "Industry dynamics with knowledge-based competition: a computational study of entry and exit patterns," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 4(1), pages 73-114, June.
    2. Arthur, R. & Sibani, P., 2017. "Decision making on fitness landscapes," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 471(C), pages 696-704.
    3. Rahul Kapoor & Shiva Agarwal, 2017. "Sustaining Superior Performance in Business Ecosystems: Evidence from Application Software Developers in the iOS and Android Smartphone Ecosystems," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 531-551, June.
    4. Sai Yayavaram & Wei-Ru Chen, 2015. "Changes in firm knowledge couplings and firm innovation performance: The moderating role of technological complexity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 377-396, March.
    5. Philip Auerswald, 2010. "Entry and Schumpeterian profits," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 553-582, August.
    6. Chung-Yi Tse, 2008. "Diffusion with variable production lead times," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 93(2), pages 177-202, March.
    7. Frenken, Koen, 2006. "A fitness landscape approach to technological complexity, modularity, and vertical disintegration," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 288-305, September.
    8. Giannoccaro, Ilaria, 2015. "Adaptive supply chains in industrial districts: A complexity science approach focused on learning," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PB), pages 576-589.
    9. Christina Fang & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Near-Term Liability of Exploitation: Exploration and Exploitation in Multistage Problems," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 538-551, June.
    10. Grove, Nico & Baumann, Oliver, 2011. "Bitpipe vs. service: Why do pure service providers outperform fully integrated operators?," 8th ITS Asia-Pacific Regional Conference, Taipei 2011: Convergence in the Digital Age 52308, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    11. Yue M. Zhou & Xiang Wan, 2017. "Product variety, sourcing complexity, and the bottleneck of coordination," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(8), pages 1569-1587, August.
    12. Sidney G. Winter & Gino Cattani & Alex Dorsch, 2007. "The Value of Moderate Obsession: Insights from a New Model of Organizational Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 403-419, June.
    13. Christina Fang & Jeho Lee & Melissa A. Schilling, 2010. "Balancing Exploration and Exploitation Through Structural Design: The Isolation of Subgroups and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 625-642, June.
    14. Kerstin Press, 2006. "Divide to conquer? The Silicon Valley - Boston 128 case revisited," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 0610, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Dec 2006.
    15. Dongil D. Keum, 2020. "Cog in the wheel: Resource release and the scope of interdependencies in corporate adjustment activities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 175-197, February.
    16. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Hoping for A to Z While Rewarding Only A: Complex Organizations and Multiple Goals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 4-21, February.
    17. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    18. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    19. Albert Faber & Koen Frenken, 2008. "Models in evolutionary economics and environmental policy: Towards an evolutionary environmental economics," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-15, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.
    20. Michael J. Leiblein & Jeffrey J. Reuer & Todd Zenger, 2018. "What Makes a Decision Strategic?," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 558-573, December.

    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:spr:comaot:v:23:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s10588-016-9214-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.