Organizational Differences in Rates of Learning: Evidence from the Adoption of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery

References

• Adler P. S. Shared learning. Management Sci. (1990) 36(8):938–957Link, Google Scholar
• Adler P. S., Clark K. B. Behind the learning curve: A sketch of the learning process. Management Sci. (1991) 37(3):267–281Link, Google Scholar
• Argote L. Organizational learning curves: Persistence, transfer and turnover. Internat. J. Tech. Management (1996) 11(7,8):759–769Google Scholar
• Argote L., Epple D. Learning curves in manufacturing. Science (1990) 247:920–924Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L., Beckman S., Epple D. The persistence and transfer of learning in industrial settings. Management Sci. (1990) 36(2):140–154Link, Google Scholar
• Argote L., Insko C. A., Yovetich N., Romero A. A. Group learning curves: The effects of turnover and task complexity on group performance. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. (1995) 25(6):512–529Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyris C., Schon D. A.Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective (1978) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
• Cohen W., Levinthal D. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1990) 35(1):128–152Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crawford F. A., Anderson R. P., Clark R. E., Grover F. L., Kouchoukos N. T., Waldhausen J. A., Wilcox B. R. Volume requirements for cardiac surgery credentialing: A critical examination. The ad hoc committee on cardiac surgery credentialing of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Ann. Thoracic Surgery (1996) 61(1):12–16Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duncan R. B., Weiss A. Organizational learning: Implications for organizational design. Res. Organ. Behavior (1979) 1(4):75–125Google Scholar
• Dutton J. M., Thomas A. Treating progress functions as a managerial opportunity. Acad. Management Rev. (1984) 9(2):235–247Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A. C., Bohmer R. M. J., Pisano G. P. Learning new technical and interpersonal routines in operating room teams: The case of minimally invasive cardiac surgery. Research on Managing Groups and Teams (2001) (Jai Press, Greenwich, CT) 29–51Google Scholar
• Edmondson A. C., Moingeon B. When to learn how and when to learn why: Appropriate organizational learning processes as a source of competitive advantage. Organizational Learning and Competitive Advantage (1996) (Sage Publications, London, U.K.) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A. C., Moingeon B. From organizational learning to the learning organization. Management Learning (1998) 29(1):5–20Crossref, Google Scholar
• Epple D., Argote L., Devadas R. Organizational learning curves: A method for investigating intra-plant transfer of knowledge acquired through learning by doing. Organ. Sci. (1991) 2(1):58–70Link, Google Scholar
• Gruber H. The learning curve in the production of semiconductor memory chips. Appl. Econom. (1992) 24:885–894Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gruber H. The yield factor and the learning curve in semiconductor production. Appl. Econom. (1994) 26(8):837–843Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan E. L. The relation between volume and outcome in health care. New England J. Medicine (1999) 340(21):1677–1679Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harvard Business School Case Number 9-696-015, Massachusetts General Hospital:CABG Surgery (A)Google Scholar
• Harvard Business School Case Number 9-696, Partners HealthCare System, Inc.(B): Cardiac Care ImprovementGoogle Scholar
• Hatch N. W., Mowery D. C. Process innovation and learning by doing in semiconductor manufacturing. Management Sci. (1998) 44(11):1461–1477Link, Google Scholar
• Hayes R. H., Clark K. B. Why some factories are more productive than others. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1986) 64(9./10):66–74Google Scholar
• Jarmin R. S. Learning by doing and competition in the early rayon industry. Rand J. Econom. (1994) 25:441–454Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levitt B., March J. G. Organizational learning. Ann. Rev. Soc. (1988) 14:319–340Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luft H. S., Garnick D. W., Mark D. H., McPhee S. J.Hospital Volume, Physician Volume, and Patient Outcomes: Assessing the Evidence (1990) (Health Administration Press, Ann Arbor, MI) Google Scholar
• Miller D.The Icarus Paradox: How Exceptional Companies Bring About Their Own Downfall (1990) (Harper Business, New York) Google Scholar
• Miner A. S., Mezias S. J. Ugly duckling no more: Pasts and futures of organizational learning research. Organ. Sci. (1996) 7(1):88–99Link, Google Scholar
• Moreland R., Argote L., Krishnan R., Tindale R.S., Heath L. Training people to work in groups. Theory and Research on Small Groups: Social and Psychological Applications to Social Issues (1998) (Plenum Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Nelson R. R., Winter S. G. The Schumpeterian tradeoff revisited. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1982) 72(1):114–132Google Scholar
• Prahalad C. K., Hamel G. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1990) 68(3):79–91Google Scholar
• Roach G. W., Kanchuger M., Mangano C. M., Newman M., Nussmeier N., Wolman R., Aggarwal A., Marschall K., Graham S. H., Ley C. Adverse cerebral outcomes after coronary bypass surgery. New England J. Medicine (1996) 335(25):1857–1863Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenberg N.Perspectives on Technology (1976) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saslow Carol A.Basic Research Methods (1982) (Random House, New York) Google Scholar
• Senge P. M.The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization (1990) (Doubleday/Currency, New York) Google Scholar
• Sinclair G., Klepper S., Cohen W. What's experience got to do with it? Sources of cost reduction in a large speciality chemicals producer. Management Sci. (2000) 46(1):28–45Link, Google Scholar
• Teece D., Pisano G. Dynamic capabilities of firms: An introduction. Industr. Corporate Change (1995) 3(3):537–556Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece D., Pisano G., Schuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management J. (1997) 18(7):509–533Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Hippel E. The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process. Res. Policy (1976) 5(3):212–239Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Hippel E. Appropriability of innovation benefit as a predictor of the source of innovation. Res. Policy (1982) 11(2):95–115Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Hippel E., Tyre M. J. How learning is done: Problem identification in novel process equipment. Res. Policy (1995) 24(1):1–12Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wernerfelt B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management J. (1984) 5(2):171–180Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wright T. P. Factors affecting the costs of airplanes. J. Aeronautical Sci. (1936) 3:122–128Crossref, Google Scholar