Age-Related Structural Inertia: A Distance-Based Approach

References

• Amburgey TL, Kelly D, Barnett WP (1993) Resetting the clock: The dynamics of organizational change and failure. Admin. Sci. Quart. 38(1):51–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aronson E (2007) The Social Animal, 10th ed. (Worth Publishers, New York).Google Scholar
• Barnett WP, Carroll GR (1995) Modeling internal organizational change. Annual Rev. Sociol. 21:217–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barnett WP, Hansen MT (1996) The Red Queen in organizational evolution. Strategic Management J. 17(S1):139–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barnett WP, Pontikes EG (2008) The Red Queen, success bias, and organizational inertia. Management Sci. 54(7):1237–1251.Link, Google Scholar
• Bourdieu P (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Brewer M (1991) The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 17(5):475–482.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burago D, Burago Y, Ivanov S (2001) A Course in Metric Geometry, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 33 (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carroll GR, Hannan MT (2000) The Demography of Corporations and Industries (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carroll GR, Feng M, Le Mens G, McKendrick DG (2010) Organizational evolution with fuzzy technological formats: Tape drive producers in the world market, 1951–1998. Hsu G, Negro G, Koçak Ö, eds. Categories in Markets: Origins and Evolution Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 31 (Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, UK), 203–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen CM, Bower JL (1996) Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. Strategic Management J. 17(3):197–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1963) Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Dawes RM (1979) The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. Amer. Psych. 34(7):571–582.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dubuisson M-P, Jain AK (1994) A modified Hausdorff distance for object matching. Proc. 12th Internat. Conf. Pattern Recognition, Vol. 1 (IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA), 566–568.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Festinger L (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert CG (2005) Unbundling the structure of inertia: Resource versus routine rigidity. Acad. Management J. 48(5):741–763.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert RJ, Newbery DMG (1982) Preemptive patenting and the persistence of monopoly. Amer. Econom. Rev. 72(3):514–526.Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2001) The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Paper 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan MT, Freeman J (1984) Structural inertia and organizational change. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 49(2):149–165.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan MT, Pólos L, Carroll GR (2007) Logics of Organization Theory: Audiences, Codes, and Ecologies (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heckman JJ (1979) Sample selection bias as specification error. Econometrica 47(1):153–161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow (Farr, Strauss, and Giroux, New York).Google Scholar
• Kovács B, Hannan MT (2013) Category spanning, distance, and appeal. Research Report 2081R, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
• Le Mens G, Hannan MT, Pólos L (2011) Founding conditions, learning, and organizational life chances: Age dependence revisited. Admin. Sci. Quart. 56(1):95–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Le Mens G, Hannan MT, Pólos L (2015) Organizational obsolescence, drifting tastes, and age dependence in organizational life chances. Organ. Sci. 26(2:550–570.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1997) Adaptation on rugged lansdcapes. Management Sci. 43(7):934–950.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, Warglien M (1999) Landscape design: Designing for local action in complex worlds. Organ. Sci. 10(3):342–357.Link, Google Scholar
• Levitt B, March JG (1988) Organizational learning. Annual Rev. Sociol. 14:319–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar
• March JG, Schulz M, Zhou X (2002) The Dynamics of Rules: Change in Written Organizational Codes (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Google Scholar
• Naslund L, Pemer F (2012) The appropriated language: Dominant stories as a source of organizational inertia. Human Relations 65(1):89–110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR, Winter SG (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Péli G, Pólos L, Hannan MT (2000) Back to inertia: Theoretical implications of alternative styles of logical formalization. Sociol. Theory 18(2):193–213.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pólos L, Hannan MT (2004) A logic for theories in flux: A model-theoretic approach. Logique et Analyse 47:85–121.Google Scholar
• Pólos L, Hannan MT, Hsu G (2010) Modalities in sociological arguments. J. Math. Sociol. 34(3):201–238.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reinganum JF (1983) Uncertain innovation and the persistence of monopoly. Amer. Econom. Rev. 73(4):741–748.Google Scholar
• Samuelson W, Zeckhauser R (1988) Status quo bias in decision making. J. Risk Uncertainty 1(1):7–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1934) The Theory of Economic Development (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Selznick P (1957) Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation (University of California Press, Berkeley).Google Scholar
• Sørensen JB, Stuart TE (2000) Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):81–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van der Steen M (2009) Inertia and management accounting change: The role of ambiguity and contradiction between formal rules and routines. Accounting, Auditing Accountability J. 22(5):736–761.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Veltman F (1996) Defaults in update semantics. J. Philos. Logic 25(3): 221–261.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zajonc RB (1968) Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 92(2, Part 2):1–27.Crossref, Google Scholar