Abstract
We borrow Wittgenstein's concept of ``languagegames'' to create a theory of action. Thelanguage-games framework integrates theeconomic model of rational maximizing and thesociological model of rule following. Languagegames are subject to a process of naturalselection. Strong competition creates a``tight'' evolutionary filter. When it does,agents are constrained to act as if they wererational. Traditional economic logic applies. When it does not, agents are free to chooseidiosyncratic actions. Sociologicalunderstanding is required. We combine thelanguage-games framework with the concept of``modular system.'' In a modular system, partsare grouped to minimize interaction betweengroups. The parts in one module interact withthose of another module only through relativelyformal ``interfaces.'' Large firms are modularsystems, and so is the larger social system,including the division of labor. Combining thelanguage-game framework with the idea ofmodular system helps us explain firm growth. Acharismatic leader founds an enterprise andplaces his interpretive framework in aprivileged position within it. The firm is nota modular system; it is not ``decomposable.'' Firm growth leads to a greater division oflabor within the enterprise and to a moremodular organization. Modularity helps thelarger enterprise function smoothly, even whenemployees have conflicting mental models. Success in transforming small firms to largefirms depends on finding the right modularstructure for the enterprise.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baldwin, C.Y. and K.B. Clark: 1997, “Managing in an Age of Modularity”, Harvard Business Review 75(5): 84–93 (September-October).
Baldwin, C.Y. and K.B. Clark: 2000, Design Rules: the Power of Modularity (Cambridge: MIT Press).
Bresnahan, T.F. and S. Greenstein: 1997, “Technical Progress and Co-invention in Computing and the Use of Computers”, in M.N. Bailey, P.C. Reiss and C. Winston (eds.), Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics, 1996 (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution).
Brooks, F.P.: 1975, The Mythical Man-Month:Essays on Software Engineering (Reading: Addison-Wesley).
Burns, T. and G.M. Stalker: 1961, TheManagement of Innovation (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Revised edition, 1994.
Chandler, A.D. Jr.: 1977, The Visible Hand: the Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press).
Coase, R.H.: 1937, “The Nature of the Firm”, Economica, N.S. 4: 386–405 (November).
Coleman, J.S.: 1990, “Rational Organization”, Rationality and Society 2(1): 94–105.
Denzau, A.T. and D.C. North: 1994, “Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions”, Kyklos 47: 1–13.
Hamilton, W.D.: 1964, “The Genetic Evolution of Social Behavior”, Journal of Theoretical Biology 7: 1–52.
Hayek, F.A.: [1945] 1948, “The Use of Knowledge in Society”, in his Individualism and Economic Order (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
Kirzner, I.: 1973, Competition and Entrepreneurship (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
Koppl, R.: 1998, “Lachmann on the Subjectivism of Active Minds”, in R. Koppl and G. Mongiovi (eds.), Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in Memory of Ludwig Lachmann (London and New York: Routledge).
Koppl, R.: 2000, “Fritz Machlup and Behavioralism”, Industrial and Corporate Change 9(4): 595–622.
Koppl, R.: 2002, Big Players and the Economic Theory of Expectations (London: Palgrave Press, forthcoming).
Koppl, R. and R. Langlois: 1994, “When Do Ideas Matter? A Study in the Natural Selection of Social Games”, Advances in Austrian Economic 1: 81–104.
Knudsen, T. and N.J. Foss: 1999, “Dispersed Knowledge and Firm Organization: Fragments of an Austro-Evolutionary Approach”, Working Paper, Copenhagen Business School.
Langlois, R.N.: 1986, “Rationality, Institutions, and Explanation”, in R. Langlois (ed.), Economics as a Process: Essays in the New Institutional Economics (New York: Cambridge University Press).
Langlois, R.N.: 1992, “Transaction-cost Economics in Real Time”, Industrial and Corporate Change 1(1): 99–127.
Langlois, R.N.: 1995, “Do Firms Plan?” Constitutional Political Economy 6(3): 247–261.
Langlois, R.N.: 1997, “Cognition and Capabilities: Opportunities Seized and Missed in the History of the Computer Industry”, in R. Garud, P. Nayyar and Z. Shapira (eds.), Technological Learning, Oversights and Foresights (New York: Cambridge University Press).
Langlois, R.N.: 1998, “Personal Capitalism as Charismatic Authority: The Organizational Economics of a Weberian Concept”, Industrial and Corporate Change 7: 195–214.
Langlois, R.N.: 2002, “Modularity in Technology and Organization”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, forthcoming.
Langlois, R.N. and P.L. Robertson: 1992, “Networks and Innovation in a Modular System: Lessons from the Microcomputer and Stereo Component Industries”, Research Policy 21(4): 297–313.
Langlois, R.N. and P.L. Robertson: 1995, Firms, Markets, and Economic Change: A Dynamic Theory of Business Institutions (London: Routledge).
Langlois, R.N. and D.A. Savage: 2001, “Standards, Modularity, and Innovation: The Case of Medical Practice”, in R. Garud and P. Karnøe (eds.), Path Dependence and Path Creation (Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum), pp. 149–168.
Machlup, F.: [1946] 1975, “Marginal Analysis and Empirical Research”, in F. Machlup (ed.), Essays in Economic Semantics (New York: New York University Press).
March, J.G.: 1991, “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning”, Organization Science 2: 71–87.
Menger, K.: [1932] 1974, Morality, Decision, and Social Organization (Dordrecht: Reidel).
Parnas, D.L.: 1972, “On the Criteria for Decomposing Systems into Modules”, Communications of the ACM 15(12): 1053–1058 (December).
Savage, D.A.: 1994, “The Professions in Theory and History: The Case of Pharmacy,” Business and Economic History 23(2): 130–160 (Winter).
Schumpeter, J.A.: [1934] 1978, The Theory of Economic Development (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Schumpeter, J.A.: 1950, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 2nd edn. (New York: Harper and Brothers).
Schutz, A.: [1932] 1967, The Phenomenology of the Social World, translated by George Walsh and Frederick Lehnert (Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press).
Schutz, A.: [1951] 1962, “Choosing Among Projects of Action”, in M. Natanson (ed.), Collected Papers I: The Problem of Social Reality (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff).
Silver, M.: 1984, Enterprise and the Scope of the Firm (London: Martin Robertson).
Simon, H.A.: 1962, “The Architecture of Complexity”, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 106: 467–482, repinted in idem, The Sciences of the Artificial, 2nd edn. (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1981).
Smith, A.: [1776] 1976, An Enquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Glasgow edition (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Weber, M.: 1947. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, trans. A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons; Talcott Parsons (ed.) (New York: Oxford University Press).
Witt, U.: 1998a, “Between Entrepreneurial Leadership and Managerial Governance: The Contingent Ontogeny of Firm Organization”, paper presented at the DRUID 1998 Summer Conference, Bornholm, Denmark, June 9-11.
Witt, U.: 1998b, “Imagination and Leadership - the Neglected Dimension of an Evolutionary Theory of the Firm”. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 35(2): 161–177.
Wittgenstein, L.: 1953. Philosophical Investigations, translated by G.E.M. Anscombe; G.E.M. Anscombe and R. Rhees (eds.) (New York: The Macmillan Company).
Womack, J.P., D.T Jones and D. Roos: 1990, The Machine that Changed the World (New York: Rawson Associates).
Yu, T.F.: 1999, “Toward a Praxeological Theory of the Firm”, Review of Austrian Economics 12(1): 25–41.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koppl, R., Langlois, R.N. Organizations and Language Games. Journal of Management & Governance 5, 287–305 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014098711639
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014098711639