The Tangled Nature Model for organizational ecology
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.
KeywordsOrganizational ecology Co-evolution Multi-level modeling Organizational adaptation
Rudy Arthur is supported by CP3-Origins which is partially funded by the Danish National Research Foundation, grant number DNRF90. Michael Christensen acknowledges support from the COPE grant provided by the Danish Council for Independent Research, Social Science (FSE). The authors would like to thank Oliver Baumann, for the invitation to talk at the Theoretical Organization Models conference in Odense which inspired R. Arthur to start thinking about this model. We would like to thank Guido Fioretti for interesting and helpful discussions and references, and Olav Sorenson for constructive feedback on an earlier version of the manuscript. Finally, we appreciate the feedback and guidance we have received from the editor and the 3 anonymous reviewers.
- Axtell R (2001) Zipf distribution of U.S. firm sizes. Science 293(September):181820Google Scholar
- Baum J (1996) Organizational ecology. In: Clegg S, Hardy C, Nord W (eds) Handbook of organization studies. Sage, London, pp 77–114Google Scholar
- di Collobiano S (2002) Tangled nature: a model of ecological evolution. PhD thesis, Imperial College LondonGoogle Scholar
- Eldredge N, Gould S (1972) Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. In: Models in paleobiology, Freeman Cooper, San Francisco, pp 82–115, reprinted in Eldredge N (1985) Time frames. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, pp. 193–223Google Scholar
- Geroski P, Markides C (2005) Fast second: how smart companies bypass radical innovation to enter and dominate new markets. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
- Goodwin RM (1967) A growth cycle. In: Feinstein CH (ed) Socialism, capitalism and economic growth: essays presented to Maurice Dobb. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 54–58Google Scholar
- Hannan M, Freeman J (1989) Organizational ecology. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Jensen H, Arcaute E (2010) Complexity, collective effects, and modeling of ecosystems: formation, function, and stability. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1195, S1 ecological complexity and sustainability, pp E19–E26Google Scholar
- Kauffman S (1993) The origins of order: self-organization and selection in evolution. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Nalebuff B, Brandenburger A (1996) Co-opetition. Harper Collins Business, LondonGoogle Scholar