Abstract
Is the systemness of social organizations related to their evolution? This research question has not yet received appropriate attention by the literature on management and organization theory. The author believes that addressing it can constitute a substantive opportunity to understand key intertwined associated processes, such as organizational survival, competitive success/advantage, or failure. In this article, the author attempts to contribute to fill the aforesaid gap adopting a critical Darwinist approach.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In other words, within the universe, “there is a sorting out process in which some variant types persist, while others disappear, so that the nature of the ensemble as a whole changes” (Lewontin 1983: 65).
“Evolution presumes creation. Creation, in the light of evolution, includes events taking place over time, i.e. it is a creatio continua, in which God becomes visible to believers as the Creator of heaven and earth” (Message by Giovanni Paolo II at the Symposium on Faith and Evolution, April, 26th, 1985, published in Pascual 2004: 34).
In the Letter to the Searchers of God, written by the Episcopal Commission for Faith’s Doctrine, we can read: “God did not create a completed world: creation was not finished. Man has slowly taken possession of the earth, moulding and shaping it to his needs, developing the potential of what has been created for his wealth and for God’s glory. In particular, to date we witness changes which were unthinkable up to few decades ago. These changes show that man owns unbounded capabilities, whose instrument is constituted by the new technologies” (Italian Episcopal Conference 2009: 24).
The prominent late cardinal and theologist Martini (2009: 9) added: “The Church does not oppose and it is open to the theory of biological evolution, provided that the possibility both of the creation by God and of the original sin—which is today explained in numerous and complex ways—is preserved”.
The founder, in Italy, of “economia aziendale” (i.e. business administration and management) as a per se discipline, Zappa (1956: 166), conceives the external environment as a context “for which” the firm “operates” and “on which it continuously reacts”. Through these lenses, the firm is considered not only as the object, but also as the subject of evolutionary change.
It is worth pointing out that in all editions of The Origin of Species going from the second to the latest—which were personally edited by Darwin (1872)—the famous biologist himself somehow attributes a role in the evolutionary process to the Divine Creator. Throughout his book, Darwin is so fascinated by the “marvellous world” of the varieties he discovers, that he concludes: “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one” … [This author’s note: After the word “breathed”, Charles Darwin has added “by the Creator” since the second publication of the book] … “and whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved” (Darwin 2008: 478). On this theme, see also the research study by Lamoureux (2012).
The highest number of new entrants is registered in those industries where the expected growth rate and the expected profits are the highest. But, the risks are also high. Especially for this reason, these industries present the firms’ highest mortality rates (Geroski and Schwalbach 1991; Vivarelli 1991).
In the natural world, selection never stops. It “silently and insensibly works, whenever and wherever opportunity offers, at the improvement of each organic being in relation to its organic and inorganic conditions of life” (Darwin 2008: 84). Indeed, we shall see further on that—as far as the economic world is concerned—the firm’s behaviour can reveal capabilities that can change the competitive environment and bend it to the desired strategy. This happens after the first years of the firm’s existence. Thanks to their accumulated experience, the surviving firms grow and start processes which modify their business sector into an environment different from that they once entered. The evolution of firms is “only partially guided by crush, in that it is much more fostered by the willingness of people to behave methodically, weightily, and plausibly. Thus, the environment becomes artificial rather than natural” (Weick 1969).
The relationship between the structure and the system can be deepened by reading Chandler’s fundamental work (1962) and the theoretical essay by Teece (1993). The important cross-country analysis by Mayer and Whittington (1999) is also worthy of mention. In this regard, we should not forget James Thompson’s seminal lesson (1967: 10) concerning the stability granted to the firm by an efficient organizational structure: “We will conceive of complex organizations as open systems, hence indeterminate and faced with uncertainty, but at the same time as subject to criteria of rationality and hence needing determinateness and certainty”. These needs foster the construction of the organization’s structure.
In this regard, see, for example, the provisions contained in the current version of the Italian Civil Code (article No. 2328, Subsection 2, Paragraph 3).
Although Darwinism is controversial and only cautiously applicable to the business administration disciplines, it is useful to mention that its critics often “tend to throw the baby out with the bath water, when they reject the evolutionary approach” (Dagnino 2006: 103). It is remarkable that, in the sesquicentennial anniversary since its first edition (London, 1859), Darwin’s main work has been considered useful also for our current public policy makers (The Economist 2008: 117).
Evolution (for example: from the Neanderthal man to the contemporary man) differs from metamorphosis (for example: in Europe, the height of the XXI century men and women has increased over the last millennium).
Darwin’s findings would suggest that “animals have descended from at most only four or five progenitors, and plants from an equal or lesser number” (2008: 472) and “probably all the organic beings have descended from some primordial form into which life was first breathed” (p. 472). At least as far as hominids are concerned, the case for the common ancestor and the branched (i.e. grouped) ancestry has been demonstrated by a number of empirical research studies (Pievani 2010: 121 ff).
During the evolutionary process, some of the genes themselves can be altered or there may be the modification of the order in which they position themselves on chromosomes. The genes can also be modified if their state is activated or disactivated. For example, The Economist (2014: 67) has recently reported: “People are living longer, which is good. But old age often brings a decline in mental faculties … many researchers … have been studying the role in ageing of klotho, a protein encoded by a gene called KL. A particular version of this gene, KL-VS, promotes longevity…. What they found was startling. KL-VS did not curb decline, but it did boost cognitive faculties regardless a person’s age by the equivalent of six IQ points … KL-VS will be the most important genetic agent of non-pathological variation in intelligence yet discovered”.
In this respect, it is common to read that only those giraffes with a long neck survive, while the others perish. The long neck is a winning genetic heritage that helps the organism to reach the fresh leaves of the high trees. That is to say, giraffes select by themselves.
That’s because it is forces that really fight. The resistance and survival of the organization are, first of all, a struggle against oneself to save the inherited forces and accumulate new forces. Only secondarily, the struggle for existence becomes a fight against others. According to some Darwinists instead (e.g. Dawkins 1976) the struggle for survival is a confrontation essentially between the genes of each individual and everything else.
“As cultural evolution includes human biological evolution … a Darwinian theory of social evolution must be both Darwinian and Lamarckian” (Marmefelt 2009: 74).
In biology, of course, “the success, or fitness, within the genetic of populations, means neither physical health nor optimal adaptation to the environment. The only criterion used for evaluating the fitness of an individual is that of determining the relative amount of descendants who survive, i.e. how much of the individual’s genotype is present in the offspring and subsequent generations” (Curtis and Barnes 1989).
“Dialectical analysis […] must be concerned with the active reconstruction of organizations. This reconstruction is aimed towards the realization of human potentialities by the removal of constraints, limitations upon praxis.” (Benson 1977: 18).
References
Abatecola, G. (2013). Survival or failure within the organizational life cycle. What lessons for managers? Journal of General Management, 38(4), 23–38.
Abatecola, G. (2014). Research in organizational evolution. What comes next? European Management Journal, 32(3), 434–443.
Abatecola, G., Cafferata, R., & Poggesi, S. (2012). Arthur Stinchcombe’s liability of newness. Contribution and impact of the construct. Journal of Management History, 18(4), 402–418.
Aldrich, H. E. (Ed.). (2011). An evolutionary approach to entrepreneurship. Selected essays by Howard E. Aldrich. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Aldrich, H. E., Hodgson, G. M., Hull, D. L., Knudsen, T., Mokyr, J., & Vanberg, V. J. (2008). In defense of generalized Darwinism. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 18(5), 577–596.
Alexander, K., & Price, I. (Eds.). (2012). Managing organizational ecologies: Space, management and organizations. New York: Routledge.
Argyris, C. (1993). On organizational learning. Oxford: Blackwell.
Astley, W. G., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1983). Central perspectives and debates in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2), 245–273.
Audretsch, D. B. (1991). New firm survival and the technological regime. Review of Economics and Statistics, 73(3), 441–450.
Bagnasco, A. (2009). Secolarismo, sfida alla vera libertà. L’Avvenire, March, 24th, 7 (Prolusion made by the Italian Episcopal Conference’s Chairman to the Permanent Episcopal Council).
Baldwin, J. R., & Rafiquzzaman, M. (1995). Selection versus evolutionary adaptation: Learning and post-entry performance. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13(4), 501–522.
Bannock, G., & Stanworth, J. (1990). The making of entrepreneurs. London: Small Business Research Trust.
Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Barney, J. B. (2001). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage. A ten-year retrospective on the resource based view. Journal of Management, 27(6), 643–650.
Barron, D. (2006). Evolutionary theory. In D. O. Faulkner & A. Campbell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of strategy (pp. 80–103). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beckman, C. M. (2006). The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behaviour. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 741–758.
Benson, J. K. (1977). Organizations: A dialectical view. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1), 1–21.
Blau, P. M., & Schoenherr, R. A. (1971). The structure of organizations. New York: Basic Books.
Breslin, D. (2008). A review of the evolutionary approach to the study of entrepreneurship. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(4), 399–423.
Breslin, D. (2010). Generalising Darwinism to study socio-cultural change. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 30(7/8), 427–439.
Breslin, D. (2011). Reviewing a generalized Darwinist approach to studying socio-economic change. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(2), 218–235.
Cafferata, R. (1987). Una interpretazione dialettica del rapporto tra impresa e ambiente esterno. Finanza Marketing e Produzione, 2, 69–108.
Cafferata, R., Abatecola, G., & Poggesi, S. (2009). Revisiting Stinchcombe’s “liability of newness”: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business, 8(3), 374–392.
Cafferata, R., & Mensi, R. (1995). The role of information in the internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises. A typological approach. International Small Business Journal, 13(3), 35–46.
Cantwell, J., & Piscitello, L. (2008). How the trend towards competence-creating MNE subsidiary innovation co-evolves with its environment. Economia e Politica Industriale, 1, 145–154.
Carmeli, A., & Markman, G. D. (2011). Capture, governance and resilience: Strategy implications from the history of Rome. Strategic Management Journal, 32(3), 322–341.
Ceccherelli, A. (1948). Economia aziendale e amministrazione delle imprese. Florence: Barbera.
Chandler, A. D, Jr. (1962). Strategy and structure. Chapters in the history of the American industrial enterprise. New York: The MIT Press.
Chandler, A. D, Jr. (1977). The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Child, J. (1984). Organization. London: Harper & Row.
Child, J., & Kieser, A. (1981). Development of organizations over time. In P. C. Nystrom & H. W. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design. Adapting organizations to their environments (pp. 28–64). New York: Oxford University Press.
Child, J., Tse, K., & Rodrigues, S. B. (2013). The dynamics of corporate co-evolution. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Churchman, C. W. (1968). The systems approach. New York: Dell Publishers.
Cordes, C. (2006). Darwinism in economics: From analogy to continuity. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 16(5), 529–541.
Curtis, H., & Barnes, N. S. (1989). On biology (5th ed.). New York: Worth Publishers.
D’Aveni, R. A., Dagnino, G. B., & Smith, K. G. (2010). The age of temporary advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(10), 1371–1385.
Dagnino, G. B. (2006). Il paradigma evolutivo in strategia d’impresa: approccio controverso o solida prospettiva conoscitiva? Economia e politica industriale, 4, 103–132.
Dale, E. (1964). The division of basic company activities. In J. D. Litterer (Ed.), Organization. Structure and behaviour (pp. 83–93). New York: Wiley.
Darwin, C. R. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray. 2008 Reprint, New York, NY: Random House.
Darwin, C. R. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. London: John Murray.
Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. New York: Oxford University Press.
De Rond, M., & Thietart, R. A. (2007). Choice, chance and inevitability in strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 28(5), 535–551.
Distin, K. (2010). Cultural evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Emery, F. E., & Trist, E. L. (1960). Socio-technical systems. In C. W. Churchman & M. Verhulst (Eds.), Management science. Models and techniques, vol. II (pp. 83–97). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Emery, F. E., & Trist, E. L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18(1), 21–31.
Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 202–225.
Farrington, B. (1946). Science and politics in the ancient world. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Fishburn, G. (2004). Natura non facit saltum in Alfred Marshall (and Charles Darwin). History of Economics Review, 40, 59–68.
Fortune, A., & Mitchell, W. (2012). Unpacking firm exit at the firm and industry levels: The adaptation and selection of firm capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 33(7), 794–819.
Francesco (2013). Evangelii Gaudium. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana—Edizioni San Paolo.
Francesco (2014). Address of his holiness Pope Francis on the occasion of the inauguration of the bust in honour of Pope Benedict XVI. Plenary Session of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, October 27th. Retrieved from http://w2.vatican.va. Accessed 28 Oct 2014.
Freeman, C. (1972). The economics of innovation. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Geroski, P., & Schwalbach, J. (1991). Entry and market contestability: An international comparison. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Ghiselin, M. T. (2009). Darwin and the evolutionary foundations of society. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 71(1), 4–9.
Golinelli, G. M. (2010). Viable systems approach (VSA). Governing business dynamics. Padua: Cedam.
Gowdy, J. E., Dollimore, D. E., Wilson, D. S., & Witt, U. (2013). Economic cosmology and the evolutionary challenge. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 90, S11–S20.
Hage, J. (1965). An axiomatic theory of organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10(3), 289–320.
Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1994). Competing for the future. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964.
Hansen, G. S., & Wernerfelt, B. (1989). Determinants of firm performance: The relative importance of economic and organizational factors. Strategic Management Journal, 10(5), 399–411.
Hayek, F. A. (1979). The counter-revolution of science. Studies on the abuse of reason. Indianapolis: Liberty Press.
Hayek, F. A. (1988). The fatal conceit: The errors of socialism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Henderson, B. D. (1989). The origin of strategy. Harvard Business Review, 67(6), 139–143.
Henderson, A. D., & Stern, I. (2004). Selection-based learning: The co-evolution of internal and external selection in high-velocity environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(1), 39–75.
Hinterhuber, H. H. (1997). Strategische unternehmungsfuerung. Strategisches handles. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Hodgson, G. M. (2013). Understanding organizational evolution: Toward a research agenda using generalized Darwinism. Organization Studies, 34(7), 973–992.
Hodgson, G. M., & Knudsen, T. (2010). Darwin’s conjecture: The search for general principles of social and economic evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hofstadter, R. (1944). Social darwinism in American thought, 1860–1915. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Horn, S. O., & Wiedenhofer, S. (2007). Creazione ed evoluzione. Bologna: Dehoniane Edizioni.
Houellebecq, M. (1998). Les particules èlèmentaires. Paris: Flammarion.
Hull, D. (1988). Science as a process. An evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Italian Episcopal Conference. (2009). Lettera ai cercatori di Dio. Milan: Paoline Editoriale Libri.
Jackson, S. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1988). Discerning threats and opportunities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(3), 370–387.
Jacobides, M. G., & Winter, S. G. (2005). The co-evolution of capabilities and transaction costs: Explaining the institutional structure of production. Strategic Management Journal, 26(5), 395–413.
Johnson, R. A., Kast, F. E., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1967). The theory and management of systems. Kogakusha: McGraw-Hill.
Jordi, C. L. (2010). Rethinking the firm’s mission and purpose. European Management Review, 7(4), 195–204.
Kast, F. E., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1972). General systems theory: Applications for organization and management. Academy of Management Journal, 15(4), 447–465.
Kast, F. E., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1988). Organization and management. A systems and contingency approach. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.
Kaysen, C. (1957). The social significance of the modern corporation. American Economic Review, 47(2), 311–319.
Koontz, H., O’Donnell, C., & Weihrich, H. (1980). Management (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Koza, M. P., Tallman, S., & Ataay, S. (2011). The strategic assembly of global firms: A microstructural analysis of local learning and global adaptation. Global Strategy Journal, 1(1/2), 27–46.
Lamoureux, D. O. (2012). Darwinian theological insights: Toward an intellectually fulfilled Christian theism—part I. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 64(2), 108–119.
Lawrence, P. R. (1981). Organization and environmental perspective. In A. Van de Ven & W. F. Joyce (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational design and behaviour (pp. 331–337). New York: Wiley.
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment. Boston: Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
Leonard, T. C. (2009). Origins of the myth of social Darwinism: The ambiguous legacy of Richard Hofstadter’s Social Darwinism in American Thought. Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization, 71(1), 37–51.
Levinthal, D. A., & Rerup, C. (2006). Crossing an apparent chasm: Bridging mindful and less-mindful perspectives on organizational learning. Organization Science, 17(4), 502–513.
Lewin, A. Y., & Volberda, H. K. (2011). Co-evolution of global sourcing: The need to understand the underlying mechanisms of firm-decisions to offshore. International Business Review, 20(3), 241–251.
Lewontin, R. C. (1983). The organism as the subject and object of evolution. Scientia, 118(1), 65–82.
Lewontin, R. C. (1989). Adaptation. Scientific American, 239(3), 157–169.
Marciano, A. (2009). Why Hayek is a Darwinian (after all)? Hayek and Darwin on social evolution. Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization, 71(1), 52–61.
Marmefelt, T. (2009). Human knowledge, rules and the spontaneous evolution of society in the social thought of Darwin, Hayek and Boulding. Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization, 71(1), 62–74.
Martini, C. M. (2009). Lettere-Temi. Corriere della Sera, August, 30th.
Mayer, M., & Whittington, R. (1999). Strategy, structure and “systemness”: National institutions and corporate change in France, Germany and the U.K., 1950–1993. Organization Studies, 20(6), 953–999.
Mayr, E. (2001). What evolution is. New York: Basic Books.
McCarthy, I. P., Lawrence, T. B., Wixted, B., & Gordon, B. (2010). A multidimensional conceptualization of environmental velocity. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 604–626.
Miller, D., & Friesen, P. (1980). Archetypes of organizational transition. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2), 268–299.
Murmann, J. P. (2013). The co-evolution of industries and important features of their environments. Organization Science, 24(1), 58–78.
Murmann, J. P., Aldrich, H. E., Levinthal, D., & Winter, S. (2003). Evolutionary thought in management and organization theory at the beginning of the new Millennium. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(1), 22–40.
Nelson, R. R. (1995). Recent evolutionary theorizing about economic change. Journal of Economic Literature, 33, 48–90.
Nelson, R. R. (2006). Evolutionary social science and universal Darwinism. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 16(5), 491–510.
Otto, K. S., & Speck, T. (Eds.). (2011). Darwin meets business. Evolutionäre und bionische lösungen für die wirtschaft. Wiesbaden: Gabler.
Parayitam, S., White, M. A., & Hough, R. J. (2001). Juxtaposition of Chester I. Barnard and Frederick W. Taylor forerunners of management. Management Decision, 40(10), 1003–1012.
Parsons, T. (1960). Structure and process in modern societies. New York: The Free Press.
Pascual, R. L. C. (2004). Teorie evoluzionistiche e magistero della Chiesa. Rome: Ateneo Pontificio Regina Apostolorum.
Penrose, E. T. (1952). Biological analogies in the theory of the firm. American Economic Review, 52(5), 804–859.
Pentland, B. T., Feldman, M. S., Becker, M. C., & Liu, P. (2012). Dynamics of organizational routines: A generative model. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1484–1508.
Phelps, R., Adams, R., & Bessant, J. (2007). Life cycles of growing organizations: A review with implications for knowledge and learning. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), 1–30.
Pievani, T. (2010). La teoria dell’evoluzione. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. The political and economic origins of our times. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.
Porac, J., & Shapira, Z. (2001). On mind, environment, and Simon’s scissors of rational behavior. Journal of Management and Governance, 5(3–4), 206–212.
Presthus, R. V. (1962). The organizational society. An analysis and a theory. London: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Price, I., & Shaw, R. (1998). Shifting the patterns. Breaching the memetic codes of corporate performance. Chaldford: Management Books.
Rendel, J. M. (1967). Canalization and gene control. London: Academic Press.
Robbins, S. P. (1990). Organizational theory. Structure, design, applications. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Ruse, M. (2009). Charles Darwin on human evolution. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 71(1), 10–19.
Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. New York: Macmillan.
Simon, H. A. (1969). On the concept of organizational goal. In H. I. Ansoff (Ed.), Business strategy (pp. 240–261). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Simon, H. A. (1993). Strategy and organizational evolution. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S2), 131–142.
Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Stoelhorst, J. W. (2008). Why is management not an evolutionary science? Evolutionary theory in strategy and organization. Journal of Management Studies, 45(5), 1008–1023.
Storey, D. J., & Johnson, S. (1987). Job generation and labour market change. London: Macmillan.
Teece, D. J. (1993). The dynamics of industrial capitalism perspectives on Alfred Chandler’s scale and scope. Journal of Economic Literature, 31(1), 199–225.
Terreberry, S. (1968). The evolution of organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(4), 590–613.
The Economist. (2008). Why we are, as we are. December, 20th.
The Economist. (2014). Genes and intelligence. The 3% solution. May, 10th.
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Timmons, J. A. (1990). New ventures creation: Entrepreneurship in the 1990s. Homewood: Irwin.
Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies, 26(9), 1377–1404.
Vivarelli, M. (1991). The birth of new enterprises. Small Business Economics, 3(3), 215–223.
Vivarelli, M. (1997). Le piccole imprese in fase di start-up: Motivazioni, performance, difficoltà. In R. Cafferata & P. Genco (Eds.), Competitività, informazioni e internazionalizzazione delle piccole e medie imprese (pp. 297–319). Bologna: Il Mulino.
von Bertalanffy, L. (1950). The theory of open systems in physics and biology. Science, January, 13th.
von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory. Development, applications. New York: George Braziller.
Weber, M. (1905). Die protestantische ethik und der geist des kapitalismus. Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, vol. XX/XXI.
Weeks, J., & Galunic, C. (2003). A theory of cultural evolution of the firm. The intra-organizational ecology of memes. Organization Studies, 24(8), 1309–1352.
Weick, K. E. (1969). The social psychology of organizing. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Weikart, R. (2009). Was Darwin or Spencer the father of laissez-faire social Darwinism? Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization, 71(1), 20–28.
Williams, G. C. (1966). Adaptation and natural selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Williamson, O. E. (1981). The modern corporation. Origins, evolution, attributes. Journal of Economic Literature, 19(4), 1537–1568.
Zappa, G. (1927). Tendenze nuove negli studi di ragioneria. Milan: S. A. Istituto Editoriale Scientifico.
Zappa, G. (1956). Le produzioni nell’economia delle imprese, vol. I. Milan: Giuffrè.
Zeitz, G. (1980). Inter-organizational dialectics. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 72–88.
Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339–351.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cafferata, R. Darwinist connections between the systemness of social organizations and their evolution. J Manag Gov 20, 19–44 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-014-9303-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-014-9303-z