Constructing Agent-Based Models of Organizational Routines
Organizational routines represent a form of organizational behavior currently studied in multifarious scientific domains, such as economics, organization science, sociology, and psychology. The diverse perspectives on this phenomenon produce a plethora of models reflecting, for instance, what a routine is and how it emerges from and changes within a socio-technical system. Newcomers to the topic of organizational routines may be easily confused by this substantial scientific diversity, discovering many maps for seemingly the same territory. This chapter presents descriptors to facilitate the comparison of work on organizational routines, and applies them to a contemporary method employed to investigate the phenomenon: agent-based modeling. This insight is related to technical issues relevant to simulating organizational routines, such as model design, implementation, and validation.
KeywordsRoutines Organizational behavior Agent-based modeling Complexity Context Personification Map-territory relation Target Simulation Model Micro-foundations Operationalization Sense-making Construct Validation
The authors greatly appreciate the feedback provided by two anonymous reviewers, Jonas Hauke and Bruce Edmonds on an early draft of this chapter. Your remarks have considerably helped us to communicate our ideas.
- Breuker, D., & Matzner, M. (2014). Performances of business processes and organizational routines: Similar research problems, different research methods – A literature review. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2014). Tel Aviv, Israel. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1242&context=ecis2014.
- Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). Behavioral theory of the firm. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Dignum, F., Prada, R., & Hofstede, G. J. (2014). From autistic to social agents. In Proceedings of AAMAS '14 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (pp.~1161–1164). Richland, SC: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.Google Scholar
- Gao, D. (2012). Multi-agent based simulation of organizational routines from an actor-based view. In 2012 3rd International Conference on System Science, Engineering Design and Manufacturing Informatization (ICSEM) (Vol. 1, pp. 311–314). doi: 10.1109/ICSSEM.2012.6340736.
- Gaskin, J., Berente, N., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2014). Toward generalizable sociomaterial inquiry: A computational approach for zooming in and out of sociomaterial routines. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 849–871.Google Scholar
- Geiger, D., & Schröder, A. (2014). Ever-changing routines? Toward a revised understanding of organizational routines between rule-following and rule-breaking. Schmalenbach Business Review, 66, 170–190.Google Scholar
- Geisendorf, S. (2009). The influence of innovation and imitation on economic performance. Economic Issues, 14(1), 65–94.Google Scholar
- Gevers, J. M. P., Passos, A. M., & Uitdewilligen, S. (2014). Call for papers: Special issue on “Team adaptation and the dynamics of team cognition.” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. Retrieved from http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/cfp/pewocfp.pdf.
- Hodgson, G. M. (2008). The concept of a routine. In M. C. Becker (Ed.), Handbook of organizational routines (pp. 15–28). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Kozica, A., Kaiser, S., & Friesl, M. (2014). Organizational routines: Conventions as a source of change and stability. Schmalenbach Business Review, 66, 334–356.Google Scholar
- Maritan, C. A., & Coen, C. A. (2004). An agent-based model of investing in capabilities: Processes, decisions and performance. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Meeting Abstract Supplement, Vol. 2004, pp. N1–N6). Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management. doi: 10.5465/AMBPP.2004.13863777.
- Meyer, M., & Carley, K. (2007). Costs and benefits of budgeting in dynamic environments – An information processing model. In European Accounting Association Annual Conference. Lisbon, Portugal, April 2007.Google Scholar
- Meyer, M., Lorscheid, I., & Troitzsch, K. G. (2009). The development of social simulation as reflected in the first ten years of JASSS: A citation and co-citation analysis. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 12(4), 12. Retrieved from http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/12/4/12.html.Google Scholar
- Miner, A. S., Ciuchta, M. P., & Gong, Y. (2008). Organizational routines and organizational learning. In M. C. Becker (Ed.), Handbook of organizational routines (pp. 152–186). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Murji, K., & Neal, S. (2014). Call for papers – Sociology special issue on the sociologies of everyday life. Sociology. Retrieved from http://www.britsoc.co.uk/media/61136/sociologies_of_the_everyday_CFP.pdf.
- Narduzzo, A., & Warglien, M. (2008). Conducting experimental research on organizational routines. In M. C. Becker (Ed.), Handbook of organizational routines (pp. 301–324). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Pentland, B. T., & Feldman, M. S. (2008). Issues in empirical studies of organizational routines. In M. C. Becker (Ed.), Handbook of organizational routines (pp. 281–300). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Schulz, M. (2008). Staying on track: A voyage to the internal mechanisms of routine reproduction. In M. C. Becker (Ed.), Handbook of organizational routines (pp. 228–255). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Siirola, J. D., Hauan, S., & Westerberg, A. W. (2003). Toward agent-based process systems engineering: Proposed framework and application to non-convex optimization. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 27(12), 1801–1811. doi: 10.1016/S0098-1354(03)00152-2.
- Sikora, R., & Shaw, M. J. (1998). A multi-agent framework for the coordination and integration of information systems. Management Science, 44(11-part-2), 65–78.Google Scholar
- Silva, C., Gonçalves, E., Dimuro, G., Dimuro, G., & de Manuel Jerez, E. (2013). Modeling agent periodic routines in agent-based social simulation using colored petri nets. In 2013 BRICS Congress on Computational Intelligence and 11th Brazilian Congress on Computational Intelligence (BRICS-CCI & CBIC) (pp. 644–650). doi: 10.1109/BRICS-CCI-CBIC.2013.112.
- Ter Bogt, H. J., & Scapens, R. W. (2014). Institutions, rationality and agency in management accounting: Rethinking and extending the Burns and Scapens Framework. Available at SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2464980.
- Vromen, J. (2007). Generalized Darwinism in evolutionary economics: The devil is in the details. Papers on Economics and Evolution. Evolutionary Economics Group, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Jena, Germany (0711), pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
- Wall, F. (2014). Agent-based modeling in managerial science: An illustrative survey and study. Review of Managerial Science, 1–59. doi: 10.1007/s11846-014-0139-3.