Summing Up Organisational Adaptations

  • Oluwaseun E. Adegbite
  • Antonis C. Simintiras
  • Yogesh K. Dwivedi
  • Kemefasu Ifie
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Business book series (BRIEFSBUSINESS)


A lot has been discussed about organisational adaptations in the preceding chapters. Each chapter has expounded new insight about adaptations in organisations. We did this primarily to further our scholarly understanding of organisational adaptations through the lens of pluralism. Our view and call for pluralistic perspective is to articulate a panoramic view of the organisation and its environment. We hope this perspective will lead to a broadened, elaborate, relevant and expanded insight into firm and its environment than what a single perspective offers. This is beneficial to practitioners and academia in the sense that sole reliance upon singular perspective or theory might lead to the application of strategies, business models and solutions that are too narrow on a practical level or too weak to effect the desired change (Frishammar, 2006). Adaptation being a complex firm concept necessitates a multi-paradigm perspective for good understanding of the problem and to be better positioned to offer the most appropriate solution.


  1. Aldrich, H. (1999). Organizations evolving. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Allcorn, S., & Diamond, M. A. (1997). Managing people during stressful times. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
  3. Amburgey, T. L., & Rao, H. (1996). Organizational ecology: Past, present, and future directions. The Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1265–1286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartunek, J. M. (1993). Rummaging behind the scenes of organizational change—And finding role transitions, illness and physical space. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 7, 41–76.Google Scholar
  5. Burgleman, E. A. (1991). Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and research. Organization Science, 2/3, 239–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carley, K. M., & Lee, J. (1998). Dynamic organisations: Organisational adaptation in a changing environment. Advances in Strategic Management, 15, 269–297.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cravens, D. W. (1995). The Changing role of the sales force. Market Management, 4(2).Google Scholar
  9. Eisenhardt, K., & Martin, J. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frishammar, J. (2006). Organizational environment revisited: A conceptual review and integration. International Studies of Management and Organisation, 36(3), 22–49. Retrieved from Scholar
  11. Gersick, C. J. G. (1991). Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. The Academy of Management Review, 16, 10–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gioia, D. A. (1992). Pinto fires and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed opportunities. Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 379–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gioia, D. A., & Pitre, E. (1990). Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. The Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 584–602.Google Scholar
  14. Godkin, L., & Allcorn, S. (2008). Overcoming organizational Inertia: A tripartite model for achieving strategic organizational change. The Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 8(1), 82–94.Google Scholar
  15. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. The American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change, American Sociological Review, 49(2), 149–164.Google Scholar
  17. Harrison, J. R., & Carroll, G. R. (1991). Keeping the faith: A model of cultural transmission in formal organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(4), 552–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hedberg, B. L. T. (1981). How organizations learn and unlearn. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design (pp. 3–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hedberg, B. L. T., & Ericson, A. (1997). Insiktströghet och manövertröghet i organisationers omorientering [Insight inertia and action inertia in organizational reorientation]. In B. L. T. Hedberg & S. E. Sjöstrand (Eds.), Från företagskriser till industripolitik [From organizational crisis to industrial politics] (pp. 54–66). Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
  20. Hedberg, B., & Wolff, R. (2003). Organizing, learning, and strategizing: From construction to discovery. In M. Dierkes, A. Berthoin Antal, J. Child, & I. Nonaka (Eds.), Handbook of organizational learning & knowledge (pp. 35–556). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hilliard, R. (2004). Tacit knowledge and dynamic capability: The importance of penrosian image. Paper presented at the DRUID Summer Conference 2004 on Industrial Dynamics, Innovation And Development Elsinore, Denmark, June 14–16, 2004.Google Scholar
  22. Jarzabkowski, P. (2004). Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use. Organization Studies, 25(4), 529–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Karim, S., & Mitchell, W. (2000). Path-dependent and path-breaking change: Reconfiguring business resources following acquisitions in the U.S. Medical Sector, 1978–1995. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10/11), 1061–1081. (Special Issue: The Evolution of Firm Capabilities (Oct.–Nov., 2000)).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Komori, S. (2015). Innovating out of crisis: How Fujifilm survived (and Thrived) as its core business was vanishing. Berkeley, CA: Stone Bridge Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kotter, J. (2012). Leading change (New ed.). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review.Google Scholar
  26. Kransdorff, A. (1998). Corporate Amnesia: Keeping know-how in the company. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  27. Lin, Z., & Hui, C. (1999). Should lean replace mass organization systems? A comparative examination from a management coordination perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(1), 45–79.Google Scholar
  28. Leonard-Barton, D. (1988). Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization. Research Policy, 17, 251–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lewis, M. W., & Grimes, A. J. (1999). Metatriangulation: Building theory from multiple paradigms. The Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 672–690.Google Scholar
  30. Lewis, M. W., & Kelemen, M. L. (2002). Multiparadigm inquiry: Exploring organizational pluralism and paradox. Human Relations; Studies Towards the Integration of the Social Sciences, 55(2), 251–275.Google Scholar
  31. Maclean, D., Maclntosh, R., & Siedl, D. (2015). rethinking dynamic capabilities from a creative action perspective. Strategic Organization, 13(4), 340–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McKelvey, B., & Aldrich, H. (1983). Populations, natural selection, and applied organizational science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(1), 101–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  34. Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1984). A longitudinal study of the corporate life cycle. Management Science, 30(10), 1161–1183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Miller, D. (1990). Organizational configurations: Cohesion, changes, and prediction. Human Relations, 43, 771–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miller, D. (1993). The architecture of simplicity. The Academy of Management Review, 18, 116–138.Google Scholar
  37. Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1980). Momentum and revolution in organizational adaptation. The Academy of Management Journal, 23(4), 591–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1983). Successful and unsuccessful phases of the corporate life cycle. Organization Studies, 4(4), 339–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Morgan, N. A., Vorhies, D. W., & Mason, C. H. (2009). Market orientation, marketing capabilities, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 909–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nonaka, I. (1994). Dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Othman, R., & Hasmin, N. A. (2004). Organization Amnesia: The Barrier to Organization Learning. Retrieved October 30, 2015, from
  42. Péli, G., Bruggeman, J., Masuch, M., & Nualláin, B. O. (1994). A logical approach to formalizing organizational ecology. American Sociological Review, 59(4), 571–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pettigrew, A. M. (1973). The politics of organizational decision making. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  44. Pettigrew, A. M. (1997). What is a processual analysis? Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13, 337–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pfeffer, J. (1997). New directions for organization theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  47. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2009). Organisational behaviour (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  48. Rumelt, R. P. (1995). Inertia and transformation. In C. Montgomery (Ed.), Resource based and evolutionary theories of the enterprise (pp. 101–132). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sandell, R. (2001). Organizational growth and ecological constraints: The growth of social movements in Sweden, 1881 to 1940. American Sociological Review, 66(5), 672–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  51. Sevon, G. (1996). Organizational imitation in identity transformation. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevon (Eds.), Translating organizational change. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  52. Shin, M. (2004). A framework for evaluating economics of knowledge management systems. Information Management, 42(1), 176–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Skalen, P., & Edvardsson, B. (2016). Transforming from the goods to the service-dominant logic. Marketing Theory, 16(1), 101–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 45–62. (Special Issue: Knowledge and the Firm).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Spender, J. C. (1998). Pluralist epistemology and the knowledge-based theory of the firm. Organization, 5, 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Szulanski, G., & Jensen, R. J. (2006). Presumptive adaptation and the effectiveness of knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 27, 937–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tsoukas, H. (1994). What is management? An outline of a metatheory. British Journal of Management, 5(4), 289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Tushman, M. L., & Rosenkopf, L. (1992). Organizational determinants of technological change: Toward a sociology of technological evolution. Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 311–347.Google Scholar
  60. Virany, B., Tushman, M. L., & Romanelli, E. (1992). Executive succession and organization outcomes in turbulent environments: An organization learning approach. Organization Science, 3(1), 72–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Volberda, H., & Lewin, A. (2003). Co-evolutionary dynamics within and between firms: From evolution to co-evolution. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 2111–2136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. In J. T. Spence, J. M. Darley, & D. J. Foss (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 50, pp. 361–386). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.Google Scholar
  63. Westney, D. E. (1987). Imitation and innovation: The transfer of western organizational patterns to Meiji Japan (1st ed.). Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., & Roos, D. (1990). The machine that changed the world. New York: Rawson Associates.Google Scholar
  65. Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13, 339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oluwaseun E. Adegbite
    • 1
  • Antonis C. Simintiras
    • 2
    • 3
  • Yogesh K. Dwivedi
    • 4
  • Kemefasu Ifie
    • 5
  1. 1.School of ManagementSwansea UniversitySwanseaUK
  2. 2.College of Business AdministrationGulf University for Science and TechnologyHawallyKuwait
  3. 3.School of Management, Swansea UniversitySwanseaUK
  4. 4.Emerging Markets Research Centre (EMaRC), School of ManagementSwansea UniversitySwanseaUK
  5. 5.School of Business and EconomicsLoughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK

Personalised recommendations