Bridging the Gap between Ecologies and Clusters: Towards an Integrative Framework of Routine Interdependence

Published date01 June 2020
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12391
Date01 June 2020
Bridging the Gap between Ecologies and
Clusters: Towards an Integrative Framework
of Routine Interdependence
JAN HOEKZEMA
Universitat Hamburg, School of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, Von-Melle-Park 9, 20146, Hamburg, Germany
This conceptual paper advances theorizing on routine interdependencies. It presents a review and comparison of
the two dominant schools of thought in this stream of research: routine ecologies and routine clusters. While the
former emphasizes generativity and flexibility, the latter conceptualizes interdependencies as limiting to
organizational dynamics and change. Despite these diverging assumptions, the paper suggests combining rather
than separating insights from both schools of thought. It contributes to routine interdependence research in three
ways. First,the paper provides an integrative framework that emphasizesthe complementary dynamics betweenboth
schools of thought. Second, the paper suggests that coordinating interdependent routines is an ongoing process of
addressing different degrees of interdependence with specific modes of coordination. Third, the paper reveals that
interdependent routines and the underlying coordination processes play a central role in balancing organizational
stability and change.
Keywords: interdependent routines; integrative model; coordination; routine dynamics; balancing stability and
change
Introduction
Research on organizational routines has expanded
significantly in recent years as scholars have recognized
the importance of routine processes for understanding
organizational dynamics (Feldman et al., 2016).
Particularly research on single routine dynamics, which
is essentially concerned with the notion that routines are
practices with internal dynamics contributing to both
stability and change (Feldman and Pentland, 2003;
Pentland et al., 2011), has been dominating the academic
debate. While lots of interesting insights on the
endogenous dynamics of single routines have been
generated (Feldman, 2000; Feldman and Pentland, 2003;
Rerup and Feldman, 2011), research on multiple
interdependentroutines is just recently gaining increasing
scholarly attention. Within this new stream of research,
the focus has shifted from stability and change within
individual routines towards the different ways routines
can interact, intersect, and be interdependent, thereby
contributing to organizational stability and change
(Feldman et al., 2016). This shift has unveiled that
organizational dynamics unfold on two different, yet
related levels: whilst single routines produce ongoing
variation, the dynamics on the level of interdependent
routines, and thus entire organizations, are likely to be
very different (Kremser and Schreyögg, 2016). How
exactly these routine interdependencies unfold and what
impact their dynamics have on organizational stability
and change is currently underexplored (Feldman et al.,
2016).
This conceptual paper sets out to unpack the dynamics
of interdependent routines and their impact on
organizational stability and/or change. By conducting a
thorough literature review, the paper illuminates that the
debate on interdependent routines has deviated into two
schools of thought:routine ecologies and routine clusters.
By juxtaposing the conceptualizations of both schools of
thought in detail, the paper carves out their diverging
nature: whilst routine ecologies scholars focus on flexible
coordination principles that bring about the generative
potential for innovative outcomes and emergent change
(Birnholtz et al., 2007; Sele and Grand, 2016; Spee
et al., 2016), routine clusters scholars emphasize that
interdependencies are coordinated via stable programmed
interfacesthat eventually cause organizational rigidityand
Correspondence: Jan Hoekzema, Universitat Hamburg, School of
Business, Economics and Social Sciences, Von-Melle-Park 9, 20146
Hamburg,Germany. E-mail jan.hoekzema@uni-hamburg.de
European Management Review, Vol. 17, 559571, (2020)
DOI: 10.1111/emre.12391
© 2020 The Authors. European Management Review published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European
Academy of Management (EURAM)
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use,
distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT