Jumping Ship: The Diffusion of Strategy Abandonment

This paper is part of my doctoral dissertation at Stanford University. I am grateful for the advice of James G. March, William P. Barnett, and Joel Podolny, the comments of Michael T. Hannan, Pamela Haunschild, Christine Oliver, David Strang, Nancy Brandon Tuma, and anonymous reviewers for ASQ, and the editorial assistance of Linda Pike. Financial support from the Stanford Center of Organizations Research, the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, the Richard D. Irwin Foundation, and the Spencer Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. This paper focuses on organizations' abandonment of strategy, which may be driven jointly by contagion qnd competition from other organizations. This paper treats both explanations but emphasizes contagion. I argue that strategy abandonment is contagious because the future performance of current and alternative strategies is highly uncertain, causing decision makers to examine the actions of other organizations in the industry for clues to the correct action. Contagion from organizations easily observed by the focal organization is stronger than contagion from other organizations, causing corporate links across markets to become important routes for the contagion of strategy abandonment. This theory is tested on a sample of radio stations abandoning a strategy and is supported by evidence that contagion of abandonment occurs through the influence of an organization's social reference groups.'

[1]  David Knoke,et al.  The Spread of Municipal Reform: Temporal, Spatial, and Social Dynamics , 1982, American Journal of Sociology.

[2]  J. Tirole.  The Theory of Industrial Organization , 1988 .

[3]  J. March,et al.  Learning from Samples of One or Fewer , 1991 .

[4]  Heather A. Haveman.  Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism and entry into new markets , 1993 .

[5]  Albert O. Hirschman,et al.  Exit, Voice, and Loyalty , 1970 .

[6]  HERBERT A. SIMON,et al.  The Architecture of Complexity , 1991 .

[7]  Eric Abrahamson.  Managerial Fads and Fashions: The Diffusion and Rejection of Innovations , 1991 .

[8]  L. Festinger.  A Theory of Social Comparison Processes , 1954 .

[9]  John B. Meisel,et al.  A dynamic analysis of the adoption of a new technology: the case of optical scanners , 1987 .

[10]  M. Hannan,et al.  Social Dynamics: Models and Methods. , 1986 .

[11]  J. Coleman,et al.  Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study. , 1967 .

[12]  Amos H. Hawley.  Human Ecology—A Theory of Community Structure , 1950 .

[13]  Robert A. Peterson,et al.  Models for innovation diffusion , 1985 .

[14]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[15]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[16]  L. Festinger,et al.  Social pressures in informal groups , 1950 .

[17]  K. Weick.  The social psychology of organizing , 1969 .

[18]  L. Edelman,et al.  Legal Environments and Organizational Governance: The Expansion of Due Process in the American Workplace , 1990, American Journal of Sociology.

[19]  Robert N. Stern,et al.  The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. , 1979 .

[20]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  Ambiguity and choice in organizations , 1976 .

[21]  W. P. Barnett,et al.  The Organizational Ecology of a Technological System. , 1990 .

[22]  A. Bandura.  Social learning theory , 1977 .

[23]  L. Burns,et al.  Adoption and abandonment of matrix management programs: effects of organizational characteristics and interorganizational networks. , 1993, Academy of Management journal. Academy of Management.