MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056070220 · doi:10.1177/0170840610397485

The Path of Most Persistence: An Evolutionary Perspective on Path Dependence and Dynamic Capabilities

2011· article· en· W2056070220 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Philippe Vergne, Rodolphe Durand

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganization Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPath dependencePath (computing)Perspective (graphical)ContingencyEvolutionary dynamicsMicroeconomicsComputer scienceEconomicsEpistemologySociologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper extends the dynamic capability view and research on organizational path dependence by arguing that path dependence can be a property of capabilities when a contingently-triggered capability path is subject to self-reinforcement (i.e. a set of positive and negative mechanisms that increases the attractiveness of a path relative to others). The paper introduces an evolutionary perspective, which specifies the underlying selection mechanisms of the property of path dependence in internal and external firm environments. This theorization sheds new light on three paradoxes that currently blur the theoretical contribution of path dependence to research at the managerial, organizational, and industry levels: (1) the problematic coexistence of path irreversibility and managerial intentionality; (2) the ambivalent strategic value of lock-in with regard to competitive advantage; and (3) the relative homogeneity in observed dynamic capabilities, despite their (possible) path dependence that should lead to a wider variety of outcomes owing to the presence of contingency. We highlight the contributions of this perspective to strategic management research and evolutionary theories.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations212
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganization StudiesSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207