"Strategy, Choice, Determinism, and Change in Organizational Task Environments: Empirical Evidence"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much of the extant management research implies that the existence of industries and organizations is dependent upon variables largely beyond their control, and survival is the result of a happy confluence of events related to their origins and growth rather than actions of their conscious volition. With data from the NBER-CES Manufacturing Industry Database, we studied changes in managerial choice and environmental determinism in a sample of 459 industries for the years 1958 to 2005 to test if industry circumstances can be overcome. Rather than study only rates of organization population change as dependent upon environmental change, we looked at whether some actions that could be taken by managers in the industry could, in the aggregate, impact their environment. We found that changes in the growth of innovation and concentration have some impact on the type of environment in which the industry later found itself. Migration and potential rationalization of organization production facilities, along with organization population pressures, were also strong forces in determining changes in organization environments. Our findings suggest that there is some degree of strategic choice at work and, at the industry level, firms may have some choice. The study’s implications are given.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".