<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Adoption and Diffusion of Organizational Innovation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2008/02/01/adoption-and-diffusion-of-organizational-innovation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2008/02/01/adoption-and-diffusion-of-organizational-innovation/</link>
	<description>Economics of organizations, strategy, entrepreneurship, innovation, and more</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:06:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: brayden</title>
		<link>http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2008/02/01/adoption-and-diffusion-of-organizational-innovation/#comment-69439</link>
		<dc:creator>brayden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 07:33:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://organizationsandmarkets.com/?p=1273#comment-69439</guid>
		<description>If you want to set yourself Peter go ahead. :) No, really, I think you're underestimating the theoretical significance of some of the sociological contributions to understanding diffusion.  And some of these papers are looking at the diffusion of organizational practices. See, for instance, this &lt;a href="http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0001-8392%28200206%2947%3A2%3C207%3AGCIATD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5&#38;size=LARGE&#38;origin=JSTOR-enlargePage" rel="nofollow"&gt;ASQ paper&lt;/a&gt; by Guler, Guillen, and Macpherson, or &lt;a href="http://aom.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&#38;backto=issue,6,15;journal,11,12;linkingpublicationresults,1:109448,1" rel="nofollow"&gt;this paper&lt;/a&gt; in AMJ by David and Strang looking at the spread of TQM.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you want to set yourself Peter go ahead. :) No, really, I think you&#8217;re underestimating the theoretical significance of some of the sociological contributions to understanding diffusion.  And some of these papers are looking at the diffusion of organizational practices. See, for instance, this <a href="http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0001-8392%28200206%2947%3A2%3C207%3AGCIATD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5&amp;size=LARGE&amp;origin=JSTOR-enlargePage" rel="nofollow">ASQ paper</a> by Guler, Guillen, and Macpherson, or <a href="http://aom.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&amp;backto=issue,6,15;journal,11,12;linkingpublicationresults,1:109448,1" rel="nofollow">this paper</a> in AMJ by David and Strang looking at the spread of TQM.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Klein</title>
		<link>http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2008/02/01/adoption-and-diffusion-of-organizational-innovation/#comment-69412</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Klein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 00:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://organizationsandmarkets.com/?p=1273#comment-69412</guid>
		<description>Brayden, is this a setup? Are you trying to goad me into saying "Yes, but I'm talking about serious studies (by economists)."

Seriously, I think what Lynch is doing here is a little different from the studies you mention. Generally speaking, economists view diffusion studies by sociologists as too atheoretical (e.g., population ecology models). There has to be some kind of underlying rational-choice framework. That having been said, there are lots of good studies of the diffusion of technological innovation (Steve Klepper's stuff, for instance), but relatively little on the diffusion of organizational practices. 

Actually, there was a breakout session at the Sundance conference co-organized by you, Brayden, in which Howard Aldrich, Art Stinchcombe, and I had exactly this same argument about "life-stages" models of the firm. Teppo tried to play referee. I thought I won, but probably no one else thought so. :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brayden, is this a setup? Are you trying to goad me into saying &#8220;Yes, but I&#8217;m talking about serious studies (by economists).&#8221;</p>
<p>Seriously, I think what Lynch is doing here is a little different from the studies you mention. Generally speaking, economists view diffusion studies by sociologists as too atheoretical (e.g., population ecology models). There has to be some kind of underlying rational-choice framework. That having been said, there are lots of good studies of the diffusion of technological innovation (Steve Klepper&#8217;s stuff, for instance), but relatively little on the diffusion of organizational practices. </p>
<p>Actually, there was a breakout session at the Sundance conference co-organized by you, Brayden, in which Howard Aldrich, Art Stinchcombe, and I had exactly this same argument about &#8220;life-stages&#8221; models of the firm. Teppo tried to play referee. I thought I won, but probably no one else thought so. :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brayden</title>
		<link>http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2008/02/01/adoption-and-diffusion-of-organizational-innovation/#comment-69398</link>
		<dc:creator>brayden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 15:13:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://organizationsandmarkets.com/?p=1273#comment-69398</guid>
		<description>I'm not sure why you think this paper is so innovative.  Sociologists have studied diffusion processes for years, developing quite sophisticated statistical models.  See for example this &lt;a href="http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0360-0572(1998)24%3C265%3ADIOASM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5" rel="nofollow"&gt;1999 review article&lt;/a&gt; by David Strang and Sarah Soule.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure why you think this paper is so innovative.  Sociologists have studied diffusion processes for years, developing quite sophisticated statistical models.  See for example this <a href="http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0360-0572(1998)24%3C265%3ADIOASM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5" rel="nofollow">1999 review article</a> by David Strang and Sarah Soule.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
