From Rumination to Rumelt via Dobzhansky

24 May 2008 at 3:24 pm 1 comment

| Randy Westgren |

I was perusing the website of the Oxford Symposium on Food and Cookery to find the references to last year’s theme: food and morality. Some interesting reads there. I noticed that the Symposium awards the Sophie D(obzhansky) Coe Prize in Food History annually. Dr. Coe was an anthropologist who wrote on pre-Columbian diets and was the daughter of Theodosius Dobzhansky, one of “the Four Horsemen” of the modern synthesis of genetics and evolution (American Philosophical Society). Dobzhansky emigrated from the University of Kiev in 1927 to Columbia University, thence to Caltech, where he and his colleagues bred squillions of generations of fruit flies and provided the empirical basis for the mathematical models of evolution of the other horsemen: Haldane, Fisher, and Wright.

In 1937, Dobzhansky had two publications. One was his landmark book, Genetics and the Origin of Species, which was the siren song that drew Ernst Mayr and other biologists to the field of evolutionary biology. Mayr has often been credited with developing the concept of the isolating mechanism as the basis for speciation. Methinks that Mayr’s long shadow at Harvard fell on Richard Rumelt, who ported the concept to strategic management without much attribution in his 1984 and 1987 pieces. Mahoney and Pandian must be credited with the most complete exposition of the concept.

However, it was Dobzhansky who introduced the concept in the other 1937 publication: “Genetic Nature of Species Differences,” The American Naturalist 71, no. 735 (July-August 1937): 404-20. See page 405. This seminal work and many which followed define isolating mechanisms as the physiological, genetic, and behavioral attributes that prevented similar organisms from interbreeding, thus providing a biological basis for the concept of species. This concept is often called reproductive isolation in recent biological literature, as many find the term mechanism to be limiting. The concept in strategy is a reason, or a set of reasons, why firms’ strategies are specific (wordplay alert!) and irreproducible (again!) by similar firms.

The metaphor works well as long as we do not try to take it too far. Equating firms with species in doing evolutionary economics and industry evolution is problematic. We can attempt to force genes to be routines and morphology to be structure, etc., but it remains that genetics and evolution are defined only as population-level concepts, while strategy is meaningful at the organism level.

Entry filed under: Evolutionary Economics, Former Guest Bloggers, People, Strategic Management. Tags: .

Elgar Catalog Covers Getting Weird InBev and Bud . . . In Bed?

1 Comment Add your own

  • 1. John S. Wilkins  |  24 May 2008 at 8:56 pm

    Also, note Dobie’s 1935 paper which raised the species concept as a problem for the new synthesists.

    But there was a longstanding issue regarding species that went back another 30 years before then, cf. Poulton 1903:

    Dobzhansky, Theodosius. 1935. A critique of the species concept in biology. Philosophy of Science 2: 344-355.

    Poulton, Edward Bagnall. 1903. What is a species? Proceedings of the Entomological Society of London: reprinted in Poulton 1908: 46-94.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Authors

Nicolai J. Foss | home | posts
Peter G. Klein | home | posts
Richard Langlois | home | posts
Lasse B. Lien | home | posts

Guests

Former Guests | posts

Networking

Recent Posts

Categories

Feeds

Our Recent Books

Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, Organizing Entrepreneurial Judgment: A New Approach to the Firm (Cambridge University Press, 2012).
Peter G. Klein and Micheal E. Sykuta, eds., The Elgar Companion to Transaction Cost Economics (Edward Elgar, 2010).
Peter G. Klein, The Capitalist and the Entrepreneur: Essays on Organizations and Markets (Mises Institute, 2010).
Richard N. Langlois, The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism: Schumpeter, Chandler, and the New Economy (Routledge, 2007).
Nicolai J. Foss, Strategy, Economic Organization, and the Knowledge Economy: The Coordination of Firms and Resources (Oxford University Press, 2005).
Raghu Garud, Arun Kumaraswamy, and Richard N. Langlois, eds., Managing in the Modular Age: Architectures, Networks and Organizations (Blackwell, 2003).
Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, eds., Entrepreneurship and the Firm: Austrian Perspectives on Economic Organization (Elgar, 2002).
Nicolai J. Foss and Volker Mahnke, eds., Competence, Governance, and Entrepreneurship: Advances in Economic Strategy Research (Oxford, 2000).
Nicolai J. Foss and Paul L. Robertson, eds., Resources, Technology, and Strategy: Explorations in the Resource-based Perspective (Routledge, 2000).

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 256 other followers