Making routines the same: Crafting similarity and singularity in routines transfer

Long‐Term Innovation Outcomes of University–Industry Collaborations: The Role of ‘Bridging’ vs ‘Blurring’ Boundary‐Spanning Practices

“…The familiarity with structured mechanisms for knowledge sharing makes it more likely that a similarly structured approach will be replicated in the UIC. This is further supported by research that has highlighted the benefits of practices' replication (Aroles and McLean, 2016;D'Adderio, 2014) to avoid the cost associated with the adoption of new ways of communication and working that might exceed the benefits of innovation (D'Adderio and Pollock, 2020).…”

“…There are several reasons to hypothesize that internal knowledge creation experience increases the likelihood of adoption of such practices. First, internal knowledge creation involves having working relationships, initiatives and structures facilitating communication and collaboration with internal parties (Blomqvist and Levy, 2006; Hillebrand and Biemans, 2003) and internally focused practices and policies (D'Adderio and Pollock, 2020). Therefore, organizations that engage in knowledge creation internally usually have independent knowledge creation processes (Iles and Yolles, 2002), which are costly and time‐consuming to adapt in order to engage in UICs.…”

The Biography of an Algorithm: Performing algorithmic technologies in organizations

“…Translation is an instance of analogical transfer (Cornelissen & Clarke, 2010) that involves the transfer of a concept, idea, or practice from one domain to another. The notion of translation suggests that transfer always involves transformation (Czarniawska & Sevón, 1996Latour, 1987) and re-creation (D'Adderio, 2014;D'Adderio & Pollock, 2020). Translating an algorithm from one location to another, for example, may create inspiration for new ways of doing things.…”

“…A broader, rather than narrowly understood conception of algorithms shows how-far from being the result of one-off technical exercises-these technologies are shaped as they are enacted, through their progressive entanglement with a diverse range of material and non-material actants (Gillespie, 2014(Gillespie, , 2016. Algorithms thus evolve by being typically activated through a chain of sociotechnical translations (Callon, 1986;Latour, 2005) or "chain of materializations" (D'Adderio & Pollock, 2020) that are required to translate the algorithmic logic and code into organizational activity. One materialization, for example, might convert an abstract logic into a mathematical model or formula.…”

“…Building on Mol (2002), recent performativity research has highlighted how objects (artifacts, routines) are more usefully seen as coordinated outcomes of different assemblage enactments at different "locations." Objects-such as atherosclerosis in the case of Mol (2002), routines in the case of D'Adderio and Pollock (2020), or algorithms in our case-and their effects, can therefore be usefully understood as the emergent and constantly challenged outcomes of multiple different and partially overlapping performations.…”