Toward a routine-based view of interfirm rivalry

Abstract

Although organizational routines have attracted increasing attention in strategy and organization research, they have received surprisingly limited attention in competitive dynamics scholarship. Our essay seeks to advance a routine-based view of interfirm rivalry by bridging the competitive dynamics and routine literatures. We put forward a conceptual model of the routine-based view of interfirm rivalry that is centered on “competitive action routines.” The model clarifies the roles that managers play in driving a firm’s competitive behavior, challenges the assumption of routine-based rigidity in competitive behavior, and adds nuance to our understanding of managerial cognition in competitive dynamics. Moreover, the routine-based view offers new insights regarding the awareness-motivation-capability framework, and amplifies previous calls to broaden the methodological repertoire of competitive dynamics research.

Research frontiers on the attention-based view of the firm

“…Note that two of the articles covered in two separate themes, Bartel and Rockmann (2024) and Kudesia and Lang (2024), addressed a fifth topic that we suggested in our call: attention, crisis management, and organizational. These two articles address similar empirical phenomena but use different meta-theoretical perspectives.…”

“…Three of the articles are empirical: One is qualitative (Plotnikova et al, 2024), and two are quantitative (Boynton, 2024; Mack et al, 2024). Five of the articles are primarily theoretical (Bartel and Rockmann, 2024; Love, 2024; Kudesia and Lang, 2024; Nicolini and Mengis, 2024; Vuori, 2024).…”

“…All emphasize the decreasing importance of organizational structures for explaining attentional dynamics in changing organizational forms. Kudesia and Lang (2024) developed a practice-based theory of attentional dynamics. Love (2024) develops a theory on attentional control through issue-specific channels.…”

“…These two articles address similar empirical phenomena but use different meta-theoretical perspectives. Bartel and Rockmann (2024) more directly embrace a cross-level approach to the ABV while Kudesia and Lang (2024) suggest that a more radical reorientation toward studying organizational crises is needed, at least in the context of the changing nature of organizations and organizing.…”

Organisational Routines and Interfirm Collaboration: Measurement Dilemmas and Recommendations for Further Research Steps

“…We would even assume that propensity to collaborate is positively related to organisational performance (proposition 2). However, there is little research addressing the issue of routine from the inter-firm perspective (Agostini and Nosella, 2017;Cantwell et al, 2010;Johansson and Kask, 2013;Luoma, Laamanen, and Lamberg, 2020;Mathews, 2001). To reduce this limitation in organisational routines research as well as in inter-firm research, we propose the construct named propensity to collaborate to measure firm propensity to enter inter-firm relationships.…”