A Comparative Analysis of Defensive Routines in Engineering Managers Versus Non-Engineering Managers

The Intertwining Impact of Intraorganizational and Routine Networks on Routine Replication Dynamics: An Agent‐Based Model

“…This implies that we focused on routines that are beneficial for organizations' survival and development; i.e., by reconfiguring these routines, creating new ones, and using them consistently Complexity 19 across organizational sites, organizations can adapt to a changing environment and obtain a high-level of performance [47][48][49]. However, "defensive routines" as mentioned in [5][6][7] are beyond the scope of our discussion. Second, we only limited our concentration on the network characteristic of distributed units within a decentralized organization -i.e., the organization within which activities (particularly those regarding decision-making) are distributed or delegated away from a central, authoritative leadership -rather than considering factors such as leadership and culture [73,80].…”

“…Recent research has shown that organizational routines, i.e., "repetitive, recognizable pattern of interdependent actions" carried out by multiple individual actors [1], are "ubiquitous" in almost every organization [2]. While certain scholars have focused on the so-called "defensive routines", i.e., actions or policies that "prevent either individuals or segments of the organization from experiencing embarrassment or threat" [3,4], and explored their negative effect on organizational learning and change [5][6][7], there is evidence that organizational routines are a key repository of organizational memory, skills and tacit knowledge which enables both organizational stability and change [1,[8][9][10][11] and constitutes organizations' sustained competitive advantages [12][13][14]. In this sense, by applying routines representing "best practices" to new environments, organizational core capabilities can be enhanced that in turn further sustain competitive advantages and profitability [15].…”

Enhancing Innovation Speed through Trust: - A Case Study on Reframing Employee Defensive Routines

“…Therefore, organizational defensive reasoning and defensive strategies involve avoidance, preventing organizational learning and capability (Argyris 1986). Accordingly, it may be a barrier to change (in this case innovation speed) (Riley, Cudney et al 2013). Since negative emotions should be avoided, there is a need for answers to effective ways that facilitate trust, caring and commitment in organizations (Argyris 2004).…”

A Comparative Analysis of Defensive Routines and Theories-In-Use of Engineering and Non-Engineering Managers

“…Organizations are faced with decisions of who is moved into management and for what reasons. In order to keep the best technical people in technical jobs, organizations may move average or below-average employees into management positions (Riley et al, 2013). There has been research that focuses on the learning styles needed to be an effective team leader and engineering manager (Wyrick, 2003).…”

“…This yields a response rate of 49%. This study uses a small sample size in order to decrease the ability to draw broad conclusions (Riley et al, 2013). …”