The behavioral theory of the firm suggests that when performance falls below aspirations, firms engage in problemistic search for solutions to the performance shortfall. In this article, we contend recent experience is a critical determinant of the search mode employed by the firm. With this foundation, we examine the boundary conditions of search and investigate whether central behavioral theory of the firm concepts of coalitions, routines, and slack resources exacerbate or alleviate the effect of recent experience. We focus our theorizing and empirical tests on R&D search, and results confirm that a firm will generally only engage in a specific search mode in response to performance shortfalls if it has had recent experience with that activity. Examination of boundary conditions indicates that the influence of recent experience is weaker for firms that have experience with other search modes, weaker for diversified firms, stronger for larger firms, and stronger for firms with more absorbed slack.
AartsHDijksterhuisA (2000) Habits as knowledge structures: Automaticity in goal-directed behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology78(1): 53–63.
2.
AmasonACMooneyAC (2008) The Icarus paradox revisited: How strong performance sows the seeds of dysfunction in future strategic decision-making. Strategic Organization6(4): 407–434.
3.
ArellanoMBondS (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The Review of Economic Studies58(2): 277–297.
4.
ArgoteLGreveHR (2007) A behavioral theory of the firm: 40 years and counting—Introduction and impact. Organization Science18(3): 337–349.
5.
AudiaPGGreveHR (2006) Less likely to fail: Low performance, firm size, and factory expansion in the shipbuilding industry. Management Science52(1): 83–94.
6.
BanerjeeALampelJBhallaA (2019) Two cheers for diversity: An experimental study of micro-level heterogeneity in problemistic search. Strategic Organization17(4): 450–469.
7.
BaumJACRowleyTJShipilovAV, et al. (2005) Dancing with strangers: Aspiration performance and the search for underwriting syndicate partners. Administrative Science Quarterly50(4): 536–575.
8.
BettisRAPrahaladCK (1995) The dominant logic: Retrospective and extension. Strategic Management Journal16(1): 5–14.
9.
BourgeoisLJIII (1981) On the measurement of organizational slack. Academy of Management Review6(1): 29–39.
10.
BourgeoisLJIIISinghJV (1983) Organizational slack and political behavior among top management teams. Academy of Management Proceedings1983: 43–47.
11.
BromileyPPapenhausenC (2003) Assumptions of rationality and equilibrium in strategy research: The limits of traditional economic analysis. Strategic Organization1(4): 413–437.
12.
BrunoGSF (2005) Approximating the bias of the LSDV estimator for dynamic unbalanced panel data models. Economics Letters87(3): 361–366.
13.
CabralJJDengCKumarMS (2020) Internal resource allocation and external alliance activity of diversified firms. Journal of Management Studies57(8): 1690–1717.
14.
ChenW-R (2008) Determinants of firms’ backward- and forward-looking R&D search behavior. Organization Science19(4): 609–622.
15.
ChenW-RMillerKD (2007) Situational and institutional determinants of firms’ R&D search intensity. Strategic Management Journal28(4): 369–381.
16.
ChrismanJJPatelPC (2012) Variations in R&D investments of family and nonfamily firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of Management Journal55: 976–997.
17.
CyertRMMarchJG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
18.
CyertRMMarchJG (1992) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, 2nd edn.Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
19.
DosiG (1988) Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature26: 1120–1171.
20.
DuchinRSosyuraD (2013) Divisional managers and internal capital markets. Journal of Finance68(2): 387–429.
21.
EggersJPKaulA (2018) Motivation and ability? A behavioral perspective on the pursuit of radical invention in multi-technology incumbents. Academy of Management Journal61(1): 67–93.
22.
EggersJPSuhJH (2019) Experience and behavior: How negative feedback in new versus experienced domains affects firm action and subsequent performance. Academy of Management Journal62(2): 46.
23.
FengHMorganNARegoLL (2015) Marketing department power and firm performance. Journal of Marketing79(5): 1–20.
24.
FosfuriAGiarratanaMSSebrekSS (2020) Resource partitioning and strategies in markets for technology. Strategic Organization18(2): 251–274.
25.
GabaVGreveHR (2019) Safe or profitable? The pursuit of conflicting goals. Organization Science30(4): 647–667.
26.
GabaVJosephJ (2013) Corporate structure and performance feedback: Aspirations and adaptation in M-form firms. Organization Science24(4): 1102–1119.
27.
GabaVLeeSMeyer-DoyleP, et al. (2022) Prior experience of managers and maladaptive responses to performance feedback: Evidence from mutual funds. Organization Science. Epub ahead of print 3June. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2022.1605.
28.
GavettiGGreveHRLevinthalDA, et al. (2012) The behavioral theory of the firm: Assessment and prospects. Academy of Management Annals6(1): 1–40.
GreveHR (2003a) A behavioral theory of R&D expenditures and innovations: Evidence from shipbuilding. Academy of Management Journal46(6): 685–702.
32.
GreveHR (2003b) Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Innovation and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
GreveHRZhangCM (2022) Is there a strategic organization in the behavioral theory of the firm? Looking back and looking forward. Strategic Organization20: 698–708.
34.
HaleblianJFinkelsteinS (1999) The influence of organizational acquisition experience on acquisition performance: A behavioral learning perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly44(1): 29–56.
35.
HallB (1993) The stock market’s valuation of R&D investment during the 1980’s. The American Economic Review83(2): 259–264.
36.
HomburgCWorkmanJPKrohmerH (1999) Marketing’s influence within the firm. Journal of Marketing63(2): 1–17.
37.
IyerDNMillerKD (2008) Performance feedback, slack, and the timing of acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal51(4): 808–822.
38.
IyerDNBaùMChiricoF, et al. (2019) The triggers of local and distant search: Relative magnitude and persistence in explaining acquisition relatedness. Long Range Planning52(5): 101825.
39.
JosephJKlingebielRWilsonAJ (2016) Organizational structure and performance feedback: Centralization, aspirations, and termination decisions. Organization Science27(5): 1065–1083.
40.
KeumDDEggersJP (2019) Setting the bar: The evaluative and allocative roles of organizational aspirations. Organization Science29(6): 1170–1186.
41.
KimHKimHLeePM (2008) Ownership structure and the relationship between financial slack and R&D investments: Evidence from Korean firms. Organization Science19(3): 404–418.
42.
KimJYFinkelsteinSHaleblianJ (2015) All aspirations are not created equal: The differential effects of historical and social aspirations on acquisition behavior. Academy of Management Journal58(5): 1361–1388.
43.
KlingebielR (2018) Risk-type preference shifts in response to performance feedback. Strategic Organization16(2): 141–166.
44.
KotilogluSChenYLechlerT (2021) Organizational responses to performance feedback: A meta-analytic review. Strategic Organization19(2): 285–311.
45.
LevinthalDAMarchJG (1981) A model of adaptive organizational search. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization2(4): 307–333.
46.
LevinthalDAMarchJG (1993) The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal14: 95–112.
47.
LevittBMarchJG (1988) Organizational learning. In: ScottWRShortJF (eds) Annual Review of Sociology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, pp. 319–340.
48.
MarchJG (1981) Footnotes to organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly26: 563–577.
49.
MarchJGSimonHA (1958) Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
50.
MazzelliANasonRSDe MassisA, et al. (2019) Causality rules: Performance feedback on hierarchically related goals and capital investment variability. Journal of Management Studies56(8): 1630–1654.
51.
MillerDChenMJ (1994) Sources and consequences of competitive inertia: A study of the United-States airline industry. Administrative Science Quarterly39(1): 1–23.
52.
MishinaYPollockTGPoracJF (2004) Are more resources always better for growth? Resource stickiness in market and product expansion. Strategic Management Journal25(12): 1179–1197.
53.
MithaniMAO’BrienJP (2021) So what exactly is a “coalition” within an organization? A review and organizing framework. Journal of Management47: 171–206.
54.
MitsuhashiHGreveHR (2004) Powerful and free: Intraorganizational power and the dynamics of corporate strategy. Strategic Organization2(2): 107–132.
55.
MizikNJacobsonR (2003) Trading off between value creation and value appropriation: The financial implications of shifts in strategic emphasis. Journal of Marketing67(1): 63–76.
56.
MorganNAVorhiesDWMasonCH (2009) Research notes and commentaries market orientation: Marketing capabilities, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal30(8): 909–920.
57.
NickellS (1981) Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica49(6): 1417.
58.
O’BrienJPDavidP (2014) Reciprocity and R&D search: Applying the behavioral theory of the firm to a communitarian context. Strategic Management Journal35(4): 550–565.
59.
PalepuK (1985) Diversification strategy, profit performance and the entropy measure. Strategic Management Journal6(3): 239–255.
60.
PosenHKeilTKimS, et al. (2018) Renewing research on problemistic search: A review and research agenda. Academy of Management Annals12(1): 208–251.
61.
PrahaladCKBettisRA (1986) The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal7(6): 485–501.
62.
RheeLOcasioWKimTH (2019) Performance feedback in hierarchical business groups: The cross-level effects of cognitive accessibility on R & D search behavior. Organization Science30(1): 1–234, C2–C3.
63.
RheeMKimT (2015) Great vessels take a long time to mature: Early success traps and competences in exploitation and exploration. Organization Science26(1): 180–197.
SchijvenMKolevKDHaleblianJ (2021) The governance of learning: Carrots, sticks, and stones in acquisition capability development. Strategic Organization. Epub ahead of print 14June. DOI: 10.1177/14761270211027841.
66.
SchildtHALaamanenT (2006) Who buys whom: Information environments and organizational boundary spanning through acquisitions. Strategic Organization4(2): 111–133.
67.
SchimmerMBrauerM (2012) Firm performance and aspiration levels as determinants of a firm’s strategic repositioning within strategic group structures. Strategic Organization10(4): 406–435.
68.
ShinkleGA (2012) Organizational aspirations, reference points, and goals: Building on the past and aiming for the future. Journal of Management38: 415–455.
69.
SydowJSchreyöggGKochJ (2009) Organizational path dependence: Opening the black box. Academy of Managementreview34(4): 689–709.
70.
TeeceDJRumeltRDosiG, et al. (1994) Understanding corporate coherence: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization23: 1–30.
71.
TripsasMGavettiG (2000) Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management Journal21(10–11): 1147–1161.
72.
VissaBGreveHRChenWR (2010) Business group affiliation and firm search behavior in India: Responsiveness and focus of attention. Organization Science21(3): 696–712.
73.
VossGBSirdeshmukhDVossZG (2008) The effects of slack resources and environmentalthreat on product exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal51(1): 147–164.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
