Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2009 Jul 9;11(2):135–164. doi: 10.1007/s10818-009-9061-1

An empirical investigation of organizational memetic variation

Jill Shepherd 1,✉, Bill McKelvey 2
PMCID: PMC7149017

Abstract

The potential of a theory based on organizational memes in coevolution with the environment has been postulated, but remains empirically under-developed. This study explores whether understanding organizational memetic variation is empirically possible and, if so, whether it might, with further development, provide managers with early indications of a misalignment between organizational action (operationalized as memetic variation) and strategic intent—the amount of memetic variation needed to stay aligned with the competitive environment. A method for empirically identifying knowledge-based memes in everyday practice is developed. It stems from modern advances in genetics allowing micro-level changes in genes to be linked to macro-environmental dynamics. Using the concept that memetic variation is caused by everyday, uncontrollable uncertainties of interpretation, memetic variation is reduced to seven categorical types. A highly exploratory quasi-experimental design allows a preliminary comparison of a would-be innovative ‘Portfolio Management Committee’ with self-organizing Internet chat-room settings that are representational of open-source innovation. Results are consistent with predictions showing that higher levels of variation are seen in the latter, despite the former’s strategic intent of innovating to stay aligned with a dynamic environment. Further work is needed, however, to test reliability and validity.

Keywords: Memes, Variation, Environmental change, Organizational innovation, Knowledge, Open-source innovation, Empirical meme research

Contributor Information

Jill Shepherd, Email: jills@sfu.ca.

Bill McKelvey, Email: mckelvey@anderson.ucla.edu.

References

  1. Aldrich H. E. Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1979. [Google Scholar]
  2. Aldrich H. E. Organizations evolving. London: Sage; 1999. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aldrich H.E., Ruef M. Organizations evolving. 2. London: Sage; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  4. Ashby W.R. An introduction to Cybernetics. London: Chapman & Hall; 1956. [Google Scholar]
  5. Augier M., Winter S. G. Why is management an evolutionary science? An interview with Sidney G. Winter. Journal of Management Inquiry. 2005;14:344–354. doi: 10.1177/1056492605279939. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Aunger R. Darwinizing culture. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bjelland O. M., Wood R. C. An inside view of IBM’s innovation jam. MIT Sloan Management Review. 2008;50:32–40. [Google Scholar]
  8. Blackmore, S. (1998). Imitation and the definition of a meme. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 2, 1–10. http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/1998/vol2/blackmore_s.html. Accessed 25May 2009.
  9. Blackmore S. The meme’s eye view. In: Aunger R., editor. Darwinizing culture. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2000. pp. 25–42. [Google Scholar]
  10. Blute, M. (2005). Memetics and evolutionary social science. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 9, 1–4. http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/2003/vol7/blute_m.html. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  11. Boisot M. Knowledge assets. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  12. Boisot M., Li Y. Organizational versus market knowledge: From concrete embodiment to abstract representation. Journal of Bioeconomics. 2006;8:219–251. doi: 10.1007/s10818-006-9004-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Brown S. L., Eisenhardt K. M. The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-based evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1997;42:1–34. doi: 10.2307/2393807. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Burgelman R. A. Corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management: Insights from a process study. Management Science. 1983;29:1349–1364. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.29.12.1349. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Burgelman R. A. Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organization Science. 1991;2:239–262. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2.3.239. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Burgelman R. A. Strategy is destiny. New York: Free Press; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  17. Burke, D. S. (1997). Recombination of HIV: An important viral evolutionary strategy. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 3. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no3/burke.htm. Accessed 25 May 2009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  18. Burt R. S. Social brokerage and closure. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  19. Business Week. (2006a). Speed demons: How smart companies are creating new products—and whole new businesses—almost overnight. March 27. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_13/b3977001.htm. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  20. Business Week. (2006b). The world’s most innovative companies. April 24. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_17/b3981401.htm. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  21. Campbell D. T. Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review. 1960;67:380–400. doi: 10.1037/h0040373. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Campbell D. T., Stanley J. C. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. In: Cage N. L., editor. Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally; 1963. pp. 171–246. [Google Scholar]
  23. Dawkins R. The selfish gene. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1976. [Google Scholar]
  24. Dawkins R. Organisms, groups and memes: Replicators or vehicles. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1982. [Google Scholar]
  25. Dennett D. C. From typo to thinko: When evolution graduated to semantic norms. In: Levinson S. C., Jaisson P., editors. Evolution and culture. Cambridge, MA: Bradford/MIT Press; 2006. pp. 133–145. [Google Scholar]
  26. Depew D. J., Weber B. H. Systems dynamics and the genealogy of natural selection. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1995. [Google Scholar]
  27. Durham W. H. Coevolution: Genes, culture, and human diversity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1991. [Google Scholar]
  28. Eldredge N. Reinventing Darwin. New York: Wiley; 1995. [Google Scholar]
  29. Fisher R. A. The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press; 1930. [Google Scholar]
  30. Fox, K, E., & Harel, D. (2007). Beyond the gene. PLoS ONE, 2(11), e1231. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001231. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0001231. Accessed 25 May 2009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  31. Friedman, M. (Ed.). (1953). Methodology of positive economics. In Essays in positive economics (pp. 3–43). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  32. Gabora, L. (1997). The origin and evolution of culture and creativity. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 1, 1–14. http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/1997/vol1/gabora_l.html. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  33. Gatherer, D. (1998). Why the ‘thought contagion’ metaphor is retarding the progress of memetics. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 2 1–22. http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/1998/vol2/gatherer_d.html. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  34. Gibbs R. Deeper into the genome. Nature. 2005;437:1233–1234. doi: 10.1038/4371233a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Glaser B. G. Emergence versus forcing: The basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press; 1992. [Google Scholar]
  36. Goldstein D. B., Cavalleri G. L. Genomics: Understanding human diversity. Nature. 2005;437:1241–1242. doi: 10.1038/4371241a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Gould S. J. The confusion over evolution. The New York Review of Books. 1992;39(19):47–54. [Google Scholar]
  38. Gould S. J. The structure of evolutionary theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap/Harvard University Press; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  39. Heyes C. M., Plotkin H. C. Replicators and interactors in cultural evolution. In: Ruse M., editor. What the philosophy of biology is: Essays dedicated to David Hull. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 1989. pp. 139–162. [Google Scholar]
  40. Hinds D. A., Stuve L. L., Nilsen G. B., Halperin E., Eskin E., Ballinger D. G., Frazer K. A., Cox D. R. Whole-genome patterns of common DNA variation in three human populations. Science. 2005;307:1072–1079. doi: 10.1126/science.1105436. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Hitt M. A., Beamish P. W., Jackson S. E., Mathieu J. E. Building theoretical and empirical bridges across levels: Multi-level research in management. Academy of Management Review. 2007;50:1385–1399. [Google Scholar]
  42. International HapMap Consortium A haplotype map of the human genome. Nature. 2005;437:1299–1320. doi: 10.1038/nature04226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Janis I. Groupthink. 2. Houghton Mifflin: Boston, MA; 1972. [Google Scholar]
  44. Kauffman S. A. The origins of order. New York: Oxford University Press; 1993. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kogut B., Zander U. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science. 1992;3:383–397. doi: 10.1287/orsc.3.3.383. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Krippendorff K. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1980. [Google Scholar]
  47. Langley A. Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review. 1999;24:691–710. doi: 10.2307/259349. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Lewin A. Y., Volberda H. Y. Beyond the selection-adaptation debate. In: Tsoukas H., Knudsen C., editors. The Oxford handbook of organization theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2003. pp. 569–595. [Google Scholar]
  49. Lewontin R. C. Adaptation. Scientific American. 1978;239:212–230. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0978-212. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Lissack, M. R. (2004). The redefinition of memes: Ascribing meaning to an empty cliché. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 8, 1–13. http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/2004/vol8/lissack_mr.html. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  51. Lord, A., & Price, I. (2001). Reconstruction of organisational phylogeny from memetic similarity analysis: Proof of feasibility. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 5 1–9. http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/2001/vol5/lord_a&price_i.html. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  52. Marra M., Jones S.J., Astell C.R., Holt R.A., Brooks-Wilson A. The genome sequence of SARS-associated coronovirus. Science. 2003;300:5624–5699. doi: 10.1126/science.1085953. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Martzen M. R., McCraith S. M., Spinelli S. L., Torres F. M., Stanley F., Grayhack E. J., Phizicky E. M. A biochemical genomist approach for identifying genes by the activity of their products. Science. 1999;286(5442):1153–1155. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5442.1153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Maynard Smith J. The theory of evolution. 3. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1993. [Google Scholar]
  55. McKelvey B. Organizational systematics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1982. [Google Scholar]
  56. McKelvey B. Quasi-natural organization science. Organization Science. 1997;8:351–380. doi: 10.1287/orsc.8.4.351. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Mintzberg H., McHugh A. Strategy formation in an adhocracy. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1985;30:160–197. doi: 10.2307/2393104. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Myers S., Bottolo L., Freeman C., McVean G., Donnelly P. A fine-scale map of recombination rates and hotspots across the human genome. Science. 2005;310(5746):321–324. doi: 10.1126/science.1117196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Nelson R. R., Winter S. G. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1982. [Google Scholar]
  60. Rose, N. (1998). Controversies in meme theory. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 2, 1–10. http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/1998/vol2/Rose_n.html. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  61. Rosness R. ‘I think I understand what you mean’: Negotiating intersubjective understanding. In: Carlsen A., Klev R., von Krogh G., editors. Living knowledge. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan; 2004. pp. 99–114. [Google Scholar]
  62. Sampler J. L. Redefining industry structure for the information age. Strategic Management Journal. 1998;19:343–355. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199804)19:4<343::AID-SMJ975>3.0.CO;2-G. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. Shepherd, J. (2002). An evolutionary (memetic) perspective on how and why does knowledge emerge? PhD Dissertation, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland.
  64. Speel H.-C. Memetics: On a conceptual framework for cultural evolution. In: Heylighen F., Bollen J., Riegler A., editors. The evolution of complexity. Norwell, MA: Kluwer; 1999. pp. 229–254. [Google Scholar]
  65. Spencer H. The principles of sociology. New York: D. Appleton & Co; 1897. [Google Scholar]
  66. Stanley S. M. Macroevolution, pattern and process. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman; 1979. [Google Scholar]
  67. Sterelny K. Dawkins versus Gould. Cambridge, UK: Icon Books; 2001. [Google Scholar]
  68. Tsoukas H., Mylonopoulos N. What does it mean to view organizations as knowledge systems? In: Tsoukas H., Mylonopoulos N., editors. Organizations as knowledge systems. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke; 2004. pp. 1–26. [Google Scholar]
  69. Voelpel S. C., Leibold M., Streb C. K. The innovation meme: Managing innovation replicators for organizational fitness. Journal of Change Management. 2005;5:57–69. doi: 10.1080/14697010500036338. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  70. Vos, E., & Kelleher, B. (2001). Mergers and takeovers: A memetic approach. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 5, 1–12. http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/2001/vol5/vos_e&kelleher_b.html. Accessed 25 May 2009.
  71. Watson J., Crick F. Molecular structure of nucleic acids: A structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature. 1953;171(4356):737–738. doi: 10.1038/171737a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Weeks J. R., Galunic C. A theory of the cultural evolution of the firm. Organization Studies. 2003;24:1283–1304. doi: 10.1177/01708406030248005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  73. Williamson O. E. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press; 1975. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Bioeconomics are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES