Knowledge Redundancy, Environmental Shocks, and Agents’ Opportunism

L. Biggiero
{"title":"Knowledge Redundancy, Environmental Shocks, and Agents’ Opportunism","authors":"L. Biggiero","doi":"10.4018/978-1-60960-587-2.CH818","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Notwithstanding the warning of myopic view, when giving too much emphasis to the short run and stable environments, efficiency is usually claimed by standard economics as the main goal of competitive firms. This is challenged by management and organization scholars, who argue that, in presence of strong uncertainty due to environmental turbulence, slack resources can be a competitive advantage. In order to put some sound block in this debate through, this paper tests four groups of hypotheses on an agent-based model of industry competitiveness based on suppliers’ quality. It innovates current literature in two ways: first, it considers redundancy in terms of organizational knowledge, and not in terms of personnel or financial assets or other types of resources, which are usually taken as object of study. Secondly, it compares the effects of two forms of perturbations: environmental shock and opportunism. The results show that these two forms impact differently on industry profitability and that knowledge redundancy can (limitedly) compensate the effects of environmental shocks but not of opportunism. Moreover, it demonstrates that, as agents exchange (and accumulate) more information, knowledge efficiency declines, but less than proportionally to the increase of knowledge exchange.","PeriodicalId":350660,"journal":{"name":"POL: Other Resource Based Strategy & Policy (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"POL: Other Resource Based Strategy & Policy (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-587-2.CH818","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Notwithstanding the warning of myopic view, when giving too much emphasis to the short run and stable environments, efficiency is usually claimed by standard economics as the main goal of competitive firms. This is challenged by management and organization scholars, who argue that, in presence of strong uncertainty due to environmental turbulence, slack resources can be a competitive advantage. In order to put some sound block in this debate through, this paper tests four groups of hypotheses on an agent-based model of industry competitiveness based on suppliers’ quality. It innovates current literature in two ways: first, it considers redundancy in terms of organizational knowledge, and not in terms of personnel or financial assets or other types of resources, which are usually taken as object of study. Secondly, it compares the effects of two forms of perturbations: environmental shock and opportunism. The results show that these two forms impact differently on industry profitability and that knowledge redundancy can (limitedly) compensate the effects of environmental shocks but not of opportunism. Moreover, it demonstrates that, as agents exchange (and accumulate) more information, knowledge efficiency declines, but less than proportionally to the increase of knowledge exchange.
知识冗余、环境冲击与代理人机会主义
尽管有短视的警告,但在过分强调短期和稳定的环境时,标准经济学通常将效率作为竞争企业的主要目标。这受到了管理和组织学者的挑战,他们认为,由于环境动荡而存在强烈的不确定性,闲置资源可能是一种竞争优势。本文在基于供应商质量的基于代理的行业竞争力模型上对四组假设进行了检验,以期为这一争论提供一些有力的论据。它在两个方面创新了现有文献:第一,它从组织知识的角度考虑冗余,而不是从通常作为研究对象的人员或金融资产或其他类型资源的角度考虑冗余。其次,它比较了两种扰动形式的影响:环境冲击和机会主义。结果表明,这两种形式对行业盈利能力的影响不同,知识冗余可以(有限地)补偿环境冲击的影响,但不能补偿机会主义的影响。此外,它还表明,随着代理交换(和积累)更多的信息,知识效率下降,但与知识交换的增加不成比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信