Aspersions!

There is a nice new paper out in California Management Review by Charles A. J. O'Reilly (Stanford GSB), Bruce Herreld (IBM) and Michael Tushman (HBS). The paper provides a cool example of corporate entrepreneurship in IBM. It also cites a paper that I wrote with Nick Dew (NPS) and Saras Sarasvathy (Darden), but casts aspersions (intentionally or not...) on me and my co-authors.

Here is the email I wrote to O'Reilly, Herreld and Tushman (Herreld's email bounced though). Either they were carelessly trying to create controversy, or they got mixed up in the editing process. So either poor judgment or carelessness. Take your pick.

Charles, Jarred and Mike,

I wish to congratulate you for your recent CMR article and thank you for citing our work in your. I just wish that your quotation of us was an accurate portrayal of our views.

You write:

"Taken uncritically, these high mortality rates have led some researchers to question the efficacy of management. Dew, Goldfarb and Sarasvarthy (2006, p. 79) conclude that ―…the strategic manager‘s job is in fact futile in the face of environmental disruptions.".

This is a misrepresentation and not our conclusion at all. In the full quote (below), we were clearly summarizing our interpretation of the views of organizational ecologists (which we are not!).

I hope that you will be more careful and accurate in the future when you imply that your fellow scholars are "uncritical".

Regards,

Brent Goldfarb

"Organizational ecologists have built a successful academic mini-industry by examining organizational dynamics based on assumptions about the role played by these structural factors (Dobrev, Kim, & Carroll, 2003; Dobrev, Kim, & Solari, 2004; Po´ los, Carroll, & Hannan, 2002; Po´ los & van Witteloostuijn, 2005; van Witteloostuijn, 1998, 2003). Ruef’s chapter in this volume is also informed by these ideas (Ruef, 2006). The underlying tenor of these arguments suggests that the strategic manager’s job is in fact futile in the face of environmental disruptions: there is no chance of corporations staying alive and thriving under all circumstances; nimbleness is simply not what organizations are about. Instead, inertia is structurally built into organizations, and failure in one period is often a concomitant of success in a previous one." [Bold added]



Organizational Ambidexterity: IBM and Emerging Business Opportunities
O’Reilly, Charles A., J. Bruce Harreld, and Michael L. Tushman
51/4 (Summer 2009): 75-99

Optimal Inertia: When Organizations Should Fail, Nick Dew, Brent Goldfarb, Saras Sarasvathy, Advances in Strategic Management 2006 Vol. 23: 73 - 99

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1016/S0742-3322(06)23003-1

Late Update: O'Reilly writes back:

from	charles o'reilly
sender-time		Sent at 11:45 AM (GMT-07:00). Current time there: 8:56 AM. ✆
to		Brent Goldfarb
date		Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:45 AM
subject		Re: Citation

Brent:

Thanks.

Charles

Late late update: Mike Tushman writes back:

Brent,

Thanks for your note and for your clarification.

Mike