Leadership, Capabilities, and Technological Change: The Transformation of NCR in the Electronic Era

By R. Rosenbloom. 2000

393 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/02e79111b8a25856a975918b78d46e3bb98cd76b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Where do capabilities come from and how do they matter? A study in the software services industry (2005, positive): “Several excellent papers in this tradition provide useful insight into the historical development and evolution of capabilities (e.g., Iansiti and Khanna, 1995; Rosenbloom, 2000).”
Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present, and Future (2013, background): “Firm histories often illustrate how, in the face of change, organization adapt their structures and processes (e.g., Kauppila, 2010; Lovas & Ghoshal, 2000; Rosenbloom, 2000; Tripsas, 1997).”
Competitive dynamics, strategic consistency, and organizational survival (2009, background): “…the evolution of industrial populations (Lewin and Volberda, 1999; Raff, 2000) have noted that firm-level changes must concur with the rate of change in the business context (e.g. changes in markets, regulation, macro-culture, and technology) to be able to survive (Cattani, 2006; Rosenbloom, 2000).”
The Complex Resource-Based View: Implications for Theory and Practice in Strategic Human Resource Management (2004, background): “Researchers have made several efforts to identify and prescribe dynamic capabilities in theoretical terms (Luo, 2000; Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997), through empirical studies (Griffith & Harvey, 2001; Helfat, 1997, 2000; Rindova & Kotha, 2001), and through historical studies of response to technolog”
Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities (2003, result): “Recent studies, for example, have documented the strong influence of top management on firm response to external change at NCR ( Rosenbloom, 2000 ) and Polaroid (Tripsas and Gavetti, 2000).”
Capability Reconfiguration: An Analysis Of Incumbent Responses To Technological Change (2006, neutral): “customer expectations (Rosenbloom, 2000), increased demand, and diversity of the customer base because of the multipurpose nature of computers (Usselman, 1993).”
Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity (2009, methodology): “A generally insular view of the internal and external business environment also prevailed at NCR’s Dayton headquarters, often referred to as the “Dayton mentality” (Rosenbloom 2000).”
Cognition, Capabilities, and Incentives: Assessing Firm Response to the Fiber-Optic Revolution (2008, result): “These results are consistent with case study research suggesting that CEO attention can compensate for a lack of capabilities (Rosenbloom, 2000).”
Cognition and Capabilities: A Multi-Level Perspective (2013, background): “Managerial attention can direct the organization (through the mindful processes discussed earlier) to build up new capabilities that would be better suited to the evolving market (Kaplan, 2008a; Rosenbloom, 2000).”
Technological pre-adaptation, speciation, and emergence of new technologies: how Corning invented and developed fiber optics (2006, background): “Several studies (e.g., Methe et al., 1997; Rosenbloom, 2000; Ahuja and Lampert, 2001) have shown how incumbents adapt, survive, and even regain historic performance levels in markets shaken by the arrival of radical technological innovations (Hill and Rothaermel, 2003: 257).”
Old technology responses to new technology threats: demand heterogeneity and technology retreats (2010, background): “…when reviewing the canon of technology change studies—e.g. the transition from sail to steam (Foster, 1986); from mechanical to electronic systems (Rosenbloom, 2000); from steam to diesel locomotives, piston to jet aircraft engines, and fountain to ball point pens (Cooper and Smith, 1992)—the…”
Technology, Identity, and Inertia Through the Lens of "The Digital Photography Company" (2009, background): “National Cash Register’s initial poor response to the advent of electronic business machines and digital computers was partially related to the rigidity of its manufacturing organization—previously a competitive strength (Rosenbloom 2000).”