Why Gaussian statistics are mostly wrong for strategic organization

111 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Geospatial analysis requires a different way of thinking: the problem of spatial heterogeneity (2014, background): “Gaussian thinking implies more or less similar things in a simple, static, and equilibrium world, while Paretian thinking believes in far more small things than large ones in a dynamic, complex, and nonequilibrium world (McKelvey and Andriani 2005; see Table 2).”
The endogenous origins of experience, routines, and organizational capabilities: the poverty of stimulus (2010, background): “In part, the problem of extremes can be attributed to underlying statistical and empirical matters recently noted by McKelvey and Andriani (2005) (e.g., the Gaussian denial of extremes and unstable means), though there are important theoretical considerations as well, which we explicate in relation…”
Heterogeneous resources and the financial crisis: implications of strategic management theory (2009, unknown): “However, neither dynamic capabilities theory, nor other strategic management perspectives focus on firms‘ adaptations to extreme events (McKelvey and Andriani 2005), or those major shocks that s imultaneously affect multiple industries and economies, transforming the demand, input prices, relations…”