The complexity of a firm's strategy affects both the ease with which the firm can replicate the strategy in a new setting and the ease with which rivals can imitate it. Simple strategies are as readily imitated as replicated, and highly intricate strategies resist imitation and replication equally. At moderate levels of complexity, however, a wedge develops between the ease of replication and the difficulty of imitation, so long as the replicator has better information than the imitator about the original success. An agent-based simulation model clarifies the structural reasons that this is so. The model also shows how the wedge-maximizing level of complexity varies with the replicator's informational edge over the imitator. The results help to pinpoint situations in which strategies requiring replication are likely to defy imitation and generate sustained competitive advantage. More generally, the analysis sheds light on the value of superior but imperfect information about good solutions to hard problems. Finally, the results suggest that a pattern long observed by organization scholars--that “loosely coupled organizations” are especially effective competitors--may arise for a very different reason than is normally posited.

We argue that the debate regarding the performance implications of demographic diversity can be usefully reframed in terms of the network variables that reflect distinct forms of social capital. Scholars who are pessimistic about the performance of diverse teams base their view on the hypothesis that decreased network density—the average strength of the relationship among team members—lowers a team's capacity for coordination. The optimistic view is founded on the hypothesis that teams that are characterized by high network heterogeneity, whereby relationships on the team cut across salient demographic boundaries, enjoy an enhanced learning capability. We test each of these hypotheses directly and thereby avoid the problematic assumption that they contradict one another. Our analysis of data on the social networks, organizational tenure, and productivity of 224 corporate R…D teams indicates that both network variables help account for team productivity. These findings support a recasting of the diversity-performance debate in terms of the network processes that are more proximate to outcomes of interest.

The ability to integrate dispersed pockets of expertise and institute an organizational repository of knowledge is considered to be vital for sustained effectiveness in contemporary business environments. Information technologies provide cost-effective functionalities for building knowledge platforms through systematic acquisition, storage, and dissemination of organizational knowledge. However, in order to gain the value-adding potential of organizational knowledge, it is not sufficient to simply adopt and deploy IT-enabled knowledge platforms. These platforms must be assimilated into the ongoing work processes in organizations. Yet, theories of technology innovation and use suggest that a variety of institutional, social, and political factors blend together in influencing the extent to which complex information technologies are actually assimilated into organizational practice. Therefore, this research addresses a significant question: What forces influence the assimilation of knowledge platforms in organization? Given the significant gap between the adoption and actual assimilation of complex technologies into organizations, this is an important question. Empirical evidence is generated by examining the forces influencing the assimilation of CASE technologies in systems development projects in organizations. CASE is considered to be one of the most mature knowledge platforms in contemporary organizations. The empirical evidence sheds light on the role of institutional forces that influence the rate of assimilation of the technology. The findings have significant implications for further research and practice.