| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Department of Management, 2000 Steinberg Hall--Dietrich Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6370
Replication, a familiar phenomenon sometimes referred to as the "McDonalds approach," entails the creation and operation of a large number of similar outlets that deliver a product or perform a service. Companies pursuing this strategy are now active in over 60 industries. Although replicators are becoming one of the dominant organizational forms of our time, they have been neglected by scholars interested in organizations. As a result of this neglect, replication is typically conceptualized as little more than the exploitation of a simple business formula. Such a view clouds the strategic subtlety of replication by sidestepping the exploration efforts to uncover and develop the best business model as well as the ongoing assessment that precedes large-scale replication of it. Empirical evidence supports an alternative view of replication strategy as a process that involves a regime of exploration in which the business model is created and refined, followed by a phase of exploitation in which the business model is stabilized and leveraged through large-scale replication.
In this paper we present the key elements of a theory of replication strategy. We discuss key aspects of a replication strategy, namely the broad scope of knowledge transfer and the role of the central organization, and the analytical concepts of template and Arrow core as a preamble for specifying hypotheses about the conditions under which a replication strategy is more likely to succeed in a competitive setting. Replication strategy provides unusually transparent examples of the process of leveraging knowledge assets; we exploit this in our concluding discussion.
The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Department of Management, 2000 Steinberg Hall--Dietrich Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6370
winter{at}wharton.upenn.edu
szulanski{at}wharton.upenn.edu
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  G. Dosi and M. Grazzi On the nature of technologies: knowledge, procedures, artifacts and production inputs Camb. J. Econ., July 1, 2009; (2009) bep041v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Salomon and X. Martin Learning, Knowledge Transfer, and Technology Implementation Performance: A Study of Time-to-Build in the Global Semiconductor Industry Management Science, July 1, 2008; 54(7): 1266 - 1280. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. G. Hoopes and T. L. Madsen A capability-based view of competitive heterogeneity Ind. Corp. Change, June 1, 2008; 17(3): 393 - 426. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. G. Winter Scaling heuristics shape technology! Should economic theory take notice? Ind. Corp. Change, June 1, 2008; 17(3): 513 - 531. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. G. Jacobides How Capability Differences, Transaction Costs, and Learning Curves Interact to Shape Vertical Scope Organization Science, March 1, 2008; 19(2): 306 - 326. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z. Ton and R. S. Huckman Managing the Impact of Employee Turnover on Performance: The Role of Process Conformance Organization Science, January 1, 2008; 19(1): 56 - 68. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. J. Jensen and G. Szulanski Template Use and the Effectiveness of Knowledge Transfer Management Science, November 1, 2007; 53(11): 1716 - 1730. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Frenken and R. A. Boschma A theoretical framework for evolutionary economic geography: industrial dynamics and urban growth as a branching process J. Econ. Geogr., September 1, 2007; 7(5): 635 - 649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. L. Tucker, I. M. Nembhard, and A. C. Edmondson Implementing New Practices: An Empirical Study of Organizational Learning in Hospital Intensive Care Units Management Science, June 1, 2007; 53(6): 894 - 907. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. D. Cohen Reading Dewey: Reflections on the Study of Routine Organization Studies, May 1, 2007; 28(5): 773 - 786. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Argote and H. R. Greve A Behavioral Theory of the Firm--40 Years and Counting: Introduction and Impact Organization Science, May 1, 2007; 18(3): 337 - 349. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. C. Wezel, G. Cattani, and J. M. Pennings Competitive Implications of Interfirm Mobility Organization Science, November 1, 2006; 17(6): 691 - 709. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q. Cao, L. M. Maruping, and R. Takeuchi Disentangling the Effects of CEO Turnover and Succession on Organizational Capabilities: A Social Network Perspective Organization Science, September 1, 2006; 17(5): 563 - 576. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Naveh, O. Meilich, and A. Marcus The effects of administrative innovation implementation on performance: an organizational learning approach Strategic Organization, August 1, 2006; 4(3): 275 - 302. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Levinthal and C. Rerup Crossing an Apparent Chasm: Bridging Mindful and Less-Mindful Perspectives on Organizational Learning Organization Science, July 1, 2006; 17(4): 502 - 513. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. A. Boschma and K. Frenken Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography J. Econ. Geogr., June 1, 2006; 6(3): 273 - 302. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Levinthal The Neo-Schumpeterian theory of the firm and the strategy field Ind. Corp. Change, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 391 - 394. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. C. Becker, T. Knudsen, and J. G. March Schumpeter, Winter, and the sources of novelty Ind. Corp. Change, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 353 - 371. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Armagan and M. P. Ferreira The Impact of Political Culture on Firms' Choice of Exploitation-Exploration Internationalization Strategy International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, December 1, 2005; 5(3): 275 - 291. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Augier Why is Management an Evolutionary Science?: An Interview With Sidney G. Winter Journal of Management Inquiry, December 1, 2005; 14(4): 344 - 354. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. C. Becker The concept of routines: some clarifications Camb. J. Econ., March 1, 2005; 29(2): 249 - 262. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Giovanni. Gavetti and D. A. Levinthal 50th Anniversay Article: The Strategy Field from the Perspective of Management Science: Divergent Strands and Possible Integration Management Science, October 1, 2004; 50(10): 1309 - 1318. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Szulanski, R. Cappetta, and R. J. Jensen When and How Trustworthiness Matters: Knowledge Transfer and the Moderating Effect of Causal Ambiguity Organization Science, September 1, 2004; 15(5): 600 - 613. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z.-L. He and P.-K. Wong Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis Organization Science, July 1, 2004; 15(4): 481 - 494. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Rerup Imperfection, Transfer Failure, and the Replication of Knowledge: An Interview with Gabriel Szulanski Journal of Management Inquiry, June 1, 2004; 13(2): 141 - 150. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z. Zhao, J. Anand, and W. Mitchell Transferring Collective Knowledge: Teaching and Learning in the Chinese Auto Industry Strategic Organization, May 1, 2004; 2(2): 133 - 167. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Racine Dissolving Dualities: The Case for Commonsense Replication Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, June 1, 2003; 32(2): 307 - 314. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Argote, B. McEvily, and R. Reagans Introduction to the Special Issue on Managing Knowledge in Organizations: Creating, Retaining, and Transferring Knowledge Management Science, April 1, 2003; 49(4): v - viii. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Argote, B. McEvily, and R. Reagans Managing Knowledge in Organizations: An Integrative Framework and Review of Emerging Themes Management Science, April 1, 2003; 49(4): 571 - 582. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
