Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Routines as multilevel mechanisms

  • JACK J. VROMEN (a1)

It is argued that routines can be fruitfully conceived of as multilevel mechanisms. The merits of viewing routines as multilevel mechanisms are that it helps in putting together a coherent picture of what routines are, what routines do, and how they do it. In particular, it helps in getting a clearer picture of how skills and routines are ontologically (rather than metaphorically) related to each other. It allows us to see that while routines are generative mechanisms producing recurrent patterns of firm behavior, as multilevel mechanisms they themselves are at the same time recurrent patterns of interaction within firms. Because of its ‘behavioral’ spirit, viewing routines as multilevel mechanisms (rather than as, for example, unobservable dispositions of firms to energize patterns of behavior in firms) greatly facilitates further empirical research on crucial, as yet unresolved issues, such as how stable and robust routines are and to what extent firm behavior is routine.

Corresponding author
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

C. F. Craver (2007), Explaining the Brain: Mechanisms and the Mosaic Unity of Neuroscience, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

R. Cummins (1975), ‘Functional Analysis’, Journal of Philosophy, 72: 741764.

C. Craver and W. Bechtel (2007), ‘Top–Down Causation without Top–Down Causes’, Biology and Philosophy, 22 (4): 547563.

J. Elster (1989), Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

M. S. Feldman and B. T. Pentland (2003), ‘Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 94118.

T. Felin and N. J. Foss (2005), ‘Strategic Organization: A Field in Search of Micro-Foundations’, Strategic Organization, 3: 441455.

G. M. Hodgson and T. Knudsen (2004), ‘The Firm as an Interactor: Firms as Vehicles for Habits and Routines’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14 (3), 281307.

G. M. Hodgson and T. Knudsen (2006), ‘Why We Need a Generalized Darwinism, and Why Generalized Darwinism is not Enough’, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 61 (1), 119.

J. J. Vromen (1995), Economic Evolution: An Enquiry into the Foundations of New Institutional Economics, London: Routledge.

J. J. Vromen (2007), ‘Neuroeconomics as a Natural Extension of Bioeconomics: The Shifting Scope of Standard Economic Theory’, Journal of Bioeconomics, 9: 145167.

J. J. Vromen (2004), ‘Conjectural Revisionary Economic Ontology: Outline of an Ambitious Research Agenda for Evolutionary Economics’, Journal of Economic Methodology, 11 (2): 213247.

J. J. Vromen (2009), ‘Microfoundations in Strategic Management? Squaring Coleman's Diagram’ (forthcoming in Erkenntnis).

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Institutional Economics
  • ISSN: 1744-1374
  • EISSN: 1744-1382
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-institutional-economics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 24 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 101 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 27th May 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.