Path-dependence in technologies and organizational routines: a critical realistic perspective

The path-dependence construct has been largely adopted in management and organization studies to capture the vague idea that "history matters" in explaining organizational phenomena, such as structural inertia, rigidity or lock-in (Sydow et. al., 2009; Vergne & Durand, 2010). However, the logic of the very process producing organi¬zational persistence still remains under-explored and scanty attention has been devoted to the self-reinforcing dynamics influencing its temporal evolution (Schreyögg & Sydow, 2011). Even in recent studies embracing a process perspective (van Driel & Dolfsma, 2009; Valorinta et al., 2011; Kock, 2011), path-dependence analysis has largely remained at strategic level or considering the organization as a whole. Our work aims at shifting the analytical focus through the exploration of organizational path-dependence at very micro-level, i.e. identifying self-reinforcing mechanisms sustaining it over time and produced during work practices. Through embracing a "practice lens" (Orlikowski, 2000; Feldman & Orlikowski, 2012) we would observe organizational path dependence at the two intertwined layers: the domain of organizational routines, i.e. the repetitive recurrent interaction patterns carried out in the firm for conducting its regular business (Cohen et al., 1996; Feldman & Pentland, 2003); the domain of technological artefacts, i.e. machinery, equipment and software, regularly used to support work activities (Orlikowski & Iacono, 2001; Kroes & Meijer, 2006) and playing a key role in organizational routine dynamics (Pentland & Feldman, 2008; D'Adderio, 2008; Leonardi, 2011) Both evolutionary and behavioural theories of the firm (Nelson & Winter, 1981; Cyert & March, 1963) have recognized that organizational routines develop in a path-dependent manner and that feedback effects play a key role in explaining such a phenomenon (Becker, 2004). However, the mechanisms through which initial conditions or chance events trigger a self-reinforcing dynamics and how different performance-revealing effects jointly work in producing path-dependence still remained unexplored. As for technology, organizational path-dependence has been hitherto investigated only at the level of strategic investments (e.g. Murman & Frenken, 2006; Valorinta et al., 2011). However, once a specific technological choice is made and a given technology is implemented, it inscribes the beliefs, goals and expectations of managers (and developers), embedding them in its material features. During the adoption stage, practitioners exercise their agency to enact a specific technology-in-use, so conditioning the further development path of technology. In organizational studies on technology, constructivist theoretical approaches have been adopted to assess the social dynamic of technology evolution and explain the dynamic that leads to the institutionalization of a certain technology (Pinch & Bijkers, 1987; Latour, 2005). However, in these studies the focus is on the development stage of the technology cycle, so that the self-reinforcing dynamics underpinning technological path-dependence during the enactment stage has remained substantially neglected. In our work we tackle the following research question: How do the co-evolutionary paths of technologies and organizational routines shape the self-reinforcing dynamics influencing the organizational adaptation capability over time? A critical realistic perspective (Bhaskar, 1978) is explicitly embraced since it is well-suited with a relational ontology and the need to explore the technological artefact in both its material and social dimensions. Coherently with critical realism, technology is treated as a dynamic and changeable system where new components are gradually added or, alternatively, replaced