SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 19
Downloaden Sie, um offline zu lesen
Omega 28 (2000) 77±95
                                                                                                  www.elsevier.com/locate/orms




              Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistic
                               classi®cations
           Ian McCarthy a,*, Keith Ridgway a, Michel Leseure a, Nick Fieller b
               a
                  Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Sheeld, Mappin Street, Sheeld S1 3JD, UK
               b
                  School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sheeld, Houns®eld Road, Sheeld S3 RH, UK
                                        Received 1 December 1996; accepted 1 March 1998



Abstract

   This article presents a case for the construction of a formal classi®cation of manufacturing systems using
cladistics, a technique from the biological school of classi®cation. A seven-stage framework for producing a
manufacturing cladogram is presented, along with a pilot case study example. This article describes the role that
classi®cation plays in the pure and applied sciences, the social sciences and reviews the status of existing
manufacturing classi®cations. If organisational diversity and organisational change processes are governed by
evolutionary mechanisms, studies of organisations based on an evolutionary approach such as cladistics could have
potential, because as March [March JG. The evolution of evolution. In: Baum JAC, Singh JV, editors. Evolutionary
dynamics of organizations. Oxford University Press, 1994. p. 39±52], page 45, states ``there is natural speculation
that organisations, like species can be engineered by understanding the evolutionary processes well enough to
intervene and produce competitive organisational e€ects''. It is suggested that a cladistic study could provide
organisations with a ``knowledge map'' of the ecosystem in which they exist and by using this phylogenetic and
situational analysis, they could determine coherent and appropriate action for the speci®cation of change. # 2000
Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Cladistics; Manufacturing; Management; Evolution; Classi®cation




1. Introduction                                                      systems. Carper and Snizek [1, p. 65], in their review
                                                                     of organisational classi®cations concluded that ``the
   Why construct a classi®cation? This question needs                most important step in conducting any form of scienti-
to be addressed in order to understand the bene®ts                   ®c enquiry involves the ordering, classi®cation, or
and applications that any classi®cation could o€er, let              other grouping of the objects or phenomena under in-
alone a cladistic classi®cation. The desire to classify              vestigation''.
transcends all disciplinary boundaries whether the enti-               In an amusing categorisation of classi®cations,
ties under study are biological organisms, chemical el-              Good [2], a noted mathematician, provided a list
ements or as in the case of this paper, manufacturing                which suggested ®ve purposes for performing classi®-
                                                                     cation: (1) for mental clari®cation and communication;
                                                                     (2) for discovering new ®elds of research; (3) for plan-
 * Corresponding author. Tel. +44-114-222-7745; fax: +44-            ning an organisational structure or machine, (4) as a
114-222-7890.                                                        check list and (5) for fun. Cormack [3] used this categ-
   E-mail address: i.p.mccarthy@sheeld.ac.uk (I. McCarthy)          orisation in his lecture to the Royal Statistical Society

0305-0483/00/$ - see front matter # 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 0 5 - 0 4 8 3 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 3 0 - 4
78                                       I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95

to illustrate the role and bene®ts that classi®cation            manufacturing companies, but with no reference to, or
o€ers research. Cormack summarised the bene®ts of a              application of the science of taxonomy. This would
hierarchical classi®cation, stating that ``the information       appear to be a major shortcoming, which reduces the
about the entities is represented in such a way that it          usefulness, stability and accuracy of the classi®cations.
will suggest fruitful hypotheses which cannot be true            Lessons should be drawn from biological taxonomy in
or false, probable or improbable, only pro®table or              an attempt to stimulate further investigations into this
unpro®table'' [3, p. 346].                                       established problem based on the disciplines and rules
   Haas, Hall and Johnson [4] discussed four advan-              regularly used by the biological scientist''. Supporting
tages of having a realistic classi®cation. Such a classi®-       the need for an organisational classi®cation is
cation could (1) be strategically helpful for re®ning            Romanelli [28, p. 82], who states ``despite the ease with
hypotheses; (2) aid in the investigation of the validity         which we may identify meaningful groupings of organ-
and utility of existing typologies based on logical and          isations, no commonly accepted classi®cation scheme
intuitive considerations; (3) serve as a basis for predict-      has been developed''.
ing organisational decisions or change and (4) permit               With this stimulus, a project funded by the
the researchers to readily specify the universe from             Engineering Physical Sciences Research Council (Grant
which their samples of organisations could be drawn.             No. GR/K97974) was initiated to investigate the feasi-
McKelvey [5] went further by arguing that the formu-             bility of constructing cladistic classi®cations of manu-
lation of a classi®cation is a necessary prerequisite for        facturing systems. The remainder of this paper details
the maturation of organisation science and that, if a            the methodology, ®ndings and conclusions of that
formal and scienti®c classi®cation existed, there would          study.
be no need for contingency theory. Biologists do not
need contingency theory because their classi®cations
make it clear that one does not apply ®ndings about
reptiles to mammals when working at a speci®c level              2. Introduction to the biological schools of classi®cation
of the classi®cation.
   The argument for creating a classi®cation is to some             There are two main principles of classi®cation within
extent demonstrated by the large number of typologies            the biological sciences: the phenetic and the phyloge-
and classi®cations that have been produced by                    netic principles. From these two underlying principles
researchers from the social sciences and applied                 emerge three approaches to classi®cation, or schools of
sciences and that many academic disciplines teach with           classi®cation: phenetic, evolutionary and cladistic (refer
reference to some form of classi®cation. It should be            to Fig. 1). The three schools of classi®cation are di€er-
noted that a typology is a description of groups, whose          entiated on the basis of how closely they adhere to a
di€erences are identi®ed solely accordingly to the               purely phylogenetic principle. That is, the species are
research focus of the investigator. Existing schemes             classi®ed according to how recently they share a com-
which embrace the subject of organisations include: or-          mon ancestor. Phenetic classi®cations are non-evol-
ganisational strategies [6], voluntary associations [7],         utionary and are thus at one end of the evolutionary
canning ®rms and farmers unions [8], general organis-            focus scale, whilst cladistics is a purist approach to the
ational classi®cations [9±11] and manufacturing-based            phylogenetic principle. Evolutionary classi®cations are
classi®cations [12±25]. For a review of the above or-            a synthesis of the phenetic and phylogenetic principles.
ganisational typologies, the reader is referred to Refs.            Phylogenetic classi®cations have become known as
[1,26,27].                                                       cladistic classi®cations, because the phylogenetic prin-
   The authors of this article sought a classi®cation            ciple was defended by the German entomologist Willi
which would facilitate the storage, alignment and                Hennig [29] and supporters of his ideas called the prin-
development of structural models of manufacturing                ciple phylogenetic systematics, which has now evolved
systems. It was intended that this classi®cation of              into the term cladism (from the Greek `klados' for
models would provide researchers and consultants with            branch).
a generic library of structural solutions for enabling              The cladistic school's approach to classi®cation
manufacturing systems to maximise their operating                involves studying the evolutionary relationships
e€ectiveness. The de®ciencies of existing classi®cations         between entities with reference to the common ancestry
of manufacturing systems, prohibited the realisation of          of the group. Constructing a classi®cation using evol-
the intended bene®ts of combining a library of ideal             utionary relationships is considered bene®cial, because
models (solutions) with a workable classi®cation of              the classi®cation will be unique and unambiguous.
manufacturing systems. This issue was discussed by               This is because evolution is actual and mankind is cur-
McCarthy [27, p. 46], who concluded that ``previous              rently unable to change evolutionary history, thus pro-
research into developing manufacturing classi®cations            viding the classi®cation with an external reference
has been based on a comprehensive understanding of               point. With phenetic classi®cations there is no such
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95                                     79




                                         Fig. 1. Biological schools of classi®cation.


reference point and thus in the words of Ridley [29, p.           and typifying the emergence of new manufacturing sys-
367], ``Cladism is theoretically the best justi®ed system         tems. This would help clarify the confusion on whether
of classi®cation. It has a deep philosophic justi®cation          fractal, virtual and holonic manufacturing systems
which phenetic and evolutionary classi®cations lack''             actually exist or are simply buzz words. This was an
Reviews of the three schools of classi®cation [29±31]             issue raised by the Engineering Physical Sciences
assess the schools on their ability to produce natural            Research Council [32]. A cladistic classi®cation of
and objective classi®cations, rather than arti®cial and           manufacturing systems could provide knowledge and
subjective classi®cations. Cladistics satis®es both these         observations on the patterns of distributed character-
criteria, as the entities within a cladistic classi®cation        istics exhibited by the manufacturing systems over
will resemble each other in terms of the de®ning char-            their evolutionary development. This knowledge could
acters and the non-de®ning characters (characters not             lead to pro®table hypotheses about the macro- and
used to represent the phylogenetic relationships).                micro-evolutionary mechanisms which in¯uence manu-
Cladistics conforms to the criteria of objectivity                facturing competitiveness and survival. Finally, many
because it represents a real unambiguous and natural              organisations live their lives looking forward, but to
property of the entity (evolutionary relationships) and           comprehend themselves they must look backwards.
thus di€erent rational people, working independently              The resultant comprehension cannot be used to extrap-
should be able to agree on a classi®cation. There could           olate the future, but it does inform them of where they
be valid disagreements between independent investi-               are and how they got there, and this information is
gators, but these will be down to assumptions and dis-            vital for any organisation intending to embark on a
agreements on the character data and not the                      journey of change.
underlying philosophy. One of the greatest strengths of
the cladistic approach is that the representation of the
classi®cation (the cladogram), illustrates the data,              3. Cladistics
assumptions and results, making all decisions transpar-
ent. This not the case with existing organisational                 The application of cladistics to manufacturing sys-
classi®cations. Section 5 of this paper presents a dis-           tems implies certain assumptions about organisational
cussion on the confusion which exists between the                 forms, their existence and diversity. Cladistic classi®-
types of manufacturing system which are believed to               cations are produced according to how recently they
exist.                                                            share a common ancestor. This means that two manu-
   In summary, a cladistic classi®cation of manufactur-           facturing species that share a recent and common
ing systems would provide a system for conducting,                ancestor will be placed in the same group and two
documenting and coordinating comparative studies of               manufacturing species sharing a more distant common
manufacturing organisations. Such a system could pro-             ancestor might be placed in di€erent groups, but they
vide the consensus for formally approving, validating             would be in the same family. As the common ancestor
80                                      I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95

of two manufacturing species becomes more and more                inheritance is controlled by the organisational
distant, they are grouped further and further apart in            equivalent of genes (knowledge transfer or memes
the classi®cation. Eventually all organisations could be          [38] or competence elements (comps) [36]), which
placed in a classi®cation possibly known as the `king-            are passed on to o€spring by chromosomes
dom of organisations'. For this principle of classi®-             (people, communication, society) in the same form
cation to apply to manufacturing organisations and                as they were inherited from the previous gener-
their systems, investigators must agree that organis-             ation [39]. If heredity were perfect, the principle of
ations evolve and that as new organisational forms                variation would not exist. The principle of natural
emerge, it is possible to identify the distinguishing             selection suggests that manufacturing systems with
characteristics from the old organisational forms.                a superior adaptation generate similar manufactur-
Supporting this assumption are organisational theorists           ing systems (o€spring) and as long as the o€spring
who have not produced a complete theory of organis-               resemble their parent, the characters of manufac-
ational evolution, but have proposed some key con-                turing systems that generate more o€spring than
cepts which include: organisational ecology [33,34],              average will increase in frequency over time. This
organisational systematics [35,36], the evolution of new          concept is supported by Hannan and Freeman [34]
organisational forms [28] and the dynamics of organis-            who believe that selection pressures, force organis-
ational speciation [37]. These concepts and the assump-           ations to imitate the successful organisations, the
tions that accompany them attempt to understand the               result being a reduction in organisational diversity
forces which determine which organisational form is               and a net increase of a particular type of organis-
viable for a certain environment; the mechanisms                  ational form. The fourth principle, the principle of
which exist to preserve organisational forms and the              adaptation, refers to the variations in manufactur-
mechanisms which are passed from one generation of                ing systems which provide an advantage for sur-
organisations to another.                                         viving and existing. This is when manufacturing
   In summary, the assumptions which govern the con-              systems change so as to maintain existence.
struction of a manufacturing cladogram are listed
below:
. Manufacturing systems evolve and have ancestors.              3.1. The cladogram
  This is evident by the way historians portray the
  advancement of manufacturing companies from pre-                 A cladogram is a tree structure capable of represent-
  historic man with his tools, to ancient workshops, to         ing the evolutionary history of a group of manufactur-
  the guild of craftsman, to the cottage industries and         ing systems. The tree structure illustrates the
  to factories which eventually became mechanised               relationships between the di€erent members of the
  and automated.                                                group under study, according to the acquisition and
. Manufacturing systems speciate. The Ford Motor                polarity of characters.
  Company is described today as a lean producer, but               Fig. 2 shows a group of manufacturing species con-
  its history demonstrates that it once was a craft             sisting of Ancient craft systems, standardised craft sys-
  shop which developed into an intensive mass produ-            tems, modern craft systems, neocraft systems and skilled
  cer. This suggests that the Ford manufacturing                large scale producers. This ®gure is a section from the
  plants have gone through at least two speciation              master cladogram of automotive assembly plants (Fig.
  events to produce new `breeds of organisation'.               3 and Table 1). This pilot study was undertaken to
. Manufacturing systems are subject to the theory of            provide a worked example which would introduce the
  natural selection. This theory consists of four basic         reader to cladistics and the various types of cladistic
  principles: the principle of variation, the principle of      grouping that exist. The construction of this cladogram
  heredity, the principle of natural selection and the          is reported in Section 4. It is important to note that
  principle of adaptation [29]. The principle of vari-          this was a pioneering study and that many of the types
  ation states that there has to be variation within a          of manufacturing system proposed in Figs. 2 and 3
  population of manufacturing systems. These vari-              will not be known to the reader. This is not because
  ations need to occur and happen at random. The                they are newly formed types of manufacturing systems,
  principle of heredity states that some manufactur-            but rather that the automobile industry has not been
  ing o€spring, on average have to resemble their               studied using the cladistic approach. The labels given
  parents more than resemble other members of                   to the species shown in Figs. 2 and 3 do not conform
  their species. This is found when new organis-                to any codes of nomenclature for organisations,
  ations are born within an industry. They are more             because none exist. Constructing a classi®cation is a
  similar to organisations within that industry, than           taxonomic process and thus by the de®nition of taxon-
  they are to organisations in other industries. This           omy, groups (taxa ) are formed and are then allocated
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95   81




       Fig. 2. Five taxa cladogram.




      Fig. 3. Automotive cladogram.
82                                         I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95

Table 1
Automotive cladistic characters

1        Standardisation of parts
2        assembly time standards
3        assembly line layout
4        reduction of craft skills
5        automation (machine paced shops)
6        pull production system
7        reduction of lot size
8        pull procurement planning
9        operator based machine maintenance
10       quality circles
11       employee innovation prizes
12       job rotation
13       large volume production
14       suppliers selected primarily by price.
15       exchange of workers with suppliers
16       socialisation training (master/apprentice learning)
17       proactive training programs
18       product range reduction
19       automation
20       multiple subcontracting
21       quality systems (procedures, tools, ISO 9000)
22       quality philosophy (culture, way of working, TQM)
23       open book policy with suppliers; sharing of cost data and pro®ts
24       ¯exible, multifunctional workforce
25       set-up time reduction
26       Kaizen change management
27       TQM sourcing; suppliers selected on the basis of quality
28       100% inspection/sampling
29       U-shape layout
30       preventive maintenance
31       individual error correction; products are not rerouted to a special ®xing station
32       sequential dependency of workers
33       line balancing
34       team policy (team motivation, pay and autonomy)
35       Toyota veri®cation of assembly line (TVAL)
36       groups vs. teams
37       job enrichment
38       manufacturing cells
39       concurrent engineering
40       ABC costing
41       excess capacity
42       ¯exible automation for product versions
43       agile automation for di€erent products
44       insourcing
45       Immigrant workforce
46       dedicated automation
47       division of labour
48       employees are system tools and simply operate m/c's
49       employees are system developers; if motivated and managed they can solve problems and create value
50       product focus
51       parallel processing (in equipment)
52       dependence on written rules; unwillingness to challenge rules such as the economic order quantity
53       further intensi®cation of labour; employees are consider part of the machine and will be replaced by a machine if possible



a name (nomy = naming). Every e€ort has been made                   such as craft, mass, agile and lean have been used.
to assign labels which describe the de®ning character-              Thus, the labels given to the species are simply for the
istics of the system and where possible existing terms              purpose of di€erentiation and communication. The in-
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95                                       83

formation content provided by the labels is considered            3.   Code characters.
to be a level higher than simply referring to each                4.   Establish character polarity.
species, as species 1, species 2, species 3, etc.                 5.   Construct conceptual cladogram.
   The cladograms illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3 are both           6.   Construct factual cladogram.
clades, as they contain a set of species including the            7.   Taxa nomenclature.
most recent common ancestor of all the members con-                  In order to demonstrate how a cladogram is pro-
tained within that set. It is important to understand             duced, the cladogram in Fig. 3 is referred to. The cla-
that Fig. 2 is a portion or segment of Fig. 3 and that            dogram is a classi®cation of automotive assembly
both Figs. are clades, despite the fact that Fig. 2 is a          plants. It was produced to the conceptual level and
subset of Fig. 3. This is due to research focus (establish        was compiled using data from several studies of the
evolutionary boundaries) and the information pre-                 automotive industry. These studies include the evol-
sented. That is, Fig. 2 in its entirety and in isolation, is      ution, population density and mortality in the automo-
by de®nition a clade, despite the fact that Fig. 2 can            tive industry; [44±48]; historical accounts of the
be expanded to Fig. 3. If we assume that a manufac-               industry, sometimes focusing on speci®c geographic
turing researcher is only interested in the clade shown
                                                                  regions; [49,50], to speci®c studies which examined the
in Fig. 2 and that his speci®c interest is devising manu-         change in manufacturing techniques used within the
facturing strategies for modern craft systems, neocraft           industry [51±53]. Technical, business and ®nancial
systems and skilled large scale producers. Then this              reports produced by the automobile industry were also
group of manufacturing species is known as the                    obtained. These documents detailed events and issues
ingroup (the study group or the group of interest).               which were in¯uencing how the industry was evolving.
Observations and hypotheses are made about the                    The most signi®cant of these documents are listed as
ingroup by comparing it with the various outgroups                references [54±78].
and most importantly with the sister group (the out-
group that is genealogically the most closely related
group to the ingroup). It should be noted that the                4.1. Select the manufacturing clade
ancestor of the ingroup is not the sister group, because
the ancestor by de®nition will always be a member of                 The starting point is to de®ne the clade to be stu-
the ingroup.                                                      died. Such a step requires a decision which in itself is a
   The numbers shown on the branches of Figs. 2 and               form of classi®cation, as the investigator must select a
3 denote the acquisition of characters. Character `1'             group of manufacturing systems which satisfy certain
(standardisation of parts) has a speci®c location on the          research objectives or interests. For example, a manu-
tree that indicates that ancient craft systems do not             facturing clade could be di€erentiated on the basis of
possess character `1' and that standardised craft sys-            the market industry into which it was born to survive,
tems, modern craft systems, neocraft systems and skilled          e.g. the automotive industry, electronic component
large scale producers do possess character `1'. Thus,             manufacturers, cutting tool manufacturers, etc.
ancient craft systems are the ancestor of a new gener-            Classi®cations based on industry di€erentiation are
ation of manufacturing systems that are based on the              widely used and accepted and are dicult to ignore. In
acquisition of character `1'. Similarly, modern craft sys-        the United Kingdom, the basic framework for analys-
tems are a descendant of standardised craft systems as            ing industrial activities is the standard industrial classi-
it later acquired character `2' (production time stan-            ®cation (SIC) [79]. The SIC is described by Price and
dards) and character `47' (division of labour). The               Mueller [80] as an empirical classi®cation which is not
characters `13', `48' and `50' resulted in the formation          derived in any way from theoretical ideas on how ac-
of neocraft systems, whilst the characters `3', `16' and          tivities should be grouped. However, it does group
`32' result in the emergence of skilled large scale produ-        together organisational entities that are involved in
cers.                                                             resource exchange and transformation of a similar
                                                                  nature. This description of organisational activity
                                                                  equates to the de®nition of an organisational ecosys-
                                                                  tem as proposed by Baum and Singh [81]. A clade by
4. Building a manufacturing cladogram                             de®nition can be equivalent to di€erent levels in the
                                                                  hierarchy. This is illustrated by Fig. 4, which shows
   The proposed framework for constructing a cladistic            how the ecological and systematic hierarchies of organ-
classi®cation of manufacturing systems has been ident-            isational evolution relate to each other (this ®gure has
i®ed and adapted from classic biological approaches to            been adapted from [81] to include the clade level).
cladism [40±43]. The seven stages are listed below:                  For the purposes of this study, the automobile
1. Select the manufacturing clade.                                assembly industry (the clade) was selected, because it
2. Determine the characters.                                      exists as a population of manufacturing organisations
84                                        I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95

                                                                  4.2. Determine the characters

                                                                     Once the clade has been selected, a number of di€er-
                                                                  ent types of manufacturing system would appear to be
                                                                  a member of that clade (mass, lean, agile, craft, job,
                                                                  etc.). The complete membership of this particular clade
                                                                  is not yet known, because no formal or validated
                                                                  clades for manufacturing systems exist. It is common
                                                                  practice to work on existing clades within the biologi-
                                                                  cal sciences, because the majority of the taxonomic
                                                                  based research, is concerned with validating, enhancing
                                                                  and expanding the knowledge contained within existing
                                                                  cladograms. As this was a new study, a primary objec-
                                                                  tive of the research was to examine the evolutionary
                                                                  development of the entity and to identify the members
                                                                  of the clade. This is a process of `mining for species'
                                                                  and during this historical excavation, evidence is
                                                                  sought which will suggest the possible existence of a
                                                                  particular type of manufacturing system. This evidence
                                                                  tends to be in the form of published material or
Fig. 4. Hierarchies of organisational evolution, adapted from     archives, which detail the existence of the manufactur-
[81].                                                             ing system, along with a description of its operations
                                                                  and de®ning characteristics, the location where it
                                                                  exists/existed and a date/period when it was ®rst dis-
(species) that make and sell a closely related set of well        covered or developed.
de®ned products. It is an industry which is widely                   This mining process uncovers the characters which
known and studied and this provides bene®ts in terms              will be used to build the cladogram. Whilst undertak-
of communicating, disseminating and validating the                ing this exploration there are a number of steps which
research. It is also a relatively young industry which            can be followed to help identify the ®nal set of charac-
has been extensively documented and this makes the                ters which will be used to construct the cladogram.
investigation into phylogenetic relationships relatively          The process of determining the characters for the auto-
easy, when compared to an industry such as the hand               motive cladogram consisted of two steps: character
tool manufacturing industry, which can be traced back             search and character selection. Character search is the
to prehistoric man. This is an important point, because           task of building the initial set of characters, by simply
there were no existing cladistic classi®cations of organ-         listing known attributes possessed by automotive
isations which could be used as a reference or starting           assembly plants. Determining which characters from
point, so it was important to select a study group                this initial set should be used to construct a classi®-
which would satisfy and assist the research objectives            cation is the task of character selection.
in terms of information collection and results dissemi-
nation. Also, the decision to study the automobile                4.2.1. Character search
assembly industry would enable both the dissemination                When searching for the manufacturing systems that
and exploitation of any bene®ts to be related to the              constitute the clade and the characters that distinguish
standard industrial classi®cation (SIC).                          the species phylogenetically, it is helpful to know what
   Identifying the ancestor of a clade is a process of            to look for and what to avoid. Whereas, an attribute is
historical investigation where evidence is accumulated            a descriptive property or feature, a taxonomic charac-
to determine the origins of a certain manufacturing               ter is a feature which is used in a classi®cation. It is
type. For example, the origins of car manufacturing               also important to di€erentiate between the character
stem back to Karl Benz and his three-wheel auto-                  (the actual feature) and the character states which are
mobile. In terms of manufacturing systems, this would             a condition that this feature exhibits. For example, the
be regarded as a craft system which evolved into an               character `plant layout' has numerous character states:
early factory system and then into a mass type organis-           job shop, ¯ow line, functional layout, manufacturing
ation. The process of identifying an ancestor is initially        cells, etc.
ambiguous and dicult, both for biologists and manu-                 The school of classi®cation used will contain theories
facturing researchers, but the process of constructing            which determine what is an acceptable taxonomic char-
the cladogram con®rms or refutes this initial assump-             acter. For instance, in cladistics, a taxonomic character
tion.                                                             has to point to a homology between two organisations,
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95                                     85

whereas in phenetic classi®cations, a taxonomic charac-         are found as they come to complement the information
ter contributes to the mathematical tightness of a clus-        content of the classi®cation. This last point applies
ter.                                                            speci®cally to cladistics, because cladists tend to
   To avoid searching for and selecting characters              quickly eliminate characters which have no evolution-
which are inappropriate Sneath and Sokal [43] describe          ary signi®cance in their data sets and therefore produce
certain kinds of characters which should be clearly dis-        classi®cations objectively and eciently.
quali®ed from a taxonomic study. These are listed as               In addition to searching for characters by studying
inadmissible characters and include:                            the entity, the use of reference characters was con-
. Meaningless characters. A character must re¯ect the           sidered. That is, does an exhaustive list of manufactur-
  internal nature of the entity, therefore, the name of         ing or organisational characteristics exist and would
  a manufacturing company would not be included as              this list help the search and selection process. To build
  a character to represent the activities of a manufac-         such a list has been a common objective for many tax-
  turing system.                                                onomists, but there are several problems associated
. Logically correlated characters. Those characters             with the management and use of such a list. The cost
  which are a logical consequence of another, should            of building an exhaustive list would be high and there
  be excluded. For example, if we assume that cell-             is no evidence that building such a list is feasible.
  based team working, requires a cellular layout, then          There are many issues to manage: duplication of data,
  there is a logical correlation between these two char-        partial redundancy between characters, correlation and
  acters, i.e. if one character state exists, another will      dependency patterns between characters. Even if such
  automatically.                                                a list was available, using it might not be cost-ecient,
. Partially logical correlation's. The degree of indepen-       because the cost of selecting characters from all poss-
  dence is the subject of this kind of character, as a          ible characters could be prohibitive.
  greater number of cases exist where the dependence               The primary bene®t of a reference list of characters,
  of one character upon another is only partial. For            is that it provides a feel good factor and a con®dent
  instance the size of a workforce will be to a degree,         starting point for researchers producing a classi®-
  relate to the number of machines that a manufactur-           cation. However, total reliance on a so-called exhaus-
  ing company has. After further investigation it could         tive reference list, would be foolish and misguided,
  be found that the degree of dependency is small,              because all classi®cations are undertaken in situations
  because other factors, such as the type of technology         where the complete character set is not known. To
  and the type of product also in¯uence this character.         assist the search for automotive characters and to
  Therefore, very few partially logical correlations are        understand the signi®cance of the characters with
  regarded as inadmissible. Hull [82] provides an               regards to the entity and its evolution, several categor-
  empirical correlation to estimate the degree of inde-         isations of characters were identi®ed and referred to:
  pendence between two characters.                              [4,36,83±85]. It is important that the categories do not
. Invariant characters. If a character which is normally        dictate, but suggest, because the ultimate decision gov-
  variable, is invariable for the sample of entities            erning character selection within a cladistic study is the
  under study, then it should be removed from the               existence of a synapomorphy which results in an hom-
  analysis. Such characters o€er no bene®ts in terms            ology. Synapomorphies are characters which have a
  of assessing similarity. An example is the absence or         derived state and are shared by two or more taxa and
  presence of manufacturing technology. When con-               thus indicate common ancestry for the manufacturing
  sidering all forms of organisation, this character            systems within this group.
  would vary from organisation to organisation.                    The distinction between homology and analogy is a
  However, as the presence of manufacturing technol-            fundamental concept of cladistics. A homology rep-
  ogy is a conforming de®nition for a manufacturing             resents `true similarity', whilst analogy is considered
  system, this character would not change for a popu-           super®cial similarity which generates noise or mislead-
  lation containing only manufacturing systems.                 ing observations. An analogy is a structural grouping
   The search for automotive assembly characters con-           where a character is shared by a set of species and is
sisted of investigating the historical development of the       derived from a common ancestor. Thus, choosing a
car making industry by analysing the work and data              character which is an analogy should be avoided. The
of the studies cited in Section 3. The characters ident-        relationship between analogy and homology is clearly
i®ed, although well known, were treated as arbitrary            demonstrated in Fig. 5 [29]. It is important to note the
or capricious characters, as their identi®cation for cla-       three groupings, as only monophyletic groups are
distic purposes must be con®rmed. Taxonomists dis-              included in a cladistic classi®cation. The monophyletic
cover characters whilst studying the entity and                 groups are the groups which result in an unambiguous
constructing the classi®cation, thus many characters            hierarchic arrangement, because the group contains a
86                                      I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95




                                            Fig. 5. Homologies and analogies.




common ancestor and all its descendants and there is            age to the extent that it would not emerge in species
no con¯icting character data.                                   which do not already exhibit character `14' (mass sub-
   Consider Fig. 3, and the characters `8' (pull procure-       contracting by price bidding).
ment planning) and `20' (multiple subcontracting).
Character `8' appears in the Toyota production system           4.2.2. Character selection
family, which includes: lean producers and agile produ-            This is a screening process and in the case of cladis-
cers, whereas character `20' appears in the mass produ-         tics, a character is validated if it is a synapomorphy.
cers family, which includes: pseudo lean producers,             Thus, the selection phase in cladistics is equivalent to a
modern mass producers, European mass producers and              test of homology. Two methods were used on the
intensive mass producers. If characters `8' and `20' are        automotive study to screen characters: (1) direct test of
replaced with one character, say character `Z' (procure-        homologies and (2) resolving character con¯icts. It
ment policy), the structure of the cladogram would              should be noted that prior to building a cladogram the
change. This is because homologies have been created            organisational systematist may only have a general
between taxa which are in fact evolutionarily remote.           knowledge of the ancestral links between species.
Thus, character `Z' is an example of an analogous               Therefore, it is not obvious that a character is an ana-
character because pull procurement is constrained by            logous character at the beginning of the analysis, it is
character `6' (pull production) and would not naturally         only con®rmed during the construction and analysis of
emerge in mass producers. Similarly, it is postulated           the cladogram.
that character `20' is associated or dependent with                The direct test method is based on the argument
some or maybe all of the characters on the same line-           that homologies and analogies tend to exist on a conti-
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95                                     87

nuum of resemblance, where the homologies are at the            homologies after a preliminary cladogram has been
high extreme resemblance end, whilst the analogies              constructed is that the validity of a character is ques-
tend to exhibit only moderate resemblance [43]. Thus,           tioned only if it generates a con¯ict with the others
even if a complete and valid historical account (`fossil        characters which are consistent and congruent with
record') for automotive manufacturing systems existed,          each other. Most classi®cations will have a consistent
the investigator would still be dependent on resem-             core, which can be identi®ed in cladistics by running a
blance based similarity. From a purist point of view,           clique analysis [86]. Any character which does not
cladists argue that resemblance is not a de®nitive test         belong to the clique set should go through a thorough
of homology, but there is a strong case to suggest that         test of homology. It should be stressed that it is often
it is a good indicator, because there are external, com-        at this stage that many characters are usually discov-
positional and structural measures which relate phenetic        ered and re®ned, as the phylogeny of the clade is
similarity with homology. Thus, the direct test consists        gradually revealed and understood by the taxonomist.
of the external method, compositional method and the
structural method.
                                                                4.3. Code characters
   The external method can be applied without study-
ing or knowing the internal structure of the feature.
                                                                   Once a set of characters has been identi®ed, along
Any external characteristic of the feature is used to
                                                                with the set of automobile assembly species which are
identify the existence of some fundamental diversity
                                                                a consequence of these characters, the relationship
within the feature. For example, the procurement sys-
                                                                between the characters and the species are examined in
tems that typically exist in lean manufacturing produ-
                                                                order to allow the construction of the cladogram. A
cers tend to have subcontractors/suppliers which are
                                                                cladogram can be constructed from the character data,
located within a short distance of the assembly plant.
                                                                because a cladistic character has three properties:
It was common for subcontractors/suppliers in
                                                                direction, order and polarity [87]. The coding of a
Western manufacturers to be located almost anywhere
                                                                character facilitates the processing of the character set.
on the planet. Thus, from an external perspective only,
                                                                Ordering is that property of a character which refers
there is a signi®cant di€erence and the location of sub-
                                                                to the possible character change sequences that can
contractors relative to the main assembly plant, could
                                                                occur. The character property, direction, refers to the
be a potential character, because no evidence of ana-
                                                                transition between the character states. When an inves-
logy has yet materialised. The compositional method
                                                                tigator determines the actual direction of transform-
requires the investigator to list the parts which consti-
                                                                ation the character is said have a `polarised' state.
tute the considered character. This internal breakdown
is then used in a comparison with other organisational
species. For example, a reduction in the number of tier         4.4. Establish character polarity
levels in a supply chain might be evident in service or-
ganisations and retail organisations and this circum-              To assess character polarity, an outgroup comparison
stantial evidence could be used to guide the selection          is undertaken. This is based on the recognition that
of characters for manufacturing systems. With the               once the characteristics of the closest relative have
structural method, the focus is on how the di€erent el-         been discovered, the information for determining
ements of the character interact with each other and if         which characters are primitive and which are derived is
there is a case for splitting a potential character into        revealed. Hence, this comparison is based on the rule
two or more characters. This decision is made purely            that for a given character with two or more states
on the basis of how the elements exist and their depen-         within a group, the state occurring in related groups is
dence with one another.                                         assumed to be primitive [88]. Any character state
   Identifying and resolving character con¯icts occurs          found only in the ingroup is considered to be derived
continually during stages 2±6 of the cladogram frame-           [30]. Decisions governing the character polarity found
work, but the ®nal validation is a postcladogram con-           at the outgroup node can be either decisive, with the
struction exercise (stages 5 and 6). Once a preliminary         node labelled as primitive (0) or derived (1), or equiv-
cladogram has been constructed, it usually exhibits cer-        ocal, with the node labelled primitive/derived (0, 1).
tain character con¯icts. These con¯icts can be natural             If this method is applied to the cladogram shown in
occurrences, such as parallelism or coevolution. They           Fig. 3, the outcome would be inconclusive, because
can also result from analogous characters, or improper          this tree has already been resolved and there are no
coding of characters. Improper coding can be the                inconsistencies in the character data. Therefore, in
result of analogous or imprecise de®nition of charac-           order to demonstrate this method, a cladogram con-
ters states, or using the wrong polarity (i.e. confusing        sisting of taxa and characters from the automobile
the derived and the primitive state), or using characters       study is used, but the data and structure of the tree
which are too general. The advantage of validating              have not been resolved. This unresolved data (Table 2)
88                                          I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95

Table 2
Data matrix for Figs. 6±9

                                      Character 1                Character 2                  Character 3                 Character 4

Ancient craft (AC)                    1                          1                            0                           0
Standardised craft (SC)               0                          1                            1                           0/1
Modern craft (MC)                     0                          0                            1                           0
Neo craft (NC)                        1                          1                            1                           1
Skilled large scale (SLS)             1                          1                            1                           1
Large scale (LS)                      0                          0                            0                           0
Mass (M)                              0/1                        0/1                          0/1                         0/1




is used to demonstrate the process of determining char-
acter polarity (Figs. 6±10).
   Fig. 6 is a possible cladogram structure for the data
contained in Table 2. The nodes are labelled 1±6,
whilst the species are labelled using letters (AC, SC,
MC, NC, SLS, LS and M). Beginning with the charac-
ter 1 from Table 2, each branch end of the cladogram
is labelled with the corresponding character state (Fig.
7). Next, starting from the furthest branches (branches
AC and SC) a polarity decision for node 2 is made.
The nodes of the cladogram are labelled `0' if the
lower node and adjacent branch are both `0', or `0'                        Fig. 7. First polarity decision using character data 1.
and `0, 1'. The nodes will be labelled `1' if the lower
node and adjacent branch are both `1' or `1' and `0,1'.
If the branches/nodes have di€erent labels, one `0' and                using the same process, but by beginning at the lowest
the other `1', then the node is labelled `0, 1'. The root              node on the branching structure (node 4). Thus, node
node (node 1) is not considered, because in order to                   4 is labelled `1', because NC is `1' and SLS is `1' (Fig.
analyse this branch another outgroup is needed. Thus,                  8). Continuing towards the ingroup (M) the remaining
node 2 is labelled `0, 1', because the ®rst branch (AC)                nodes (nodes 3 and 5) are labelled, until only the out-
is `1' and the second branch (SC) is `0'.                              group node (node 6) remains. Node 5 is labelled `0/1'
   The next stage is to identify what is termed the near-              because LS is `0' and node 4 is `1' and node 3 is
est branching structure, which occurs at node 6 (Fig.                  labelled `0', because MC is `0' and node 2 is `0/1' (Fig.
7). The nodes of the branching structure are labelled                  9). The analysis for character 1 is complete when node
                                                                       6 is labelled. Node 6 is found to be decisive (`0'),




Fig. 6. Determining the character polarity for mass producers
and its corresponding outgroups.                                          Fig. 8. Second polarity decision using character data 1.
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95                                       89

                                                                 state will be decisive for the outgroup node. If the last
                                                                 outgroup has a di€erent character state, then the char-
                                                                 acter state decision will be equivocal.

                                                                 4.5. Construct conceptual cladogram

                                                                   Various tools exist to construct cladograms which
                                                                 provide a `best estimate' of the evolutionary relation-
                                                                 ships contained within the data matrix. These tools
                                                                 have one of two approaches:
                                                                 1. Construct the best cladogram using a speci®c algor-
                                                                    ithm.
                                                                 2. Apply a criterion for choosing between alternative
Fig. 9. Third and fourth polarity decision using character
                                                                    cladograms.
data 1.
                                                                    The ®rst approach is faster, but does not rank the
                                                                 trees which are considered suboptimal. The second
because node 3 is `0' and node 5 is `0/1' (Fig. 10).             approach provides ranking for all the trees under com-
Thus, by using the outgroup comparison a best esti-              parison, but it is not able to generate exact results for
mate of the polarity was made and `0' was found to be            matrices with more than 12 taxa, owing to compu-
primitive and `1' is derived for character 1.                    tational diculties [12].
   This process of assessing character polarity is made             From these two approaches four methods for estimat-
for each character. It should be noted that although             ing phylogeny have developed: (1) methods based on
this procedure plays a signi®cant role in identifying            pairwise data, (2) parsimony methods, (3) Lake's
character polarity and resolving any con¯icts that may           method of invariants and (4) maximum likelihood phy-
exist in the cladogram, the ®nal validation of character         logenies. The parsimony method selects the shortest
states is subject to the rule of parsimony (Section 4.5).        tree, i.e. the tree requiring the least evolutionary charac-
   In summary, two rules of analysis are used to con-            ter changes. This method is the most popular because it
duct an outgroup comparison: the doublet rule and the            has a simple rule of application which is; the longer the
alternating sister group rule [88]. With the doublet             tree length, the worse the ®t; the shorter the tree length
rule, if the sister group and the ®rst two consecutive           the better the ®t. The other methods vary between parsi-
outgroups have the same character state, then that               monious and phenetic, but were developed to compare
character state is decisive for the outgroup node. Any           nucleotide specimens, DNA and molecular sequences.
two consecutive outgroups with the same character                Thus, a parsimonious approach is adopted as it aims to
state are called a doublet. With the alternating sister          select a best tree on an evolutionary basis rather than a
group rule, if the character states are alternating down         phenetic basis. Also, the method is based on the tree
the cladogram, and if the last outgroup has the same             structure rather than elements of the entity (DNA,
character state as the sister group, then the character          nucleotides, molecular distances, etc.) and thus there
                                                                 would appear to be no limitations when applying it to a
                                                                 manufacturing cladogram. For a detailed account of
                                                                 parsimony methods, see [89].
                                                                    The testing of a cladogram is essentially based on its
                                                                 ability to explain the phylogeny of the clade. With this
                                                                 aim there are two sets of problems:
                                                                 1. The proposed relationships are not acceptable or
                                                                    not historically coherent.
                                                                 2. Several con¯icting cladograms of the same length
                                                                    are obtained.
                                                                    Refusing a cladogram because it does not ®t with
                                                                 historical evidence is a dangerous exercise as there are
                                                                 no general rules linking the number of characters
                                                                 acquired by a species and its period of existence. Very
                                                                 evolved species might become un®t in a later period.
Fig. 10. Polarity decision for node 6 (outgroup node) using         Once a cladogram has been produced, the ®rst step
character data 1.                                                is to map the character changes onto the tree in order
90                                      I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95

to have a global view of the proposed phylogeny. It is          cess results in the organisation acquiring and reversing
common practice to shape test the cladogram by add-             the necessary character states which will lead to the
ing additional species and characters. It is important          new organisational form. This reversal is similar to
to note that adding characters and species at this stage        Sagasti's model of adaptive behaviour [91], which
of the framework is easier and more reliable than at            occurs due to selective pressures. Reactive reversals are
the clade building stage.                                       not part of the phylogeny of a clade, they are a
  When examining the top section of the cladogram,              measure of a systems' lack of strategic focus.
the investigator should question if the acquisition             Biological organisms tend to evolve according to the
could have led to a speciation, or if it is just a case of      rule of parsimony (smallest number of evolutionary
anagenesis. If a character could have potentially cre-          changes), but organisations which to some extent in¯u-
ated a viable species, and if historical evidence of the        ence evolutionary destiny, do not always take the most
existence of this species can be gathered, then the             parsimonious route.
species should be added.
  The automotive cladogram was constructed using                4.7. Taxa nomenclature
MacClade Version 3 [90]. MacClade provides an inter-
action environment for exploring phylogeny and resol-              The name given to a taxa of manufacturing systems
ving character con¯icts. MacClade allows the user to            is more than a word which simply acts as a means of
manipulate cladogram structures and character data              reference. The name given to a taxa must act as a ve-
and to visualise the characters on each branch. Finally,        hicle for communication, be unambiguous and univer-
MacClade provides tools for moving branches, rerout-            sal. It should also indicate its position within the
ing clades and automatically searching for the most             classi®cation hierarchy. Je€rey [40] describes the codes
parsimonious tree.                                              of nomenclature used for plants (International Code of
                                                                Botanical Nomenclature), for bacteria (International
4.6. Construct factual cladogram                                Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria) and for animals
                                                                (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature).
   This stage involves studying real and existing manu-         Each code di€ers in detail but certain basic features
facturing organisations in order to observe the manu-           are common. For a summary of the relevant codes,
facturing systems which they operate. This typically            discussed in an organisational context, the reader is
consists of plant inspections, discussions with employ-         referred to [92].
ees, assessment of planning and control procedures
and assessment of documentation (annual reports,
business plans and surveys, etc.). The study aims to            5. Applications
validate the existence of the characters identi®ed
during the previous stages. It will test the validity of           This article began by discussing the reasons for
any proposed tree structure by ensuring that the char-          undertaking a classi®cation study using cladistics.
acter data matrix is complete (i.e. no important histori-       Although many of the reasons presented might appear
cal events which relate to characters have been                 to be common sense, this does not dilute their import-
omitted) and that the assigned polarity is correct. This        ance and contribution to any serious and scienti®c in-
stage is to an extent, validation by dissemination,             vestigation into organisations. The following
because the factual data will be used to verify the con-        discussion presents possible academic and practical ap-
ceptual data. The validity of any proposed tree struc-          plications of cladistics.
ture will also be tested by allocating existing
organisations a position on the cladogram.                      5.1. Understanding organisational diversity
   The factual stage is undertaken because character            (organisational systematics)
reversal (the dropping of a character) is a possible pro-
cess with manufacturing systems. This paper suggests               There is common agreement on the de®nition of the
that two forms of character reversal could occur within         attributes of a just-in-time manufacturing system, see
organisations: phylogenetic reversal and reactive rever-        for instance [93, 94], but these de®nitions are su-
sal. Phylogenetic reversal is illustrated in Fig. 2(a) by       ciently vague to cause confusion with the terms ¯exible
character `(20±)' where by the character has been               manufacturing systems, agile manufacturing systems,
reversed naturally by the circumstances of evolution            world class manufacturing systems and lean manufac-
and thus is illustrated on the cladogram. Reactive              turing systems. This problem has been identi®ed by
character reversal occurs, because organisations realise        many researchers and is summarised by the following
that their current position is at the end of an inap-           quote: ``( F F F) the diversity involved in the manufactur-
propriate evolutionary path and take the decision to            ing industry is such that it is unlikely that all industry
acquire a new organisational form. This change pro-             types should be aiming for the same procedures, pol-
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95                                     91

icies and culture. Yet there has been very little research       turing terms, examples of stress are unreliable sourcing
which tries to identify what the term world class (WC)           mechanisms, lack of skilled labour, lack of ®nance,
means for certain industry types. This leaves the cur-           machine breakdowns, etc. Disturbance is a serious en-
rent apparently poor performers with inadequate infor-           vironmental event which happens occasionally.
mation to decide whether they are really not of WC               Examples of disturbances in biology are ®re, frost,
standard, and, if not, insucient appropriate guidance           earthquakes, etc. In manufacturing, disturbances are
to determine how to achieve the WC goals to which                strikes, ®re, the loss of a market. If several organis-
most would agree to aspire''. [95, p. 43].                       ations exist in a perfect environment with no stress
   Despite the need for knowledge on the evolution of            and no disturbance, they tend to be competitors (C).
new organisational forms, as described in Section 1 of           Competitors are merciless and compete to be the tal-
this paper, no theoretical consensus exists for organis-         lest, biggest, etc. If stress appears in the environment,
ing and supporting the vast number of empirical stu-             stress tolerators (S) tend to take the lead over competi-
dies which examine industrial and organisational                 tors, whose strategy for survival is not appropriate. If
diversity. Using a systematic and comparative method             disturbance is high, ruderals (R) are better adapted
such as cladistics, permits an assessment of the general-        and dominate the environment. Competition is the
ity of the attributes of complex systems [96]. Cladistic         dominate functional type studied and documented in
classi®cations and the desire to develop a theory of or-         business studies and in manufacturing management,
ganisational di€erences could play a signi®cant role in          but it would be interesting and possibly bene®cial to
explaining the processes by which the practices and              develop policies for creating manufacturing systems
structures of organisations and organisational forms             which are tolerators or ruderals.
persist and exist over time.

5.2. Understanding organisational ecology                        5.3. Understanding and achieving organisational change

   Where as the ®rst application was concerned with
creating a systematic system of organisational diver-               ( F F F ) an attempt was made to identify a general im-
sity, this discussion suggests that cladistic classi®-              plementation sequence. However, similar to the ob-
cations could provide the comparative index which                   servation made by Im and Lee [99], a general
might assist the creation of theories which focus on or-            implementation pattern for the JIT practices could
ganisational processes (e.g. replication, mutation,                 not be established [94, p. 8].
recombination, learning, entrepreneurship, competition
and natural selection) and organisational events (e.g.
birth, death, transformation, speciation and extinc-                The ®rst two applications were academic in nature,
tion). Cladistics could be coupled with functional stu-          but the deliverables from such applications could pro-
dies which seek to ascertain an overall measure for              vide organisations with new tools and knowledge
complexity, stress resistance, mortality index etc. in an        which could help them to be proactive in the manipu-
ecosystem. A functional study of organisations would             lation of their evolution. Since cladistics is a classi®-
aim to forecast environmental/market changes (the                cation method which ties its de®nition of similarity to
rate of new product introduction, service mechanisms,            naturally occurring change processes, the result is that
supply relationships, etc.) and forecasts on which man-          the information contained within a cladogram is useful
ufacturing species will dominate, compete and survive            for identifying standard change sequences. A clado-
such market and economic conditions. Functional stu-             gram could also provide a framework or index for
dies and cladistics are viewed as complementary disci-           positioning and benchmarking studies [100].
plines by many biologists and philosophers [97], since              The analysis of a cladogram goes further than a
their results describe di€erent properties of species (re-       simple speci®cation of a change sequence. It indicates:
spectively, their identity and their strategy for survi-         the sequence of steps required to transform an organis-
val). The goal of functionalists is to develop a                 ation to a certain state, along with the characteristics
catalogue of knowledge, related to a classi®cation, for          which must be dropped (the `unlearning' steps). If
identifying strategies for survival. An example of such          there is agreement that the cladogram has been con-
a classi®cation is the CSR model of Philip Grime from            structed according to the rules of parsimony, the physi-
the NERC unit of the University of Sheeld [98]. The             cal and ®nancial cost of the identi®ed change route
CSR model, models the environment along two dimen-               would be minimised.
sions: stress and disturbance. Stress is a limitation put           The tree-like nature of a cladogram could be com-
on the resources necessary for the organisations to sur-         pared to a map, which once constructed provides or-
vive. In biological terms, stress is the lack of nutrients,      ganisations with an unambiguous and precise
the lack of light, cold temperatures, etc. In manufac-           de®nition of the starting point of the change journey.
92                                        I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95

If the journey is a mimetic process then it will also                Cladistics, as with all classi®cations, is a method for
provide a de®nition of the destination.                           systematically organising knowledge about a popu-
                                                                  lation of entities. It is a process for studying diversity
5.4. Strategy                                                     and attempting to identify and understand laws and re-
                                                                  lationships which explain the evolution and existence
     Despite the popularity of ¯exible manufacturing              of the variety groups. Its intellectual and practical
     systems, managers su€er from inadequate frame-               value is derived from this ability to explain.
     works to help incorporate ¯exibility into their stra-           This article suggests that cladistics is a novel and
     tegic planning [101, p. 7].                                  appropriate approach for producing an organisational
                                                                  classi®cation, because unlike the best phenetic classi®-
   A cladogram provides a snapshot of the evolution-              cations and the multitude of subjective classi®cations,
ary history of a company. Thus, it can be used by                 cladistics has an underlying philosophy (evolution) and
managers to check that their vision for the future is             accompanying rules and procedures. Cladistics uses
consistent with their understanding of the past.                  evolutionary relationships to identify and form groups,
Cladistics also provides an interesting measure of stra-          because evolution is the process which accompanies
tegic excellence, through the principle of parsimony.             the changes which materialise to produce di€erent or-
Strategic management is a discipline which was under              ganisational forms. The resulting classi®cation and the
close scrutiny in the eighties and many researchers               knowledge contained within, provide insights into or-
questioned if a correlation could be found between the            ganisational diversity. These insights include: observing
practice of strategic management and organisational               the patterns and events which accompany the organis-
performance, usually de®ned as pro®tability. Although             ational change and observing the most parsimonious
some researchers con®rmed the existence of such a cor-            route between di€erent organisational forms.
relation [102±104], many others found no correlations                This fundamental, but important insight could result
whatsoever, [105±109]. Strategic management is con-               in organisational cladograms being used as a tool
cerned with the long term sustainability of pro®ts and            within a change framework, for achieving successful
thus strategic excellence can be dicult to de®ne,                organisational design and change. Thus, regardless of
because assessments may need to view a decade of                  the industrial sector, organisations could use clado-
®nancial loss before capturing the bene®ts of a well-             grams as an evolutionary analysis technique for deter-
articulated strategy.                                             mining `where they have been and where they are
   If there is agreement with the statements that ``( F F F )     now''. This evolutionary analysis could be used to for-
successful ®rms have followed more than one route to              mulate coherent and appropriate action for managers
successful redesign.'', ``Too often, (F F F), pieces are          who are organisational architects and planners.
missing from the strategies and structures ®rms create
in the process of redesign'' [110, p. 129], then the prin-
ciple of parsimony could o€er a legitimate de®nition of
strategic excellence. Researchers can easily question, a          References
posterior, how parsimonious the strategy of a ®rm was.
The Toyota Motor Company demonstrates a remark-                     [1] Carper WB, Snizek WE. The nature and types of or-
able record of excellent strategic practices, with the                  ganisational taxonomies: an overview. Acad Manage
highly focused introduction of the Toyota production                    Rev 1980;5(1):66±75.
system [111] and its subsequent evolution toward lean               [2] Good IJ. Categorisation of classi®cation. In:
production. Cladistics could be used to develop a set                   Mathematics and computer science in medicine and bi-
of performance measures which would govern the stra-                    ology. London: H.M.S.O, 1965. p. 115±28.
tegic decision making process within companies.                     [3] Cormack RM. A review of classi®cation. Proceedings
                                                                        of the Royal Statistical Society 1971;3:321±67.
                                                                    [4] Haas J, Hall R, Johnson N. Toward an empirically de-
                                                                        rived taxonomy of organisations. In: Bovers R, editor.
6. Summary                                                              Studies on behaviour in organisations. Athens, GA:
                                                                        University of Georgia Press, 1966. p. 157±80.
   Although classi®cation is an habitual process which              [5] McKelvey B, Guidelines for the empirical classi®cation
all humans do, the use of classi®cations in organis-                    of organisations. Adm Sci Q. 1975;20:509±25.
                                                                    [6] Chrisman J, Hofer C, Boulton W. Toward a system for
ational science has not reached the same status as the
                                                                        classifying business strategies. Acad Manage Rev
classi®cations which exist in physics, chemistry and bi-                1988;13(3):413±28.
ology. This paper has sought to describe and justify                [7] Gordon CW, Babchuk N. A typology of voluntary or-
the bene®ts of organisational classi®cations and in par-                ganisations. Am Sociol Rev 1958;24:22±3.
ticular cladistic classi®cations of manufacturing sys-              [8] Emery FE, Trist EL. The casual texture of organis-
tems.                                                                   ational environments. Human Relat 1965;18:21±32.
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95                                           93

 [9] Thompson JD. Organisations in action. New York:                     cedures. In: Special Publications No 19. The University
     McGraw-Hill, 1967.                                                  of Kansas Museum of Natural History, 1991.
[10] Perrow C. Organisational analysis: a sociological            [31]   De Queiroz K. Systematics and the Darwinian revolu-
     review. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1970.                             tion. Philos Sci 1988;55:238±59.
[11] Van Ripper PP. Organisations: basic issues and pro-          [32]   EPSRC (1996), Blueprint Ð The control design and
     posed typology. In: Bowers RV, editor. Studies on                   production newsletter of EPSRC, Issue No. 9, July
     behaviour in organisations. Athens: University of                   1996.
     Georgia Press, 1966.                                         [33]   Hannan MT, Freeman J. The population ecology of or-
[12] Constable CJ, New CC. Operations management, a sys-                 ganisations. Am Sociol Rev 1977;83:929±84.
     tems approach through text and cases. John Wiley &           [34]   Hannan MT, Freeman J. Organisational Ecology.
     Sons, 1976.                                                         Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989.
[13] Wild R. The techniques of production management.             [35]   Baum JAC. A population perspective organizations: a
     London: Holt, Reinhart and Winston, 1971.                           study of diversity and transformation in child care ser-
[14] Johnson LA, Montgomery DC. Operation research in                    vice organisations. Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of
     production planning, scheduling and inventory control.              Management, University of Toronto, 1989.
     New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974.                           [36]   McKelvey B. Organisational systematics: taxonomy,
[15] De Toni A, Panizzolo R. Repetitive and intermittent                 evolution, classi®cation. Berkeley: University of
     manufacturing: comparison of characteristics. In:                   California Press, 1982.
     Integrated manufacturing systems, vol. 3. MCB                [37]   Lumsden CJ, Singh JV. The dynamics of organizational
     University Press, 1992. p. 23±37 (No. 4).                           speciation. In: Singh JV, editor. Organizational evol-
[16] Schmitt TG, Klastorin T, Shtub A. Production classi®-               ution: new directions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990.
     cation system: concepts, models and strategies. Int J               p. 145±63.
     Prod Res 1985;23(3):563±78.                                  [38]   Brodie R. The virus of the mind: the new science of the
[17] Ingham H. Balancing sales and production: models of                 meme. Integral Press, 1995.
     typical business policies. Management Publication, 1971      [39]   McCarthy IP. The development of a manufacturing
     [ch 1±2].                                                           classi®cation using concepts from organisational sys-
[18] Wild R. Production and operations management.                       tematics and biological taxonomy. Ph.D. dissertation,
     Cassel Ed, 1989 [ch 1].                                             University of Sheeld, UK, 1995.
[19] Aneke NAG, Carrie AS. A comprehensive ¯owline                [40]   Je€rey C. Biological nomenclature, 3rd ed. Systematics
     classi®cation scheme. Int J Prod Res 1984;22(2):282±97.             Association, Chapman and Hall, 1977.
[20] Burbidge JL. International Seminar On Group                  [41]   Forey PL, Humphries CJ, Kitching IJ, Scotland RW,
     Technology, Final report. Turin International Centre,               Siebert DJ, Williams DM. Cladistics: a practical course
     Turin, Italy, 1970.                                                 in systematics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.
[21] Frizelle GDM. OPT in perspective. In: Advanced man-          [42]   Minelli A. Biological systematics the state of the art.
     ufacturing engineering, 1. Butterworth and Co, 1989.                Chapman & Hall, 1994.
[22] Barber KD, Hollier RH. The use of numerical analysis         [43]   Sneath P, Sokal R. Numerical taxonomy, the principles
     to classify companies according to production control               and practices of numerical classi®cation. Freeman,
     complexity. Int J Prod Res 1986;24(1):203±22.                       1973.
[23] Woodward J. In: Industrial organisation, theory and          [44]   Rao HV, Reddy M. University manuscript. Density
     practice. Oxford University Press, 1980. p. 22±49.                  and organizational mortality in technologically hetero-
[24] Burbidge JL. The principles of production control, 4th              geneous industries. Emory University, GA, USA, 1992.
     ed. Plymouth, UK: MacDonald & Evans, 1962.                   [45]   Hannan MT, Freeman J. Organizations in industry:
[25] Hitomi K. Manufacturing systems engineering (a uni-                 strategy, structure and selection. Oxford University
     ®ed approach to manufacturing technology and pro-                   Press, 1995.
     duction management), 2nd ed. London: Taylor and              [46]   Scott WR. Organizations: rational, natural and open
     Francis, 1996.                                                      systems, 3rd ed. Englewood Cli€s, NJ: Prentice Hall,
[26] Spencer MS, Cox JF. An analysis of the product±pro-                 1992.
     cess matrix and repetitive manufacturing. Int J Prod         [47]   Hannan, Carroll, Dundon, Torres. Organizational evol-
     Res 1995;33(5):1275±94.                                             ution in multinational context: automobile manufac-
[27] McCarthy IP. Manufacturing classi®cations: lessons                  turers in Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, and Italy.
     from organizational systematics and biological taxon-               Am Sociol Rev 1995;88:234±53.
     omy. Int J Manuf Technol Manage Ð Integrated                 [48]   Cusumano MA. The Japanese automobile industry.
     Manuf Sys 1995;6(6):47±8.                                           Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985.
[28] Romanelli E. The evolution of new organizational             [49]   Flink JJ. The automobile age. Cambridge, MA: MIT
     forms. In: Annual review of sociology, 17. Annual                   Press, 1988.
     Reviews, 1991. p. 79±103.                                    [50]   Laux JM. The European automobile industry. New
[29] Ridley M. Evolution. Blackwell Scienti®c Publications,              York: Twayne, 1992.
     1993.                                                        [51]   Rae JB. The American automobile manufacturers: the
[30] Wiley EO, Siegel-Causey D, Brooks DR, Funk VA.                      ®rst forty years. Philadelphia: Chiltern, 1959.
     The compleat cladist Ð a primer of phylogenetic pro-         [52]   Hounshell DA. From the American system to mass
94                                          I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95

        production. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,       [86] Quicke DLJ. Principles and techniques of contemporary
        1984.                                                             taxonomy. Chapman and Hall, 1993.
 [53]   Womack JP, Jones DT, Roos D. The machine that                [87] Swo€ord DL, Maddison WP. Reconstructing ancestral
        changed the world. New York: Macmillan Publishing,                states under Wagner parsimony. Math Biosci
        1990.                                                             1987;87:199±299.
 [54]   Fiat Group. Financial overview, January 30, 1998.            [88] Watrous LE, Wheeler QD. The out-group comparison
 [55]   Fiat Group. Annual report, 1996.                                  method. Syst Zool 1981;30:1±11.
 [56]   Fiat Group. Report of the Board of Directors on oper-        [89] Felsenstein J. Parsimony in systematics: biological and
        ations in the ®rst half of 1997.                                  statistical issues. Ann Rev Ecol System 1983;14:313±33.
 [57]   Ford Motor Company. Annual report, 1965.                     [90] Maddison WP, Maddison DR. MacClade Version 3.
 [58]   Ford Motor Company. Annual report, 1975.                          Analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. MA,
 [59]   Ford Motor Company. Annual report, 1985.                          USA: Sinauer Associates, 1992.
 [60]   Ford Motor Company. Annual report, 1995.                     [91] Sagasti F. A conceptual and taxonomic framework for
 [61]   General Motors. A look at General Motors today,                   the analysis of adaptive behaviour. General systems,
        1996.                                                             vol. XV, 1970. p. 151±60.
 [62]   General Motors. What drives General Motors. Annual           [92] McCarthy IP, Leseure M, Ridgway K, Fieller N.
        report, 1996.                                                     Building manufacturing cladograms. International
 [63]   General Motors. The EV1 electric vehicle, teamwork in             Journal of Technology Management 1997;13(3):269±86.
        action. Annual report, 1995.                                 [93] Stevenson W. Production/operations management, 4th
 [64]   Honda. Annual report, 1995.                                       ed. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1993.
 [65]   Mercedes-Benz. Annual report, 1995.                          [94] Hum S, Ng Y. A study on just-in-time practices in
 [66]   Mitsubishi Corporation. The principles that de®ne                 Singapore. Int J Oper Prod Manage 1995;15(6):5±24.
        Mitsubishi Corporation. Annual report, 1996.                 [95] Hendry LC. World class in the make-to-order sector.
 [67]   Mitsubishi Corporation. Annual report, 1995.                      MESELA '97 Conference, 22±24 July, 1997,
 [68]   Nissan. Even higher customer satisfaction. Annual
                                                                          Loughborough, ISBN 1 86058 0661, 1997. p. 41±6.
        report, 1995.
                                                                     [96] de Pinna M. Concepts and tests of homology in the cla-
 [69]   Peugeot Motor Company Plc. Annual review, 1995.
                                                                          distics paradox. Cladistics 1991;7:367±94.
 [70]   Peugeot Motor Company Plc. Statement of accounts
                                                                     [97] Griths P. Cladistics and functional explanation. Philo
        and annual report, 1995.
                                                                          Sci 1994;61:206±27.
 [71]   Peugeot Motor Company Plc. Annual review, 1996.
                                                                     [98] Grime P. The C±S±R model of primary plant strategies:
 [72]   Peugeot Motor Company Plc. Statement of accounts
                                                                          origins, implications and tests ch 14. In: Gottlieb LD,
        and annual report, 1996.
                                                                          Kain SK, editors. Plant evolutionary biology. London:
 [73]   Renault SA. Annual report, 1995.
                                                                          Chapman and Hall, 1988.
 [74]   Toyota. Here's how we are getting better and even bet-
                                                                     [99] Im J, Lee S. Implementation of just-in-time systems in
        ter. Annual report, 1996.
                                                                          US manufacturing ®rms. Int J Prod Res 1989;28(6):5±
 [75]   Toyota. You ain't seen nuthin' yet! Annual report,
                                                                          14.
        1995.
                                                                    [100] Camp R. Benchmarking, the search for industry best
 [76]   Volkswagen AG. Annual report, 1996.
 [77]   Volkswagen, AG. Annual report, 1995.                              practices that lead to superior performance. Milwaukee,
 [78]   Volvo. Annual report, 1996.                                       WI: ASQC Quality Press, 1989.
 [79]   Gibson      JL,    Ivancevich    JM,     Donnelly   JR.     [101] Suarez F, Cusumano M, Fine C. An empirical study of
        Organizations: behaviour, structure, processes, 7th ed.           ¯exibility in manufacturing. In: Sloan management
        Homewood IL: Irwin, 1991.                                         review, 1995. p. 25±32.
 [80]   Price JL, Mueller CW. Handbook of organisational            [102] Armstrong J. Strategic planning improves manufactur-
        measurement. Marsh®eld, MA: Pitman, 1986.                         ing performance. In: Long-range planning, 1991. p.
 [81]   Baum JAC, Singh JV. Evolutionary dynamics of organ-               127±9.
        izations. Oxford University Press, 1994.                    [103] Powell T. Strategic planning as competitive advantage.
 [82]   Hull DL. The natural system and the species problem.              In: Strategic Manage J, 1992. p. 551±8.
        In: Sibley CG, editor. Systematic biology. Proceedings      [104] Waalevwijn P, Segaar P. Strategic management: the key
        of an International Conference Conducted At The                   to pro®tability in small companies. In: Long-range
        University of Michigan, June 14±16, 1967. p. 56±61.               planning, 1993. p. 24±30.
 [83]   Pugh D, Hickson D, Hinings C, Turner C. Dimensions          [105] Grinyer P, Norburn D. Planning for existing markets:
        or organizational structure. Adm Sci Q 1968;13:65±105.            perceptions of executives and ®nancial performance (pt.
 [84]   Sells S. Toward a taxonomy of organizations. In:                  1). J R Stat Soc A 1975;138:70±81.
        Cooper W, Leavitt H, Shelly M, editors. New perspec-        [106] Kallman E, Shapiro H. The motor freight industry: a
        tives in organizational research. New York: Wiley,                case against planning. In: Long-range planning, 1978.
        1964. p. 515±32.                                                  p. 81±95.
 [85]   Warriner C, editor. Empirical taxonomy of organiz-          [107] Kudla J. The e€ects of strategic planning on common
        ations: problematics in their development. Presented at           stock returns. In: Acad Manage J, 1980. p. 5±32.
        the Roundtable Discussion, Annual Meeting of the            [108] Leontiades M, Tezel A. Planning perceptions and plan-
        American Sociological Association, Boston, 1979.                  ning results. In: Strategic Manage J, 1980. p. 65±79.
I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95                                95

[109] Rue L, Fulmer R. Is long-range planning pro®table? In:      [111] Monden Y. Toyota production system: practical
      Academy of Management Proceedings, 1973. p. 66±89.                approach to production management. Industrial
[110] Miles R, Coleman H, Douglas C. Keys to success in                 Engineering and Management Press, Institute of
      corporate redesign. Calif Manage Rev 1995;37(3):128±              Industrial Engineers, 1983.
      45.

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...
Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...
Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...Ian McCarthy
 
Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...
Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...
Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...Ian McCarthy
 
Achieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary Analysis
Achieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary AnalysisAchieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary Analysis
Achieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary AnalysisIan McCarthy
 
Remanufacturing is_a_superior_choce.pdf
 Remanufacturing is_a_superior_choce.pdf Remanufacturing is_a_superior_choce.pdf
Remanufacturing is_a_superior_choce.pdfMichael Davis
 
When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...
When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...
When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...Ian McCarthy
 
Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...
Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...
Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...Ian McCarthy
 
Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamification
Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamificationGame on: Engaging customers and employees through gamification
Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamificationIan McCarthy
 
Unpacking the Social Media Phenomenon: Towards a Research Agenda
Unpacking the Social Media Phenomenon: Towards a Research AgendaUnpacking the Social Media Phenomenon: Towards a Research Agenda
Unpacking the Social Media Phenomenon: Towards a Research AgendaIan McCarthy
 
Making a face: Graphical illustrations of managerial stances toward customer ...
Making a face: Graphical illustrations of managerial stances toward customer ...Making a face: Graphical illustrations of managerial stances toward customer ...
Making a face: Graphical illustrations of managerial stances toward customer ...Ian McCarthy
 
Executive Digest: managing resources, managing the crowd and disrupting indus...
Executive Digest: managing resources, managing the crowd and disrupting indus...Executive Digest: managing resources, managing the crowd and disrupting indus...
Executive Digest: managing resources, managing the crowd and disrupting indus...Ian McCarthy
 
Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibi...
Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibi...Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibi...
Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibi...Ian McCarthy
 
An Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial Networks
An Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial NetworksAn Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial Networks
An Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial NetworksIan McCarthy
 
CGIP: Managing Consumer-Generated Intellectual Property
CGIP: Managing Consumer-Generated Intellectual PropertyCGIP: Managing Consumer-Generated Intellectual Property
CGIP: Managing Consumer-Generated Intellectual PropertyIan McCarthy
 
Unpacking the social media phenomenon: towards a research agenda
Unpacking the social media phenomenon: towards a research agendaUnpacking the social media phenomenon: towards a research agenda
Unpacking the social media phenomenon: towards a research agendaIan McCarthy
 
Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistics classifications
Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistics classificationsOrganisational diversity, evolution and cladistics classifications
Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistics classificationsIan McCarthy
 
The impact of outsourcing on the transaction costs and boundaries of manufact...
The impact of outsourcing on the transaction costs and boundaries of manufact...The impact of outsourcing on the transaction costs and boundaries of manufact...
The impact of outsourcing on the transaction costs and boundaries of manufact...Ian McCarthy
 
Manufacturing strategy – understanding the fitness landscape
Manufacturing strategy – understanding the fitness landscapeManufacturing strategy – understanding the fitness landscape
Manufacturing strategy – understanding the fitness landscapeIan McCarthy
 
Understanding Gamification of Consumer Experiences
Understanding Gamification of Consumer ExperiencesUnderstanding Gamification of Consumer Experiences
Understanding Gamification of Consumer ExperiencesIan McCarthy
 
Standardization efforts:The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search...
Standardization efforts:The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search...Standardization efforts:The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search...
Standardization efforts:The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search...Ian McCarthy
 
FULL PROOF ReMaTec_Oct16-v1_LR(1)
FULL PROOF ReMaTec_Oct16-v1_LR(1)FULL PROOF ReMaTec_Oct16-v1_LR(1)
FULL PROOF ReMaTec_Oct16-v1_LR(1)Adam Hill
 

Andere mochten auch (20)

Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...
Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...
Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control...
 
Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...
Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...
Complex adaptive system mechanisms, adaptive management practices, and firm p...
 
Achieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary Analysis
Achieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary AnalysisAchieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary Analysis
Achieving Agility Using Cladistics: An Evolutionary Analysis
 
Remanufacturing is_a_superior_choce.pdf
 Remanufacturing is_a_superior_choce.pdf Remanufacturing is_a_superior_choce.pdf
Remanufacturing is_a_superior_choce.pdf
 
When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...
When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...
When customers get clever: Managerial approaches to dealing with creative con...
 
Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...
Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...
Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capabili...
 
Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamification
Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamificationGame on: Engaging customers and employees through gamification
Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamification
 
Unpacking the Social Media Phenomenon: Towards a Research Agenda
Unpacking the Social Media Phenomenon: Towards a Research AgendaUnpacking the Social Media Phenomenon: Towards a Research Agenda
Unpacking the Social Media Phenomenon: Towards a Research Agenda
 
Making a face: Graphical illustrations of managerial stances toward customer ...
Making a face: Graphical illustrations of managerial stances toward customer ...Making a face: Graphical illustrations of managerial stances toward customer ...
Making a face: Graphical illustrations of managerial stances toward customer ...
 
Executive Digest: managing resources, managing the crowd and disrupting indus...
Executive Digest: managing resources, managing the crowd and disrupting indus...Executive Digest: managing resources, managing the crowd and disrupting indus...
Executive Digest: managing resources, managing the crowd and disrupting indus...
 
Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibi...
Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibi...Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibi...
Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibi...
 
An Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial Networks
An Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial NetworksAn Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial Networks
An Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial Networks
 
CGIP: Managing Consumer-Generated Intellectual Property
CGIP: Managing Consumer-Generated Intellectual PropertyCGIP: Managing Consumer-Generated Intellectual Property
CGIP: Managing Consumer-Generated Intellectual Property
 
Unpacking the social media phenomenon: towards a research agenda
Unpacking the social media phenomenon: towards a research agendaUnpacking the social media phenomenon: towards a research agenda
Unpacking the social media phenomenon: towards a research agenda
 
Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistics classifications
Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistics classificationsOrganisational diversity, evolution and cladistics classifications
Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistics classifications
 
The impact of outsourcing on the transaction costs and boundaries of manufact...
The impact of outsourcing on the transaction costs and boundaries of manufact...The impact of outsourcing on the transaction costs and boundaries of manufact...
The impact of outsourcing on the transaction costs and boundaries of manufact...
 
Manufacturing strategy – understanding the fitness landscape
Manufacturing strategy – understanding the fitness landscapeManufacturing strategy – understanding the fitness landscape
Manufacturing strategy – understanding the fitness landscape
 
Understanding Gamification of Consumer Experiences
Understanding Gamification of Consumer ExperiencesUnderstanding Gamification of Consumer Experiences
Understanding Gamification of Consumer Experiences
 
Standardization efforts:The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search...
Standardization efforts:The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search...Standardization efforts:The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search...
Standardization efforts:The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search...
 
FULL PROOF ReMaTec_Oct16-v1_LR(1)
FULL PROOF ReMaTec_Oct16-v1_LR(1)FULL PROOF ReMaTec_Oct16-v1_LR(1)
FULL PROOF ReMaTec_Oct16-v1_LR(1)
 

Ähnlich wie Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistic classifications

10 heuristics for modeling decision making
10 heuristics for modeling decision making10 heuristics for modeling decision making
10 heuristics for modeling decision makingBarney Stacher
 
A Case in Case Study Methodology.pdf
A Case in Case Study Methodology.pdfA Case in Case Study Methodology.pdf
A Case in Case Study Methodology.pdfKarla Long
 
Induction of Decision Trees
Induction of Decision TreesInduction of Decision Trees
Induction of Decision Treesnep_test_account
 
Chapter 5 theory and methodology
Chapter 5 theory and methodology Chapter 5 theory and methodology
Chapter 5 theory and methodology grainne
 
Running head COMPLEXITY THEORY1COMPLEXITY THEORY4.docx
Running head COMPLEXITY THEORY1COMPLEXITY THEORY4.docxRunning head COMPLEXITY THEORY1COMPLEXITY THEORY4.docx
Running head COMPLEXITY THEORY1COMPLEXITY THEORY4.docxjoellemurphey
 
MATTHIAS KAISER, KATE MILLAR, ERIK THORSTENSEN, and SANDYTOM.docx
MATTHIAS KAISER, KATE MILLAR, ERIK THORSTENSEN, and SANDYTOM.docxMATTHIAS KAISER, KATE MILLAR, ERIK THORSTENSEN, and SANDYTOM.docx
MATTHIAS KAISER, KATE MILLAR, ERIK THORSTENSEN, and SANDYTOM.docxandreecapon
 
Action Research - David Avison
Action Research  - David AvisonAction Research  - David Avison
Action Research - David Avisonguestc990b6
 
Annotated Bibliography On Research Methodologies
Annotated Bibliography On Research MethodologiesAnnotated Bibliography On Research Methodologies
Annotated Bibliography On Research MethodologiesJeff Nelson
 
Examples Of Categorisation
Examples Of CategorisationExamples Of Categorisation
Examples Of CategorisationJoanna Paulsen
 
Educational Researcher, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 131 –139DOI 10.3.docx
Educational Researcher, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 131 –139DOI 10.3.docxEducational Researcher, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 131 –139DOI 10.3.docx
Educational Researcher, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 131 –139DOI 10.3.docxgreg1eden90113
 
Student ID No. 1619853Contemporary Issues in International.docx
Student ID No. 1619853Contemporary Issues in International.docxStudent ID No. 1619853Contemporary Issues in International.docx
Student ID No. 1619853Contemporary Issues in International.docxcpatriciarpatricia
 
Research Metodology
Research MetodologyResearch Metodology
Research MetodologyJairo Gomez
 
[Matt_Baker,_Rick_Rudd,_Carol_Pomeroy]_Critical_an(BookFi.org)
[Matt_Baker,_Rick_Rudd,_Carol_Pomeroy]_Critical_an(BookFi.org)[Matt_Baker,_Rick_Rudd,_Carol_Pomeroy]_Critical_an(BookFi.org)
[Matt_Baker,_Rick_Rudd,_Carol_Pomeroy]_Critical_an(BookFi.org)Ammad khan
 
80 Int. J. Strategic Change Management, Vol.docx
80 Int. J. Strategic Change Management, Vol.docx80 Int. J. Strategic Change Management, Vol.docx
80 Int. J. Strategic Change Management, Vol.docxtarifarmarie
 
2 Foundations And Definitions Of Theory Building
2 Foundations And Definitions Of Theory Building2 Foundations And Definitions Of Theory Building
2 Foundations And Definitions Of Theory BuildingAnita Miller
 
Praxeology keynote becera 2012
Praxeology keynote becera 2012Praxeology keynote becera 2012
Praxeology keynote becera 2012gsykes
 
A big challenge is that these are two different building types.docx
A big challenge is that these are two different building types.docxA big challenge is that these are two different building types.docx
A big challenge is that these are two different building types.docxrobert345678
 

Ähnlich wie Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistic classifications (20)

10 heuristics for modeling decision making
10 heuristics for modeling decision making10 heuristics for modeling decision making
10 heuristics for modeling decision making
 
Taxonomy org
Taxonomy orgTaxonomy org
Taxonomy org
 
A Case in Case Study Methodology.pdf
A Case in Case Study Methodology.pdfA Case in Case Study Methodology.pdf
A Case in Case Study Methodology.pdf
 
Induction of Decision Trees
Induction of Decision TreesInduction of Decision Trees
Induction of Decision Trees
 
Chapter 5 theory and methodology
Chapter 5 theory and methodology Chapter 5 theory and methodology
Chapter 5 theory and methodology
 
Running head COMPLEXITY THEORY1COMPLEXITY THEORY4.docx
Running head COMPLEXITY THEORY1COMPLEXITY THEORY4.docxRunning head COMPLEXITY THEORY1COMPLEXITY THEORY4.docx
Running head COMPLEXITY THEORY1COMPLEXITY THEORY4.docx
 
MATTHIAS KAISER, KATE MILLAR, ERIK THORSTENSEN, and SANDYTOM.docx
MATTHIAS KAISER, KATE MILLAR, ERIK THORSTENSEN, and SANDYTOM.docxMATTHIAS KAISER, KATE MILLAR, ERIK THORSTENSEN, and SANDYTOM.docx
MATTHIAS KAISER, KATE MILLAR, ERIK THORSTENSEN, and SANDYTOM.docx
 
Algo sobre cladista to read
Algo sobre cladista to readAlgo sobre cladista to read
Algo sobre cladista to read
 
Action Research - David Avison
Action Research  - David AvisonAction Research  - David Avison
Action Research - David Avison
 
Annotated Bibliography On Research Methodologies
Annotated Bibliography On Research MethodologiesAnnotated Bibliography On Research Methodologies
Annotated Bibliography On Research Methodologies
 
Examples Of Categorisation
Examples Of CategorisationExamples Of Categorisation
Examples Of Categorisation
 
Educational Researcher, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 131 –139DOI 10.3.docx
Educational Researcher, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 131 –139DOI 10.3.docxEducational Researcher, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 131 –139DOI 10.3.docx
Educational Researcher, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 131 –139DOI 10.3.docx
 
Student ID No. 1619853Contemporary Issues in International.docx
Student ID No. 1619853Contemporary Issues in International.docxStudent ID No. 1619853Contemporary Issues in International.docx
Student ID No. 1619853Contemporary Issues in International.docx
 
Research Metodology
Research MetodologyResearch Metodology
Research Metodology
 
[Matt_Baker,_Rick_Rudd,_Carol_Pomeroy]_Critical_an(BookFi.org)
[Matt_Baker,_Rick_Rudd,_Carol_Pomeroy]_Critical_an(BookFi.org)[Matt_Baker,_Rick_Rudd,_Carol_Pomeroy]_Critical_an(BookFi.org)
[Matt_Baker,_Rick_Rudd,_Carol_Pomeroy]_Critical_an(BookFi.org)
 
80 Int. J. Strategic Change Management, Vol.docx
80 Int. J. Strategic Change Management, Vol.docx80 Int. J. Strategic Change Management, Vol.docx
80 Int. J. Strategic Change Management, Vol.docx
 
Chapter 3(methodology) Rough
Chapter  3(methodology) RoughChapter  3(methodology) Rough
Chapter 3(methodology) Rough
 
2 Foundations And Definitions Of Theory Building
2 Foundations And Definitions Of Theory Building2 Foundations And Definitions Of Theory Building
2 Foundations And Definitions Of Theory Building
 
Praxeology keynote becera 2012
Praxeology keynote becera 2012Praxeology keynote becera 2012
Praxeology keynote becera 2012
 
A big challenge is that these are two different building types.docx
A big challenge is that these are two different building types.docxA big challenge is that these are two different building types.docx
A big challenge is that these are two different building types.docx
 

Mehr von Ian McCarthy

The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...
The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...
The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...Ian McCarthy
 
Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...
Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...
Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...Ian McCarthy
 
Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...
Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...
Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...Ian McCarthy
 
Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...
Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...
Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...Ian McCarthy
 
Does getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activities
Does getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activitiesDoes getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activities
Does getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activitiesIan McCarthy
 
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitConfronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitIan McCarthy
 
What Next for Rowing? Exploring the Discontinuous Side of Change
What Next for Rowing? Exploring the Discontinuous Side of ChangeWhat Next for Rowing? Exploring the Discontinuous Side of Change
What Next for Rowing? Exploring the Discontinuous Side of ChangeIan McCarthy
 
Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social mediaSocial media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social mediaIan McCarthy
 
Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...
Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...
Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...Ian McCarthy
 
Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...
Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...
Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...Ian McCarthy
 
Making sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysis
Making sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysisMaking sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysis
Making sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysisIan McCarthy
 
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitConfronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitIan McCarthy
 
The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...
The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...
The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...Ian McCarthy
 
Masterclass: Confronting indifference to truth
Masterclass: Confronting indifference to truthMasterclass: Confronting indifference to truth
Masterclass: Confronting indifference to truthIan McCarthy
 
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitConfronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitIan McCarthy
 
Deepfakes: Trick or Treat?
Deepfakes: Trick or Treat?Deepfakes: Trick or Treat?
Deepfakes: Trick or Treat?Ian McCarthy
 
Social media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
Social media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social mediaSocial media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
Social media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social mediaIan McCarthy
 
The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...
The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...
The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...Ian McCarthy
 
Seven steps for framing and testing a research paper
Seven steps for framing and testing a research paperSeven steps for framing and testing a research paper
Seven steps for framing and testing a research paperIan McCarthy
 
Being a Business School Professor
Being a Business School ProfessorBeing a Business School Professor
Being a Business School ProfessorIan McCarthy
 

Mehr von Ian McCarthy (20)

The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...
The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...
The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to ...
 
Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...
Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...
Big Data for Creating and Capturing Value in the Digitalized Environment: Unp...
 
Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...
Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...
Standardization in a Digital and Global World: State-of-the-Art and Future Pe...
 
Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...
Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...
Open branding: Managing the unauthorized use of brand-related intellectual pr...
 
Does getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activities
Does getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activitiesDoes getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activities
Does getting along matter? Tourist-tourist rapport in guided group activities
 
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitConfronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
 
What Next for Rowing? Exploring the Discontinuous Side of Change
What Next for Rowing? Exploring the Discontinuous Side of ChangeWhat Next for Rowing? Exploring the Discontinuous Side of Change
What Next for Rowing? Exploring the Discontinuous Side of Change
 
Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social mediaSocial media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
 
Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...
Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...
Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategie...
 
Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...
Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...
Do your employees think your slogan is “fake news?” A framework for understan...
 
Making sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysis
Making sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysisMaking sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysis
Making sense of text: artificial intelligence-enabled content analysis
 
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitConfronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
 
The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...
The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...
The Promise of Digitalization: Unpacking the Effects of Big Data Volume, Vari...
 
Masterclass: Confronting indifference to truth
Masterclass: Confronting indifference to truthMasterclass: Confronting indifference to truth
Masterclass: Confronting indifference to truth
 
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshitConfronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit
 
Deepfakes: Trick or Treat?
Deepfakes: Trick or Treat?Deepfakes: Trick or Treat?
Deepfakes: Trick or Treat?
 
Social media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
Social media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social mediaSocial media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
Social media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social media
 
The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...
The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...
The propensity and speed of technology licensing: at LUISS Guido Carli Univer...
 
Seven steps for framing and testing a research paper
Seven steps for framing and testing a research paperSeven steps for framing and testing a research paper
Seven steps for framing and testing a research paper
 
Being a Business School Professor
Being a Business School ProfessorBeing a Business School Professor
Being a Business School Professor
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyAnyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyHanna Klim
 
Project Brief & Information Architecture Report
Project Brief & Information Architecture ReportProject Brief & Information Architecture Report
Project Brief & Information Architecture Reportamberjiles31
 
Live-Streaming in the Music Industry Webinar
Live-Streaming in the Music Industry WebinarLive-Streaming in the Music Industry Webinar
Live-Streaming in the Music Industry WebinarNathanielSchmuck
 
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...AustraliaChapterIIBA
 
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)Lviv Startup Club
 
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHelene Heckrotte
 
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxCracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxWorkforce Group
 
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...IMARC Group
 
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdfAMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdfJohnCarloValencia4
 
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023Steve Rader
 
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakTata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakEditores1
 
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..dlewis191
 
To Create Your Own Wig Online To Create Your Own Wig Online
To Create Your Own Wig Online  To Create Your Own Wig OnlineTo Create Your Own Wig Online  To Create Your Own Wig Online
To Create Your Own Wig Online To Create Your Own Wig Onlinelng ths
 
Intellectual Property Licensing Examples
Intellectual Property Licensing ExamplesIntellectual Property Licensing Examples
Intellectual Property Licensing Examplesamberjiles31
 
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinSlicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinAnton Skornyakov
 
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxIntroduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxJemalSeid25
 
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access
 
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdfPDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdfHajeJanKamps
 
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003believeminhh
 
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZMihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZKanakChauhan5
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyAnyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
 
Project Brief & Information Architecture Report
Project Brief & Information Architecture ReportProject Brief & Information Architecture Report
Project Brief & Information Architecture Report
 
Live-Streaming in the Music Industry Webinar
Live-Streaming in the Music Industry WebinarLive-Streaming in the Music Industry Webinar
Live-Streaming in the Music Industry Webinar
 
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
 
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
 
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
 
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxCracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
 
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
 
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdfAMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
 
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
 
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakTata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
 
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
 
To Create Your Own Wig Online To Create Your Own Wig Online
To Create Your Own Wig Online  To Create Your Own Wig OnlineTo Create Your Own Wig Online  To Create Your Own Wig Online
To Create Your Own Wig Online To Create Your Own Wig Online
 
Intellectual Property Licensing Examples
Intellectual Property Licensing ExamplesIntellectual Property Licensing Examples
Intellectual Property Licensing Examples
 
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinSlicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
 
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxIntroduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
 
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
 
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdfPDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
 
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
 
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZMihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
 

Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistic classifications

  • 1. Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 www.elsevier.com/locate/orms Organisational diversity, evolution and cladistic classi®cations Ian McCarthy a,*, Keith Ridgway a, Michel Leseure a, Nick Fieller b a Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Sheeld, Mappin Street, Sheeld S1 3JD, UK b School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sheeld, Houns®eld Road, Sheeld S3 RH, UK Received 1 December 1996; accepted 1 March 1998 Abstract This article presents a case for the construction of a formal classi®cation of manufacturing systems using cladistics, a technique from the biological school of classi®cation. A seven-stage framework for producing a manufacturing cladogram is presented, along with a pilot case study example. This article describes the role that classi®cation plays in the pure and applied sciences, the social sciences and reviews the status of existing manufacturing classi®cations. If organisational diversity and organisational change processes are governed by evolutionary mechanisms, studies of organisations based on an evolutionary approach such as cladistics could have potential, because as March [March JG. The evolution of evolution. In: Baum JAC, Singh JV, editors. Evolutionary dynamics of organizations. Oxford University Press, 1994. p. 39±52], page 45, states ``there is natural speculation that organisations, like species can be engineered by understanding the evolutionary processes well enough to intervene and produce competitive organisational e€ects''. It is suggested that a cladistic study could provide organisations with a ``knowledge map'' of the ecosystem in which they exist and by using this phylogenetic and situational analysis, they could determine coherent and appropriate action for the speci®cation of change. # 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Cladistics; Manufacturing; Management; Evolution; Classi®cation 1. Introduction systems. Carper and Snizek [1, p. 65], in their review of organisational classi®cations concluded that ``the Why construct a classi®cation? This question needs most important step in conducting any form of scienti- to be addressed in order to understand the bene®ts ®c enquiry involves the ordering, classi®cation, or and applications that any classi®cation could o€er, let other grouping of the objects or phenomena under in- alone a cladistic classi®cation. The desire to classify vestigation''. transcends all disciplinary boundaries whether the enti- In an amusing categorisation of classi®cations, ties under study are biological organisms, chemical el- Good [2], a noted mathematician, provided a list ements or as in the case of this paper, manufacturing which suggested ®ve purposes for performing classi®- cation: (1) for mental clari®cation and communication; (2) for discovering new ®elds of research; (3) for plan- * Corresponding author. Tel. +44-114-222-7745; fax: +44- ning an organisational structure or machine, (4) as a 114-222-7890. check list and (5) for fun. Cormack [3] used this categ- E-mail address: i.p.mccarthy@sheeld.ac.uk (I. McCarthy) orisation in his lecture to the Royal Statistical Society 0305-0483/00/$ - see front matter # 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 3 0 5 - 0 4 8 3 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 3 0 - 4
  • 2. 78 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 to illustrate the role and bene®ts that classi®cation manufacturing companies, but with no reference to, or o€ers research. Cormack summarised the bene®ts of a application of the science of taxonomy. This would hierarchical classi®cation, stating that ``the information appear to be a major shortcoming, which reduces the about the entities is represented in such a way that it usefulness, stability and accuracy of the classi®cations. will suggest fruitful hypotheses which cannot be true Lessons should be drawn from biological taxonomy in or false, probable or improbable, only pro®table or an attempt to stimulate further investigations into this unpro®table'' [3, p. 346]. established problem based on the disciplines and rules Haas, Hall and Johnson [4] discussed four advan- regularly used by the biological scientist''. Supporting tages of having a realistic classi®cation. Such a classi®- the need for an organisational classi®cation is cation could (1) be strategically helpful for re®ning Romanelli [28, p. 82], who states ``despite the ease with hypotheses; (2) aid in the investigation of the validity which we may identify meaningful groupings of organ- and utility of existing typologies based on logical and isations, no commonly accepted classi®cation scheme intuitive considerations; (3) serve as a basis for predict- has been developed''. ing organisational decisions or change and (4) permit With this stimulus, a project funded by the the researchers to readily specify the universe from Engineering Physical Sciences Research Council (Grant which their samples of organisations could be drawn. No. GR/K97974) was initiated to investigate the feasi- McKelvey [5] went further by arguing that the formu- bility of constructing cladistic classi®cations of manu- lation of a classi®cation is a necessary prerequisite for facturing systems. The remainder of this paper details the maturation of organisation science and that, if a the methodology, ®ndings and conclusions of that formal and scienti®c classi®cation existed, there would study. be no need for contingency theory. Biologists do not need contingency theory because their classi®cations make it clear that one does not apply ®ndings about reptiles to mammals when working at a speci®c level 2. Introduction to the biological schools of classi®cation of the classi®cation. The argument for creating a classi®cation is to some There are two main principles of classi®cation within extent demonstrated by the large number of typologies the biological sciences: the phenetic and the phyloge- and classi®cations that have been produced by netic principles. From these two underlying principles researchers from the social sciences and applied emerge three approaches to classi®cation, or schools of sciences and that many academic disciplines teach with classi®cation: phenetic, evolutionary and cladistic (refer reference to some form of classi®cation. It should be to Fig. 1). The three schools of classi®cation are di€er- noted that a typology is a description of groups, whose entiated on the basis of how closely they adhere to a di€erences are identi®ed solely accordingly to the purely phylogenetic principle. That is, the species are research focus of the investigator. Existing schemes classi®ed according to how recently they share a com- which embrace the subject of organisations include: or- mon ancestor. Phenetic classi®cations are non-evol- ganisational strategies [6], voluntary associations [7], utionary and are thus at one end of the evolutionary canning ®rms and farmers unions [8], general organis- focus scale, whilst cladistics is a purist approach to the ational classi®cations [9±11] and manufacturing-based phylogenetic principle. Evolutionary classi®cations are classi®cations [12±25]. For a review of the above or- a synthesis of the phenetic and phylogenetic principles. ganisational typologies, the reader is referred to Refs. Phylogenetic classi®cations have become known as [1,26,27]. cladistic classi®cations, because the phylogenetic prin- The authors of this article sought a classi®cation ciple was defended by the German entomologist Willi which would facilitate the storage, alignment and Hennig [29] and supporters of his ideas called the prin- development of structural models of manufacturing ciple phylogenetic systematics, which has now evolved systems. It was intended that this classi®cation of into the term cladism (from the Greek `klados' for models would provide researchers and consultants with branch). a generic library of structural solutions for enabling The cladistic school's approach to classi®cation manufacturing systems to maximise their operating involves studying the evolutionary relationships e€ectiveness. The de®ciencies of existing classi®cations between entities with reference to the common ancestry of manufacturing systems, prohibited the realisation of of the group. Constructing a classi®cation using evol- the intended bene®ts of combining a library of ideal utionary relationships is considered bene®cial, because models (solutions) with a workable classi®cation of the classi®cation will be unique and unambiguous. manufacturing systems. This issue was discussed by This is because evolution is actual and mankind is cur- McCarthy [27, p. 46], who concluded that ``previous rently unable to change evolutionary history, thus pro- research into developing manufacturing classi®cations viding the classi®cation with an external reference has been based on a comprehensive understanding of point. With phenetic classi®cations there is no such
  • 3. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 79 Fig. 1. Biological schools of classi®cation. reference point and thus in the words of Ridley [29, p. and typifying the emergence of new manufacturing sys- 367], ``Cladism is theoretically the best justi®ed system tems. This would help clarify the confusion on whether of classi®cation. It has a deep philosophic justi®cation fractal, virtual and holonic manufacturing systems which phenetic and evolutionary classi®cations lack'' actually exist or are simply buzz words. This was an Reviews of the three schools of classi®cation [29±31] issue raised by the Engineering Physical Sciences assess the schools on their ability to produce natural Research Council [32]. A cladistic classi®cation of and objective classi®cations, rather than arti®cial and manufacturing systems could provide knowledge and subjective classi®cations. Cladistics satis®es both these observations on the patterns of distributed character- criteria, as the entities within a cladistic classi®cation istics exhibited by the manufacturing systems over will resemble each other in terms of the de®ning char- their evolutionary development. This knowledge could acters and the non-de®ning characters (characters not lead to pro®table hypotheses about the macro- and used to represent the phylogenetic relationships). micro-evolutionary mechanisms which in¯uence manu- Cladistics conforms to the criteria of objectivity facturing competitiveness and survival. Finally, many because it represents a real unambiguous and natural organisations live their lives looking forward, but to property of the entity (evolutionary relationships) and comprehend themselves they must look backwards. thus di€erent rational people, working independently The resultant comprehension cannot be used to extrap- should be able to agree on a classi®cation. There could olate the future, but it does inform them of where they be valid disagreements between independent investi- are and how they got there, and this information is gators, but these will be down to assumptions and dis- vital for any organisation intending to embark on a agreements on the character data and not the journey of change. underlying philosophy. One of the greatest strengths of the cladistic approach is that the representation of the classi®cation (the cladogram), illustrates the data, 3. Cladistics assumptions and results, making all decisions transpar- ent. This not the case with existing organisational The application of cladistics to manufacturing sys- classi®cations. Section 5 of this paper presents a dis- tems implies certain assumptions about organisational cussion on the confusion which exists between the forms, their existence and diversity. Cladistic classi®- types of manufacturing system which are believed to cations are produced according to how recently they exist. share a common ancestor. This means that two manu- In summary, a cladistic classi®cation of manufactur- facturing species that share a recent and common ing systems would provide a system for conducting, ancestor will be placed in the same group and two documenting and coordinating comparative studies of manufacturing species sharing a more distant common manufacturing organisations. Such a system could pro- ancestor might be placed in di€erent groups, but they vide the consensus for formally approving, validating would be in the same family. As the common ancestor
  • 4. 80 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 of two manufacturing species becomes more and more inheritance is controlled by the organisational distant, they are grouped further and further apart in equivalent of genes (knowledge transfer or memes the classi®cation. Eventually all organisations could be [38] or competence elements (comps) [36]), which placed in a classi®cation possibly known as the `king- are passed on to o€spring by chromosomes dom of organisations'. For this principle of classi®- (people, communication, society) in the same form cation to apply to manufacturing organisations and as they were inherited from the previous gener- their systems, investigators must agree that organis- ation [39]. If heredity were perfect, the principle of ations evolve and that as new organisational forms variation would not exist. The principle of natural emerge, it is possible to identify the distinguishing selection suggests that manufacturing systems with characteristics from the old organisational forms. a superior adaptation generate similar manufactur- Supporting this assumption are organisational theorists ing systems (o€spring) and as long as the o€spring who have not produced a complete theory of organis- resemble their parent, the characters of manufac- ational evolution, but have proposed some key con- turing systems that generate more o€spring than cepts which include: organisational ecology [33,34], average will increase in frequency over time. This organisational systematics [35,36], the evolution of new concept is supported by Hannan and Freeman [34] organisational forms [28] and the dynamics of organis- who believe that selection pressures, force organis- ational speciation [37]. These concepts and the assump- ations to imitate the successful organisations, the tions that accompany them attempt to understand the result being a reduction in organisational diversity forces which determine which organisational form is and a net increase of a particular type of organis- viable for a certain environment; the mechanisms ational form. The fourth principle, the principle of which exist to preserve organisational forms and the adaptation, refers to the variations in manufactur- mechanisms which are passed from one generation of ing systems which provide an advantage for sur- organisations to another. viving and existing. This is when manufacturing In summary, the assumptions which govern the con- systems change so as to maintain existence. struction of a manufacturing cladogram are listed below: . Manufacturing systems evolve and have ancestors. 3.1. The cladogram This is evident by the way historians portray the advancement of manufacturing companies from pre- A cladogram is a tree structure capable of represent- historic man with his tools, to ancient workshops, to ing the evolutionary history of a group of manufactur- the guild of craftsman, to the cottage industries and ing systems. The tree structure illustrates the to factories which eventually became mechanised relationships between the di€erent members of the and automated. group under study, according to the acquisition and . Manufacturing systems speciate. The Ford Motor polarity of characters. Company is described today as a lean producer, but Fig. 2 shows a group of manufacturing species con- its history demonstrates that it once was a craft sisting of Ancient craft systems, standardised craft sys- shop which developed into an intensive mass produ- tems, modern craft systems, neocraft systems and skilled cer. This suggests that the Ford manufacturing large scale producers. This ®gure is a section from the plants have gone through at least two speciation master cladogram of automotive assembly plants (Fig. events to produce new `breeds of organisation'. 3 and Table 1). This pilot study was undertaken to . Manufacturing systems are subject to the theory of provide a worked example which would introduce the natural selection. This theory consists of four basic reader to cladistics and the various types of cladistic principles: the principle of variation, the principle of grouping that exist. The construction of this cladogram heredity, the principle of natural selection and the is reported in Section 4. It is important to note that principle of adaptation [29]. The principle of vari- this was a pioneering study and that many of the types ation states that there has to be variation within a of manufacturing system proposed in Figs. 2 and 3 population of manufacturing systems. These vari- will not be known to the reader. This is not because ations need to occur and happen at random. The they are newly formed types of manufacturing systems, principle of heredity states that some manufactur- but rather that the automobile industry has not been ing o€spring, on average have to resemble their studied using the cladistic approach. The labels given parents more than resemble other members of to the species shown in Figs. 2 and 3 do not conform their species. This is found when new organis- to any codes of nomenclature for organisations, ations are born within an industry. They are more because none exist. Constructing a classi®cation is a similar to organisations within that industry, than taxonomic process and thus by the de®nition of taxon- they are to organisations in other industries. This omy, groups (taxa ) are formed and are then allocated
  • 5. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 81 Fig. 2. Five taxa cladogram. Fig. 3. Automotive cladogram.
  • 6. 82 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 Table 1 Automotive cladistic characters 1 Standardisation of parts 2 assembly time standards 3 assembly line layout 4 reduction of craft skills 5 automation (machine paced shops) 6 pull production system 7 reduction of lot size 8 pull procurement planning 9 operator based machine maintenance 10 quality circles 11 employee innovation prizes 12 job rotation 13 large volume production 14 suppliers selected primarily by price. 15 exchange of workers with suppliers 16 socialisation training (master/apprentice learning) 17 proactive training programs 18 product range reduction 19 automation 20 multiple subcontracting 21 quality systems (procedures, tools, ISO 9000) 22 quality philosophy (culture, way of working, TQM) 23 open book policy with suppliers; sharing of cost data and pro®ts 24 ¯exible, multifunctional workforce 25 set-up time reduction 26 Kaizen change management 27 TQM sourcing; suppliers selected on the basis of quality 28 100% inspection/sampling 29 U-shape layout 30 preventive maintenance 31 individual error correction; products are not rerouted to a special ®xing station 32 sequential dependency of workers 33 line balancing 34 team policy (team motivation, pay and autonomy) 35 Toyota veri®cation of assembly line (TVAL) 36 groups vs. teams 37 job enrichment 38 manufacturing cells 39 concurrent engineering 40 ABC costing 41 excess capacity 42 ¯exible automation for product versions 43 agile automation for di€erent products 44 insourcing 45 Immigrant workforce 46 dedicated automation 47 division of labour 48 employees are system tools and simply operate m/c's 49 employees are system developers; if motivated and managed they can solve problems and create value 50 product focus 51 parallel processing (in equipment) 52 dependence on written rules; unwillingness to challenge rules such as the economic order quantity 53 further intensi®cation of labour; employees are consider part of the machine and will be replaced by a machine if possible a name (nomy = naming). Every e€ort has been made such as craft, mass, agile and lean have been used. to assign labels which describe the de®ning character- Thus, the labels given to the species are simply for the istics of the system and where possible existing terms purpose of di€erentiation and communication. The in-
  • 7. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 83 formation content provided by the labels is considered 3. Code characters. to be a level higher than simply referring to each 4. Establish character polarity. species, as species 1, species 2, species 3, etc. 5. Construct conceptual cladogram. The cladograms illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3 are both 6. Construct factual cladogram. clades, as they contain a set of species including the 7. Taxa nomenclature. most recent common ancestor of all the members con- In order to demonstrate how a cladogram is pro- tained within that set. It is important to understand duced, the cladogram in Fig. 3 is referred to. The cla- that Fig. 2 is a portion or segment of Fig. 3 and that dogram is a classi®cation of automotive assembly both Figs. are clades, despite the fact that Fig. 2 is a plants. It was produced to the conceptual level and subset of Fig. 3. This is due to research focus (establish was compiled using data from several studies of the evolutionary boundaries) and the information pre- automotive industry. These studies include the evol- sented. That is, Fig. 2 in its entirety and in isolation, is ution, population density and mortality in the automo- by de®nition a clade, despite the fact that Fig. 2 can tive industry; [44±48]; historical accounts of the be expanded to Fig. 3. If we assume that a manufac- industry, sometimes focusing on speci®c geographic turing researcher is only interested in the clade shown regions; [49,50], to speci®c studies which examined the in Fig. 2 and that his speci®c interest is devising manu- change in manufacturing techniques used within the facturing strategies for modern craft systems, neocraft industry [51±53]. Technical, business and ®nancial systems and skilled large scale producers. Then this reports produced by the automobile industry were also group of manufacturing species is known as the obtained. These documents detailed events and issues ingroup (the study group or the group of interest). which were in¯uencing how the industry was evolving. Observations and hypotheses are made about the The most signi®cant of these documents are listed as ingroup by comparing it with the various outgroups references [54±78]. and most importantly with the sister group (the out- group that is genealogically the most closely related group to the ingroup). It should be noted that the 4.1. Select the manufacturing clade ancestor of the ingroup is not the sister group, because the ancestor by de®nition will always be a member of The starting point is to de®ne the clade to be stu- the ingroup. died. Such a step requires a decision which in itself is a The numbers shown on the branches of Figs. 2 and form of classi®cation, as the investigator must select a 3 denote the acquisition of characters. Character `1' group of manufacturing systems which satisfy certain (standardisation of parts) has a speci®c location on the research objectives or interests. For example, a manu- tree that indicates that ancient craft systems do not facturing clade could be di€erentiated on the basis of possess character `1' and that standardised craft sys- the market industry into which it was born to survive, tems, modern craft systems, neocraft systems and skilled e.g. the automotive industry, electronic component large scale producers do possess character `1'. Thus, manufacturers, cutting tool manufacturers, etc. ancient craft systems are the ancestor of a new gener- Classi®cations based on industry di€erentiation are ation of manufacturing systems that are based on the widely used and accepted and are dicult to ignore. In acquisition of character `1'. Similarly, modern craft sys- the United Kingdom, the basic framework for analys- tems are a descendant of standardised craft systems as ing industrial activities is the standard industrial classi- it later acquired character `2' (production time stan- ®cation (SIC) [79]. The SIC is described by Price and dards) and character `47' (division of labour). The Mueller [80] as an empirical classi®cation which is not characters `13', `48' and `50' resulted in the formation derived in any way from theoretical ideas on how ac- of neocraft systems, whilst the characters `3', `16' and tivities should be grouped. However, it does group `32' result in the emergence of skilled large scale produ- together organisational entities that are involved in cers. resource exchange and transformation of a similar nature. This description of organisational activity equates to the de®nition of an organisational ecosys- tem as proposed by Baum and Singh [81]. A clade by 4. Building a manufacturing cladogram de®nition can be equivalent to di€erent levels in the hierarchy. This is illustrated by Fig. 4, which shows The proposed framework for constructing a cladistic how the ecological and systematic hierarchies of organ- classi®cation of manufacturing systems has been ident- isational evolution relate to each other (this ®gure has i®ed and adapted from classic biological approaches to been adapted from [81] to include the clade level). cladism [40±43]. The seven stages are listed below: For the purposes of this study, the automobile 1. Select the manufacturing clade. assembly industry (the clade) was selected, because it 2. Determine the characters. exists as a population of manufacturing organisations
  • 8. 84 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 4.2. Determine the characters Once the clade has been selected, a number of di€er- ent types of manufacturing system would appear to be a member of that clade (mass, lean, agile, craft, job, etc.). The complete membership of this particular clade is not yet known, because no formal or validated clades for manufacturing systems exist. It is common practice to work on existing clades within the biologi- cal sciences, because the majority of the taxonomic based research, is concerned with validating, enhancing and expanding the knowledge contained within existing cladograms. As this was a new study, a primary objec- tive of the research was to examine the evolutionary development of the entity and to identify the members of the clade. This is a process of `mining for species' and during this historical excavation, evidence is sought which will suggest the possible existence of a particular type of manufacturing system. This evidence tends to be in the form of published material or Fig. 4. Hierarchies of organisational evolution, adapted from archives, which detail the existence of the manufactur- [81]. ing system, along with a description of its operations and de®ning characteristics, the location where it exists/existed and a date/period when it was ®rst dis- (species) that make and sell a closely related set of well covered or developed. de®ned products. It is an industry which is widely This mining process uncovers the characters which known and studied and this provides bene®ts in terms will be used to build the cladogram. Whilst undertak- of communicating, disseminating and validating the ing this exploration there are a number of steps which research. It is also a relatively young industry which can be followed to help identify the ®nal set of charac- has been extensively documented and this makes the ters which will be used to construct the cladogram. investigation into phylogenetic relationships relatively The process of determining the characters for the auto- easy, when compared to an industry such as the hand motive cladogram consisted of two steps: character tool manufacturing industry, which can be traced back search and character selection. Character search is the to prehistoric man. This is an important point, because task of building the initial set of characters, by simply there were no existing cladistic classi®cations of organ- listing known attributes possessed by automotive isations which could be used as a reference or starting assembly plants. Determining which characters from point, so it was important to select a study group this initial set should be used to construct a classi®- which would satisfy and assist the research objectives cation is the task of character selection. in terms of information collection and results dissemi- nation. Also, the decision to study the automobile 4.2.1. Character search assembly industry would enable both the dissemination When searching for the manufacturing systems that and exploitation of any bene®ts to be related to the constitute the clade and the characters that distinguish standard industrial classi®cation (SIC). the species phylogenetically, it is helpful to know what Identifying the ancestor of a clade is a process of to look for and what to avoid. Whereas, an attribute is historical investigation where evidence is accumulated a descriptive property or feature, a taxonomic charac- to determine the origins of a certain manufacturing ter is a feature which is used in a classi®cation. It is type. For example, the origins of car manufacturing also important to di€erentiate between the character stem back to Karl Benz and his three-wheel auto- (the actual feature) and the character states which are mobile. In terms of manufacturing systems, this would a condition that this feature exhibits. For example, the be regarded as a craft system which evolved into an character `plant layout' has numerous character states: early factory system and then into a mass type organis- job shop, ¯ow line, functional layout, manufacturing ation. The process of identifying an ancestor is initially cells, etc. ambiguous and dicult, both for biologists and manu- The school of classi®cation used will contain theories facturing researchers, but the process of constructing which determine what is an acceptable taxonomic char- the cladogram con®rms or refutes this initial assump- acter. For instance, in cladistics, a taxonomic character tion. has to point to a homology between two organisations,
  • 9. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 85 whereas in phenetic classi®cations, a taxonomic charac- are found as they come to complement the information ter contributes to the mathematical tightness of a clus- content of the classi®cation. This last point applies ter. speci®cally to cladistics, because cladists tend to To avoid searching for and selecting characters quickly eliminate characters which have no evolution- which are inappropriate Sneath and Sokal [43] describe ary signi®cance in their data sets and therefore produce certain kinds of characters which should be clearly dis- classi®cations objectively and eciently. quali®ed from a taxonomic study. These are listed as In addition to searching for characters by studying inadmissible characters and include: the entity, the use of reference characters was con- . Meaningless characters. A character must re¯ect the sidered. That is, does an exhaustive list of manufactur- internal nature of the entity, therefore, the name of ing or organisational characteristics exist and would a manufacturing company would not be included as this list help the search and selection process. To build a character to represent the activities of a manufac- such a list has been a common objective for many tax- turing system. onomists, but there are several problems associated . Logically correlated characters. Those characters with the management and use of such a list. The cost which are a logical consequence of another, should of building an exhaustive list would be high and there be excluded. For example, if we assume that cell- is no evidence that building such a list is feasible. based team working, requires a cellular layout, then There are many issues to manage: duplication of data, there is a logical correlation between these two char- partial redundancy between characters, correlation and acters, i.e. if one character state exists, another will dependency patterns between characters. Even if such automatically. a list was available, using it might not be cost-ecient, . Partially logical correlation's. The degree of indepen- because the cost of selecting characters from all poss- dence is the subject of this kind of character, as a ible characters could be prohibitive. greater number of cases exist where the dependence The primary bene®t of a reference list of characters, of one character upon another is only partial. For is that it provides a feel good factor and a con®dent instance the size of a workforce will be to a degree, starting point for researchers producing a classi®- relate to the number of machines that a manufactur- cation. However, total reliance on a so-called exhaus- ing company has. After further investigation it could tive reference list, would be foolish and misguided, be found that the degree of dependency is small, because all classi®cations are undertaken in situations because other factors, such as the type of technology where the complete character set is not known. To and the type of product also in¯uence this character. assist the search for automotive characters and to Therefore, very few partially logical correlations are understand the signi®cance of the characters with regarded as inadmissible. Hull [82] provides an regards to the entity and its evolution, several categor- empirical correlation to estimate the degree of inde- isations of characters were identi®ed and referred to: pendence between two characters. [4,36,83±85]. It is important that the categories do not . Invariant characters. If a character which is normally dictate, but suggest, because the ultimate decision gov- variable, is invariable for the sample of entities erning character selection within a cladistic study is the under study, then it should be removed from the existence of a synapomorphy which results in an hom- analysis. Such characters o€er no bene®ts in terms ology. Synapomorphies are characters which have a of assessing similarity. An example is the absence or derived state and are shared by two or more taxa and presence of manufacturing technology. When con- thus indicate common ancestry for the manufacturing sidering all forms of organisation, this character systems within this group. would vary from organisation to organisation. The distinction between homology and analogy is a However, as the presence of manufacturing technol- fundamental concept of cladistics. A homology rep- ogy is a conforming de®nition for a manufacturing resents `true similarity', whilst analogy is considered system, this character would not change for a popu- super®cial similarity which generates noise or mislead- lation containing only manufacturing systems. ing observations. An analogy is a structural grouping The search for automotive assembly characters con- where a character is shared by a set of species and is sisted of investigating the historical development of the derived from a common ancestor. Thus, choosing a car making industry by analysing the work and data character which is an analogy should be avoided. The of the studies cited in Section 3. The characters ident- relationship between analogy and homology is clearly i®ed, although well known, were treated as arbitrary demonstrated in Fig. 5 [29]. It is important to note the or capricious characters, as their identi®cation for cla- three groupings, as only monophyletic groups are distic purposes must be con®rmed. Taxonomists dis- included in a cladistic classi®cation. The monophyletic cover characters whilst studying the entity and groups are the groups which result in an unambiguous constructing the classi®cation, thus many characters hierarchic arrangement, because the group contains a
  • 10. 86 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 Fig. 5. Homologies and analogies. common ancestor and all its descendants and there is age to the extent that it would not emerge in species no con¯icting character data. which do not already exhibit character `14' (mass sub- Consider Fig. 3, and the characters `8' (pull procure- contracting by price bidding). ment planning) and `20' (multiple subcontracting). Character `8' appears in the Toyota production system 4.2.2. Character selection family, which includes: lean producers and agile produ- This is a screening process and in the case of cladis- cers, whereas character `20' appears in the mass produ- tics, a character is validated if it is a synapomorphy. cers family, which includes: pseudo lean producers, Thus, the selection phase in cladistics is equivalent to a modern mass producers, European mass producers and test of homology. Two methods were used on the intensive mass producers. If characters `8' and `20' are automotive study to screen characters: (1) direct test of replaced with one character, say character `Z' (procure- homologies and (2) resolving character con¯icts. It ment policy), the structure of the cladogram would should be noted that prior to building a cladogram the change. This is because homologies have been created organisational systematist may only have a general between taxa which are in fact evolutionarily remote. knowledge of the ancestral links between species. Thus, character `Z' is an example of an analogous Therefore, it is not obvious that a character is an ana- character because pull procurement is constrained by logous character at the beginning of the analysis, it is character `6' (pull production) and would not naturally only con®rmed during the construction and analysis of emerge in mass producers. Similarly, it is postulated the cladogram. that character `20' is associated or dependent with The direct test method is based on the argument some or maybe all of the characters on the same line- that homologies and analogies tend to exist on a conti-
  • 11. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 87 nuum of resemblance, where the homologies are at the homologies after a preliminary cladogram has been high extreme resemblance end, whilst the analogies constructed is that the validity of a character is ques- tend to exhibit only moderate resemblance [43]. Thus, tioned only if it generates a con¯ict with the others even if a complete and valid historical account (`fossil characters which are consistent and congruent with record') for automotive manufacturing systems existed, each other. Most classi®cations will have a consistent the investigator would still be dependent on resem- core, which can be identi®ed in cladistics by running a blance based similarity. From a purist point of view, clique analysis [86]. Any character which does not cladists argue that resemblance is not a de®nitive test belong to the clique set should go through a thorough of homology, but there is a strong case to suggest that test of homology. It should be stressed that it is often it is a good indicator, because there are external, com- at this stage that many characters are usually discov- positional and structural measures which relate phenetic ered and re®ned, as the phylogeny of the clade is similarity with homology. Thus, the direct test consists gradually revealed and understood by the taxonomist. of the external method, compositional method and the structural method. 4.3. Code characters The external method can be applied without study- ing or knowing the internal structure of the feature. Once a set of characters has been identi®ed, along Any external characteristic of the feature is used to with the set of automobile assembly species which are identify the existence of some fundamental diversity a consequence of these characters, the relationship within the feature. For example, the procurement sys- between the characters and the species are examined in tems that typically exist in lean manufacturing produ- order to allow the construction of the cladogram. A cers tend to have subcontractors/suppliers which are cladogram can be constructed from the character data, located within a short distance of the assembly plant. because a cladistic character has three properties: It was common for subcontractors/suppliers in direction, order and polarity [87]. The coding of a Western manufacturers to be located almost anywhere character facilitates the processing of the character set. on the planet. Thus, from an external perspective only, Ordering is that property of a character which refers there is a signi®cant di€erence and the location of sub- to the possible character change sequences that can contractors relative to the main assembly plant, could occur. The character property, direction, refers to the be a potential character, because no evidence of ana- transition between the character states. When an inves- logy has yet materialised. The compositional method tigator determines the actual direction of transform- requires the investigator to list the parts which consti- ation the character is said have a `polarised' state. tute the considered character. This internal breakdown is then used in a comparison with other organisational species. For example, a reduction in the number of tier 4.4. Establish character polarity levels in a supply chain might be evident in service or- ganisations and retail organisations and this circum- To assess character polarity, an outgroup comparison stantial evidence could be used to guide the selection is undertaken. This is based on the recognition that of characters for manufacturing systems. With the once the characteristics of the closest relative have structural method, the focus is on how the di€erent el- been discovered, the information for determining ements of the character interact with each other and if which characters are primitive and which are derived is there is a case for splitting a potential character into revealed. Hence, this comparison is based on the rule two or more characters. This decision is made purely that for a given character with two or more states on the basis of how the elements exist and their depen- within a group, the state occurring in related groups is dence with one another. assumed to be primitive [88]. Any character state Identifying and resolving character con¯icts occurs found only in the ingroup is considered to be derived continually during stages 2±6 of the cladogram frame- [30]. Decisions governing the character polarity found work, but the ®nal validation is a postcladogram con- at the outgroup node can be either decisive, with the struction exercise (stages 5 and 6). Once a preliminary node labelled as primitive (0) or derived (1), or equiv- cladogram has been constructed, it usually exhibits cer- ocal, with the node labelled primitive/derived (0, 1). tain character con¯icts. These con¯icts can be natural If this method is applied to the cladogram shown in occurrences, such as parallelism or coevolution. They Fig. 3, the outcome would be inconclusive, because can also result from analogous characters, or improper this tree has already been resolved and there are no coding of characters. Improper coding can be the inconsistencies in the character data. Therefore, in result of analogous or imprecise de®nition of charac- order to demonstrate this method, a cladogram con- ters states, or using the wrong polarity (i.e. confusing sisting of taxa and characters from the automobile the derived and the primitive state), or using characters study is used, but the data and structure of the tree which are too general. The advantage of validating have not been resolved. This unresolved data (Table 2)
  • 12. 88 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 Table 2 Data matrix for Figs. 6±9 Character 1 Character 2 Character 3 Character 4 Ancient craft (AC) 1 1 0 0 Standardised craft (SC) 0 1 1 0/1 Modern craft (MC) 0 0 1 0 Neo craft (NC) 1 1 1 1 Skilled large scale (SLS) 1 1 1 1 Large scale (LS) 0 0 0 0 Mass (M) 0/1 0/1 0/1 0/1 is used to demonstrate the process of determining char- acter polarity (Figs. 6±10). Fig. 6 is a possible cladogram structure for the data contained in Table 2. The nodes are labelled 1±6, whilst the species are labelled using letters (AC, SC, MC, NC, SLS, LS and M). Beginning with the charac- ter 1 from Table 2, each branch end of the cladogram is labelled with the corresponding character state (Fig. 7). Next, starting from the furthest branches (branches AC and SC) a polarity decision for node 2 is made. The nodes of the cladogram are labelled `0' if the lower node and adjacent branch are both `0', or `0' Fig. 7. First polarity decision using character data 1. and `0, 1'. The nodes will be labelled `1' if the lower node and adjacent branch are both `1' or `1' and `0,1'. If the branches/nodes have di€erent labels, one `0' and using the same process, but by beginning at the lowest the other `1', then the node is labelled `0, 1'. The root node on the branching structure (node 4). Thus, node node (node 1) is not considered, because in order to 4 is labelled `1', because NC is `1' and SLS is `1' (Fig. analyse this branch another outgroup is needed. Thus, 8). Continuing towards the ingroup (M) the remaining node 2 is labelled `0, 1', because the ®rst branch (AC) nodes (nodes 3 and 5) are labelled, until only the out- is `1' and the second branch (SC) is `0'. group node (node 6) remains. Node 5 is labelled `0/1' The next stage is to identify what is termed the near- because LS is `0' and node 4 is `1' and node 3 is est branching structure, which occurs at node 6 (Fig. labelled `0', because MC is `0' and node 2 is `0/1' (Fig. 7). The nodes of the branching structure are labelled 9). The analysis for character 1 is complete when node 6 is labelled. Node 6 is found to be decisive (`0'), Fig. 6. Determining the character polarity for mass producers and its corresponding outgroups. Fig. 8. Second polarity decision using character data 1.
  • 13. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 89 state will be decisive for the outgroup node. If the last outgroup has a di€erent character state, then the char- acter state decision will be equivocal. 4.5. Construct conceptual cladogram Various tools exist to construct cladograms which provide a `best estimate' of the evolutionary relation- ships contained within the data matrix. These tools have one of two approaches: 1. Construct the best cladogram using a speci®c algor- ithm. 2. Apply a criterion for choosing between alternative Fig. 9. Third and fourth polarity decision using character cladograms. data 1. The ®rst approach is faster, but does not rank the trees which are considered suboptimal. The second because node 3 is `0' and node 5 is `0/1' (Fig. 10). approach provides ranking for all the trees under com- Thus, by using the outgroup comparison a best esti- parison, but it is not able to generate exact results for mate of the polarity was made and `0' was found to be matrices with more than 12 taxa, owing to compu- primitive and `1' is derived for character 1. tational diculties [12]. This process of assessing character polarity is made From these two approaches four methods for estimat- for each character. It should be noted that although ing phylogeny have developed: (1) methods based on this procedure plays a signi®cant role in identifying pairwise data, (2) parsimony methods, (3) Lake's character polarity and resolving any con¯icts that may method of invariants and (4) maximum likelihood phy- exist in the cladogram, the ®nal validation of character logenies. The parsimony method selects the shortest states is subject to the rule of parsimony (Section 4.5). tree, i.e. the tree requiring the least evolutionary charac- In summary, two rules of analysis are used to con- ter changes. This method is the most popular because it duct an outgroup comparison: the doublet rule and the has a simple rule of application which is; the longer the alternating sister group rule [88]. With the doublet tree length, the worse the ®t; the shorter the tree length rule, if the sister group and the ®rst two consecutive the better the ®t. The other methods vary between parsi- outgroups have the same character state, then that monious and phenetic, but were developed to compare character state is decisive for the outgroup node. Any nucleotide specimens, DNA and molecular sequences. two consecutive outgroups with the same character Thus, a parsimonious approach is adopted as it aims to state are called a doublet. With the alternating sister select a best tree on an evolutionary basis rather than a group rule, if the character states are alternating down phenetic basis. Also, the method is based on the tree the cladogram, and if the last outgroup has the same structure rather than elements of the entity (DNA, character state as the sister group, then the character nucleotides, molecular distances, etc.) and thus there would appear to be no limitations when applying it to a manufacturing cladogram. For a detailed account of parsimony methods, see [89]. The testing of a cladogram is essentially based on its ability to explain the phylogeny of the clade. With this aim there are two sets of problems: 1. The proposed relationships are not acceptable or not historically coherent. 2. Several con¯icting cladograms of the same length are obtained. Refusing a cladogram because it does not ®t with historical evidence is a dangerous exercise as there are no general rules linking the number of characters acquired by a species and its period of existence. Very evolved species might become un®t in a later period. Fig. 10. Polarity decision for node 6 (outgroup node) using Once a cladogram has been produced, the ®rst step character data 1. is to map the character changes onto the tree in order
  • 14. 90 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 to have a global view of the proposed phylogeny. It is cess results in the organisation acquiring and reversing common practice to shape test the cladogram by add- the necessary character states which will lead to the ing additional species and characters. It is important new organisational form. This reversal is similar to to note that adding characters and species at this stage Sagasti's model of adaptive behaviour [91], which of the framework is easier and more reliable than at occurs due to selective pressures. Reactive reversals are the clade building stage. not part of the phylogeny of a clade, they are a When examining the top section of the cladogram, measure of a systems' lack of strategic focus. the investigator should question if the acquisition Biological organisms tend to evolve according to the could have led to a speciation, or if it is just a case of rule of parsimony (smallest number of evolutionary anagenesis. If a character could have potentially cre- changes), but organisations which to some extent in¯u- ated a viable species, and if historical evidence of the ence evolutionary destiny, do not always take the most existence of this species can be gathered, then the parsimonious route. species should be added. The automotive cladogram was constructed using 4.7. Taxa nomenclature MacClade Version 3 [90]. MacClade provides an inter- action environment for exploring phylogeny and resol- The name given to a taxa of manufacturing systems ving character con¯icts. MacClade allows the user to is more than a word which simply acts as a means of manipulate cladogram structures and character data reference. The name given to a taxa must act as a ve- and to visualise the characters on each branch. Finally, hicle for communication, be unambiguous and univer- MacClade provides tools for moving branches, rerout- sal. It should also indicate its position within the ing clades and automatically searching for the most classi®cation hierarchy. Je€rey [40] describes the codes parsimonious tree. of nomenclature used for plants (International Code of Botanical Nomenclature), for bacteria (International 4.6. Construct factual cladogram Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria) and for animals (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature). This stage involves studying real and existing manu- Each code di€ers in detail but certain basic features facturing organisations in order to observe the manu- are common. For a summary of the relevant codes, facturing systems which they operate. This typically discussed in an organisational context, the reader is consists of plant inspections, discussions with employ- referred to [92]. ees, assessment of planning and control procedures and assessment of documentation (annual reports, business plans and surveys, etc.). The study aims to 5. Applications validate the existence of the characters identi®ed during the previous stages. It will test the validity of This article began by discussing the reasons for any proposed tree structure by ensuring that the char- undertaking a classi®cation study using cladistics. acter data matrix is complete (i.e. no important histori- Although many of the reasons presented might appear cal events which relate to characters have been to be common sense, this does not dilute their import- omitted) and that the assigned polarity is correct. This ance and contribution to any serious and scienti®c in- stage is to an extent, validation by dissemination, vestigation into organisations. The following because the factual data will be used to verify the con- discussion presents possible academic and practical ap- ceptual data. The validity of any proposed tree struc- plications of cladistics. ture will also be tested by allocating existing organisations a position on the cladogram. 5.1. Understanding organisational diversity The factual stage is undertaken because character (organisational systematics) reversal (the dropping of a character) is a possible pro- cess with manufacturing systems. This paper suggests There is common agreement on the de®nition of the that two forms of character reversal could occur within attributes of a just-in-time manufacturing system, see organisations: phylogenetic reversal and reactive rever- for instance [93, 94], but these de®nitions are su- sal. Phylogenetic reversal is illustrated in Fig. 2(a) by ciently vague to cause confusion with the terms ¯exible character `(20±)' where by the character has been manufacturing systems, agile manufacturing systems, reversed naturally by the circumstances of evolution world class manufacturing systems and lean manufac- and thus is illustrated on the cladogram. Reactive turing systems. This problem has been identi®ed by character reversal occurs, because organisations realise many researchers and is summarised by the following that their current position is at the end of an inap- quote: ``( F F F) the diversity involved in the manufactur- propriate evolutionary path and take the decision to ing industry is such that it is unlikely that all industry acquire a new organisational form. This change pro- types should be aiming for the same procedures, pol-
  • 15. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 91 icies and culture. Yet there has been very little research turing terms, examples of stress are unreliable sourcing which tries to identify what the term world class (WC) mechanisms, lack of skilled labour, lack of ®nance, means for certain industry types. This leaves the cur- machine breakdowns, etc. Disturbance is a serious en- rent apparently poor performers with inadequate infor- vironmental event which happens occasionally. mation to decide whether they are really not of WC Examples of disturbances in biology are ®re, frost, standard, and, if not, insucient appropriate guidance earthquakes, etc. In manufacturing, disturbances are to determine how to achieve the WC goals to which strikes, ®re, the loss of a market. If several organis- most would agree to aspire''. [95, p. 43]. ations exist in a perfect environment with no stress Despite the need for knowledge on the evolution of and no disturbance, they tend to be competitors (C). new organisational forms, as described in Section 1 of Competitors are merciless and compete to be the tal- this paper, no theoretical consensus exists for organis- lest, biggest, etc. If stress appears in the environment, ing and supporting the vast number of empirical stu- stress tolerators (S) tend to take the lead over competi- dies which examine industrial and organisational tors, whose strategy for survival is not appropriate. If diversity. Using a systematic and comparative method disturbance is high, ruderals (R) are better adapted such as cladistics, permits an assessment of the general- and dominate the environment. Competition is the ity of the attributes of complex systems [96]. Cladistic dominate functional type studied and documented in classi®cations and the desire to develop a theory of or- business studies and in manufacturing management, ganisational di€erences could play a signi®cant role in but it would be interesting and possibly bene®cial to explaining the processes by which the practices and develop policies for creating manufacturing systems structures of organisations and organisational forms which are tolerators or ruderals. persist and exist over time. 5.2. Understanding organisational ecology 5.3. Understanding and achieving organisational change Where as the ®rst application was concerned with creating a systematic system of organisational diver- ( F F F ) an attempt was made to identify a general im- sity, this discussion suggests that cladistic classi®- plementation sequence. However, similar to the ob- cations could provide the comparative index which servation made by Im and Lee [99], a general might assist the creation of theories which focus on or- implementation pattern for the JIT practices could ganisational processes (e.g. replication, mutation, not be established [94, p. 8]. recombination, learning, entrepreneurship, competition and natural selection) and organisational events (e.g. birth, death, transformation, speciation and extinc- The ®rst two applications were academic in nature, tion). Cladistics could be coupled with functional stu- but the deliverables from such applications could pro- dies which seek to ascertain an overall measure for vide organisations with new tools and knowledge complexity, stress resistance, mortality index etc. in an which could help them to be proactive in the manipu- ecosystem. A functional study of organisations would lation of their evolution. Since cladistics is a classi®- aim to forecast environmental/market changes (the cation method which ties its de®nition of similarity to rate of new product introduction, service mechanisms, naturally occurring change processes, the result is that supply relationships, etc.) and forecasts on which man- the information contained within a cladogram is useful ufacturing species will dominate, compete and survive for identifying standard change sequences. A clado- such market and economic conditions. Functional stu- gram could also provide a framework or index for dies and cladistics are viewed as complementary disci- positioning and benchmarking studies [100]. plines by many biologists and philosophers [97], since The analysis of a cladogram goes further than a their results describe di€erent properties of species (re- simple speci®cation of a change sequence. It indicates: spectively, their identity and their strategy for survi- the sequence of steps required to transform an organis- val). The goal of functionalists is to develop a ation to a certain state, along with the characteristics catalogue of knowledge, related to a classi®cation, for which must be dropped (the `unlearning' steps). If identifying strategies for survival. An example of such there is agreement that the cladogram has been con- a classi®cation is the CSR model of Philip Grime from structed according to the rules of parsimony, the physi- the NERC unit of the University of Sheeld [98]. The cal and ®nancial cost of the identi®ed change route CSR model, models the environment along two dimen- would be minimised. sions: stress and disturbance. Stress is a limitation put The tree-like nature of a cladogram could be com- on the resources necessary for the organisations to sur- pared to a map, which once constructed provides or- vive. In biological terms, stress is the lack of nutrients, ganisations with an unambiguous and precise the lack of light, cold temperatures, etc. In manufac- de®nition of the starting point of the change journey.
  • 16. 92 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 If the journey is a mimetic process then it will also Cladistics, as with all classi®cations, is a method for provide a de®nition of the destination. systematically organising knowledge about a popu- lation of entities. It is a process for studying diversity 5.4. Strategy and attempting to identify and understand laws and re- lationships which explain the evolution and existence Despite the popularity of ¯exible manufacturing of the variety groups. Its intellectual and practical systems, managers su€er from inadequate frame- value is derived from this ability to explain. works to help incorporate ¯exibility into their stra- This article suggests that cladistics is a novel and tegic planning [101, p. 7]. appropriate approach for producing an organisational classi®cation, because unlike the best phenetic classi®- A cladogram provides a snapshot of the evolution- cations and the multitude of subjective classi®cations, ary history of a company. Thus, it can be used by cladistics has an underlying philosophy (evolution) and managers to check that their vision for the future is accompanying rules and procedures. Cladistics uses consistent with their understanding of the past. evolutionary relationships to identify and form groups, Cladistics also provides an interesting measure of stra- because evolution is the process which accompanies tegic excellence, through the principle of parsimony. the changes which materialise to produce di€erent or- Strategic management is a discipline which was under ganisational forms. The resulting classi®cation and the close scrutiny in the eighties and many researchers knowledge contained within, provide insights into or- questioned if a correlation could be found between the ganisational diversity. These insights include: observing practice of strategic management and organisational the patterns and events which accompany the organis- performance, usually de®ned as pro®tability. Although ational change and observing the most parsimonious some researchers con®rmed the existence of such a cor- route between di€erent organisational forms. relation [102±104], many others found no correlations This fundamental, but important insight could result whatsoever, [105±109]. Strategic management is con- in organisational cladograms being used as a tool cerned with the long term sustainability of pro®ts and within a change framework, for achieving successful thus strategic excellence can be dicult to de®ne, organisational design and change. Thus, regardless of because assessments may need to view a decade of the industrial sector, organisations could use clado- ®nancial loss before capturing the bene®ts of a well- grams as an evolutionary analysis technique for deter- articulated strategy. mining `where they have been and where they are If there is agreement with the statements that ``( F F F ) now''. This evolutionary analysis could be used to for- successful ®rms have followed more than one route to mulate coherent and appropriate action for managers successful redesign.'', ``Too often, (F F F), pieces are who are organisational architects and planners. missing from the strategies and structures ®rms create in the process of redesign'' [110, p. 129], then the prin- ciple of parsimony could o€er a legitimate de®nition of strategic excellence. Researchers can easily question, a References posterior, how parsimonious the strategy of a ®rm was. The Toyota Motor Company demonstrates a remark- [1] Carper WB, Snizek WE. The nature and types of or- able record of excellent strategic practices, with the ganisational taxonomies: an overview. Acad Manage highly focused introduction of the Toyota production Rev 1980;5(1):66±75. system [111] and its subsequent evolution toward lean [2] Good IJ. Categorisation of classi®cation. In: production. Cladistics could be used to develop a set Mathematics and computer science in medicine and bi- of performance measures which would govern the stra- ology. London: H.M.S.O, 1965. p. 115±28. tegic decision making process within companies. [3] Cormack RM. A review of classi®cation. Proceedings of the Royal Statistical Society 1971;3:321±67. [4] Haas J, Hall R, Johnson N. Toward an empirically de- rived taxonomy of organisations. In: Bovers R, editor. 6. Summary Studies on behaviour in organisations. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1966. p. 157±80. Although classi®cation is an habitual process which [5] McKelvey B, Guidelines for the empirical classi®cation all humans do, the use of classi®cations in organis- of organisations. Adm Sci Q. 1975;20:509±25. [6] Chrisman J, Hofer C, Boulton W. Toward a system for ational science has not reached the same status as the classifying business strategies. Acad Manage Rev classi®cations which exist in physics, chemistry and bi- 1988;13(3):413±28. ology. This paper has sought to describe and justify [7] Gordon CW, Babchuk N. A typology of voluntary or- the bene®ts of organisational classi®cations and in par- ganisations. Am Sociol Rev 1958;24:22±3. ticular cladistic classi®cations of manufacturing sys- [8] Emery FE, Trist EL. The casual texture of organis- tems. ational environments. Human Relat 1965;18:21±32.
  • 17. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 93 [9] Thompson JD. Organisations in action. New York: cedures. In: Special Publications No 19. The University McGraw-Hill, 1967. of Kansas Museum of Natural History, 1991. [10] Perrow C. Organisational analysis: a sociological [31] De Queiroz K. Systematics and the Darwinian revolu- review. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1970. tion. Philos Sci 1988;55:238±59. [11] Van Ripper PP. Organisations: basic issues and pro- [32] EPSRC (1996), Blueprint Ð The control design and posed typology. In: Bowers RV, editor. Studies on production newsletter of EPSRC, Issue No. 9, July behaviour in organisations. Athens: University of 1996. Georgia Press, 1966. [33] Hannan MT, Freeman J. The population ecology of or- [12] Constable CJ, New CC. Operations management, a sys- ganisations. Am Sociol Rev 1977;83:929±84. tems approach through text and cases. John Wiley & [34] Hannan MT, Freeman J. Organisational Ecology. Sons, 1976. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989. [13] Wild R. The techniques of production management. [35] Baum JAC. A population perspective organizations: a London: Holt, Reinhart and Winston, 1971. study of diversity and transformation in child care ser- [14] Johnson LA, Montgomery DC. Operation research in vice organisations. Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of production planning, scheduling and inventory control. Management, University of Toronto, 1989. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974. [36] McKelvey B. Organisational systematics: taxonomy, [15] De Toni A, Panizzolo R. Repetitive and intermittent evolution, classi®cation. Berkeley: University of manufacturing: comparison of characteristics. In: California Press, 1982. Integrated manufacturing systems, vol. 3. MCB [37] Lumsden CJ, Singh JV. The dynamics of organizational University Press, 1992. p. 23±37 (No. 4). speciation. In: Singh JV, editor. Organizational evol- [16] Schmitt TG, Klastorin T, Shtub A. Production classi®- ution: new directions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990. cation system: concepts, models and strategies. Int J p. 145±63. Prod Res 1985;23(3):563±78. [38] Brodie R. The virus of the mind: the new science of the [17] Ingham H. Balancing sales and production: models of meme. Integral Press, 1995. typical business policies. Management Publication, 1971 [39] McCarthy IP. The development of a manufacturing [ch 1±2]. classi®cation using concepts from organisational sys- [18] Wild R. Production and operations management. tematics and biological taxonomy. Ph.D. dissertation, Cassel Ed, 1989 [ch 1]. University of Sheeld, UK, 1995. [19] Aneke NAG, Carrie AS. A comprehensive ¯owline [40] Je€rey C. Biological nomenclature, 3rd ed. Systematics classi®cation scheme. Int J Prod Res 1984;22(2):282±97. Association, Chapman and Hall, 1977. [20] Burbidge JL. International Seminar On Group [41] Forey PL, Humphries CJ, Kitching IJ, Scotland RW, Technology, Final report. Turin International Centre, Siebert DJ, Williams DM. Cladistics: a practical course Turin, Italy, 1970. in systematics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992. [21] Frizelle GDM. OPT in perspective. In: Advanced man- [42] Minelli A. Biological systematics the state of the art. ufacturing engineering, 1. Butterworth and Co, 1989. Chapman & Hall, 1994. [22] Barber KD, Hollier RH. The use of numerical analysis [43] Sneath P, Sokal R. Numerical taxonomy, the principles to classify companies according to production control and practices of numerical classi®cation. Freeman, complexity. Int J Prod Res 1986;24(1):203±22. 1973. [23] Woodward J. In: Industrial organisation, theory and [44] Rao HV, Reddy M. University manuscript. Density practice. Oxford University Press, 1980. p. 22±49. and organizational mortality in technologically hetero- [24] Burbidge JL. The principles of production control, 4th geneous industries. Emory University, GA, USA, 1992. ed. Plymouth, UK: MacDonald & Evans, 1962. [45] Hannan MT, Freeman J. Organizations in industry: [25] Hitomi K. Manufacturing systems engineering (a uni- strategy, structure and selection. Oxford University ®ed approach to manufacturing technology and pro- Press, 1995. duction management), 2nd ed. London: Taylor and [46] Scott WR. Organizations: rational, natural and open Francis, 1996. systems, 3rd ed. Englewood Cli€s, NJ: Prentice Hall, [26] Spencer MS, Cox JF. An analysis of the product±pro- 1992. cess matrix and repetitive manufacturing. Int J Prod [47] Hannan, Carroll, Dundon, Torres. Organizational evol- Res 1995;33(5):1275±94. ution in multinational context: automobile manufac- [27] McCarthy IP. Manufacturing classi®cations: lessons turers in Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, and Italy. from organizational systematics and biological taxon- Am Sociol Rev 1995;88:234±53. omy. Int J Manuf Technol Manage Ð Integrated [48] Cusumano MA. The Japanese automobile industry. Manuf Sys 1995;6(6):47±8. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985. [28] Romanelli E. The evolution of new organizational [49] Flink JJ. The automobile age. Cambridge, MA: MIT forms. In: Annual review of sociology, 17. Annual Press, 1988. Reviews, 1991. p. 79±103. [50] Laux JM. The European automobile industry. New [29] Ridley M. Evolution. Blackwell Scienti®c Publications, York: Twayne, 1992. 1993. [51] Rae JB. The American automobile manufacturers: the [30] Wiley EO, Siegel-Causey D, Brooks DR, Funk VA. ®rst forty years. Philadelphia: Chiltern, 1959. The compleat cladist Ð a primer of phylogenetic pro- [52] Hounshell DA. From the American system to mass
  • 18. 94 I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 production. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, [86] Quicke DLJ. Principles and techniques of contemporary 1984. taxonomy. Chapman and Hall, 1993. [53] Womack JP, Jones DT, Roos D. The machine that [87] Swo€ord DL, Maddison WP. Reconstructing ancestral changed the world. New York: Macmillan Publishing, states under Wagner parsimony. Math Biosci 1990. 1987;87:199±299. [54] Fiat Group. Financial overview, January 30, 1998. [88] Watrous LE, Wheeler QD. The out-group comparison [55] Fiat Group. Annual report, 1996. method. Syst Zool 1981;30:1±11. [56] Fiat Group. Report of the Board of Directors on oper- [89] Felsenstein J. Parsimony in systematics: biological and ations in the ®rst half of 1997. statistical issues. Ann Rev Ecol System 1983;14:313±33. [57] Ford Motor Company. Annual report, 1965. [90] Maddison WP, Maddison DR. MacClade Version 3. [58] Ford Motor Company. Annual report, 1975. Analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. MA, [59] Ford Motor Company. Annual report, 1985. USA: Sinauer Associates, 1992. [60] Ford Motor Company. Annual report, 1995. [91] Sagasti F. A conceptual and taxonomic framework for [61] General Motors. A look at General Motors today, the analysis of adaptive behaviour. General systems, 1996. vol. XV, 1970. p. 151±60. [62] General Motors. What drives General Motors. Annual [92] McCarthy IP, Leseure M, Ridgway K, Fieller N. report, 1996. Building manufacturing cladograms. International [63] General Motors. The EV1 electric vehicle, teamwork in Journal of Technology Management 1997;13(3):269±86. action. Annual report, 1995. [93] Stevenson W. Production/operations management, 4th [64] Honda. Annual report, 1995. ed. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1993. [65] Mercedes-Benz. Annual report, 1995. [94] Hum S, Ng Y. A study on just-in-time practices in [66] Mitsubishi Corporation. The principles that de®ne Singapore. Int J Oper Prod Manage 1995;15(6):5±24. Mitsubishi Corporation. Annual report, 1996. [95] Hendry LC. World class in the make-to-order sector. [67] Mitsubishi Corporation. Annual report, 1995. MESELA '97 Conference, 22±24 July, 1997, [68] Nissan. Even higher customer satisfaction. Annual Loughborough, ISBN 1 86058 0661, 1997. p. 41±6. report, 1995. [96] de Pinna M. Concepts and tests of homology in the cla- [69] Peugeot Motor Company Plc. Annual review, 1995. distics paradox. Cladistics 1991;7:367±94. [70] Peugeot Motor Company Plc. Statement of accounts [97] Griths P. Cladistics and functional explanation. Philo and annual report, 1995. Sci 1994;61:206±27. [71] Peugeot Motor Company Plc. Annual review, 1996. [98] Grime P. The C±S±R model of primary plant strategies: [72] Peugeot Motor Company Plc. Statement of accounts origins, implications and tests ch 14. In: Gottlieb LD, and annual report, 1996. Kain SK, editors. Plant evolutionary biology. London: [73] Renault SA. Annual report, 1995. Chapman and Hall, 1988. [74] Toyota. Here's how we are getting better and even bet- [99] Im J, Lee S. Implementation of just-in-time systems in ter. Annual report, 1996. US manufacturing ®rms. Int J Prod Res 1989;28(6):5± [75] Toyota. You ain't seen nuthin' yet! Annual report, 14. 1995. [100] Camp R. Benchmarking, the search for industry best [76] Volkswagen AG. Annual report, 1996. [77] Volkswagen, AG. Annual report, 1995. practices that lead to superior performance. Milwaukee, [78] Volvo. Annual report, 1996. WI: ASQC Quality Press, 1989. [79] Gibson JL, Ivancevich JM, Donnelly JR. [101] Suarez F, Cusumano M, Fine C. An empirical study of Organizations: behaviour, structure, processes, 7th ed. ¯exibility in manufacturing. In: Sloan management Homewood IL: Irwin, 1991. review, 1995. p. 25±32. [80] Price JL, Mueller CW. Handbook of organisational [102] Armstrong J. Strategic planning improves manufactur- measurement. Marsh®eld, MA: Pitman, 1986. ing performance. In: Long-range planning, 1991. p. [81] Baum JAC, Singh JV. Evolutionary dynamics of organ- 127±9. izations. Oxford University Press, 1994. [103] Powell T. Strategic planning as competitive advantage. [82] Hull DL. The natural system and the species problem. In: Strategic Manage J, 1992. p. 551±8. In: Sibley CG, editor. Systematic biology. Proceedings [104] Waalevwijn P, Segaar P. Strategic management: the key of an International Conference Conducted At The to pro®tability in small companies. In: Long-range University of Michigan, June 14±16, 1967. p. 56±61. planning, 1993. p. 24±30. [83] Pugh D, Hickson D, Hinings C, Turner C. Dimensions [105] Grinyer P, Norburn D. Planning for existing markets: or organizational structure. Adm Sci Q 1968;13:65±105. perceptions of executives and ®nancial performance (pt. [84] Sells S. Toward a taxonomy of organizations. In: 1). J R Stat Soc A 1975;138:70±81. Cooper W, Leavitt H, Shelly M, editors. New perspec- [106] Kallman E, Shapiro H. The motor freight industry: a tives in organizational research. New York: Wiley, case against planning. In: Long-range planning, 1978. 1964. p. 515±32. p. 81±95. [85] Warriner C, editor. Empirical taxonomy of organiz- [107] Kudla J. The e€ects of strategic planning on common ations: problematics in their development. Presented at stock returns. In: Acad Manage J, 1980. p. 5±32. the Roundtable Discussion, Annual Meeting of the [108] Leontiades M, Tezel A. Planning perceptions and plan- American Sociological Association, Boston, 1979. ning results. In: Strategic Manage J, 1980. p. 65±79.
  • 19. I. McCarthy et al. / Omega 28 (2000) 77±95 95 [109] Rue L, Fulmer R. Is long-range planning pro®table? In: [111] Monden Y. Toyota production system: practical Academy of Management Proceedings, 1973. p. 66±89. approach to production management. Industrial [110] Miles R, Coleman H, Douglas C. Keys to success in Engineering and Management Press, Institute of corporate redesign. Calif Manage Rev 1995;37(3):128± Industrial Engineers, 1983. 45.