Coevolution is an established research framework in the biological and evolutionary sciences, and though a new entrant to organization studies, it holds potential to transform the field (Lewin et al., 2003). Its fundamental premise is that entities or organizations evolve in relation to their environments while at the same time these environments evolve in relation to them. This paper argues that a coevolutionary approach is particularly well suited for research on organizations and the natural environment (O&NE), and that O&NE scholars may make significant contributions to organization theory from this perspective. However, this potential depends upon developing and maintaining a clear distinction between coevolution as a verb, or broad logic (a.k.a. macro coevolution), and coevolution as a noun, or specific mechanism (a.k.a. micro coevolution). In building these arguments the paper develops a definition and research framework for coevolutionary research and discusses theoretical and practical implications for O&NE.
Aldrich, H. (1979). Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
2.
Aragon-Correa, J., & Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. Academy of Management Review,28(1), 71-88.
3.
Bansal, P. (2003). From issues to actions: The importance of individual concerns and organizational values in responding to natural environmental issues. Organization Science,14(5), 510-527.
4.
Bardini, T. (2000). Bootstrapping: Douglas Engelbart, coevolution, and the origins of personal computing. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
5.
Baum, J., & Singh, J. (1994). Organization-environment coevolution. In J. Baum & J. Singh (Eds.),Evolutionary dynamics of organizations (pp. 379-402). New York: Oxford University Press.
6.
Berry, M., & Rondinelli, D. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental management: A new industrial revolution. Academy of Management Executive,12(2), 38-50.
7.
Bertalanffy, L. V. (1950). The theory of open systems in physics and biology. Science,111, 23-29.
8.
Bertalanffy, L. V. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: George Braziller.
9.
Bradbury, H. (2003). Sustaining inner and outer worlds: A whole-systems approach to developing sustainable business practices in management. Journal of Management Education,27, 172-187.
10.
Burgelman, R. (1991). Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organization Science,2(3), 239-262.
11.
Chandler, A. (1962). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the industrial enterprise. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
Child, J. (1972). Organization structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology,6, 2-22.
13.
Clayson, D., Frost, T., & Sheffet, M. (2006). Grades and the student evaluation of instruction: A test of the reciprocity effect. Academy of Managment Learning and Education, 5(1), 52-65.
14.
Clippinger, J. (1999). Order from the bottom up: Complex adaptive systems and their management. In J. Clippinger (Ed.),The biology of business: Decoding the natural laws of enterprise (pp. 1-30). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
Conrad, J., & Salas, G. (1993). Economic strategies for coevolution: Timber and butterflies in Mexico. Land Economics,69(4), 404-415.
16.
Dacin, T., Goldstein, J., & Scott, W. R. (2002). Institutional theory and institutional change: Introduction to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 45-56.
17.
Daft, R., & Weick, K. (1988). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review,9(2), 284-295.
18.
D'Aveni, R., & Gunther, R. (1994). Hypercompetition: Managing the dynamics of strategic maneuvering. New York: Free Press.
19.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(April), 147-160.
20.
Donaldson, L. (1996). The normal science of structural contingency theory. In H. N. Clegg (Ed.),Handbook of organization studies (pp. 57-76). London: Sage.
21.
Dutton, J., Ashford, S., O'Neill, K., & Lawrence, K. (2001). Moves that matter: Issue selling and organizational change. Academy of Management Journal,44(4), 716-736.
22.
Ehrlich, P., & Raven, P. (1964). Butterflies and plants: A study in coevolution. Evolution, 18, 586-608.
23.
Elfring, T., & Volberda, H. (2001). Multiple futures of strategy synthesis: Shifting boundaries, dynamic capabilities and strategy configurations. In H. Volberda & T. Elfring (Eds.),Rethinking strategy (pp. 245-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24.
Emery, F., & Trist, E. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations,18, 21-32.
25.
Fayol, H. (1949). General and industrial management. London: Pitman.
26.
Feldman, M., & Laland, K. (1996). Gene-culture coevolutionary theory. TREE,11, 453-457.
27.
Flannery, B., & May, D. (2000). Environmental ethical decision making in the U.S. metalfinishing industry. Academy of Management Journal,43(4), 642-662.
28.
Floyd, S., & Wooldridge, B. (1997). Middle managers' strategic influence and organizational performance. Journal of Management Studies,34, 465-485.
29.
Floyd, S., & Wooldridge, B. (2000). Building strategy from the middle: Reconceptualizing strategy process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
Foster, J., & Mellor, M. (1997). Economy and ecology. Organization and Environment, 10(1), 12-15.
31.
Freeland, W., & Boulton, W. (1992). Coevolution of food webs: Parasites, predators and plant secondary compounds. Biotropica,24(2b), 309-327.
32.
Fussler, C. (1996). Driving eco-innovation. London: Pitman.
33.
Futuyama, D., & Slatkin, M. (Eds.). (1983). Coevolution. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
34.
Gladwin, T., Kennelly, J., & Krause, T. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review,20(4), 874-907.
35.
Green Star Cities. (2005a). Alternatives,31(3), 5-11.
36.
Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal,49(1), 27-48.
37.
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology,82, 929-964.
38.
Hatch, M., & Yanow, D. (2003). Organization theory as an interpretive science. In H. Tsoukas & C. Knudsen (Eds.),The Oxford handbook of organization theory(pp. 63-87). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
39.
Henderson, A., & Stern, I. (2004). Selection-based learning: The coevolution of internal and external selection in high-velocity environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49, 39-75.
40.
Inkpen, A., & Currall, S. (2004). The coevolution of trust, control, and learning in joint ventures. Organization Science,15(5), 586-599.
41.
Janzen, D. (1980). When is it coevolution?Evolution,34(3), 611-612.
42.
Jermier, J., Forbes, L., Benn, S., & Orsato, R. (2006). The new corporate environmentalism and green politics. In S. Clegg (Ed.),The SAGE handbook of organization studies (2nd ed., pp. 618-650). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43.
Kauffman, S. (1993). The origins of order: Self-organization and selection in evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
44.
Kearins, K., & Springett, D. (2003). Educating for sustainability: Developing critical skills. Journal of Management Education,27(2), 188-204.
45.
King, A., & Lenox, M. (2002). Exploring the locus of profitable pollution reduction. Management Science,48(2), 289-299.
46.
Koza, M., & Lewin, A. (1998). The coevolution of strategic alliances. Organization Science,9, 255-264.
47.
Langton, C. (1992). Artificial life. New York: Addison-Wesley.
48.
Laufer, W. (2003). Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of BusinessEthics,43(3), 253-261.
49.
Levin, S. (1983). Some approaches to the modelling of coevolutionary interactions. In M. Nitecki (Ed.),Coevolution (pp. 21-65). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
50.
Levitt, B., & March, J. (1988). Organizational learning. In W. R. Scott (Ed.),Annual review of sociology (Vol. 14, pp. 319-340). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
51.
Lewin, A., & Koza, M. (2001). Empirical research in co-evolutionary processes of strategic adaptation and change: The promise and the challenge. Organization Studies, 22(6), 9-15.
52.
Lewin, A., Long, C., & Carroll, T. (1999). The coevolution of new organizational forms. Organization Science,10(5), 535-550.
53.
Lewin, A., & Volberda, H. (2003). The future of organization studies: Beyond the selectionadaptation debate. In H. Tsoukas & C. Knudsen (Eds.),The Oxford handbook of organization theory (pp. 568-595). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
54.
Lloyd, M. (2006). The poverty/conservation equation. The Nature Conservancy,56(2), 20-30.
55.
Longair, M. (Ed.). (1997). The large, the small, and the human mind. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
56.
Lovas, B., & Ghoshal, S. (2000). Strategy as guided evolution. Strategic Management Journal,21(9), 875-896.
57.
Lovelock, J. (2000). The Gaia hypothesis. In L. Margulis, C. Matthews, & A. Haselton (Eds.),Environmental evolution: Effects of the origin and evolution of life on planet Earth (pp. 1-28). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1973)
58.
Macready, W., & Meyer, C. (1999). Adaptive operations: Creating business processes that evolve. In J. Clippinger (Ed.),The biology of business: Decoding the natural laws of enterprise(pp. 181-199). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
59.
Malerba, F. (2006). Innovation and the evolution of industries. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,16, 3-23.
60.
Marshall, R., Cordano, M., & Silverman, M. (2005). Exploring individual and institutional drivers of proactive environmentalism in the US wine industry. Business Strategy and the Environment,14, 92-109.
61.
Mayo, E. (1945). The social problems of an industrial civilization. London: Routledge.
62.
Mayors of the world sign urban accords. (2005b). Environmental Science and Technology, 47, 4-5.
63.
McKelvey, B. (1997). Quasi-natural organization science. Organization Science,8(4), 352-380.
64.
Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management Science,24(9), 934-948.
65.
Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. (1985). Of strategies deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal,6, 257-272.
66.
Moore, J. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review,71(3), 75-84.
67.
Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
68.
Nishiguchi, T. (2001). Coevolution of interorganizational relations. In I. Nonaka & T. Nishiguchi (Eds.),Knowledge emergence (pp. 197-222). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
69.
Nitecki, M. (Ed.). (1983). Coevolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
70.
Nonaka, I., & Nishiguchi, T. (Eds.). (2001). Knowledge emergence: Social, technical, and evolutionary dimensions of knowledge creation. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
71.
Norgaard, R. (1984). Coevolutionary agricultural development. Economic Development and Cultural Change,32(3), 525-547.
72.
Norgaard, R. (1994). Development betrayed: The end of progress and a coevolutionary revisioning of the future. London: Routledge.
73.
Odum, E. (1963). Ecology. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
74.
Orsato, R., & Clegg, S. (2005). Radical reformism: Towards criticalecological modernization. Sustainable Development,13, 253-267.
75.
Palombo, S. (1999). The emergent ego: Complexity and coevolution in the psychoanalytic process. Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
76.
Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. New York: Free Press.
77.
Pascale, R. (1999, Spring). Surfing the edge of chaos. Sloan Management Review, 83-94.
78.
Pasquero, J. (1991). Supraorganizational collaboration: The Canadian environmental experiment. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,27(1), 38-65.
79.
Ramus, C., & Steger, U. (2000). The roles of supervisory support behaviors and environmental policy in employee “ecoinitiatives” at leading-edge European companies. Academy of Management Journal,43(4), 605-626.
80.
Reed, M. (1996). Organizational theorizing: A historically contested terrain. In H. Clegg & W. Nord (Ed.),Handbook of Organization Studies (pp. 31-56). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
81.
Roethlisberger, F. J., & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the worker: An account of a research program conducted by the Western Electric Company, Hawthorne Works, Chicago. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
82.
Rothenberg, S. (2005, May). Going beyond the win-win/win-lose debate: Research overview and suggestions for future research. Paper presented at the Eastern Academy of Management conference, Springfield, MA.
83.
Russo, M., & Fouts, P. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal,40(3), 534-559.
84.
Scott, R. (1992). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
85.
Seo, M., & Creed, W. (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27, 222-247.
Slatkin, M. (1983). Coevolution or coadaptation? Permo-carbiniferous vertebrate chronofauna. In M. Nitecki (Ed.),Coevolution (pp. 339-370). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
88.
Starik, M. (1995). Should trees have managerial standing? Toward stakeholder status for non-human nature. Journal of Business Ethics,14, 204-217.
89.
Starik, M., & Rands, G. (1995). Weaving an integrated web: Multilevel and multisystem perspectives of ecologically sustainable organizations. Academy of Management Review,20(4), 908-935.
90.
Stead, W. E., & Stead, J. (2004). Sustainable strategic management. London: M.E. Sharpe.
91.
Taylor, F. W. (1914). The principles of scientific management. New York: Harper & Brothers.
92.
Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,18(7), 509-533.
93.
Thompson, J. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
94.
Thompson, J. (1982). Interaction and coevolution. New York: Wiley.
95.
Thompson, J. (1994). The coevolutionary process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
96.
van den Bergh, J., & Stagl, S. (2003). Coevolution of economic behavior and institutions: Towards a theory of institutional change. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,13, 289-317.
97.
Van de Ven, A., & Garud, R. (1994). The coevolution of technical and institutional events in the development of an innovation. In J. Baum & J. Singh (Eds.),Evolutionary dynamics of organizations (pp. 425-443). New York: Oxford University Press.
98.
Van Valen, L. (1983). How pervasive is coevolution? In M. Nitecki (Ed.),Coevolution (pp. 1-19). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
99.
Weber, M. (1946). From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. New York: Oxford University Press.
100.
White, M., Marin, D., Brazeal, D., & Friedman, W. (1997). The evolution of organizations: Suggestions from complexity theory about the interplay between natural selection and adaptation. Human Relations,50(11), 1383-1400.
101.
Winn, M., & Angell, L. (2000). Towards a process model of corporate greening. Organization Studies,21(6), 1119-1147.
