description: "Bibliography and scientific foundation of Organizational Intelligence (Argyris, Nonaka, Teece, Walsh/Ungson)."
Bibliography
This bibliography contains exclusively the citable core sources of this book, without fabricated page numbers. Every source carries a three-step evaluation: Contribution (what it achieves) · Boundary (where it ends for our problem) · Extension (what this book operationalizes). The book's claim to novelty is consistent throughout: operationalizes, does not invent. Further relevant sources are listed at the end as verification candidates and become citable only after examination.
A · Organizational Intelligence Conceptual Line
Wilensky, H. L. (1967): Organizational Intelligence. Basic Books.
- Contribution: Foundational work of the conceptual lineage. Demonstrates that wrong decisions arise from informational pathologies (secrecy, lack of indexing, overly small informed audiences), rather than a lack of information.
- Boundary: Treats intelligence as a social and political phenomenon (hierarchy, rivalry, doctrine); a technical carrier layer for continuous self-interpretation lay beyond his horizon. Moreover, his findings implicitly warn against conflict-free smoothing: overly smooth "truth" is itself a pathology.
- Extension: This book adopts Wilensky's pathology diagnosis and responds to it architecturally, using explicit conflict semantics (
conflict_record) that keep contradictions visible rather than prematurely resolving them. - Mapping: Ch. 3 (lineage), Ch. 8 (definition anchor Intelligence), Ch. 17 (smoothing objection).
Glynn, M. A. (1996): Innovative Genius. AMR 21(4), 1081–1111.
- Contribution: Systematizes the concept of intelligence at the organizational level (aggregation, cross-level transfer, distributed intelligence) and connects it to innovative capability.
- Boundary: The concept remains metaphorical in Glynn's work, as across the entire lineage, lacking measurement specifications and a carrier system.
- Extension: This book replaces the metaphor with observable decision metrics (decision latency, rework rate) evaluated against an auditable repository.
- Mapping: Ch. 3, Ch. 8 (definition anchor Intelligence, Z1/Z3).
- Link: doi.org/10.5465/amr.1996.9704071864
B · Memory, Sensemaking, Knowledge
Walsh, J. P./Ungson, G. R. (1991): Organizational Memory. AMR 16(1), 57–91.
- Contribution: The authoritative theory of organizational memory: five storage locations ("retention bins"), acquisition, retrieval, and consequences. Distinguishes information from memory: memory emerges only through interpretive reference to decisions.
- Boundary: Storage locations without consolidation semantics: the model does not explain how contradictory repositories across sources become a resilient memory; information systems are missing as a distinct retention bin.
- Extension: Definition 5.1/6.1 operationalizes memory as a governed, versioned, cross-source consolidated, and conflict-aware repository (Claims).
- Mapping: Ch. 3, Ch. 5 (Def. 5.1), Ch. 6 (Def. 6.1, Case C), Ch. 16 (cumulativeness as value).
- Link: doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4278992
Weick, K. E. (1995): Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage.
- Contribution: Explains how organizations construct meaning: retrospectively, socially, continuously, driven by plausibility rather than accuracy. The strongest theory on why understanding is not mere memory content.
- Boundary: Sensemaking remains bound to individuals and retrospection; Weick's constructivism opposes any claim that an ontology represents "the objective truth" of an organization.
- Extension: Definition 5.2/7.x frames self-understanding as a continuous, machine-readable repository of versioned, plausible interpretations. Conflict semantics provides triggers for sensemaking; it does not replace it. This tension is highlighted as a design principle rather than resolved.
- Mapping: Ch. 3, Ch. 5 (Def. 5.2), Ch. 7 (definition anchor, Case B), Ch. 17 (anthropomorphism/truth objection).
Nonaka, I./Takeuchi, H. (1995): The Knowledge-Creating Company. Oxford UP.
- Contribution: SECI model of knowledge conversion (tacit ↔ explicit); explains why expert knowledge must be externalized before it belongs to the organization.
- Boundary: Describes conversion processes and contexts ("Ba"), but lacks a permanent, auditable carrier layer in which externalized knowledge remains consolidated, governed, and conflict-checked.
- Extension: This book treats externalization as entry into a consolidated repository with provenance, validity, and conflict status; the retirement case (Muster AG) is thus shifted from an appeal to an architectural imperative.
- Mapping: Ch. 3, Ch. 6 (externalization connection), Ch. 17 ("Isn't this Knowledge Management?").
Wegner, D. M. (1987): Transactive Memory. In: Theories of Group Behavior. Springer.
- Contribution: Shows that groups store knowledge divisionally ("who knows what"): memory resides in the directory system, not just in individual minds.
- Boundary: Developed for small groups; the directory system does not scale to organizations with thousands of employees and competing source systems.
- Extension: This book makes the directory system explicit and machine-readable (Claims with source and context), enabling it to survive staff turnover.
- Mapping: Ch. 1 (fragmentation diagnosis), Ch. 6.
- Link: doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4634-3_9
Hutchins, E. (1995): Cognition in the Wild. MIT Press.
- Contribution: Distributed Cognition: cognition takes place within sociotechnical systems composed of humans, artifacts, and representations, not merely inside individuals. The non-anthropomorphic vocabulary for "organizations that understand themselves."
- Boundary: Ethnographic-descriptive (ship navigation); provides no design or measurement specifications for organizations.
- Extension: This book uses distributed cognition to justify why self-understanding can be an infrastructural property, while supplying the missing measurement specifications (Ch. 10).
- Mapping: Ch. 4 ("understanding as infrastructure"), Ch. 7 (emergence thesis), Ch. 17 (anthropomorphism objection).
C · Learning, Capabilities, Decision
Argyris, C./Schön, D. A. (1978): Organizational Learning. Addison-Wesley.
- Contribution: Single- vs. double-loop learning; explains why organizations repeat mistakes whose solutions they already know.
- Boundary: Locates the blockage in theories of action and defensive routines; the carrier problem (where the second loop finds its material) remains unanswered.
- Extension: The consolidated repository turns discrepancies between documented and actual practice into an explicit object of review: material for the second loop.
- Mapping: Ch. 1 (symptom catalog), Ch. 3, Ch. 9.
Senge, P. M. (1990): The Fifth Discipline. Doubleday.
- Contribution: Popularized the learning organization and systems thinking; anchored leadership accountability for learning capability.
- Boundary: Disciplines framed as mindset and practice, deliberately lacking a technical substrate; "shared mental models" remain aspirational appeals.
- Extension: This book provides shared models with an auditable home: the versioned, consolidated self-image with conflict status.
- Mapping: Ch. 3, Ch. 9.
Teece, D. J./Pisano, G./Shuen, A. (1997): Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. SMJ 18(7), 509–533.
- Contribution: The domain-agnostic capability definition: capabilities as hard-to-imitate, repeatable action patterns rooted in processes, positions, and paths; Dynamic Capabilities as reconfiguration capability.
- Boundary: Strategy-focused, barely operationalized; explicitly rooted in culture and history. Software does not create capabilities; it can only make them visible and developable. This boundary is actively highlighted in the book (no "our software creates Dynamic Capabilities").
- Extension: Claim-based, machine-readable framing: capabilities become observable as consolidated, governed process variants (Case B) and measurable via Time-to-Context and reusability rate.
- Mapping: Ch. 3, Ch. 5 (Def. 5.4), Ch. 8 (Z1 resolution), Ch. 9, Ch. 16.
- Link: doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7%3C509::AID-SMJ882%3E3.0.CO;2-Z
Winter, S. G. (2003): Understanding Dynamic Capabilities. SMJ 24(10), 991–995.
- Contribution: The hierarchy of capability levels (zero-level to higher-order) and the resolution of the regress problem: "capabilities to develop capabilities" are logically permissible; regress ends at cost, not logic.
- Boundary: Remains far from measurement; names no observable variables by which higher-order capabilities could be recognized.
- Extension: Self-Empowerment is framed as an observable versioning and release cycle (Case A); the supposed self-improvement loop thus becomes a legitimate, measurable higher-order capability.
- Mapping: Ch. 5 (Def. 5.5), Ch. 9 (Z2 resolution), Ch. 12 (stage logic).
- Link: doi.org/10.1002/smj.318
Cohen, W. M./Levinthal, D. A. (1990): Absorptive Capacity. ASQ 35(1), 128–152.
- Contribution: Absorptive Capacity: the ability to recognize the value of new knowledge, assimilate it, and apply it commercially depends on prior related knowledge – a domain-agnostic determinant of self-development.
- Boundary: Developed for R&D contexts and far from measurement regarding organization-wide process and structural knowledge.
- Extension: The consolidated repository is the organization-wide version of "prior related knowledge"; its maintenance cycles make absorptive capacity observable.
- Mapping: Ch. 9 (Z2 resolution).
- Link: doi.org/10.2307/2393553
March, J. G. (1991): Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science 2(1), 71–87.
- Contribution: The core tension of organizational learning: exploitation of the known vs. exploration of the new; explains why organizations systematically learn too little from existing knowledge.
- Boundary: Formal-abstract; does not explain how an organization even knows what it already knows (the prerequisite for exploitation).
- Extension: A conflict-checked repository lowers the costs of exploitation and makes exploration more targeted – decision anchor for Definition 8.1.
- Mapping: Ch. 8 (definition anchor Intelligence), Ch. 16.
- Link: doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
Simon, H. A. (1997): Administrative Behavior, 4th ed. Free Press.
- Contribution: Decision primacy and bounded rationality: organizations are decision systems; their performance hinges on the information and attention conditions of decision-making.
- Boundary: The decision-maker's information environment remains a given in Simon's work; how an organization systematically creates and maintains its own decision foundation is not his subject.
- Extension: The book's central hypothesis (performance ~ decision quality under change) builds on Simon and renders it auditable via the Ch. 10 metrics catalog.
- Mapping: Ch. 8 (central hypothesis), Ch. 10.
D · Process Science and Methodological Role Model
van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2016): Process Mining: Data Science in Action, 2nd ed. Springer.
- Contribution: The blueprint for a category-defining work: precise vocabulary (Event Log, Trace, Case), formal core, metrics, separation of theory and reference implementation (ProM).
- Boundary: Event-log-based: presupposes timestamped, structured event data. The consolidation of heterogeneous, often unstructured process and procedural knowledge (SOPs, manuals, models, domain experts) lies beyond its scope.
- Extension: This book transfers the pattern (vocabulary, formal core, metrics, reference architecture) to the knowledge- and document-centric layer as a neighbor, not a competitor, of Process Mining.
- Mapping: Ch. 2 (epoch reference), Ch. 4 (criteria matrix), Ch. 7 (formal core model), Ch. 13 (ProM pattern), Ch. 17.
- Link: doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49851-4
IEEE Task Force on Process Mining (2011): Process Mining Manifesto.
- Contribution: Proves that openly stating challenges strengthens categories: eleven open problems co-signed by dozens of organizations.
- Boundary: Content restricted to event-log analysis; governance and consolidation questions of this category are absent.
- Extension: Model for this book's manifesto (8 principles + 8 open challenges) and research agenda (Chapter 18).
- Mapping: Manifesto, Ch. 4, Ch. 18.
E · Identity, Empowerment, Resilience
Albert, S./Whetten, D. A. (1985): Organizational Identity. Research in Organizational Behavior 7, 263–295.
- Contribution: Organizational identity as the central, distinctive, and enduring character of an organization: the reference concept for what a self-image should capture in the first place.
- Boundary: Identity framed as members' self-attribution, lacking procedures to audit attributions against operational reality.
- Extension: The conflict report renders discrepancies between declared self-image and documented/lived practice explicitly auditable.
- Mapping: Ch. 3, Ch. 7.
Conger, J. A./Kanungo, R. N. (1988): The Empowerment Process. AMR 13(3), 471–482.
- Contribution: Empowerment as a process of enhancing self-efficacy beliefs, rather than a mere act of delegation; provides the individual-psychological basis of the concept.
- Boundary: Individual-centric; organizational Self-Empowerment (institutionalizing internal development cycles) is not covered.
- Extension: This book elevates the concept to the organizational level and ties it to observable versioning and release cycles.
- Mapping: Ch. 9 (conceptual origin Empowerment).
- Link: doi.org/10.5465/amr.1988.4306983
ISO 22316:2017: Organizational resilience — Principles and attributes.
- Contribution: The normative reference framework: resilience principles and attributes (including shared understanding, information availability) with international alignment.
- Boundary: Catalog of principles without infrastructure connection: the standard states that shared knowledge should be available, not how an organization establishes this permanently and demonstrably.
- Extension: Ch. 9 tabulates theory against the standard and shows the infrastructure equivalent for each attribute (Case A).
- Mapping: Ch. 5 (Def. 5.6), Ch. 9, Ch. 14 (governance alignment).
- Link: iso.org/standard/50053.html
Weick, K. E./Sutcliffe, K. M. (2001): Managing the Unexpected. Jossey-Bass.
- Contribution: HRO research: High Reliability Organizations remain operational through mindfulness regarding deviations and contradictions, rather than flawless perfection.
- Boundary: Principles and culture without a carrier system; "sensitivity to operations/deviations" remains bound to humans and manual routines.
- Extension: Conflict semantics institutionalizes precisely this sensitivity to deviations as an infrastructural property.
- Mapping: Ch. 9 (definition anchor Resilience, Z3).
Chapter Mapping Overview (A3 → A4)
| Chapter | Required Anchor (Whitelist) |
|---|---|
| Ch. 1 Observation | Wegner 1987; Argyris/Schön 1978 |
| Ch. 2 Three Epochs | van der Aalst 2016; |
| Ch. 3 On the Shoulders | Wilensky 1967; Walsh/Ungson 1991; Weick 1995; Nonaka/Takeuchi 1995; Senge 1990; Argyris/Schön 1978; Teece et al. 1997; Albert/Whetten 1985; Glynn 1996; van der Aalst 2016 |
| Ch. 4 Missing Layer | van der Aalst 2016; IEEE 2011; Nonaka/Takeuchi 1995; Hutchins 1995 |
| Ch. 5 Model | per ladder rung: Walsh/Ungson · Weick · Wilensky/Glynn + Simon/March · Teece/Winter · Winter/Cohen-Levinthal · ISO 22316/Weick-Sutcliffe |
| Ch. 6 Memory | Walsh/Ungson 1991; Nonaka/Takeuchi 1995; Wegner 1987 |
| Ch. 7 Self-Understanding & Formal Core | Weick 1995; Hutchins 1995; Albert/Whetten 1985; van der Aalst 2016 (formal core model) |
| Ch. 8 Intelligence & Capabilities | Wilensky 1967; Glynn 1996; Simon 1997; March 1991; Teece et al. 1997; Winter 2003 |
| Ch. 9 Empowerment & Resilience | Winter 2003; Cohen/Levinthal 1990; Conger/Kanungo 1988; ISO 22316; Weick/Sutcliffe 2001; Senge 1990; Argyris/Schön 1978 |
| Ch. 10 Measurement | IEEE 2011 (metrics model); Simon 1997 |
| Ch. 11 Case Studies | – (empirical; no literature obligation) |
| Ch. 12 Maturity | Winter 2003 |
| Ch. 13 Reference Architecture | van der Aalst 2016 (ProM pattern) |
| Ch. 14 Governance & Audit | ISO 22316; Bitkom/BSI source situation updated alongside standards status |
| Ch. 15 First 90 Days | Nonaka/Takeuchi 1995 (externalization in implementation) |
| Ch. 16 Economics | Teece et al. 1997; March 1991; Walsh/Ungson 1991 |
| Ch. 17 Objections | van der Aalst 2016; IEEE 2011; Nonaka/Takeuchi 1995; Weick 1995; Hutchins 1995; Wilensky 1967 |
| Ch. 18 Research Agenda | IEEE 2011 (model); proposed sources at chapter end |
| Ch. 19 Outlook | – (prognosis, disclose scenario methodology) |