Loose metaphorical use of a concept blocks empirical testing of it.

Evidence

In organizational research the term is used mostly as a broad label indicating all kinds of imprinting effects of the past on organizational behavior (e.g., recently, Beckman & Burton, 2008). A closer examination quickly reveals that the predominant usage is more metaphorical than theoretical in nature. A clear specification is usually missing. This means, at the same time, that no indicators are available that allow for examining whether or not the organizational phenomena in question are actually path dependent. If we want “path dependence” to provide more than a synonym for persistence, then we need a theoretical framework clarifying the notion and helping us better understand the conditions and dynamics under which organizations become path dependent. — Jörg Sydow, Georg Schreyögg, and Jochen Koch, Organizational Path Dependence, 4

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to debates about borrowed physics/biology metaphors in social science and to measurement critiques in organizational theory.
• SEED: Article angle: ‘the metaphor tax’ — how borrowed labels (path dependence, ecosystem, entropy) arrive without indicators and quietly stop research from being falsifiable.