Mobilizing a network to develop a field: Enriching the business actor's mobilization analysis toolkit

Bockhaven, Wouter Van; Matthyssens, Paul

doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.001

Cited by 20 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Actor-driven change based on non-predictive strategy: effectuation and experimentation. Key references Anderson & Tushman, 1990 ; Bourdieu, 2005 ; Carvalho et al, 2017 ; Christenson, 1997 ; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983 , DiMaggio and Powell, 1991 ; Fourcade, 2007 ; Fligstein, 1991 ; Garud et al, 2007 ; Moore, 1993 ; Rogers, 2010 ; Scott, 2014 ; Scott & Davis, 2007 ; Thornton & Ocasio, 1999 ; Van Bockhaven & Matthyssens, 2017 . Aarikka-Stenroos et al, 2014 ; Aarikka-Stenroos & Ritala, 2017 ; Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006 ; Frels et al, 2003 ; Henneberg et al, 2006 ; Håkansson & Ford, 2002 ; Håkansson & Snehota, 1995 ; Håkansson & Waluszewski, 2002 ; Medlin & Törnroos, 2014 ; Möller, 2013 ; Möller & Halinen, 2017 ; Möller and Svahn, 2006 , Möller and Svahn, 2009 ; Möller & Rajala, 2007 ; Möller et al, 2005 ; Pisano & Verganti, 2008 ; Ritter et al, 2004 .…”

Section: Understanding Complex Business Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A single example will serve. Drawing on institutionalism but also collective action, stakeholder theory, and strategic network studies, Van Bockhaven and Matthyssens (2017) propose a comprehensive toolkit for influencing an emerging business field, consisting of: recognizing and prioritizing stakeholders (stakeholder power and salience for the target issue, stakeholder self-interest); assessing stakeholder dispositions (stakeholder group identity, stakeholder mapping); mobilizing collective action (gaining resonance among a critical mass of stakeholders for the target issue, attracting resources and relationships that mobilize/influence wider actors, influencing political actors); motivating targeted cross-sector participation to co-construct a new value-creating system (VCS), by recognizing various actor dispositions towards the targeted VCS, reducing actor uncertainty about the elements of the VCS, the mobilizer firm, the actors' expected role in the new VCS and field, and motivating actors with divergent mental models to converge on the new mental model). Diffusion of innovations New value-creation practices, rules of conducting production and commerce, and technologies emerge, diffuse, and become legitimated over time and at varying rates in a social system ( Christenson, 1997 ; Fligstein, 1991 ; Rogers, 2010 ).…”

Section: Appendix 1 Four Approaches To Understand the Business Envirmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Since all major innovations are systemic, involving different types of actors and often major changes in the business field, the institutional theory of business fields provides significantly more comprehensive conceptual understanding and tools for innovation management than the traditional New Product Development (NPD) approach common in marketing. The Van Bockhaven and Matthyssens (2017) toolkit also works for innovation management. Business Networks Goals for describing and theorizing the environment The overarching goal of Business Networks research is to examine and describe firm environments (industries, markets) as interorganizational networks constituted by actor relationships .…”

Section: Appendix 1 Four Approaches To Understand the Business Envirmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Networks, ecosystems, fields, market systems? Making sense of the business environment

Möller

Nenonen

Storbacka

2020

Industrial Marketing Management

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Understanding Complex Business Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix 1 Four Approaches To Understand the Business Envirmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix 1 Four Approaches To Understand the Business Envirmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Networks, ecosystems, fields, market systems? Making sense of the business environment

Möller

Nenonen

Storbacka

2020

Industrial Marketing Management

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…All relevant interdependent actors need to be convinced of the innovation’s value, and their diverse interests should be aligned. Van Bockhaven and Matthyssens (2017) conclude that:…”

Section: Value Innovation: Concept Drivers and Barriersmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Van Bockhaven and Matthyssens (2017, p. 70) start from the observation that business actors should tackle the behavioral challenges faced when they introduce radical innovations “that go against the institutionalized rules, interests and logics of their field”. Value innovations get stuck on the unwillingness of actors to adopt or accommodate the innovation, provoked by the innovations’ infringement on actors’ behavioral drivers such as existing and shared frames, self-identities, interests and power structures, and thus the risk of unsettling the consensus within an existing field.…”

Section: Value Innovation: Concept Drivers and Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconceptualizing value innovation for Industry 4.0 and the Industrial Internet of Things

Matthyssens¹

2019

JBIM

Self Cite

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Starting from the foundations of value innovation, this paper aims to give an idea of the key drivers and barriers – internal and external to the company – and to provide insight into proven capabilities underscoring the ability to create a flow of new value initiatives. These thoughts are then confronted with the present challenges of Industry 4.0 and the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT). The confrontation leads to the identification of five capabilities for future-proof value innovation. Design/methodology/approach Literature review based upon the work of the author with more than two decades of experience within value innovation research is included. The review is supplemented with recent literature and an overview of the challenges of Industry 4.0/IIoT, which leads into a confrontation of the present status of value innovation with future requirements. Findings Value innovation remains important specifically for established companies facing path-breaking digital disruption of their existing business models provoked by Industry 4.0 and IIoT. Five key capabilities are suggested to rejuvenate value innovation and prepare it for the Industry 4.0 challenge: capabilities for designing, adapting and marketing product service systems; capabilities for blending digital strategy and processes with value offerings; capabilities for designing and mobilizing ecosystems and integrating these into a value-based IIoT platform; capabilities for combining and integrating technological and value innovation approaches; and capabilities for linking value creation to value capturing. Research limitations/implications This paper is more of a “viewpoint” than an empirically based paper presenting new research findings. It is based on expert judgment and confrontation with extant literature. The outlook indicating five key capabilities needs further empirical corroboration. Practical implications The overview of barriers and the “toolkit” for value innovation (Figure 1) and the five capabilities for future value innovation are expected to be managerially relevant. Originality/value The paper highlights the concept of value innovation, as discussed over the past decades, and links it to recent challenges and opportunities imposed by Industry 4.0 and the IIoT. The concept of value or strategic innovation is still valid but needs a re-conceptualization in view of these developments. The paper provides five capabilities business marketers should develop to perform value innovation in an Industry 4.0 environment.

show abstract

Thought experiments: Review and recommendations

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Thought experiments have been used as an effective methodological approach to advance theory in numerous scientific fields. However, they are underutilized in organizational behavior (OB) and adjacent fields. Accordingly, we conducted a comprehensive and multidisciplinary literature review of thought experiments that entailed 174 sources in economics, psychology, marketing, medicine, sociology, finance, and other fields. We used insights from this literature review to define and describe the unique nature of thought experiments and offer a taxonomy of four main types based on a theory's development stage (i.e., early vs. late) and a study's theoretical goal (i.e., confirmation vs. disconfirmation). We also provide a decision‐making tree useful for evaluating whether conducting a thought experiment is beneficial for a particular research situation and which of the four types is most likely to produce a meaningful contribution. Then, we offer best‐practice recommendations for conducting thought experiments that address how to plan, execute, report results, and discuss implications. In addition, we demonstrate the potential of thought experiments by using the best‐practice recommendations to design and conduct a thought experiment in the domain of workplace allyship. Finally, we offer suggestions for future substantive research that would benefit from thought experiment methodology (i.e., diversity, equity, and inclusion; leadership; performance; selection and recruitment; teams; and turnover). Overall, our article offers a comprehensive review and recommendations that we hope will be a catalyst for using thought experiments to advance theory in OB and related fields.

show abstract

Mobilizing a network to develop a field: Enriching the business actor's mobilization analysis toolkit

Cited by 20 publications

References 88 publications

Networks, ecosystems, fields, market systems? Making sense of the business environment

Networks, ecosystems, fields, market systems? Making sense of the business environment

Reconceptualizing value innovation for Industry 4.0 and the Industrial Internet of Things

Thought experiments: Review and recommendations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About