Win-win in action-a case study

Kulmala, Harri I.; Happonen, M.-P.; Lahikainen, Tommi; Paranko, Jari

doi:10.1109/icmit.2000.916810

Cited by 1 publication

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are a few empirical interventionist studies in the management accounting literature already. Typically, interventionist research has been conducted with single organisations (Laine et al, 2016;Saukkonen et al, 2018;Stormi et al, 2020), or at the supplier interface, primarily from the customer's perspective (Kulmala et al, 2000;Kajüter & Kulmala, 2005;Suomala et al, 2010). Additionally, interventionist cases have been reported within the methodological studies on interventionist management accounting research (Suomala et al, 2014;Lyly-Yrjänäinen et al, 2017), thus extending the empirical basis for the stream.…”

Section: Interventionist Research In Different Streams Of Management mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In all the interventionist studies we found on interorganizational management accounting, the intervening researchers were somehow focusing on the suppliers' processes providing cost behaviour logic to support customer's decision-making following the principles of open-book accounting (Romano & Formentini, 2012). The aim has been for a researcher to be a third, neutral party providing 'impartial' cost analyses shared with the www.ejbrm.com 117 ISSN 1477-7029 customers for well-grounded decisions in a collaborative context to identify win-win scenarios (Kulmala et al, 2000). In some cases, the customer has, at least implicitly, used its negotiation power for the supplier to 'happily' open the books (Suomala et al, 2010).…”

Section: Interventionist Research In Different Streams Of Management mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The auditor position was the starting position for the researcher before getting access to the supplier organisation. In some interventionist studies about open-book accounting, suppliers have shared some cost information with their customers, seeking win-win situations (Kulmala et al, 2000). The intervening researchers have also positioned themselves as neutral, third party, providing cost analytics free of hidden agenda (Kulmala et al, 2000).…”

Section: Possibilities and Limitations Of The Three Positionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some interventionist studies about open-book accounting, suppliers have shared some cost information with their customers, seeking win-win situations (Kulmala et al, 2000). The intervening researchers have also positioned themselves as neutral, third party, providing cost analytics free of hidden agenda (Kulmala et al, 2000). In this position, it can be more challenging to gain access to sensitive or unknown information, limiting the depth of access to the first three levels by Suomala and Lyly-Yrjänäinen (2011) and focusing on the domain of the interface between the supplier and the customer.…”

Section: Possibilities and Limitations Of The Three Positionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some interventionist studies have already been done in interorganizational contexts, but mainly from an upstream perspective. Several studies have utilised interventionist research in supplier-customer dyads from the customer's perspective (Kulmala et al, 2000;Kajüter & Kulmala, 2005;Suomala et al, 2010). Studies focusing on interorganizational management accounting blossomed during the turn of the century (Caglio & Ditillo, 2008), with open-book accounting as one notable application of interorganizational management accounting (Jakobsen, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Three Positions for Interorganizational Interventionist Researcher: Navigating in the Supplier‑Customer Dyad

Tiitola¹,

Lyly-Yrjänäinen²,

Laine³

2020

EJBRM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper identifies and examines different positions of an interventionist researcher, facilitating value co‑creation for new technology in customer‑supplier dyads. The paper answers two research questions: (1) "what kind of positions can an interventionist researcher assume in a supplier‑customer dyad?" and (2) "what should an interventionist researcher consider when choosing a suitable position for her research design?" The paper reflects upon a longitudinal interventionist case study (2017‑2020) focused on facilitating and evaluating the value created by new medicine‑dispensing robot technology in home‑care in Nordic countries. The researchers conducted interventionist research in 11 supplier‑customer dyads, with multiple, evolving positions of the researcher(s). As a result, as a contribution to the existing knowledge about the role of the interventionist researchers, the paper proposes three positions that the interventionist researcher can take in an interorganizational supplier‑customer dyad: an auditor, a lawyer or a mediator. The auditor investigates the interface between the supplier and the customer as an outsider. The lawyer position compromises this perceived neutrality (but not independence) for deeper access to empirical data regarding one of the organisations. Thus, the lawyer actively pursues the status of 'one of us' with either the supplier or the customer. The mediator expands the previous positions by trying to achieve a status of 'one of us' in both organisations trying to understand both sides of the same story supporting both the supplier's and customers' activities. Importantly, as an extension to the existing knowledge, the paper argues that not only can an interventionist researcher move between the etic and emic domains, but she can also move within the supplier‑customer dyad under examination. Thus, when conducting research within the customer‑supplier dyads (and within similarly complex contexts), the interventionist researcher needs to be aware of the existence of different positions and her actual position to the subject of interventionist study. Indeed, the interventionist researcher may choose her role, or the role may be a result of an evolutionary process. The role is 'given' by the people the interventionist researcher interacts with and, thus, not something the researcher can completely decide by herself. However, the interventionist researcher can pursue a specific role that fits her research agenda and design. In any case, the researcher needs to be honest and transparent regarding the actually taken position to avoid potential methodological pitfalls arising from complex, novel research settings.

show abstract