Debbie Harrison

Activation in resource networks: a comparative study of ports

Purpose – The paper seeks to provide an example of how new business unit resources can activate previously passively connected networks of resources.Design/methodology/approach – Two case studies are used, both of which are examples of new business unit resources being embedded into, and also changing, existing resource networks. The cases are organised around issues of the existing network prior to the introduction of the new resource and how resources can become valuable from within a network.Findings – The paper provides details of two business unit resources being embedded in existing resource networks. In both cases, ports are changed from passive to active actors. There are consequences for a set of existing resources when a new actor activates these in relation to a number of specific counterparts. Further, the value of single resources can be enhanced when they are combined in new ways. The main finding is that the value of resources is closely connected to how newly created actors are able to act...

How users shape markets

The purpose of this article is to elaborate conceptually on the user–market relationship. Existing research reports a limited user–market relationship, which simultaneously exaggerates and underplays user influence on markets. Assuming a constructivist market studies (CMS) perspective, we argue that the scope of the user–market relationship is broader than developing offers and uses. We conceptualize market shaping as five interrelated subprocesses in which users may be involved as agents: qualifying goods, fashioning modes of exchange, configuring actors, establishing market norms and generating market representations. The extent of user influence in these subprocesses is likely to vary both within a specific market and across markets. By identifying conditions conducive to user involvement in each subprocess, we lay the foundation for empirical research into how users shape markets.

Being concerned about markets

Building markets is one of the most ordinary ways to produce society. This assertion seems both obvious and controversial. It is obvious because it quite simply accounts for what we see all around us, namely the pervasiveness of economic logic in the domain of social life. The situations in which market transactions intervene in our relationships with other people and in the course of our everyday activities multiply: shopping in malls, city centres or online is an ordinary leisure activity; students are increasingly advised to consider university education as an investment decision and universities compete by demonstrating the payoff of a degree in salary terms; our personal conversations on social network platforms fuel the constitution of marketing databases; professional sports clubs increasingly resemble multinational companies; dinner conversation over organ donation markets or whether and how surrogate mothers should be paid for their services are commonplace; and health care issues have moved into lifestyle and technology markets, to name but a few examples. But the assertion is also controversial. This is because to a large extent the economy and society are still considered as two complementary but nonetheless different dimensions of human affairs. The clash between social values and the economic order is a matter of ordinary perception, but also of disciplinary battle; witness, for instance, the fight between liberal economists striving for the implementation of pure competitive market coordination in all possible domains of activity and social science researchers insisting on the primacy of social order over the logic of economic transactions. The return on investment of ‘human capital’, as considered by Gary Becker, strongly conflicts with Karl Polanyi’s conception of markets as ‘embedded’ in preexisting social institutions and with Mark Granovetter’s weak embeddedness position, where economic action is entangled in ongoing social relations. Recently, a number of researchers from different academic disciplines have attempted to give deeper meaning and content to the idea that markets produce society and to go beyond its paradoxical or polemical

3 Starting Up: Relating to a Context in Motion

The odds that a start-up succeeds are low. The risk of failure during the first three years is estimated at 85 %; statistics show that only a few newly started businesses survive more than a handful of years (Short, McKelvie, Ketchen, & Chandler, 2009). Despite these odds, the number of entrepreneurs who want to start their own business continues to grow, and the interest among policy makers and investors remains. Since such unfavourable statistics persist, despite research on entrepreneurship and the support which start-ups receive, our understanding and knowledge about the process of establishing and developing a new business venture is apparently rather limited or not fully relevant. Following a certain tradition in new venturing studies (Gartner, 1985), in this chapter we use the notion of ‘start-up’ when we refer to the pre-organizational stage, and that of ‘new business venture’ when the enterprise acquires the features of an organized activity system (drawing a clear line is of course arbitrary but this is not really central to our purpose in this chapter).

Interdependencies – Blessings and Curses

Abstract This chapter contains a discussion of interdependencies as an explanatory construct in conceptualising the business world and explaining managerial behaviours. Specific interdependencies that exist in business networks influence the outcomes of business relationships. Such interdependencies can be more or less clearly acknowledged and perceived by the practitioners (managers), who can act upon them and create new interdependencies. Interdependence thus also plays an important role in developing effective explanations and conceptualisations of the business world. Some of the interdependencies are consequences of actions focusing on rationalisations, development or positioning, while other interdependencies are made with the intention of creating a specific position or some other effects. To live with, and be competent in, handling interdependencies is thus imperative in the interactive business landscape; as a consequence interdependencies need to be addressed when theorising the business world and its dynamics.