Kamal Munir

The Birth of the 'Kodak Moment': Institutional Entrepreneurship and the Adoption of New Technologies

In this paper, we adopt a discourse analytic methodology to explore the role of institutional entrepreneurs in the process of institutional change that coincides with the adoption of a radically new technology. More specifically, we examine how Kodak managed to transform photography from a highly specialized activity to one that became an integral part of everyday life. Based on this case, we develop an initial typology of the strategies available to institutional entrepreneurs who wish to affect the processes of social construction that lead to change in institutional fields. The use of discourse analysis in analysing institutional change provides new insights into the processes through which institutional fields evolve as well as into how institutional entrepreneurs are able to act strategically to embody their interests in the resulting institutions.

The Social Construction of Events: A Study of Institutional Change in the Photographic Field

Institutional theorists have recently been moving towards a notion that non-isomorphic institutional change is precipitated by significant events or ‘jolts’. In this paper, we argue that in doing so theorists have tended to move away from the social constructivist roots of institutional theory towards an understanding which implies the emergence of new organizational forms or practices in response to functional imperatives. In this context, we examine the ongoing institutional change from photography to digital imaging. Our analysis suggests that attributing institutional change to a single event or ‘jolt’ leads to a flawed understanding of institutional change processes. We demonstrate that, rather than causing institutional change, events are a part of the change process, and only become significant as actors bring them to our notice and ‘theorize’ around them (Greenwood et al. 2002). This social construction process determines the scope, significance and relevance of events, leading to the development of new artifacts and the enrolment of new stakeholders in the field. Situating events within the theorization process, rather than outside it, underlines the importance of focusing on social construction processes in accounts of institutional change.

Systems of organizational sensemaking for sustained product innovation

Abstract We map out the systems of sensemaking people use to link market and technology knowledge into new products, in innovative versus non-innovative organizations. Systems of sensemaking are organized “webs of meaning” that govern the knowledge people make sense of, and the sense they make. Innovative sensemaking systems link more knowledge because they: (1) frame linking as hands-on practices of value creation; and (2) loosely couple three tensions between tacit and articulated knowledge across organizational levels to draw in, exploit, and recreate knowledge for innovation. We contrast sensemaking systems in innovative versus non-innovative organizations, and draw implications for theory and practice.

Discontinuity and After: the Social Dynamics of Technology Evolution and Dominance

While there has been much discussion of the social dynamics of technology evolution within the technology management literature, this has made relatively little use of work done by sociologists on similar issues. In this article, the potential of sociological research to inform our understanding of technology evolution and dominance is explored, focusing in particular on the contribution of actor network theory. The bringing together of questions posed by technology management theorists and insights offered by social theorists provides new insights on technology evolution, and generates several important implications for both research and practice.

The concept of industry and the case of radical technological change

Abstract In the strategic management literature, the concept of ‘industry,’ usually defined with reference to products or services that are close substitutes, is widely deployed as an aid in competitive analysis. While this concept serves managers well in relatively stable periods, in this paper we argue that the same concept is of little use during times of significant technological change. Following a radical technological discontinuity, industries suddenly lose the central product, technology, or design around which they are organized. Since the idea of an industry is firmly rooted in a central product (e.g., the “VCR industry” or the “PC industry”), a firms competitive environment cannot be characterized as an ‘industry’ until a new dominant design emerges and it is again possible to discern what constitutes close substitutes. Therefore, while making sense of a firms competitive environment in terms of ‘industry’ may be useful during periods of stability, it can be dangerously misleading for researchers and managers in the face of radical technological change. We go on to argue that for firms engulfed in technological change, the concept of ‘activity network’—a broad group of firms struggling to shape or influence the perceived value, nature, and technique for carrying out a particular activity—should be substituted for ‘industry.’ We illustrate our argument using the case of the photographic industry, which is currently experiencing a profound technological shock that is rapidly eroding traditional industry boundaries.

Financial Crisis 2008-2009: What Does the Silence of Institutional Theorists Tell Us?

This article is a reflection on why the 2007-2009 financial crisis was largely ignored by organization theorists, in particular, institutional theorists. The general lack of engagement with the events that transpired in this period of turmoil is surprising given their potential to inform the ongoing inquiries into the dynamics of organizations, markets, communities, and society in general. Given corporate excesses that led to the crisis, it is difficult to imagine how life could go on as usual for organization theorists. Losing the forest for the trees is no longer an option. Nor is continuing to act as a cheerleader for big business. Who knows, the time may even have come to turn prescriptive!

A Loss of Power in Institutional Theory

Institutional theory has made tremendous gains in recent years. However, while it has borrowed concepts and insights from more critical perspectives, it has resisted the import of a more critical outlook. This has meant that institutional theory has shied away from identifying and examining more problematic uses of power. Consequently, institutional understandings of how power operates continue to fall short of the theory’s full potential.

Being Different: How Normative and Cognitive Aspects of Institutional Environments Influence Technology Transfer

This article provides a novel perspective on technology transfer by arguing that incorporation of a new technology into an organization may require it to become different in more ways than existing research would have us believe. This is especially true when host and home organizations are based in two widely different institutional environments. Because institutional pressures exert themselves on organizational behavior from both outside and inside the organization, they are critical in determining whether the transfer process is successful. Borrowing from institutional theory, the institutional environment of an organization is divided into regulative, normative and cognitive aspects. It is argued that, although less obvious in their influence, normative and cognitive institutions are no less important than the relatively more visible regulatory institutions. This article discusses how normative and cognitive aspects of the institutional environment affect international technology transfer and offers propositions as well as implications for researchers and managers. Although the insights developed in this article are applicable to any instance of technology transfer, they are more salient in cases where technology is transferred internationally. Also, the propositions developed here are probably more relevant in cases where ‘process-embodied’ technologies are being transferred.

Beyond the hype: Taking business strategy to the “bottom of the pyramid”

Recent studies in strategy have highlighted both the successes and failures of applying conventional perspectives in strategic management to developing markets. Within this debate, Bottom of the Pyramid (BoP) strategies, aimed at exploiting high-volume, low-margins strata at the bottom of these societies, have particularly drawn interest. We critically examine the emergence and evolution of BoP strategies and compare their anticipated outcomes to some of the empirical evidence. We then draw on the concept of global value chains to usefully extend the BoP concept, and suggest areas for further theory building and empirical research. We offer a typology of BoP ventures, and suggest appropriate levels of public–private engagement to achieve the desired social and economic outcomes.

Competitive dynamics in face of technological discontinuity: a framework for action

Abstract Following radical technological discontinuities, several equally plausible designs are often seen competing for dominance in a particular industry. How the industry comes to evolve along one of the many possible trajectories is a question that has puzzled researchers for some time. This article addresses the question: How do some designs and technologies attain dominance, even when they are considered ‘inferior’ in many respects, and become the basis for a sustainable competitive advantage for their proponents? Using examples from practice, we build on existing knowledge of technology evolution to provide a conceptual framework that explains this evolutionary process. We argue that during the era of ferment, competing designs represent mere claims. Each design or claim is mired in numerous controversies. As firms strategize to provide closure to these controversies, their particular design is gradually ‘factualized’. Finally, firms are able to retain control over their designs and hence, make it a basis for a sustainable competitive advantage only when the design is positioned as an obligatory passage point. We believe that managers equipped with a better understanding of this process would be in a position to make more informed decisions regarding choice of technologies, adoption of particular standards, or selection of alliance-partners.