Cognitive Consensus Enables the Weaving of a Net of Business Partners in the Boat Industry

The aim of the study is to investigate the manageability of networks through business partnership building during industry discontinuity. The contribution is the proposition that a cognitive consensus about the likelihood of strategic nets being weaved is key to increasing the manageability of hitherto spontaneous and uncoordinated networks. This cognitive consensus is proposed to be driven by existence of a focal network actor, institutional discontinuities and business model transformation. We have studied the development of the Finnish boat industry in order to develop a framework for understanding the role of cognitive consensus in the manageability of networks. Research avenues for utilizing the boat industry to study this issue further are presented.

[1]  Lars-Erik Gadde,et al.  Strategizing in Industrial Networks , 2003 .

[2]  A. Kumaraswamy,et al.  INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE SPONSORSHIP OF COMMON TECHNOLOGICAL STANDARDS: THE CASE OF SUN MICROSYSTEMS AND JAVA * , 2002 .

[3]  J. G. Hunt,et al.  Multi-level leadership: Grounded theory and mainstream theory applied to the case of general motors , 1995 .

[4]  H. Tikkanen,et al.  Managerial cognition, action and the business model of the firm , 2005 .

[5]  N. Piercy,et al.  New Organizational Forms for Competing in Highly Dynamic Environments: the Network Paradigm , 1996 .

[6]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Strategic decision processes in high velocity environments: four cases in the microcomputer industry , 1988 .

[7]  M. Castells.  The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture , 1999 .

[8]  A. Lewin,et al.  Prolegomena on Coevolution: a Framework for Research on Strategy and New Organizational Forms , 1999 .

[9]  C. Hardy,et al.  Institutional Entrepreneurship in Emerging Fields: HIV/AIDS Treatment Advocacy in Canada , 2004 .

[10]  Seung Ho Park,et al.  Managing an Interorganizational Network: A Framework of the Institutional Mechanism for Network Control , 1996 .

[11]  I. Wilkinson,et al.  Managing in complex business networks , 2004 .

[12]  Rajdeep Grewal,et al.  The Role of the Institutional Environment in Marketing Channels , 2002 .

[13]  L. Zucker.  Institutional Theories of Organization , 1987 .

[14]  Arto Rajala,et al.  Strategic business nets - their type and management , 2005 .

[15]  Louise Young,et al.  On cooperating: firms, relations and networks☆ , 2002 .

[16]  M. Castells.  The rise of the network society , 1996 .

[17]  J. Jarillo.  On strategic networks , 1988 .

[18]  Frank-Jürgen Richter,et al.  Strategic Networks: The Art of Japanese Interfirm Cooperation , 1999 .

[19]  K. Möller,et al.  Managing Strategic Nets , 2003 .

[20]  Giovanni Gavetti,et al.  Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging , 2000 .

[21]  S. Rothenberg.  Sustainability Through Servicizing , 2007 .

[22]  Pamela S. Tolbert,et al.  Institutionalization and Structuration: Studying the Links between Action and Institution , 1997 .

[23]  L. Zucker.  The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. , 1977 .

[24]  P. Berger,et al.  The Social Construction of Reality , 1966 .

[25]  W. Streeck,et al.  Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies , 2005 .

[26]  H. Tikkanen,et al.  Planned and spontaneous orders in the emerging network society , 2006 .

[27]  H. Thomas,et al.  Competitive Groups as Cognitive Communities: The Case of Scottish Knitwear Manufacturers Revisited , 1989 .

[28]  José C. Jarillo,et al.  Strategic Networks: Creating the Borderless Organization , 1993 .

[29]  S. Lenway,et al.  Knowledge and competitive advantage, the coevolution of firms, technology and national institutions , 2003 .