Search results

This viewpoint reflection draws upon the authors’ ongoing experience and research in the agribusiness sector and aims to propose a framework for succeeding in emerging markets and offer some insights that run counter to traditional approaches and practices. Despite its economic, social and political significance, the agribusiness sector remains neglected in mainstream academic scholarship. Additionally, much research presents an MNC-centric view, despite the success of several local firms. The framework presented in this viewpoint reflection identifies seven pillars of a winning strategic architecture to succeed in emerging markets and encourages future scholarship that theoretically elaborates and specifies boundaries for each of the practices that underpin it.

This viewpoint draws upon our experience, case studies, and ongoing primary research on the agribusiness sector. It is meant to be a “call for future research” as opposed to testing or elaborating theory.

This paper proposes a framework on seven pillars of a winning strategic architecture – benefits of centralization, satisficing, avoiding short-term myopia, developing own talent, more playfulness and experimentation, customer-driven product development and novel types of process innovation – and encourage future scholarship to theoretically elaborate and specify boundaries for each of these practices.

This paper offers a winning architecture template of seven practices and urges future theory to test, elaborate and establish boundaries for these practices.

The seven practices offered in this paper will allow managers to question prior assumptions and rethink their business models.

Although the agribusiness sector is one of the largest and most important sectors in emerging markets, it remains neglected in much scholarship. This sector employs large numbers of people and focuses on one of the most important aspects of society (i.e. food).

This paper offers several country intuitive insights on the seven elements of a winning strategic architecture. Examples include: advocating centralization and/or vertical integration, building as opposed to buying talent, satisficing as opposed to excelling and a greater focus on long-term and relational approaches even though they might appear to be inefficient in the short term.

There is a growing consensus about the role of communication in facilitating employees' acceptance of and support for organizational change initiatives. However, little is known about why communication breakdowns occur during change or how change recipients' cultural values can influence the effectiveness of communication in this context. The study addresses this gap.

The authors develop a theoretical framework that links four purposes of communication during change—disrupting, envisioning, legitimizing, and co-creating—to change recipients' cultural orientations. The authors also develop propositions that highlight how change agents' cultural sensitivity influences the relationship between communication purpose and the change readiness of change recipients.

The study implies that greater awareness and consideration of cultural values can reduce the likelihood of communication breakdowns and promote greater acceptance of and support for change initiatives. The authors conclude by discussing the implications of their theoretical framework for micro-level perspectives on change.

Although failures to change have in the past been linked to poor communication efforts by change agents, less is known about how or why communication breakdowns occur from the perspective of change recipients. The framework teases out issues related to the “what”, ‘how”, and “why” aspects of communication and offers prescriptions on the best approaches to communicate change.

Despite the rise of multicultural workforces and a recognition of the role played by cultural values in influencing leadership practices across cultures, theories of change have neglected these elements. Effective change efforts not only help enable economic and social renewal, they also enable the well-being of employees. Additionally, many change initiatives in the modern era have social implications (e.g. enhancing sustainability, inclusion and diversity).

A key contribution is a synthesis of different bodies of literature that have developed separately from each other. The authors offer some nuanced and counter-intuitive insights into what makes communication effective during change and identify culturally sensitive communication as an antecedent of change readiness.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting‐edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

Any history of innovation and entrepreneurship in the twentieth and twenty‐first centuries would have to include a huge chunk of text about the phenomenon that is Silicon Valley So why is it that so many people intent on encouraging new generations of innovators and entrepreneurs suggest avoiding trying to create their own Silicon Valley?

The paper provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world's leading organizations.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy‐to digest format.

This chapter presents the case study of Origin Green, the Irish food industry’s national program that committed the entire supply chain to meet sustainability targets and simultaneously branded the efforts and outcomes to increase demand for Irish food products. The brand creation is discussed under headings of building predictability, creating innovative capacity, and facilitating an intimate relationship.

The chapter describes supply chain risk mitigation, brand development, and the relationship between the two, proposing that they should be regarded as simultaneous rather than separate processes. This is followed by the case history of Origin Green.

The literatures on risk mitigation and brand equity development are extended by suggesting that the development of each should be regarded as simultaneous rather than consecutive activities.

The chapter outlines a program for national branding and sustainability and an insight on risk mitigation and branding that should be of interest to policymakers designing such programs and senior leaders considering involvement.

This chapter will be useful to policymakers considering national or industry-wide initiatives. Further, the chapter demonstrates the opportunity and challenges of systemic approaches to sustainability. The opportunity to brand nations and systems and the need to simultaneously build supply chain and brand for such is an original insight that is of value to strategy and planning. Similarly, at firm level, removing risk from the supply chain and building a brand would be of value.

The purpose of this paper is to present an example of action learning in marketing – the unique postgraduate programme in marketing called the marketing development programme (MDP). This uniqueness arises in three main ways. First, the MDP is open only to those students with no work experience. Second, it employs action learning as the central pedagogy rather than an add‐on. Finally, it is a rolling programme with overlapping intakes and as such appears to have no beginning and no end. There are two important streams of learning to be harvested from such a programme. First, the MDP has for more than 20 years educated young marketers through affording them the opportunity to learn from marketing action within a supportive learning environment. The second is that there can be no action without learning, that is, the MDP has learned from its experience and created new learning for participants as a result. The paper concludes by considering the implications of the MDP for marketing education, theory and practice.

In recent years, industrial firms have been moving from selling pure products to selling smart services. Yet limited empirical evidence exists about how the new markets for these novel services are created. This paper seeks to extend current theory and create new insights by studying the new services market creation process in nascent industrial fields.

The authors' research design is a multiple‐case, inductive study that uses in‐depth archival and field data to track closely how five industrial firms created new market for new types of services.

The authors find that firms adopt a holistic initiative to address the challenges in new services market creation. In particular, they use three interrelated strategies to create a new market: co‐creating with customers, innovating in different ways and exploiting institutional forces.

The study focused only on life science research services. Moreover, in‐depth field interviews were used only in a small number of firms.

To successfully develop a new market for an industrial service innovation, a firm should innovate within and outside the firm, win over customers for adopting, adapting the service innovation and identifying its new uses, and utilize institutional mechanisms to legitimatize, claim and control the emerging market.

This paper's central contribution is a holistic framework of the longitudinal processes by which successful firms develop new services and construct new markets.

We argue that in order to address the contemporary challenges that organizations and societies are facing, the field of organization development (OD) requires frameworks and skills to focus on the eco-system as the level of analysis. In a world that has become economically, socially, and technologically highly connected, approaches that foster the optimization of specific actors in the eco-system, such as individual corporations, result in sub-optimization of the sustainability of the natural and social system because there is insufficient offset to the ego-centric purposes of the focal organization. We discuss the need for OD to broaden focus to deal with technological advances that enable new ways of organizing at the eco-system level, and to deal with the challenges to sustainable development. Case examples from healthcare and the agri-foods industry illustrate the kinds of development approaches that are required for the development of healthy eco-systems. We do not suggest fundamental changes in the identity of the field of organizational development. In fact, we demonstrate the need to dig deeply into the open systems and socio-technical roots of the field, and to translate the traditional values and approaches of OD to continue to be relevant in today’s dynamic interdependent world.

Global Account Management (GAM) is not a recent phenomenon. Xerox first appointed global account managers in 1988 and Citicorp has a history of using GAM processes that go back over twenty‐five years. What is new is that GAM has emerged as one of the major strategic issues facing multinational companies operating markets that are thinking globally. As a consequence GAM has stimulated growing interest among academics and a flurry of experiential articles in practitioner journals and “How we did it” presentations at conferences. Over the past few years a number of major research initiatives have produced papers that attempted to build upon the rather fragmented outputs addressing GAM related issues that began to emerge during the middle of the 1990s. Three of the recent studies of particular interest are: The SRT/SAMA Global Account Management Study; The GAM Contingency Model; and The St.Gallen GAM Study. Even though each has provided valuable insights into the GAM process the new conceptual model provided in this paper is the first attempt to integrate all of the individual findings. A number of propositions are offered in an attempt to stimulate research in the area.