Search results

This is the second part of a long investigation under the title of, Principia Oeconomica; the first having appeared in this journal in 1986. The substance of the argument in this contribution is in the form of a dialogue with Henri Guitton, member of l'Institut de France and author of a book in French, De l'Imperfection en Economie (1979). Guitton is leading a new French Economic School critical of a modern economy characterised by ‘Econosm” or “Economy of Counter‐sense”. Economism refers to the practice of conceiving problems of a modern society in strictly economic‐accounting terms and neglecting a host of social and human aspects. The second term means that the sole attention given to growth in production did not increase the happiness of man but on the contrary it created for him new problems (pollution, noise, atomic radiation and other hazards). To cope with these problems, the French school recommends wise policies which Guitton called “creative imperfection”. Guitton's presentation is followed step by step, with an interpretation in terms of stable equilibrium. The recommendation stresses structural reforms to solve the same problems but following a road of “creative perfection” leading to the same goal sought by Guitton: a better world of tomorrow.

Looks at the impact John Maynard Keynes and the movement (Keynesian) he started had on the theory and practice of economics in the 1930s and onwards. Identifies respective problems about capitalism and discusses them in depth. States that the monetary and fiscal policies recommended by Keynes have helped the West escape severe social consequences in the aftermath of the Great Depression. Goes on to show how economists after Keynes carried his work forward and upward in the 1940s and 1950s. Closes by stating there is a further, third revolution in economic thinking on the rise.

Discusses the heritage of John Maynard Keynes in terms of application and results of his new economic philosophy over the last four decades. Compares the Keynesian school of thought with other classical and contemporary economists in relation to foundations of monetary and economic analysis, the economics of stable equilibrium, and the economics of disequilibrium. Comments on Keynes’ concept of economic stability, his view on the instability of money and monetary reform, his concept of monetary policy and of the pure theory of money, and his misjudgement of the mixed nature of the modern gold standard. Examines the provisions of the US Federal Reserve Act (1913), focusing on the Federal reserve systems’ nature and functioning, cited by Keynes as a prototype of a modern gold standard. Concludes with an examination of the international aspect of the modern gold standard.

The controversy between Hayek and Keynes in the 1930s is probably one of the best‐known disputes in economics and several comments have been made on this episode (Hicks, 1967; Machlup, 1977; Fletcher, 1987). In the assessments little attention has been paid to the development of the ideas of the two economists, to the views they had in common and to the influence they had on each other. These aspects will be taken into consideration in this contribution with the aim of extending our knowledge of the fundamental points of disagreement between them. The crucial question is how it came about that Hayek and Keynes, who for some time studied very similar monetary problems, ended as such fierce opponents on the question of how a modern capitalist system works. Keynes went as far as denying that the market system is self‐adjusting, whereas Hayek, especially in his later writings, propounded the view that markets constitute an efficient mechanism for the satisfaction of human needs.

Determining the strategic thrust of the firm, it may be argued, is the principal task of top management. This task is aided by recent theories of business and marketing strategy, including the normative imperatives based on industry factors, resource factors, competences, market orientation, and relationship marketing. Choosing wisely from among the various theories of strategy requires an accurate understanding of the contexts of competition. This article argues that resource‐advantage theory, an evolutionary, disequilibrium‐provoking process theory of competition, provides that understanding. That is, resource‐advantage theory grounds theories of business and marketing strategy.

Since the first Volume of this Bibliography there has been an explosion of literature in all the main areas of business. The researcher and librarian have to be able to uncover specific articles devoted to certain topics. This Bibliography is designed to help. Volume III, in addition to the annotated list of articles as the two previous volumes, contains further features to help the reader. Each entry within has been indexed according to the Fifth Edition of the SCIMP/SCAMP Thesaurus and thus provides a full subject index to facilitate rapid information retrieval. Each article has its own unique number and this is used in both the subject and author index. The first Volume of the Bibliography covered seven journals published by MCB University Press. This Volume now indexes 25 journals, indicating the greater depth, coverage and expansion of the subject areas concerned.

This paper aims to examine the origins of value co-creation (VCC) knowledge streams, vis-a-vis their progression over the past 18 years. The study explores how knowledge of this discipline emerged across the tripartite strategic paradigms of business transformation.

Co-citation analysis (CCA) and co-word analysis (CWA) are used as bibliometric techniques, for which, a group of articles is retrieved using Scopus’s usual keyword-based search. The initial collection consists of 3,431 research articles published in business and management publications. By explaining the article clusters generated through CCA and keyword connections generated through CWA, the findings outline the origins and development of VCC research. A CWA-based chronological study adds further insights to the development of VCC research themes.

The results depict that VCC research has grown multifold in the past 18 years, whereby it has shifted its attention from a dyadic interaction approach to a multistakeholder ecosystem-based approach detailing the phenomenological instances of resource integration and institutional processes. Notably, extant research in this field has grown at a much faster rate since 2008. In fact, a stronger concentration of research emerged in the experience domain, particularly in terms of hedonic services. Development of engagement platforms has been driven by research into technologies such as IoT and artificial intelligence.

The theoretical framework of the VCC paradigm is used to describe the aggregation of co-creation research around the three strategic pillars. This framework is useful for business strategy and to track VCC research over time.

This work identifies the practices and strategies of VCC at three different levels: capacity, platform and experience. The study offers insights into a variety of co-creation practices at their respective levels, incorporating micro-level dyadic interactions and macro-level processes in a service ecosystem.

This study uses different bibliometric methodologies to investigate the development of this scientific field over time. “Document co-citation” analysis, a more preferred bibliometric technique under CCA, is used to construct the cluster of theoretical cores of this area. The results are classified under the strategic framework of the co-creation paradigm (Ramaswamy and Ozcan, 2014).