Search results

This paper aims to highlight the importance of addressing both competitive strategy and business model for the long-term success of a company. The paper builds a prescriptive framework to help managers assess their companies’ positions based on the extent to which they attend to their strategies and business models simultaneously. In doing so, the paper offers four possible outcomes – idling, faceoff, breakdown and traction – providing examples to capture each scenario and managerial prescription.

The framework of this study is based on academic research in strategy and business model design, the authors’ scholarly work on innovation and their combined experiences and observations in the industry. The framework uses examples of well-known companies to make the case for why managers need to pay heed to both business models and strategies simultaneously to achieve long-term competitive profitability.

This study’s framework suggests that the delicate balance between strategy and business model design determines the long-term competitive advantage and profitability of a company. Focusing on strategy without paying heed to the business model can cause companies to lose sight of changing customer behaviors. Alternatively, managerial attention to business models at the exclusion of its strategy leaves the company vulnerable to competition. The framework points at the delicate strategy–business model balance required to manage winning companies.

Business models and strategies represent two separate yet inextricably linked domains under the purview of management. However, companies can be weakened because of an overemphasis on one at the expense of the other. This paper’s framework offers a simple yet effective guide to assist managers in assessing their organizations’ current positions while also providing direction toward addressing any shortcomings.

This paper aims to address risks inherent in business model innovation. The authors make the case that entrepreneurs and managers, in relying on sources of innovation when designing business models, need to pay heed to these hidden risks – or tripwires – that can prevent the venture from efficiently, effectively and profitably scaling. The authors provide a guiding framework to help entrepreneurs and managers identify four distinct tripwires in their business model underlying the sources of innovation.

The authors build a systematic framework of the four tripwires – structure, scaling, systems and strategy – underlying offer-driven, customer-driven, finance-driven and resource-driven business model innovations. By relying on academic research, the authors’ scholarly work on organizational decline, innovation and corporate turnaround and the authors combined experiences and observations in industry, this study makes explicit and highlights problem areas in the business model, providing examples of representative companies to illustrate the challenges and consequences of failing to identify and manage its tripwires.

The authors demonstrate that awareness and attention to the tripwires underlying sources of innovation can mitigate a business model’s future challenges. Business model innovations can and often do conceal hazards that become apparent only as a venture begins to grow. As such, it is essential that entrepreneurs and managers attend to these potential problem areas in the early stages of designing their business models. In bringing awareness to innovation-related tripwires, the authors offer a risk-management “patch” for managers and entrepreneurs when developing their business models.

Business model innovation is a powerful tool to help in identifying growth opportunities. Yet in launching, scaling or transforming their business models, entrepreneurs and managers can encounter unforeseen challenges. While sources of innovation in the business model prioritize the discovery of growth opportunities, this has often come at the expense of the potential risks underlying them. The authors provide a means to identify four distinct tripwires that may be triggered when implementing business model innovations.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the governance structures of two distinctive governance forms: the family firm and the leveraged buyout (LBO). The paper also explores the relative performance of these two organizational forms over the course of the economic business cycle.

The paper provides a theoretical treatment of the family firm and the LBO using the stewardship perspective and agency theory. The analysis anticipates the board structure for each organizational form and relates family firm and LBO governance to performance over the business cycle.

From a conceptual treatment, the family‐owned concern exhibits board characteristics reflecting the longer‐term orientation of the firm, with boards empowered to include non‐economic, as well as economic, goals. LBOs are structured to maximize shareholder value over a shorter time horizon. LBOs may take advantage of expansionary environments whereas family firms may be better prepared for economic down‐cycles.

The paper takes a holistic approach to contrasting two organizational forms that fit their respective theoretical frames and compares some of their more salient governance characteristics and performance over the business cycle.

Managers and boards can structure governance to manage the business cycle. Stakeholders can selectively engage firms that portray vital governance characteristics for their benefit and may also pressure boards and top management to make necessary governance improvements.

The paper offers an introductory comparison between family firms and LBOs in terms of governance and managing the firm over the business cycle. This paper makes the case that some organizational forms are better suited to certain types of economic climates.

This paper seeks to give consideration to the family imprint on governance in the context of firms experiencing economic recession. It aims to rely on agency and stewardship theories to empirically examine the relationship between CEO duality and slack resources on family firm performance during economic recession.

Trend analyses were used employing hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to evaluate the influence of duality and slack resources on the performance of 75 family‐controlled public firms (FCPFs) during the 2001‐2002 US economic recession and recovery.

The results indicate that duality and slack by themselves do not influence firm performance. However, family firms with a combined CEO‐chair and ample slack resources experience enhanced performance both at the onset of recession and at its conclusion. The findings suggest that a unified leadership and access to slack provide the family with the means to weather economic hardship. The paper makes the case that the stewardship afforded by this combination provides clear benefits to outside shareholders.

The absolute leadership and decision‐making control afforded to a CEO‐chair who also holds the reins over firm resources helps to favorably position the business and ease its course through difficult times. The results of this paper suggest that what is good for the family may also be good for other stakeholders in the firm, in this case non‐family shareholders.

With this study, attention is drawn to the governance of family businesses during times of economic duress. To the authors' knowledge, this study represents the only empirical investigation into family firm governance within this unique, albeit prevalent context.

Despite the episodic pervasiveness of recessions and their destructive impact on firms, a void exists in the management literature examining the intersection between recessions, strategy, and performance. This paper seeks directly to address this research void by reviewing relevant literature spanning the past 20 years and building an integrative framework for future research efforts.

The paper systematically reviews and compartmentalizes articles on the intersection between firm strategy and economic recession published between 1991 and 2010 in widely recognized management and entrepreneurship journals. Concurrently, a theoretical framework is proposed which identifies distinct constructs and linkages related to economic recessions, strategy, and performance.

The findings are twofold. First, the review distils disparate scholarly works on firm behavior and recessions to provide a systematic appraisal and review of what people know and do not know about managing firms through economic downturn. Second, the conceptual framework points to numerous opportunities to scholars interested in conducting research on this timely and important topic.

The paper answers a call by scholars for research that fills a void on systematic diagnosis, prescription, or prophylaxis that can guide managers through recessions.

This paper represents the only research initiative to systematically bring a comprehensive overview of firm strategy in the context of recessionary environments. In effect, it addresses the larger research question: “What do we know about the interplay between firm strategy and recession?”

This paper aims to introduce a supplementary strategic mapping tool designed specifically for family businesses. The authors extend the popular tool of strategy maps into the family business arena to address potential misalignments arising from the family imprint on a business. The resulting family enterprise strategy map (FESM) aims, both literally and figuratively, to get internal stakeholders on the same page in their pursuit of family business objectives. Using the FESM, family managers can enhance strategy design and implementation, thereby increasing the viability and longevity of their enterprises for future generations.

The framework draws from previous work on strategic maps, from scholarly research on family businesses and from the authors’ experiences consulting with family enterprises. The framework addresses four distinct but interrelated perspectives requiring managerial attention: family business objectives, family alignment, family systems and family business foundation. The case of Mondavi Winery is used to illustrate the prescriptive value of the FESM.

The FESM is meant to be used cooperatively among internal stakeholders to tease out potential challenges that can hinder the effective design and implementation of a family business strategy. The FESM makes explicit the primary objectives of the family business, prompts stakeholders to voice professional and personal ambitions in the business and brings individual risk propensities to the dialogue. Systems and activities necessary for successful strategy implementation are also underlined in the FESM. Lastly, the framework helps to identify the strategic foundation that can be leveraged to achieve the family enterprise’s objective.

The value of the FESM is threefold. First, having family members and non-family managers engage in this activity can make known individual, family and non-family functions, desires and goals. In doing so, the FESM also effectively highlights misalignments among and between various internal stakeholders that may otherwise go unnoticed. Second, the FESM draws management’s attention to specific family-related resources and capabilities within the company and, just as importantly, those that need to be cultivated to achieve strategic objectives. Third, the FESM can serve as a valuable reminder during those times when family systems begin to malfunction or to diverge from intended objectives.

In this paper, the authors build a prescriptive framework for managers to help assess potential shifts in consumer behavior during economic recession. The framework offers a guide to help evaluate the extent of customer attrition risks, and to devise customer‐centric strategies to stabilize businesses in light of recessionary demand shocks.

The framework is built based on insights gained from surveying approximately 500 small, medium‐sized, and large businesses during the 2001‐2002 and 2007‐present recession. The executives surveyed worked in a wide array of industries, at organizations that varied in size from one person to thousands of employees.

The framework suggests that the interaction between two consumer behavior dynamics – lock‐in and utility specificity – determines the extent of customer retention and attrition to businesses experiencing recession. As such, all organizations need to assess the likelihood that their customers will alter their purchases in response to recessionary pressures. The authors provide measures to help managers anticipate shifts in buying behavior and formulate appropriate responses for customer retention and acquisition.

Research on effective management strategies for coping with recessions remains one of the most important but nevertheless overlooked areas in strategic management. In most instances, prescriptions fall under two broad categories – i.e. seek out inefficiencies and reduce costs. The authors contend that for companies to successfully navigate recessionary environments they need to reach beyond efficiency measures to also adopt strategies minimizing customer loss during the recession and luring back buyers post‐recession. The authors offer insights to help managers evaluate customer acquisition and retention recession.

Humanitarian logistics is an essential element of disaster management and it presents many challenges due to the unique disaster relief environment. The paper describes the main features and challenges of humanitarian logistics and the potential role of technology. Radio frequency identification (RFID) technology has been increasingly considered to improve the efficiency of supply chain management. Security is an important requirement for disaster management. The purpose of this paper is to propose and describe the application of secure RFID technology to improve the management and security of relief supply chains.

The paper describes the challenges of disaster of supply chains and how secure RFID can address them in the overall framework of disaster management.

The paper describes the efficiency of the crypotgraphic algorithm used in the design of the secure RFID, the system architecture and the deployment workflow.

The establishment of a logistics tracking framework based on secure RFID has the potential to greatly increase the effectiveness of future emergency crises response operations.

The originality of the paper is to present the application of secure RFID to the context of disaster management, where the security of supply chains is often not addressed.

In this paper, the authors aim to build a prescriptive framework to help managers in turning around their ailing organizations. Their framework focuses on the extent of contractionary and expansionary initiatives needed to rebuild long‐term competitive advantage. They make the case that managers engaging in a pro‐active and balanced approach to scaling down and growing their organizations can boost the success of their recovery efforts.

The authors build their framework based on academic research on corporate turnarounds, their scholarly work on corporate restructuring, and their combined experiences and observations in industry. Their framework proposes four possible outcomes of the turnaround process: comeback, adrift, running‐on‐empty, and collapse. They provide examples to describe each outcome.

The authors' framework suggests that the interaction between two restructuring actions – retrenchment and repositioning ‐ determines the outcome of corporate turnarounds. By overemphasizing downsizing, managers fail to jumpstart entrepreneurial growth that can propel the firm towards long‐term competitive advantage. Similarly, stresses arising from excessive growth programs can quickly drain firm resources. As such, all managers need to assess the alignment between downsizing efforts and growth‐oriented initiatives. By bringing awareness to the interdependency between retrenchment and repositioning, the authors' framework can guide managers in making necessary adjustments on the way to fixing their organization.

Retrenchment and repositioning represent the means available to managers attempting corporate turnaround. However, corporate turnarounds often fail due to an overemphasis on one phase of the restructuring process, at the expense of the other. This framework points to the delicate retrenchment‐repositioning required to achieve successful turnaround.