Search results

This paper aims to examine the role strategic problem identification and resolution played in identifying and capturing new sources of competitive advantage as CSL Limited (CSL) transformed itself into the world’s fifth-largest biotechnology company. Historical accounts of superior business growth are usually explained by looking back to identify a firm’s sources of competitive advantage. However, what managers really want to know is how to identify opportunities to create and capture competitive advantage ahead of competitors.

The authors examined CSL’s journey between 1994 and 2019 through a case study approach and the lens of the problem-identification and problem-solving perspective (PSP). The PSP assumes strategic problems act as antecedents to discovering and capturing new sources of competitive advantage. The problems a firm identifies and resolves influences whether or not, in what direction and for whom an organization creates value.

The authors provide examples of the strategic problems CSL identified and how they acted as the catalyst to proactively identify new sources of competitive advantage. The formulated problems helped manager to see in advance what resources, capabilities and governance mechanisms would be required to create and capture value.

Generalizing the lessons learned, the authors propose a business-problem classification framework and portfolio approach to encourage managers to identify, formulate and resolve different types of strategic problems. These problems could motivate firms to tackle problems beyond which they have successfully tackled before and discover new sources of competitive advantage ahead of competitors.

The current innovation environment is characterized by complexity, networking and internationalization and calls for managerial approaches that not only foster value‐capture activities, but acknowledge value creation as equally important. The purpose of this study is to clarify and define in more useful conceptual detail the nature of value creation, an area within the Knowledge Management field that has not received as much research scrutiny as it warrants. The authors' main contribution in unpacking a logic of problem finding is to expand understanding of how organizations choose valuable problems on which to work.

The research findings are based on a literature review. In particular, the paper aims to increase understanding of value creation in innovation by critically examining and augmenting the problem‐finding/problem‐solving (PF/PS) perspective.

Based on the PF/PS approach, the paper proposes a managerial cognitive frame that shows the challenges faced by managers in the value creation process and also the associated decision points. The paper argues that three distinct discriminating alignment choices – process selection, problem‐selection, and governance choice – are essential parts of value creation, and can in time lead to efficient value‐capture and improved innovation outcomes. Also, concentrating on the early stages of innovation, the paper identifies relevant processes and the various management biases that impede successful problem‐finding.

As the paper is conceptual, the findings await empirical confirmation. However, the paper presents a framework that will provide a useful basis for further work.

The discussion of problem‐finding and the different processes that can be used to overcome various biases can be utilized by managers to improve processes within their organizations. Using the proposed framework as a tool, organizations can reduce resources wasted trying to solve inappropriately defined problems.

The contribution of the paper lies in presenting a new approach to value creation and capture, with a focus on the neglected area of problem‐finding. A new legalistic bias is specified in some detail, and the importance of awareness of bias by teams to diminish its impact on problem‐finding efficiency is discussed. Closer examination of value creation increases the potential for improved competitive advantage and value‐capture. Limitations of this and prior work are also discussed and directions for future work suggested.

Design thinking has become something of a buzz word in innovation discussions and has recently also invested occupied education spaces. In this chapter we briefly compare design thinking to problem-based learning (PBL) and enquiry-based learning (EBL) approaches to problem solving in education before focusing on the approach itself and current debates about its meaning and significance. This chapter focuses particular attention on the problem finding aspect of design thinking and its integration of creative methods for solving a range of tame to wicked problems in a variety of spaces. We ground our analysis in three environments of design thinking and five specific cases of application across education sectors from primary through to university. The examples focus on the generative potential of design thinking for all students and especially those from non-design disciplines. It is this capacity of design thinking to complement existing pedagogies and provide inspiration for change and innovation that is the strength of the model.

In developing CI capability, organisations need to move to a level of development in which strategic goals are communicated and deployed and where improvement activity is guided by a process of monitoring and measurement against these strategic objectives. Policy deployment of this kind is more prevalent in Japanese examples and in a handful of cases in Western firms. Implementing it poses significant challenges and requires a different and additional toolkit of enabling resources. This paper reports on the experience of policy deployment in Japan and in Western enterprises and explores some of the implementation issues raised.

Current research has theorized that developing dynamic capability can be viewed as a problem-finding and problem-solving process in terms of a firm’s resource reconfiguration. However, there continues to be a scarcity of empirical research on how firms and managers solve innovation problems to develop capabilities. Building on the theoretical lens of problem-solving perspective (PSP) and dynamic capability literature, the purpose of this paper is to address this gap by examining how a large automobile company developed different types of capabilities (combining capability, replacing capability and evolving capability) and their underlying problem-solving processes.

An inductive multi-case design was used to investigate the problem-solving process in different types of capability development in the context of NPD. This methodology has a number of benefits, including accommodation of the rich data used to compare the inferences among cases, thus enabling researchers to extend the emergent theory.

The findings of a multi-case study show that managers tend to direct their attentions to searching for solutions among external resources when the problem is framed as a combination of existing capabilities. Conversely, managers direct their attention to facilitating organizational learning when the problem is framed as an extension of an existing capability. However, managers need to direct more attention to gaining legitimacy when the problem is framed as a replacement of existing capabilities. The findings thus respond to increasing calls for more investigations into the microfoundations underlying firms’ capabilities, by revealing different instances of PSP, and their connections with different actions that take to capability development.

By comparatively examining the unique problem-solving process underlying an established firm’s innovative challenges in developing capabilities, the findings identify different instances of PSP, and their connections with different actions that take to capability development. Thus, the findings respond to increasing calls for more investigation into the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities for organizational outcomes. The findings also add to the new product development literature by examining how a product innovation can be framed differently depending on the attributes of an innovation problem. As PSP is particularly useful in offering guidance to firms’ innovative search, it is important for managers to pay attention to the attribute of each product and its domain of solution in considering the effectiveness of value creation.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the digitalization of operational processes and activities in lean manufacturing firms and explore the associated learning implications through the lens of cumulative capability theory.

Adopting a multiple-case design, we examine four cases of digitalization initiatives within lean manufacturing firms. We collected data through semi-structured interviews and direct observations during site visits.

The study uncovers the development of learning capabilities as a result of integrating lean and digitalization. We find that digitalization in lean manufacturing firms contributes to the development of both routinized and evolutionary learning capabilities in a cumulative fashion.

The study adds nuance to the limited theoretical understanding of the integration of lean and digitalization by showing how it cumulatively develops the learning capabilities of lean manufacturing firms. As such, the study supports the robustness of cumulative capability theory. We further contribute to research by offering empirical support for the cumulative nature of learning.

The absence of the reasoning stage in the analysis of long-term investment decision creates a serious gap in this classic topic in management accounting literature. The purpose of this paper is to fill this gap. The traditional analysis focuses on the evaluation stage using capital budgeting tools to rank alternative investment proposals. It tacitly assumes that the decision is to be made, thereby bypassing the reasoning stage. However, the reasoning stage may reveal that there is no sufficient justification (reasoning) to consider searching for and evaluating alternative proposals for this decision. Focusing on the reasoning component, the paper combines Fritz's (1989, 1990) “creative tension” and Janis and Mann's (1977) “challenges” as the driving forces for the problem-finding step. To demonstrate the significance of filling the reasoning gap in the long-term investment decision, the paper selects the modular manufacturing system and the complex investment decision required for its adoption. Using hypothetical data, the paper employs the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence and Omer, et al's (1995) algorithm to compute the belief and plausibility values of the three reasoned actions: (1) maintain the status quo, (2) adopt Level 2 (assembly) modularity or (3) adopt Level 2 (design) modularity.

The contributions of the paper include (1) highlighting a critical gap currently existing in one of the classical decisions in the management accounting literature; (2) developing a framework for filling this gap and (3) applying this framework to the intricate nature of the modular manufacturing system and its complex investment decision.

This article aims to reinterpret principal preparatory programs to also include the collective learning‐from‐success process (success‐based learning), thus providing a complementary instructional framework on how to prepare principals for today's public school reality.

The discussion reviews the core leadership capacities for today's and tomorrow's principalship and the need to rethink principal preparatory programs accordingly. The interrelationship between problems and learning is described, coupled with the possibilities and limitations of problem‐based learning. Success‐based learning is then described, enumerating its potentials and pitfalls.

The paper finds that focusing on both learning from problems and learning from successes in leadership education may better develop prospective principals' leadership capacities necessary to lead schools in a dynamic environment.

The paper highlights the need to conceptualize and empirically investigate problem‐based learning and success‐based learning as interrelated instructional frameworks that are both necessary to develop effective future leaders.

This chapter attempts to elucidate the important role that divergent thinking plays in organizational creativity, innovation, and change. We define brainstorming as a systematized method of divergent thinking, review this literature, and advocate for the strategic use of brainstorming to enhance creativity and innovation. We identify contradictory findings in the research literature that have led practitioners and researchers to disregard brainstorming techniques. We suggest that cultural forces embedded in organizations may prevent divergent thinking and brainstorming from becoming established normative organizational processes, thus hampering organizations’ potential for change and innovation. The chapter closes by putting divergent thinking and brainstorming in perspective and provides guidelines for its use.

The phenomenon of creativity spans research topics across Marketing and Consumer Behavior. Interest in, and research on, creativity has grown over the past several decades. With this heightened attention comes the question of how best to conceptualize and measure creativity. This question is addressed by reviewing the conceptualizations and measures used in the psychological study of creativity. From this review, we build a framework by which to analyze papers from the Journal of Consumer Research and the Journal of Marketing Research. Based upon this analysis, we provide recommendations and best practices for future research. Of particular importance, we recommend the use of convergent problem-solving tasks in combination with ratings of novelty and usefulness reported separately. Such measures allow one to distinguish between instances of effective-creativity (when an idea is both novel and useful) and instances of quasi-creativity (when an idea is novel but lacks usefulness). The importance of the framework to research and analysis beyond the experimental paradigm is discussed.