Search results

Sociologists studying the rise of postmodernism have generally concentrated on either macro-level structures of economy or micro-level subjectivities of individuals. Few have specified how meso-level actions within concrete institutions have produced both these macro- and micro-changes. Bourdieu's concept of field provides a meso-level concept that allows sociologists to explain the transition to a postmodern society by changes in the composition and competition of producers and consumers struggling for advantage in the economy and culture. The chapter focuses on architecture, revealing that the rise of a postmodern aesthetic was the result of internal changes of this field and their complex interrelation with the external changes of an economy in transition from Fordism to post-Fordism.

The chapter presents emerging evidence on the development of the platform economy, paying particular attention to the motivations for entering platform work, the conditions of platform work, and the extent of social protections afforded platform workers. Debate thus far has tended to be highly speculative and lacking in grounded empirical analysis, with policy-makers in particular actively looking to regulate platform work on the basis of its novelty as a form of employment within the wider context of the decline of the “standard employment relationship.” The chapter explores such concerns through an analysis of European Union labor market data and a unique data-set of circa 1,200 online “click workers” across four established platforms. A novel contribution of the analysis is to differentiate between those that only work on platforms (work-dependent platform workers) and those that do such work in addition to another job. The analysis suggests that work-dependent platform workers are more likely to be differentiated by their motivations for doing such work than their experiences of job quality or access to social protections. However, the relationship between platform working and levels of social protection is complex, notably in terms of combined level of social protection and the contractual arrangement of additional job holders. This leaves us to conclude that policy initiatives designed to address gaps in social protections for platform workers would be more appropriately targeted toward problems of insecure work more broadly. Finally, a number of areas for future research are outlined.

Internationalizing new firms face the dual challenge of overcoming the liabilities of newness and liabilities of foreignness (Stinchcombe, 1965; Dunning, 1981; Zaheer, 1995). Because of their newness, new firms are constrained in their ability to access external resources required for survival and growth. Because of their foreignness relative to the foreign target market, internationalizing firms are disadvantaged relative to domestic firms when establishing business relationships. These disadvantages are exacerbated by the additional knowledge inputs required by the internationalization process itself: internationalizing firms face the dual challenge of both learning how to do business in a new national and institutional environment while also learning to manage the inherently complex international business organization (Johanson & Vahlne, 1990).

This chapter explores authentic leadership at the ‘edge of chaos’ – a transitional period from one kind of stability to another triggered by the emergence and implementation of newness. The authors argue that continuous, abrupt or unpredictable change at the edge of chaos impacts authentic leadership, resulting in the development of new values, new perspectives on legitimacy and new identities. Kinyanjui and Turcan identify four leader legitimation strategies, when introducing newness at the edge of chaos: feedback loop; conformance; familiar cues; and consistency and repetition. Kinyanjui and Turcan call for future research into the co-emergence of newness at the edge of chaos to equip decision-makers and policy-makers with a better understanding of legitimation strategies in the implementation of newness.

International new ventures have been argued to seek foreign markets from inception in response to the external environment and/or motivations internal to the firm. For example, a new venture that exists in an industry that is more globally integrated is more likely to have a need to internationalize in order to remain competitive (Shrader, Oviatt, & McDougall, 2000). Similarly, those new ventures that have limited domestic growth due to the size of their home country may look elsewhere in order to gain a sufficient level of sales to survive (Zahra & George, 2002). Some of the many firm-specific motivations to internationalize might include the desire to fully exploit a unique product (Burgel & Murray, 2000; Oviatt & McDougall, 1994, 1995), capitalize on the learning advantage of newness (Autio, Sapienza, & Almeida, 2000) or take advantage of networking opportunities (Reuber & Fischer, 1997).

This study investigates the conditions that shape the contractual structure of pharmaceutical-biotechnology R&D agreements and whether these collaborations have produced measurable impact on the overall R&D productivity of pharmaceutical companies. In one section, the effect of uncertainty due to the advances in technology on the structure of R&D contracts is discussed. Specifically, it is shown that newer technologies associated with higher uncertainty result in the choice of more hierarchical contract structures. In addition, the significance of R&D collaborations on the overall innovation process of pharmaceutical companies is evaluated. The results indicate that only some types of R&D alliances, signed in earlier stages of research, have a significant role in the patent production and drug discovery process.

The complicated environment surrounding high-technology firms, involving a high degree of market uncertainty, a high degree of technological uncertainty, a high degree of competitive volatility, high R&D expenditures and the rapid obsolescence of products, creates a great need for sophisticated marketing (Mohr & Shooshtari, 2003). Yet these firms continue to have underdeveloped competencies in marketing (Mohr & Sarin, 2009).

This chapter explores the advantages of newness and positive aspects of resource constraints, critically departing from assumptions of resource constraints and liabilities of newness. The chapter is based on a multiple case study consisting of nascent entrepreneurial processes from inexperienced entrepreneurs with severely constrained access to resources. Six theoretical concepts (legitimacy, fashion, flexibility, networks, bootstrapping, and motivation) are developed in the frame of reference. Empirical data is collected on a rich variety of sources, including longitudinal data in the form of weekly logbooks, business plans, theoretical reflections, and additional collected data during the process. Based on this data, the analysis shows that while these entrepreneurs face resource constraints and liabilities of newness, they also use strategies to leverage their constraints and novelty as an advantage in advancing their venturing efforts.

The purposes of this chapter are to propose definitions of innovation, product innovation, business model innovation, marketing innovation, innovation strategy, and strategic innovation, elaborate on their literature and conceptual underpinnings, and provide an overview of the conceptual domains of innovation, innovation strategy, and strategic innovation.

First, certain definitions of innovation, drawn from literature, are presented. Next, certain definitions that incorporate logically incremental refinements in them are presented. Building on these, definitions of innovation, product innovation, business model innovation, and marketing innovation are proposed.

Innovation is the creation of value by using relevant knowledge and resources for conversion of an idea into a new product, process, or practice, or improvements in an existing product, process, or practice. Innovation strategy is an organization’s relative emphasis on different types of innovations and the associated pattern of resource allocation, in alignment with its strategy at the corporate and business unit levels. Strategic innovation is the creation of value by using relevant knowledge and resources for conversion of an idea into a new product, process, or practice with the potential to have a major transformational effect on the evolution of markets and industries.

Over the past several decades, there has been a sustained and high level of interest in issues relating to innovation among academics in a number of disciplines, business and social entrepreneurs, business practitioners, and policy makers. Books, journal articles, and business magazine articles provide a number of definitions of innovation and specific types of innovation. Multiple definitions of a construct can be problematic in certain respects and beneficial in other respects. A potential upside of multiple definitions of innovation is the prospect of each being a source of ideas for one or more innovations that benefit society, and an impetus for research focusing on specific questions.

Implementation of an idea, value creation, and use of relevant knowledge and resources are used as constituent elements in the proposed definitions of innovation, product innovation, business model innovation, marketing innovation, and strategic innovation.