Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Theoretical and Managerial Implications

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Boundary Management

  • 660 Accesses

Abstract

First I would like to consider boundaries management frameworks within the framework of the dynamic view of the strategic management process (see Fig. 1.1) through the case analyses presented in Chaps. 3–6.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Kodama (2009) for details of the five management driver concepts of efficiency, creativity, resource, value, and dialectic. Among these, the “creativity view,” especially, promotes the value chain model through the vertical integration of Japanese companies, and reforms existing rules (technology and market) aimed at creating new products and services. The “dialectic view,” moreover, synthesizes and integrates diverse knowledge while promoting a co-evolution model aimed at building a new business model among partners crossing industry boundaries.

  2. 2.

    This is also an ideal system of business architecture for integrated organizations. With current corporate activity, however, optimizing business architecture entails various problems. Prominent among them is business-related intrusion and cannibalization among multiple emergent organizations at major corporations, and the impact of the power imbalance on business architecture congruence among emergent and traditional organizations. This kind of non-conformance of business architecture surfaces when a company faces new environments. Thus the degree of business architecture congruence can also influence corporate performance. There is no space to expand on the topic in this text, but I would like to present the results of my research in the future.

  3. 3.

    In network theory, “leadership teams” are small-world structures (SWS) arising from shortcuts among actors within and among organizations. See, for example, Paduda (2008).

References

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(3), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1996). Gaining and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S., Eisenhardt, K. (1998). Competing on the Edge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruch, H., Ghoshal, S. (2004). A Bias for Action: How Effective Managers Harness Their Willpower, Achieve Results, and Stop Wasting Time. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of American Enterprise. Boston, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, A. D. (1977). The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H., Schwartz, K. (2007). Innovating business models with co-development partnerships. Research Technology Management, 50(1), 55–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. H. (1993). The nature of the firm: influence. in The Nature of the Firm. O. E. Williamson and S. G. Winter (eds),. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, J., Porras, J. (1994). Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. New York: Harpercollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demsetz, H. (1988). The theory of the firm revisited. Journal of Law and Economic Organization, 4, 141–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 517–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Futuyama, D., Slatkin, M. (1983). Coevolution. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Berkeley. CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G., Prahalad, C. K. (1989). Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, 67(3), 139–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huston, L., Sakkab, N. (2006). Connect and develop inside Procter & Gamble’s new model for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 58–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, M. (2002). Strategic partnership with innovative customers: a Japanese case study. Information Systems Management, 19(2), 31–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, M. (2007a). The Strategic Community-Based Firm. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, M. (2007b). Knowledge Innovation – Strategic Management as Practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, M. (2007c). Project-Based Organization in the Knowledge-Based Society. London: Imperial College Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, M. (2008). New Knowledge Creation Through ICT Dynamic Capability-Creating Knowledge Communities Using Broadband. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, M. (2009). Innovation Networks in Knowledge-Based Firm – ICT-Based Integrative Competences. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B. (2000). The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strategic Management Journal. 21, 405–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson, J. A., Silverman, B. S. (2003). Why firms want to organize efficiently and what keeps them from doing so: Inappropriate governance, performance, and adaptation in a deregulated industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(3), 433–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C., III, Pfeffer, J. (2000). Hidden Value: How Great Companies Achieve Extraordinary Results with Ordinary People. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C., III, Tushman, M. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82, 74–82, April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paduda, G. (2008). Enhancing the innovation performance of firms by balancing cohesiveness and bridging ties. Long Range Planning, 41(4), 395–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, T. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, T., Waterman, R. (1982). In Search of Excellence. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poppo, L., Zenger, T. (1998). Testing alternative theories of the firm: transaction cost, knowledge-based, and measurement explanations for make-or-buy decisions in information services. Strategic Management Journal, 19(9), 853–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (1985). Competitive Advantage. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Co-opting customer competence. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 79–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, M., Eisenhardt, K. (2005). Organizational boundaries and theories of organization. Organization Science, 16(5), 491–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawhney, M., Prandelli, E. (2000). Communities of creation: managing distributed innovation in turbulent markets. California Management Review, 42, 24–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shibata, T., Kodama, M. (2008). Managing technological transition from old to new technology: case of Fanuc’s successful transition. Business Strategy Series, 9(4), 157–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. (2002). The rise of the corporation in a craft industry: conflict and conformity in institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 81–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. P. (1995). Managerial and organizational cognition: notes from a trip down memory lane. Organization Science, 6(3), 280–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts, J., Strogatz, S. (1998). Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature, 393(4), 440–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking. Organizations. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(1), 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, E. (1975). Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1981). The economics of organizations: the transaction cost approach. American Journal of Sociology, 87(3), 548–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witt, L. A. (1998). Enhancing organizational goal congruence: a solution to organizational politics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 666–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Commerce and Graduate School of Business Administration Nihon University, 5-2-1 Kinuta Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, 157-8570, Japan

    Mitsuru Kodama Ph.D. (Professor of Information and Management)

Authors
  1. Mitsuru Kodama Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mitsuru Kodama Ph.D. .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kodama, M. (2010). Theoretical and Managerial Implications. In: Boundary Management. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03789-4_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation