Advertisement

The Shape of Firms: Opportunities from Rapid Manufacturing

  • Antonio EsparzaEmail author
  • Ricardo Sosa
  • Andy M. Connor
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 532)

Abstract

This paper examines the role of design in the creation of new firms. A new interpretation of firm design is developed to explain the dynamics of entrepreneurship. This paper seeks to expand the conversation between design and management studies by focusing on the concept of shaping the firm. The study of the shape of the firm seeks to characterise the dependencies between the features of products and the organizational possibilities of new firms. We intersect theories from the fields of management and design theory to examine the shape of the firm in the entrepreneurship context. From this study, opportunities are identified for research approaches to address the entanglement between the shape of the product and the shape of the firm. Implications for practice are discussed.

Keywords

Firm design Entrepreneurship Digital technologies 

References

  1. 1.
    T. Brown, Design thinking, Harvard Business Review, 01 Jun 2008 [Online], https://hbr.org/2008/06/design-thinking. Accessed 29 Mar 2016
  2. 2.
    L. Kimbell, Rethinking design thinking: Part I. Des. Cult. 3(3), 285–306 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.L. Martin, Design of Business: Why Design Thinking is the Next Competitive Advantage (Harvard Business Press, Brighton, 2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S.D. Sarasvathy, Entrepreneurship as a science of the artificial. J. Econ. Psychol. 24(2), 203–220 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S.D. Sarasvathy, Making it happen: Beyond theories of the firm to theories of firm design. Entrep. Theory Pract. 28(6), 519–531 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Mintzberg, The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 11(3), 171–195 (1990)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. Mintzberg, J.A. Waters, Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strateg. Manag. J. 6(3), 257–272 (1985)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Liedtka, In defense of strategy as design. Calif. Manag. Rev. 42(3), 8–30 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Martin, Design thinking: Achieving insights via the ‘knowledge funnel’. Strategy Leadersh 38(2), 37–41 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Buchanan, Design research and the new learning. Des. Issues 17(4), 3–23 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H.A. Simon, The Sciences of the Artificial (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Heidegger, J. Stambaugh, Being and Time (a Translation of Sein und Zeit) (State University of New York Press, Albany, 1996)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    K. Krippendorff, The Semantic Turn: A New Foundation for Design (CRC/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, 2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    V. Margolin, Design, the future and the human Spirit. Des. Issues 23(3), 4–15 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Dong, M. Kleinsmann, D. Snelders, A Design-based Theory of the Firm, (Unpublished, 2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S.D. Sarasvathy, Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad. Manag. Rev. 26(2), 243–263 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    S.D. Sarasvathy, Effectuation: Elements of Entrepreneurial Expertise (Edward Elgar, Northampton, 2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J.J. Gibson, The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition (Psychology Press, London, 2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    F.M. Juez, Contribuciones para una antropología del diseño, 1st edn. (Gedisa Editorial, Barcelona, 2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Krampen, Semiotics in architecture and industrial/product design. Des. Issues 5(2), 124–140 (1989)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    E.R. Abbing, C. van Gessel, Brand-driven innovation. Des. Manag. Rev. 19(3), 51–58 (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J.S. Gero, U. Kannengiesser, The function-behaviour-structure ontology of design, in An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design, ed. by A. Chakrabarti, L.T.M. Blessing (Springer, London, 2014), pp. 263–283Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    G. Cascini, G. Fantoni, F. Montagna, Situating needs and requirements in the FBS framework. Des. Stud. 34(5), 636–662 (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    K. Dorst, P.E. Vermaas, John Gero’s function-behaviour-structure model of designing: A critical analysis. Res. Eng. Des. 16(1–2), 17–26 (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    U. Kannengiesser, J.S. Gero, A process framework of affordances in design. Des. Issues 28(1), 50–62 (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    L. Qian, J.S. Gero, Function–behavior–structure paths and their role in analogy-based design. AI EDAM 10(4), 289–312 (1996)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    J.B. Barney, The resource-based theory of the firm. Organ. Sci. 7(5), 469–469 (1996)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    R.H. Coase, The nature of the firm. Economica 4(16), 386–405 (1937)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    R.M. Grant, Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 17(S2), 109–122 (1996)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    O.D. Hart, Incomplete contracts and the theory of the firm. J. Law Econ. Organ. 4(1), 119–139 (1988)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    O.E. Williamson, Transaction cost economics, in Handbook of Industrial Organization, vol. 1, (Elsevier, New York, 1989), pp. 135–182Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    R.M. Cyert, E.A. Feigenbaum, J.G. March, Models in a behavioral theory of the firm. Behav. Sci. 4(2), 81–95 (1959)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    B. Johannisson, Towards a practice theory of entrepreneuring. Small Bus. Econ. 36(2), 135–150 (2011)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    T. Baker, R.E. Nelson, Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Adm. Sci. Q. 50(3), 329–366 (2005)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    M.S. Fox, M. Gruninger, Enterprise Modeling. AI Mag. 19(3), 109 (1998)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    K. Hoerr, Uber driver jailed for raping woman, ABC News, 13 Jun 2017 [Online], http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-13/sydney-uber-driver-jailed-over-rape-of-passenger-kings-cross/8612936. Accessed 30 Jun 2017
  37. 37.
    A. Osterwalder, Y. Pigneur, C.L. Tucci, Clarifying business models: Origins, present, and future of the concept. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 16(1), 1–25 (2005)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    C. Zott, R. Amit, Business model design: An activity system perspective. Long Range Plan. 43(2–3), 216–226 (2010)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    A. Osterwalder, The Business Model Ontology a Proposition in a Design Science Approach (Universite De Lausanne Ecole Des Hautes Etudes Commerciales, Lausanne, 2004)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    P. Anderson, M.L. Tushman, Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change. Adm. Sci. Q. 35(4), 604 (1990)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    R.M. Henderson, K.B. Clark, Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Adm. Sci. Q. 35(1), 9 (1990)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    R. Sanchez, J.T. Mahoney, Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strateg. Manag. J. 17(S2), 63–76 (1996)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    L.J. Colfer, C.Y. Baldwin, The mirroring hypothesis: Theory, evidence, and exceptions. Ind. Corp. Change 25(5), 709–738 (2016)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    C. Christensen, The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail (Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, 2013)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    N. Furr, J.A. Nickerson, R. Wuebker, A Theory of Entrepreneuring (Social Science Research Network, Rochester., SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2747458, 2016)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    P. Schubert, J. Fisher, U. Leimstoll, ICT and innovation in small companies, in ECIS 2007 Proc., (University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, 2007)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    S. Shane, S. Venkataraman, The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 25(1), 217–226 (2000)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    E. Ries, The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses (Crown Publishing Group, New York, 2011)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    D. Sola, G.S. Borioli, G. Scalabrini, New product development and disciplined experimentation. Symphonya Emerg. Issues Manag. 0(2), 105–118 (2015)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    S.H. Khajavi, J. Partanen, J. Holmström, Additive manufacturing in the spare parts supply chain. Comput. Ind. 65(1), 50–63 (2014)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    K. Sterelny, Externalism, Epistemic Artefacts and the Extended Mind. The Externalist Challenge (2004), pp. 239–254Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    A. Macfarlane, Google sells maker of ‘nightmare-inducing’ robots to Japan’s SoftBank, CNNMoney, 09 Jun 2017 [Online], http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/09/technology/boston-dynamics-robots-google-alphabet-softbank/index.html. Accessed 30 Jun 2017
  53. 53.
    A. Heath, Here are all the times Facebook has copied Snapchat so far, Business Insider, 27 May 2017 [Online], http://www.businessinsider.com/all-the-times-facebook-copied-snapchat-2017-5. Accessed 30 Jun 2017
  54. 54.
    D. Thier, Nintendo’s biggest mobile game is the one nobody’s really talking about, Forbes, 30 May 2017 [Online], http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2017/05/30/nintendos-biggest-mobile-game-is-the-one-nobodys-really-talking-about/. Accessed 30 Jun 2017

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Esparza
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ricardo Sosa
    • 1
  • Andy M. Connor
    • 1
  1. 1.Colab, Auckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations