Advertisement

Which Collaboration Strategy for the Networked Enterprise in Wine Industry? Technological and Organizational Challenges

  • Emilio Bellini
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7200)

Abstract

The technological dimension and the organizational dimension are the two faces of Information Technology (IT) revolution shaping the life of large and small firms in last 50 years, from the first adoption of mainframe and reusable software to the recent integration of hardware and software technologies within Internet of Things. Over the last few decades, a number of scholars coming from computer science and from organization theory shared a deep confidence on the magic power of networks, especially of technological networks, more and more fast and reliable, and of organizational networks, more and more effective in balancing cooperation and competition among firms. Coherently with the aim of this volume, in this chapter we assume a more critical perspective deriving from the joint analysis of organizational challenges and of technological opportunities for networked enterprises aimed at developing new products/services. The management of innovation within networked enterprises requires a strategic approach to many dimensions. In this chapter we apply at open-closed trade-off the model developed by Pisano & Verganti in the paper Which kind of Collaboration is Right for You published by Harvard Business Review in December 2008. In the Chapter 4 we will focus the strategic models aimed at managing the new product development within the networked enterprise modelled as a design discourse. In the Chapter 5 authors will propose a third strategic perspective, proposing the application of a platform strategy in order to promote the a doption of advanced network infrastructures by Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs).

Keywords

Coordination Mechanism Innovation Strategy Harvard Business Review Marketing Capability Wine Industry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abernathy, W., Clark, K.: Innovation: mapping the winds of creative destruction. Research Policy (14) (1985)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adler, P.: Market, hierarchy, and trust: the knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organization Science (12), 215–234 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellini, E., Canonico, P.: Knowing communities in project driven organizations: Analysing the strategic impact of socially constructed hrm practices. International Journal of Project Management (IJPM) (26), 44–50 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bellini, E., Dell’ Era, C.: How can product semantics be embedded in product technologies? the case of the italian wine industry. International Journal of Innovation Management (IJIM) (3) (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blackler, F.: Epliogue: Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations. The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chesbrough, H.: Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harward Business School Press, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chesbrough, H.W., Vanhaverbeke, W., West, J.: Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choo, C., Bontis, N. (eds.): Sense making, knowledge creation and decision making: organizational knowing and emergent strategy. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Christensen, C., Rosembloom, R.: Explaining the attacker’s advantage: technological paradigms, organizational dynamics and the value network. Research Policy (24), 233–257 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Colombo, M.G.: The changing boundaries of the firm (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Davies, S., Meyer, C.: Blur: The speed of change in the connected economy (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Friedberg, E.: Le pouvoir et la régle. Le Seuil, Paris (1993)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Galbraith, J.: Designing complex organizations. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co, Reading (1973)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gambetta, D.: Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations (1988)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gassman, O.: Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda. R&D Management 36(3) (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Giddens, A.: The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structure. University of California Press, Berkeley (1984)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goffmann, E.: Frame analyses. Harper and Row, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hertog, J., Huizenga, E.: The knowledge enterprise: Implementation of intelligent business strategies (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Itami, H., Numagami, T.: Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organizational Science (3), 119–136 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kodama, F.: Technology fusion and the new r&d. Harvard Business Review (1992)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Miotti, L., Sachwald, F.: Co-operative r&d: Why and with whom? an integrated framework of analysis. Research Policy 32(8) (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Orlikowski, W.: The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organizational Science 3(3) (1992)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Orlikowski, W.: Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organizational Science 11(4) (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pisano, G., Verganti, R.: Which kind of collaboration is right for you? Harvard Business Review (12), 78–86 (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Powell, W., Koput, K., Smith-Doerr, L.: Interorganisational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning. Administrative Science Quarterly (41) (1996)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Verganti, R.: Innovating through design. Harvard Business Review (12), 114–122 (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Verganti, R.: Design, meanings and radical innovation: A metamodel and a research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management (25), 435–456 (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Raffa, M., Zollo, G.: Sources of innovation and professionals in small innovative firms. International Journal of Technology Management 9(3-4) (2009)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schonsleben, P., Buchel, A.: Organising the extended enterprise. Journal of Product Innovation Management (2008)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Seybold, P.: Get inside the lives of your customers (2001)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stein, E., Iansiti, M.: Understanding user needs (1995)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thomke, S., Von Hippel, E.: Customers as innovators: a new way to create value. Harvard Business Review, 47–56 (2002)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tonchia, S., Tramontano, A.: Process management for the extended enterprise: organizational and ict networks (2004)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tushman, M., Anderson, P.: Technological discontinuities and organizational environment. Administrative Science Quarterly (3), 439–465 (1986)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tushman, M., Anderson, P.: Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: a cyclic model of technological change (35) (1990)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Venkatraman, N., Henderson, J.: Real strategies for virtual organizing. Sloan Management Review (Fall 1998)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weick, K.: The social psychology of organizing. Addison- Wesley, MA (1979)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wenger, E., Snyder, W.: Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review (78) (2000)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Williamson, O.: Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly (36) (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emilio Bellini
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of EngineeringUniversity of SannioItaly
  2. 2.Department of Management, Economics and Industrial EngineeringPolitecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations