IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aae/journl/v17y2021i2p125-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is dominant logic a value or a liability? On the explorative turn in the German power utility industry

Author

Listed:
  • Ekaterina

    (Ph.D. candidate, Faculty for Business Studies and Economics, LEMEX – Chair for Small Business & Entrepreneurship, University of Bremen, Enrique-Schmidt-Str. 1, 28359 Bremen, Germany, e-mail: ekbrandt@uni-bremen.de)

  • Jörg

    (Prof. Dr., Faculty for Business Studies and Economics, LEMEX – Chair for Small Business & Entrepreneurship, University of Bremen, Enrique-Schmidt-Str. 1, 28359 Bremen, Germany, e-mail: freiling@uni-bremen.de)

Abstract

Purpose: This study seeks to specify the role of ‘dominant logic’ in an organization. So doing, the ambiguous character of the dominant logic emerges, as on the one hand, a dominant logic can make sense of a change, provide useful guidelines and keep the company focused. However, on the other hand, a dominant logic may provide reasons why preventing change could be ‘logical’ or work as a blinder when it comes to interpreting up-and-coming developments. Therefore, a dominant logic can be a value and a liability in times of change. Methodology: This study sets out to contribute to prior research by raising two questions. First, how can we re-conceptualize the construct of dominant logic to address both the driving and the hampering role in the case of explorative turns? And, second, which factors restrain and which allow explorative turns? With special regard to the German energy transition in the 2010s, this research grounds on explorative qualitative empirical research and employs a single case-study design for a traditional German power utility company, which – as an incumbent – has to deal with the high complexity in the German power industry. Data sources are in-depth and problem-centered interviews with both internal and external experts as well as field observations. An inductive procedure allows the development of research propositions from data, framed by prior research. Findings: As a result, this study delivers a six-factor framework to shine a light on the micro-foundations of dominant logic. Whether a dominant logic is of value or is a liability in organizational change and allows an explorative turn, depends on the identified abilities to unlearn, to explore, to change and to manage. Data suggests that an explorative turn, driven by dominant logic, works better in the case of combined learning and unlearning capacities, an ambidextrous balance of exploration and exploitation, co-existing logics, continuous adaptations of dominant logic and lower levels of leadership power and formal structures. Implications for theory and practice: This study specifies the roles of dominant logic that may hamper explorative turns in times of severe disruptions. Originality and value: It contributes to the research of managerial cognition by refining and applying the concept of dominant logic. It provides empirical evidence on how this phenomenon creates inertia, drives change, and discusses the needs for and the barriers to an explorative turn. From a managerial viewpoint, dominant logic serves as a filter to identify required changes and to tune the speed of change. This, however, depends on managerial reflection on the appropriateness of dominant logic in the run of events.

Suggested Citation

  • Ekaterina & Jörg, 2021. "Is dominant logic a value or a liability? On the explorative turn in the German power utility industry," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 17(2), pages 125-158.
  • Handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:17:y:2021:i:2:p:125-158
    DOI: 10.7341/20211725
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://jemi.edu.pl/uploadedFiles/file/all-issues/vol17/issue2/JEMI_Vol17_Issue2_2021_Article5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.7341/20211725?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Greif, Avner & Laitin, David D., 2004. "A Theory of Endogenous Institutional Change," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 633-652, November.
    3. Camilla Chlebna & James Simmie, 2018. "New technological path creation and the role of institutions in different geo-political spaces," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(5), pages 969-987, May.
    4. Joerg Freiling, 2004. "A Competence-based Theory of the Firm," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 15(1), pages 27-52.
    5. C. K. Prahalad & Richard A. Bettis, 1986. "The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(6), pages 485-501, November.
    6. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    7. Ryan Raffaelli & Mary Ann Glynn & Michael Tushman, 2019. "Frame flexibility: The role of cognitive and emotional framing in innovation adoption by incumbent firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(7), pages 1013-1039, July.
    8. Giones, Ferran & Brem, Alexander & Berger, Andreas, 2019. "Strategic decisions in turbulent times: Lessons from the energy industry," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 215-225.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sirén, Charlotta & Kohtamäki, Marko, 2016. "Stretching strategic learning to the limit: The interaction between strategic planning and learning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 653-663.
    2. Hutzschenreuter, Thomas & Kleindienst, Ingo, 2013. "(How) Does discretion change over time? A contribution toward a dynamic view of managerial discretion," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 264-281.
    3. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    4. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    5. Linan Lei & Xiaobo Wu, 2022. "Thinking like a specialist or a generalist? Evidence from hidden champions in China," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(1), pages 25-57, February.
    6. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    7. Hicheon Kim & Johngseok Bae & Garry Bruton, 2012. "Business groups and institutional upheaval in emerging economies: Corporate venturing in Korea," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 729-752, September.
    8. Ko, Young Jin & O'Neill, Hugh & Xie, Xuanli, 2021. "Strategic intent as a contingency of the relationship between external knowledge and firm innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    9. Wu, Jie & Wood, Geoffrey & Chen, Xiaoyun & Meyer, Martin & Liu, Zhiyang, 2020. "Strategic ambidexterity and innovation in Chinese multinational vs. indigenous firms: The role of managerial capability," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6).
    10. Patricia Doyle Corner & Kathryn Pavlovich, 2016. "Shared Value Through Inner Knowledge Creation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 543-555, May.
    11. Thomas Keil & Erkko Autio & Gerard George, 2008. "Corporate Venture Capital, Disembodied Experimentation and Capability Development," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1475-1505, December.
    12. Piaskowska, D., 2005. "Essays on firm growth and value creation," Other publications TiSEM 89053610-79c6-4c52-9d1c-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Jeffrey Cummings, 2003. "Knowledge Sharing : A Review of the Literature," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 19060, December.
    14. François Constant & Richard Calvi & Thomas Johnsen, 2020. "Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing function ambidexterity Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing functio," Post-Print hal-02891790, HAL.
    15. Kwaku Atuahene-Gima & Anthony Ko, 2001. "An Empirical Investigation of the Effect of Market Orientation and Entrepreneurship Orientation Alignment on Product Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 54-74, February.
    16. Heinrichs, Simon & Walter, Sascha, 2013. "Don’t Step Into Your Parent’s Shoes – How Exploitation and Exploration Affect Spin-out Growth," EconStor Preprints 68591, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    17. Zheng, Leven J. & Xiong, Chang & Chen, Xihui & Li, Chung-Sheng, 2021. "Product innovation in entrepreneurial firms: How business model design influences disruptive and adoptive innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    18. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    19. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    20. Inseong Song & Jonghoon Bae, 2016. "Politics, strong institution and competitive advantage: an examination of organizational aspiration for competition," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 412-443, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:17:y:2021:i:2:p:125-158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anna Ujwary-Gil (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://fundacjacognitione.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.