IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v137y2018icp101-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Right on time - Socioecological strategy and implications of turbulence in the Swiss watchmaking field

Author

Listed:
  • Hoffmann, Jonas
  • Ramirez, Rafael
  • Lecamp, Laurent

Abstract

We explore how the socio-ecological approach to strategy extends and enriches current theory on fields (especially Fligstein and McAdam, 2012). We do so with a socio-ecological (Ramirez and Selsky, 2016) lens which helps us analyse how contention and change work in conditions of turbulence, conditions where macro-level issues play a central role in transforming a field. Our empirical exploration of the Swiss watchmaking field in its current turbulent causal texture enables us to examine the locus of strategic action (intra-field vs inter-field) by both incumbents and challengers, and how they enact the strategic stances of preparation, relocating and reinventing collaboration. With this lens we also analyse the roles a legacy technology can play in the framing-reframing contention, where incumbents favour an ‘intra-field’ framing (i.e. centred in the legacy technology) whereas challengers favour an ‘inter-field’ reframing (i.e. open to emerging technologies). Our research further contributes to the literature by providing a clarification of the Ramirez and Selsky (2016) strategic stances in relation to its core unit of analysis: field-level vs organizational-level vs inter-organizational network level and does so with empirical data.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoffmann, Jonas & Ramirez, Rafael & Lecamp, Laurent, 2018. "Right on time - Socioecological strategy and implications of turbulence in the Swiss watchmaking field," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 101-117.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:137:y:2018:i:c:p:101-117
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162518302762
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.047?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lang, Trudi & Ramírez, Rafael, 2017. "Building new social capital with scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 51-65.
    2. Glasmeier, Amy, 1991. "Technological discontinuities and flexible production networks: The case of Switzerland and the world watch industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 469-485, October.
    3. Jonas Hoffmann & Betina Hoffmann, 2012. "The Pier Framework of Luxury Innovation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Jonas Hoffmann & Ivan Coste-Manière (ed.), Luxury Strategy in Action, chapter 4, pages 57-73, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Christophe Sempels & Jonas Hoffmann, 2013. "Sustainable Innovation Strategy," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-137-35261-3, September.
    5. Mary Tripsas, 2009. "Technology, Identity, and Inertia Through the Lens of “The Digital Photography Company”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 441-460, April.
    6. Bonvillian, William B. & Weiss, Charles, 2015. "Technological Innovation in Legacy Sectors," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199374519.
    7. Kim S. Cameron, 1986. "Effectiveness as Paradox: Consensus and Conflict in Conceptions of Organizational Effectiveness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 539-553, May.
    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. König, Andreas & Schulte, Martin & Enders, Albrecht, 2012. "Inertia in response to non-paradigmatic change: The case of meta-organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1325-1343.
    2. Pinar Ozcan & Douglas Hannah, 2020. "Social Origins of Great Strategies Advertising Suppliers to Realize Disruptive Social Media Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 193-217, September.
    3. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    4. Marta Gancarczyk, 2010. "Model schyłku i odrodzenia klastrów," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 1-21.
    5. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    6. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    7. Ieda Margarete Oro & Carlos Eduardo Facin Lavarda, 2017. "Interaction Between Strategy and Organizational Performance: The Influence of Family Management," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 14(5), pages 493-509, September.
    8. Andrews, Matt & Pritchett, Lant & Woolcock, Michael, 2013. "Escaping Capability Traps Through Problem Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA)," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 234-244.
    9. Bövers, Jana & Hoon, Christina, 2021. "Surviving disruptive change: The role of history in aligning strategy and identity in family businesses," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4).
    10. Phanish Puranam & Harbir Singh & Saikat Chaudhuri, 2009. "Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration Is (Un)necessary," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 313-328, April.
    11. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2019. "Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1319-1348, November.
    12. Timothy Clark & Mike Wright & Zilia Iskoujina & Philip Garnett, 2014. "JMS at 50: Trends over Time," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 19-37, January.
    13. Deishin Lee, 2012. "Turning Waste into By-Product," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 115-127, January.
    14. repec:unu:wpaper:wp2012-64 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Губа К. С. & Соколов М. М. & Цивинская А. О., 2020. "Фиктивная Эффективность: Что На Самом Деле Оценивал Мониторинг Эффективности Образовательных Организаций," Вопросы образования // Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 97-125.
    16. Al-Atwi, Amer Ali & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Khan, Zaheer, 2021. "Micro-foundations of organizational design and sustainability: The mediating role of learning ambidexterity," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1).
    17. Molina-Morales, Francesc Xavier & Martínez-Cháfer, Luís & Valiente-Bordanova, David, 2017. "Disruptive Technological Innovations as New Opportunities for Mature Industrial Clusters. The Case of Digital Printing Innovation in the Spanish Ceramic Tile Cluster," INVESTIGACIONES REGIONALES - Journal of REGIONAL RESEARCH, Asociación Española de Ciencia Regional, issue 39, pages 39-57.
    18. Charles Amoyea Atogenzoya & Anna Comacchio, 2019. "Nature and Management of Social-business Tensions: A Study of Micro and Small Social Enterprises in Developing Countries," Proceedings of Business and Management Conferences 8612069, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    19. Russo, Angeloantonio & Vurro, Clodia & Nag, Rajiv, 2019. "To have or to be? The interplay between knowledge structure and market identity in knowledge-based alliance formation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 571-583.
    20. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    21. Jonathan Wareham & Paul B. Fox & Josep Lluís Cano Giner, 2014. "Technology Ecosystem Governance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1195-1215, August.

    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:eee:tefoso:v:137:y:2018:i:c:p:101-117. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.