How is the relationship significance brought about? A critical realist approach
AbstractThe markets-as-networks theorists contend, at least tacitly, the significance of business relationships for the focal firm – that is, business relationships contribute somewhat to the focal firm’s survival and growth. We do not deny the existence of significant business relationships but sustain, in contrast to the consensus within the Markets-as-Networks Theory, that relationship significance should not be a self-evident assumption. Significance cannot be a taken-for-granted property of each and every one of the focal firm’s business relationships. We adopt explicitly a critical realist position in this conceptual paper and claim that the relationship significance is an event of the business world, whose causes remain yet largely unidentified. Where the powers and liabilities of business relationships (i.e., their functions and dysfunctions) are put to work, inevitably under certain contingencies (namely the surrounding networks and markets), effects result for the focal firm (often benefits in excess of sacrifices, i.e., relationship value) and as a result the relationship significance is likely to be brought about. In addition, the relationship significance can result from the dual influence that business relationships have on a great part of the structure and powers and liabilities of the focal firm, i.e., its nature and scope respectively.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto in its series FEP Working Papers with number 282.
Date of creation: Jul 2008
Date of revision:
Markets-as-Networks Theory; relationship significance; business relationships; focal firm; resources; competences; activities;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2008-07-14 (All new papers)
- NEP-PKE-2008-07-14 (Post Keynesian Economics)
- NEP-SOC-2008-07-14 (Social Norms & Social Capital)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Brian J. Loasby, 2000. "Market institutions and economic evolution," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 297-309.
- Grossman, Sanford J. & Hart, Oliver D., 1986.
"The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration,"
3450060, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver D, 1986. "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 691-719, August.
- Oliver Hart & Sanford Grossman, 1985. "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," Working papers 372, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver, 1985. "The Cost and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," CEPR Discussion Papers 70, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Patel, Pari & Pavitt, Keith, 1997. "The technological competencies of the world's largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 141-156, May.
- Mouzas, Stefanos, 2006. "Efficiency versus effectiveness in business networks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(10-11), pages 1124-1132, October.
- Joao Mota & Luis M. de Castro, 2004. "A Capabilities Perspective on the Evolution of Firm Boundaries: A Comparative Case Example from the Portuguese Moulds Industry," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 295-316, 03.
- Hakansson, Hakan & Ford, David, 2002. "How should companies interact in business networks?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 133-139, February.
- McLoughlin, Damien & Horan, Conor, 2002. "Markets-as-networks: notes on a unique understanding," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 535-543, July.
- Mouzas, Stefanos & Ford, David, 2006. "Managing relationships in showery weather: The role of umbrella agreements," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(12), pages 1248-1256, November.
- Alajoutsijärvi, Kimmo & Eriksson, Päivi & Tikkanen, Henrikki, 2001. "Dominant metaphors in the IMP network discourse: 'the network as a marriage' and 'the network as a business system'," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 91-107, February.
- Steve Fleetwood, 2001. "Causal Laws, Functional Relations and Tendencies," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 201-220.
- Hart, Oliver D. & Moore, John, 1990.
"Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm,"
3448675, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Alessia Contu & Hugh Willmott, 2005. "You Spin Me Round: The Realist Turn in Organization and Management Studies," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(8), pages 1645-1662, December.
- Young, Allyn A., 1928. "Increasing Returns and Economic Progress," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 38, pages 527-542.
- Michael Reed, 2005. "Reflections on the 'Realist Turn' in Organization and Management Studies," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(8), pages 1621-1644, December.
- Richardson, G B, 1972. "The Organisation of Industry," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 82(327), pages 883-96, September.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.