IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tucdir/22007.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Institutional reflexivity

Author

Listed:
  • Moldaschl, Manfred

Abstract

How can we understand the innovativeness of firms or organizations in general, and how should we assess it in terms of nontechnological innovation? My paper deals with these two questions. The ability of companies to adapt to new circumstances, to create new products, processes and new knowledge, has been conceptualized in many approaches. Some of them simply define a list of (critical) success factors or (key) performance indicators as tools for ranking and evaluation, without any theoretical reference. Others, like the resource-based or capability-based approach(es), work with theoretical references, but are still very weak in operationalizing of what they call capability. My paper gives a critical description of this situation and offers a new proposal to classify and to measure the inclination of organizations to innovate in all dimensions. This proposal roots in pragmatistic thinking as represented in the theory of reflexive modernization and in the pragmatist version of organizational learning theory. Empirically, it has been applied merely in case studies yet. A survey project is in preparation.

Suggested Citation

  • Moldaschl, Manfred, 2007. "Institutional reflexivity," Papers and Preprints of the Department of Innovation Research and Sustainable Resource Management 2/2007, Chemnitz University of Technology, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tucdir:22007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/55387/1/684991462.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ingemar Dierickx & Karel Cool, 1989. "Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(12), pages 1504-1511, December.
    2. Jay B. Barney, 1986. "Strategic Factor Markets: Expectations, Luck, and Business Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(10), pages 1231-1241, October.
    3. Kirsten Foss & Nicolai J. Foss, 2004. "The Next Step in the Evolution of the RBV: Integration with Transaction Cost Economics," management revue. Socio-economic Studies, Rainer Hampp Verlag, vol. 15(1), pages 107-121.
    4. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    5. 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.
    6. Kirsten Foss & Nicolai J. Foss, 2004. "The Next Step in the Evolution of the RBV: Integration with Transaction Cost Economics," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 15(1), pages 107-121.
    7. Kathleen R. Conner & C. K. Prahalad, 1996. "A Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 477-501, October.
    8. Sidney G. Winter, 2003. "Understanding dynamic capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 991-995, October.
    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. Kraaijenbrink, Jeroen & Spender, JC & Groen, Aard, 2009. "The resource-based view: A review and assessment of its critiques," MPRA Paper 21442, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Nickerson, Jack A. & Yen, C. James & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2011. "Exploring the Problem-Finding and Problem-Solving Approach for Designing Organizations," Working Papers 11-0107, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    3. Iman Seoudi & Matthias Huehn & Bo Carlsson, 2008. "Penrose Revisited: A Re-Appraisal of the Resource Perspective," Working Papers 14, The German University in Cairo, Faculty of Management Technology.
    4. 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.
    5. Lippert, Inge, 2008. "Perspektivenverschiebungen in der Corporate Governance: Neuere Ansätze und Studien der Corporate-Governance-Forschung," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Knowledge, Production Systems and Work SP III 2008-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    6. Tan, Justin & Wang, Liang, 2010. "Flexibility-efficiency tradeoff and performance implications among Chinese SOEs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 356-362, April.
    7. Jan-Erik Vahlne & Jan Johanson, 2017. "From internationalization to evolution: The Uppsala model at 40 years," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(9), pages 1087-1102, December.
    8. Giovanni. Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2004. "50th Anniversay Article: The Strategy Field from the Perspective of Management Science: Divergent Strands and Possible Integration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1309-1318, October.
    9. Kazeminia, Ali, 2021. "Unfolding the airbus’ strategic growth: A successful case," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(1).
    10. Nicolaï Foss & Nils Stieglitz, 2012. "Modern Resource-based Theory(ies)," Chapters, in: Michael Dietrich & Jackie Krafft (ed.), Handbook on the Economics and Theory of the Firm, chapter 20, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Sharma, Sunil, 2015. "Relevance of Resource Based View Themes for Capability Evolution," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-03-30, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    12. Reha Karadag & Laura Poppo, 2023. "Strategic resource decay," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(6), pages 1534-1561, June.
    13. William B. Edgar & Chris A. Lockwood, 2021. "Corporate Core Competencies’ Essence, Contexts, Discovery, and Future: A Call to Action for Executives and Researchers," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1_suppl), pages 21582440211, December.
    14. Corinne A. Coen & Catherine A. Maritan, 2011. "Investing in Capabilities: The Dynamics of Resource Allocation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 99-117, February.
    15. Jaideep Anand & Raffaele Oriani & Roberto S. Vassolo, 2010. "Alliance Activity as a Dynamic Capability in the Face of a Discontinuous Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1213-1232, December.
    16. Hiroko Nagano, 2020. "The impact of knowledge diversity: Integrating two economic perspectives through the dynamic capability approach," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(6), pages 1057-1070, September.
    17. Wójcik Piotr, 2015. "Exploring Links Between Dynamic Capabilities Perspective and Resource-Based View: A Literature Overview," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 45(1), pages 83-107, March.
    18. Gottschalg, Oliver & Zollo, Mauricio, 2006. "Interest alignment and competitive advantage," HEC Research Papers Series 823, HEC Paris.
    19. Annie Bartoli & Sylvie Yung & Quentin Bedard & Philippe Hermel & Delphine Philip de Saint Julien & Maria Costin & Oleg Gheorgies & Driss Bourazzouq & Min Feng, 2022. "Les cahiers de recherche du LAREQUOI Vol.2022/1," Post-Print hal-04648210, HAL.
    20. Franco Maria Battagello & Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi, 2019. "Prioritization of Strategic Intangible Assets in Make/Buy Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, February.

    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:zbw:tucdir:22007. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwtucde.html .

    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.