{"title":"Industrial productivity dilemma in management and economics: Retrospect and prospect","authors":"Fei Zheng, Yuhua Li, Ze Jian, Ren Lu","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Industrial productivity dilemma refers to a situation in which modifying and refining existing technologies helps maximize an industry's productivity but constrains productivity from leaping forward. As substantial research exists on this topic in both management and economics, we seek to clarify the concept and its utility. We synthesize relevant studies in various disciplines by reviewing 731 pieces of literature. We summarize various mechanisms that explain why, as the industry develops, the proportion of disruptive innovation declines and the ratio of productivity research and development increases. Our results suggest that industrial productivity dilemma occurs because under a given technological paradigm, there are economic and natural limits to technological development. Only through disruptive innovation can industries improve their long-term adaptability to the environment and promote industrial upgrading or forming new industries. Although with modern technology developments, industrial productivity dilemma may be resolved, because some giant firms can balance the exploration–exploitation conflict well; moreover, structural problems occur as productivity is unbalanced among firms. The productivity dilemma (and its by-product, the structural problem) will always exist. We develop a conceptual framework based on the environment, industry, firm, and policy dimensions to guide future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"25 4","pages":"666-686"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Management Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijmr.12327","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Industrial productivity dilemma refers to a situation in which modifying and refining existing technologies helps maximize an industry's productivity but constrains productivity from leaping forward. As substantial research exists on this topic in both management and economics, we seek to clarify the concept and its utility. We synthesize relevant studies in various disciplines by reviewing 731 pieces of literature. We summarize various mechanisms that explain why, as the industry develops, the proportion of disruptive innovation declines and the ratio of productivity research and development increases. Our results suggest that industrial productivity dilemma occurs because under a given technological paradigm, there are economic and natural limits to technological development. Only through disruptive innovation can industries improve their long-term adaptability to the environment and promote industrial upgrading or forming new industries. Although with modern technology developments, industrial productivity dilemma may be resolved, because some giant firms can balance the exploration–exploitation conflict well; moreover, structural problems occur as productivity is unbalanced among firms. The productivity dilemma (and its by-product, the structural problem) will always exist. We develop a conceptual framework based on the environment, industry, firm, and policy dimensions to guide future research.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Management Reviews (IJMR) stands as the premier global review journal in Organisation and Management Studies (OMS). Its published papers aim to provide substantial conceptual contributions, acting as a strategic platform for new research directions. IJMR plays a pivotal role in influencing how OMS scholars conceptualize research in their respective fields. The journal's reviews critically assess the state of knowledge in specific fields, appraising the conceptual foundations of competing paradigms to advance current and future research in the area.