International Journal of Management Reviews最新文献

This study explores the intricate strategic implications of digital transformation for large established organisations operating within dynamic environments. While digital transformation has garnered substantial attention in the context of startups, large established organisations face unique challenges in balancing existing capabilities with adopting new digital capacities. This research sheds light on how large established organisations navigate the interplay between change and stability during digital transformation by employing a dynamic capabilities framework. Through a systematic literature review of 123 articles from leading journals, the research categorises large established organisations dynamic capabilities into four domains: performance, leadership, governance and structure. The findings reveal that for each domain, large established organisations encounter a range of dilemmas during digital transformation. The study highlights the need for large established organisations to address these dilemmas and operationalise digital transformation effectively. By offering a comprehensive perspective on these challenges, the study provides valuable guidance for researchers and managers seeking to navigate the complexities of digital transformation in established organisations. The paper concludes by outlining potential directions for future research in this evolving field.

Design has become a prominent concept in entrepreneurship research and practise. However, previous literature has offered multiple, often divergent interpretations of the role of design in entrepreneurship. For example, studies have highlighted the benefits of adopting design thinking practises in entrepreneurial endeavours, using design science as a research method for studying entrepreneurship and treating entrepreneurial opportunities as design artefacts that entrepreneurs can shape. Although this multitude of perspectives reflects the conceptual richness of design, it simultaneously complicates the accumulation of scholarly understanding. To address this issue, we have conducted a systematic literature review, uncovering the philosophical assumptions underpinning different interpretations of design in entrepreneurship: (i) design as ontology (entrepreneurship as design), (ii) design as epistemology (entrepreneurship research as design research), (iii) design as phenomenology (entrepreneurship as a means to design), (iv) design as logic (entrepreneurship by design) and (v) design as methodology (entrepreneurship through design). Further, we have identified five modes of enquiry that can guide future studies of design in entrepreneurship. The resulting interpretive framework contributes to entrepreneurship theory and practise by providing a foundation for more conscious and systematic research on design in entrepreneurship.

Digital ecosystems (DEs), driven by information and communication technologies, are reshaping the way firms create, deliver, and capture value across interconnected networks. These dynamic and loosely coupled ecosystems facilitate collaboration and innovation among firms, customers, suppliers, and partners. While research on digital transformation (DT) has often focused on internal firm changes, the influence of DEs on the set of capabilities at the ecosystem, partner, and focal firm levels remains underexplored. This paper addresses this gap by adopting a dynamic capabilities (DCs) framework to investigate which capabilities are required by a firm engaging in DEs. Through a systematic literature review, we identify 17 DCs essential for firms to adapt to ecosystem-based interactions. Our findings reveal that success in DEs requires firms to co-create and co-deliver value through new capabilities that leverage data, foster coopetition, and align operations with the broader ecosystem. We propose a multi-level framework that highlights the critical role of interfirm collaboration and offers actionable insights for firms navigating increasingly interconnected digital environments. Lastly, we present five future research directions that address gaps at different levels of ecosystem research.

We advance a novel perspective to study how field actors co-develop field governance through continuous interactions. Field governance determines the formal and informal rules of a field, defining membership boundaries and core practices. Prior research has mostly studied the establishment of top-down regulations or the work of advocacy and social movement organisations to influence or overthrow existing regimes. We review 147 previously disconnected articles on field governance and institutional work and identify interactional governing activities (IGAs), the concept we advance and define as the strategic and interactional activities actors deploy to develop, disrupt and maintain field governance. Depending on field conditions, we propose that actors combine IGAs in various interaction modes to either oppose the existing order, lobby for change or collaborate to jointly develop field governance. We contribute to the scholarly understanding of field governance development by proposing a continuous process that extends beyond influencing regulatory decision-making to include knowledge-building and interactional infrastructure-development activities. Our study provides novel insights on collaborative institutional work for field governance co-development by heterogeneous actors. By defining and categorising IGAs, we contribute to both a more integrative theoretical understanding of field governance as well as a playbook for practitioners, collective interest organisations and regulators engaged in field-building work.

Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are crucial in driving innovation, creating employment, and fostering economic development. To achieve these goals, they collaborate with various organizations, including universities, to extend their internal resources and capabilities, thereby scaling their efforts. However, inconsistent results and vague theoretical conclusions harbour ambiguity and a lack of paradigmatic analysis, hindering scholars’ ability to integrate and advance insights and harness the full potential of SME-university collaboration for impactful outcomes. Our systematic literature review addresses these issues by providing a comprehensive and up-to-date understanding of the literature on SME-university collaboration. Our review encompasses 145 peer-reviewed publications from 1981 to 2023, showcasing the diversity of research regarding journal outlets, publication timelines, methodologies, empirical contexts, theoretical lenses, and themes. Our review reveals three paradigmatic collaboration logics: technology transfer, knowledge co-development, and value co-creation. We analyse and synthesize these insights to propose an overarching conceptual framework for theorizing SME-university collaborations and supporting future research. We combine these to articulate theoretical and policy implications and present a future research agenda.

Deceptive signalling occurs when resource seekers provide communication or observable behaviour that seems to indicate high-quality attributes yet actually misleads about the resource seekers’ attributes. Deceptive signalling is an everyday phenomenon that hurts investors, consumers and high-quality ventures alike, leading to resource misallocation and market inefficiencies. It is also a challenge for researchers interested in signalling theory, as deceptive signalling defies signalling theory's predictions, leading to ambiguity regarding if and how deceptive signals should be analysed from a signalling theory perspective. Research on deceptive signalling has accumulated, yet it is scattered across disciplines and discourses, which hampers our ability to understand the phenomenon and obstructs progress in signalling theory. To mitigate this state of affairs, this paper provides a cross-disciplinary integrative review, systematizing extant research on deceptive signalling, developing suggestions for the integration of deceptive signalling into signalling theory and outlining a research agenda on currently unresolved questions in signalling research pertaining to deceptive signalling. Developing a better understanding of deceptive signalling seems particularly pressing as recent advances in AI technologies, which reduce the detectability of deceptive signals as well as the costs for producing such signals, will presumably lead to an exacerbation of deceptive signalling problems.

Research on the branding of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), known as SME branding, has garnered substantial interest over the past two decades. Although researchers acknowledge the importance of stakeholders and networks as co-creators of SME brands, a comprehensive conceptualisation of SME brand co-creation remains lacking. The current study addresses this gap by combining systematic literature searches with a cumulative narrative review. By analysing 136 journal articles using brand co-creation and process theory lenses, the study identifies two SME brand co-creation eras—the initiation era and the advanced era—and categorises the research across these eras into three principal streams and eight sub-streams. Synthesising insights from across these eras and streams concludes in conceptualising SME brand co-creation in terms of concepts, developmental processes and causal processes, as well as introducing a framework called the SME brand co-creation research diamond. The framework visually illustrates the intertwined nature of authentic brand co-creation culture, co-creation types and outcomes from the viewpoints of concepts, developmental processes and causal processes, emphasising interactions with stakeholders and wider society. As the first to conceptualise SME brand co-creation, this study lays the groundwork for advancing the field into the expansion era. The study advises researchers to comprehend their work in a wider context, position their own research and further examine SME brand co-creation. It also assists SME owners, managers and entrepreneurs in recognising and developing aspects of brand co-creation culture and stakeholder and societal activities, along with their broader implications.

Business and management scholars have always placed a strong emphasis on the study of capabilities. As digital technology moves from the back office to the forefront of digital innovation and transformation, organizations increasingly recognize the vital role of their digital-related capabilities. Yet, despite the attention, substantial confusion remains in the cross-disciplinary management and business literature, caused by conflating related, yet distinct, constructs: information technology (IT) capabilities, IT-enabled capabilities and digital capabilities. Our objective in this article is twofold. First, we analyse the capability literature across business research areas to identify weaknesses, contradictions, controversies or inconsistencies regarding ‘IT’ and ‘digital’ constructs. We do so by conducting a theory-driven critical review encompassing 360 studies in fields ranging from accounting to strategy. Second, our article advances a theoretical framework that clarifies the differences across IT capabilities, IT-enabled capabilities and digital capabilities. It also provides solid ground for future inquiry by ensuring reliable knowledge accumulation while pointing research attention to unique and novel research questions.

The application of design science (DS) in the field of operations management (OM) is believed to be lopsided, with most studies pursuing theory-to-practice rather than practice-to-theory applications of DS. However, this belief has remained untested at the level of the entire body of DS applications in OM. This paper therefore reviews and synthesises 66 peer-reviewed DS-based publications (2003–2024) and presents a novel configurational framework. We analyse the DS applications through the lens of this framework to conclude that most of these applications contribute incrementally to extant theories but make a rather revelatory contribution to practice. This analysis points at four main reasons: DS is still an emerging research methodology, which is not labelled as such in many applications; OM researchers often assume that problem-solving is the primary purpose of DS, which inhibits the delivery of more theoretical research outcomes; the lack of methodological guidelines to support the transition from specific to generalised knowledge; and the rather fragmented body of knowledge on DS, which is dispersed across multiple sources and different domains. This paper offers a configurational framework for DS to guide OM scholars in their efforts to explore scientific discoveries beyond problem-solving.

This review takes a transdisciplinary approach to work–family (WF) research, offering new perspectives on different family forms in the context of employment. It focuses on lone-parents and blended families, highlighting how management research on the WF interface has been constrained by traditional definitions of ‘family’, assuming intact couple relationships. The review shows that the WF experiences of lone-parents and blended families differ significantly from those of traditional or nuclear families. Our findings demonstrate that blended and lone-parent families struggle with conventional WF policies based on traditional family forms. These families face four main challenges: (1) complex residential arrangements and relationships with co-parents; (2) managing (limited) resources; (3) navigating stigma; and (4) narrow cultural scripts defining family roles. Utilizing cross-domain identity transition theory, we question the traditional ideas at the core of current WF theory. We demonstrate that non-traditional families occupy a ‘liminal’ WF space due to their more fluid parental, occupational and household identities compared to traditional families. We urge employers and policy makers to recognize and address the distinct WF challenges faced by lone-parents and blended families. Employers should develop flexible working policies that accommodate complex residential arrangements and provide resources to support lone and blended family structures. Policy makers should consider revising family leave policies to be more inclusive of diverse family forms. Future research should further explore the diverse experiences of employed parents, including those from LGBTQIA+ communities, using our framework, which encourages researchers to think differently regarding existing WF theories through the consideration of our four themes.