当前位置: X-MOL 学术Int. J. Manag. Rev. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Clarifying the Dominant Logic Construct by Disentangling and Reassembling its Dimensions
International Journal of Management Reviews ( IF 7.5 ) Pub Date : 2020-05-10 , DOI: 10.1111/ijmr.12227
Alexander Engelmann 1 , Barbara Kump 2 , Christina Schweiger 3
Affiliation  

Since its introduction, Prahalad and Bettis's concept of dominant logic has informed a variety of scholarly conversations in management and strategy research. However, scholars have interpreted dominant logic in different ways, emphasizing different aspects, such as managerial mindsets, administrative tools and management functions, as defining elements. Similarly, empirical studies have captured various aspects, such as meanings of entrepreneurs, observable strategic decisions and business model similarity, as indicators of dominant logic. Consequently, the concept lacks analytical clarity, and it is difficult to compare or generalize findings from this diverse set of studies. The aim of this review is to improve conceptual clarity by analysing, comparing and evaluating the existing interpretations and assessments of dominant logic in 94 studies. In the first part of the review, by disentangling the interpretations of the concept, we show that dominant logic consists of four defining dimensions: (i) shared mental models; (ii) values and premises; (iii) organizational practices; and (iv) organizing structures. In the second part, we reassemble dominant logic into an integrative model and theorize about how these dimensions operate in concert to produce a firm's dominant logic. Thus, our main contribution is a clarification and synthesis of the literature, which comes with implications on how future research can conceptualize and operationalize dominant logic more consistently.

中文翻译:

通过解开并重新组合其维来澄清主导逻辑结构

自从引入以来,Prahalad和Bettis的主导逻辑概念已经为管理和策略研究中的各种学术对话提供了参考。但是,学者们以不同的方式解释了主导逻辑,强调了诸如管理思维方式,管理工具和管理功能等不同方面作为定义要素。同样,实证研究已捕获了各个方面,例如企业家的含义,可观察到的战略决策和业务模型相似性,作为主导逻辑的指标。因此,这个概念缺乏分析的清晰度,并且很难比较或归纳来自这一系列不同研究的结果。这项审查的目的是通过分析,比较和评估94项研究中对主导逻辑的现有解释和评估。在本综述的第一部分中,通过解开对概念的解释,我们表明主导逻辑包括四个定义维度:(i)共享心智模型;(ii)价值和前提;(iii)组织惯例;(iv)组织架构。在第二部分中,我们将主导逻辑重组为一个集成模型,并对这些维度如何协同运作以产生企业的主导逻辑进行理论化。因此,我们的主要贡献是对文献进行了澄清和综合,从而对未来的研究如何更一致地概念化和操作主导逻辑产生了影响。我们证明了主导逻辑由四个定义维度组成:(i)共享心智模型;(ii)价值和前提;(iii)组织惯例;(iv)组织架构。在第二部分中,我们将主导逻辑重组为一个集成模型,并对这些维度如何协同运作以产生企业的主导逻辑进行理论化。因此,我们的主要贡献是对文献进行了澄清和综合,从而对未来的研究如何更一致地概念化和操作主导逻辑产生了影响。我们证明了主导逻辑由四个定义维度组成:(i)共享心智模型;(ii)价值和前提;(iii)组织惯例;(iv)组织架构。在第二部分中,我们将主导逻辑重组为一个集成模型,并对这些维度如何协同运作以产生企业的主导逻辑进行理论化。因此,我们的主要贡献是对文献进行了澄清和综合,从而对未来的研究如何更一致地概念化和操作主导逻辑产生了影响。我们将主导逻辑重组为一个集成模型,并对这些维度如何协同运作以产生企业的主导逻辑进行理论化。因此,我们的主要贡献是对文献进行了澄清和综合,从而对未来的研究如何更一致地概念化和操作主导逻辑产生了影响。我们将主导逻辑重组为一个集成模型,并对这些维度如何协同运作以产生企业的主导逻辑进行理论化。因此,我们的主要贡献是对文献进行了澄清和综合,从而对未来的研究如何更一致地概念化和操作主导逻辑产生了影响。
更新日期:2020-05-10
down
wechat
bug