Abstract: In this paper we develop the outlines of a theory for the firm—a theory that gui ...
Expand
Abstract: In this paper we develop the outlines of a theory for the firm—a theory that guides a firm’s path to value creation, in response to the critique by von Hippel and von Krogh [von Hippel E, von Krogh G (2016) Identifying viable "need–solution pairs": Problem solving without problem formulation. Organ. Sci. 27:207–221; henceforth Hippel–Krogh] of the problem-solving perspective as a theory of value creation. Hippel–Krogh argue (a) that problems and solutions cannot always be separated because they often emerge as problem–solution or need–solution pairs that are discovered serendipitously, and (b) that deliberately formulating or choosing a single, fixed problem restricts the firm from accessing the vast array of external problem solvers and restricts the firm from valuable reformulations of the problem and “rich landscape search.” Although Hippel–Krogh raise interesting and important arguments, we claim that they miss what is most central about the problem-solving approach: the comparative, organizational, and strategic aspects of the theory. However, their critique is also important because it draws attention to a critical void in the problem-solving perspective, namely, the need for firms to possess a theory to guide their efforts at value creation. We argue that this theory for the firm links problem solving with a broader theory of value creation, thus responding to the concerns raised by Hippel–Krogh. We discuss how firms theorize the process of value creation by articulating an overall architecture and bundle of problems around which each firm uniquely organizes and governs as a path to value creation. We provide two brief, informal examples (Starbucks and Apple) to illustrate our points, linking these examples to the need–solution landscape proposed by Hippel–Krogh. In all, we provide a broad sketch and outline of a theory of value creation as it relates to problem finding and problem solving while concurrently responding to points raised by Hippel–Krogh.
Collapse
Semantic filters:
theory of gravity
Topics:
value creation problem solving innovation management business model usability
Methods:
theory development experiment
Theories:
theory of gravity transaction cost economics theory of affordance
The nature of research: qualitative or quantitative, narrative or paradigmatic?
1996 | Information Systems Journal | Citations: 19
Authors: Remenyi, Dan; Williams, Brian
Abstract: Abstract. This paper explores the role of qualitative and quantitative approach ...
Expand
Abstract: Abstract. This paper explores the role of qualitative and quantitative approaches in information systems research. The importance of qualitative data and the construction of narratives as a key procedure in the development of theoretical conjectures and empirical generalizations or hypotheses are discussed. This paper also puts the importance of paradigmatic thinking and research into perspective by contrasting this approach with narrative thinking and qualitative research. A recent PhD dissertation on strategic information systems is used to illustrate some of the concepts discussed in the paper. Although the paper advocates the importance of qualitative research and argues that in some respects it may be regarded as more creative than quantitative research, it clearly recognizes that the distinguishing feature of modern science is the formulation of laws, very often mathematical, that capture the essential features of a problem and allow us to make predictions both into the future and about other current situations.
Collapse
Semantic filters:
theory of gravity
Topics:
strategic information system
Methods:
case study qualitative content analysis experimental design multiple case study single case study
Theories:
theory of gravity evolutionary theory theory of electromagnetism quantum theory
