Towards a taxonomy of strategic research in the IMP tradition

The project reported in this article is part of a wider project, the aim of which is to investigate the contribution that interaction and networks (IMP) research has made to the field of strategy (Baraldi et al 2006). The specific aim of the sub-project described here is to develop, from the archive of IMP research, a better understanding of both the implicit and the explicit contributions that IMP research has made to the strategy field. The method employed is a systematic analysis of the IMP research database, using a content analysis approach, with the aim of developing a robust taxonomy of strategic research that has emerged from this body of knowledge. Specifically, this paper concerns itself with the development of the analytical method for this task, and with the presentation of the results of a pilot study conducted on 55 IMP research papers to test the analytical approachPeer reviewedSubmitted Versio

Customer portfolios:Challenges of internal and external alignment

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to extend the discussion about customer portfolios beyond simple identification of models and how they can be used for balanced resource allocation to a discussion about how portfolios should take into account views from relationship partners and how they should be aligned in internal as well as a relational context. Design/methodology/approach The portfolio literature is reviewed (most recent, seminal, IMP related) and considered in the context of both the sales organization and the customers involved in the portfolio. A conceptual framework is introduced that helps improve the understanding of how customer portfolio models can actually be applied from a relational perspective. Findings The key aspects of the conceptual framework relate to how alignment of the relationships in the portfolio is achieved. Critical to this are the interaction spaces that facilitate communication relating to alignment and provide the context for the legitimacy of these actions to be discussed. Research limitations/implications This framework needs to be empirically explored. Practical implications Understanding of alignment and misalignment processes in customer portfolios gives managers a tool to help to cope with the dynamic aspects of the customer portfolio. Recognition of the importance of communication to the process, the development of trust and the role of legitimacy also provides areas that managers can focus upon in their relationship management processes. Originality/value This conceptualization moves the consideration of relationship/customer portfolios beyond simply that of a resource allocation tool into a process that facilitates the use of the portfolio in relational processes and thus aids their understanding of how portfolios can be usefully applied. </jats:sec

Servitization capabilities for advanced services:a multi-actor perspective

Servitization is the process by which manufacturers add services to their product offerings and even replace products with services. The capabilities necessary to develop and deliver advanced services as part of servitization are often discussed in the literature from the manufacturer’s perspective, e.g., having a service-focused culture or the ability to sell solutions. Recent research has acknowledged the important role of customers and, to a lesser extent, other actors (e.g., intermediaries) in bringing about successful servitization, particularly for use-oriented and results-oriented advanced services. The objective of this study is to identify the capabilities required to successful develop advanced services as part of servitization by considering the perspective of manufacturers, intermediaries and customers. This study involved interviews with 33 managers in 28 large UK-based companies from these three groups, about servitization capabilities. The findings suggest that there are eight broad capabilities that are important for advanced services; 1) personnel with expertise and deep technical product knowledge, 2) methodologies for improving operational processes, helping to manage risk and reduce costs, 3) the evolution from being a product- focused manufacturer to embracing a services culture, 4) developing trusting relationships with other actors in the network to support the delivery of advanced services, 5) new innovation activities focused on financing contracts (e.g., ‘gain share’) and technology implementation (e.g., Web-based applications), 6) customer intimacy through understanding their business challenges in order to develop suitable solutions, 7) extensive infrastructure (e.g., personnel, service centres) to deliver a local service, and 8) the ability to tailor service offerings to each customer’s requirements and deliver these responsively to changing needs. The capabilities required to develop and deliver advanced services align to a need to enhance the operational performance of supplied products throughout their lifecycles and as such require greater investment than the capabilities for base and intermediate services

Identifying (territorial) tensions in the servitization value chain

Purpose: To understand the tensions that servitization activities create between actors within networks. Design/methodology/approach: Interviews were conducted with manufacturers, intermediaries and customers across a range of industrial sectors. Findings: Tensions relating to two key sets of capabilities are identified: in developing or acquiring (i) operant technical expertise and (ii) operand service infrastructure. The former tension concerns whom knowledge is co-created with and where expertise resides. The latter involves a territorial investment component; firms developing strategies to acquire greater access to, or ownership of, infrastructures closer to customers. Developing and acquiring these capabilities is a strategic decision on the part of managers of servitizing firms, in order to gain recognized power and control in a particular territory. Originality/value: This paper explores how firms’ servitization activities involve value appropriation (from the rest of the network), contrasting with the narrative norm for servitization: that it creates additional value. There is a need to understand the tensions that servitization activities create within networks. Some firms may be able to improve servitization performance through co-operation rather than competition, generating co-opetitive relationships. Others may need to become much more aggressive, if they are to take a greater share of the ‘value’ from the value chain

Interactively developed capabilities:evidence from dyadic servitization relationships

Purpose – The paper challenges the focal firm perspective of much resource/capability research, identifying how a dyadic perspective facilitates identification of capabilities required for servitization. Design/methodology/approach – Exploratory study consisting of seven dyadic relationships in five sectors. Findings – An additional dimension of capabilities should be recognised; whether they are developed independently or interactively (with another actor). The following examples of interactively developed capabilities are identified: knowledge development, where partners interactively communicate to understand capabilities; service enablement, manufacturers work with suppliers and customers to support delivery of new services; service development, partners interact to optimise performance of existing services; risk management, customers work with manufacturers to manage risks of product acquisition/operation. Six propositions were developed to articulate these findings. Research implications/limitations – Interactively developed capabilities are created when two or more actors interact to create value. Interactively developed capabilities do not just reside within one firm and, therefore, cannot be a source of competitive advantage for one firm alone. Many of the capabilities required for servitization are interactive, yet have received little research attention. The study does not provide an exhaustive list of interactively developed capabilities, but demonstrates their existence in manufacturer/supplier and manufacturer/customer dyads. Practical implications – Manufacturers need to understand how to develop capabilities interactively to create competitive advantage and value and identify other actors with whom these capabilities can be developed. Originality/value – Previous research has focused on relational capabilities within a focal firm. This study extends existing theories to include interactively developed capabilities. The paper proposes that interactivity is a key dimension of actors’ complementary capabilities

Identifying tensions in the servitized value chain

OVERVIEW: Servitization is recognized as an opportunity for manufacturing firms to harvest additional value by accessing new sources of revenue and expanding their reach up and down the value chain. It is a network activity, as it involves not just the servitizing firm but actors across the firm’s ecosystem. Most studies argue that servitization creates value for all network actors. However, service innovation activities may also result in the firm appropriating value from other actors, creating tensions in the network. Those tensions can undermine servitization efforts and destroy value for all participants. To avoid this outcome, firms must anticipate and manage tensions to create cooperative relationships with value chain partners. Through a series of semi-structured interviews with key actors at servitizing firms and their customers and intermediaries, we identified specific types and sources of tensions in the servitization process and explored how they might be mitigated or managed