Individual and collective actions as the starting point

2.4 A NALYTICAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY

2.4.2 Individual and collective actions as the starting point

The study focuses on the firms’ individual and/or collective actions in relation to one focal dyadic business relationship. These actions can therefore be performed by three main actors; firm A, firm B, and firm A and B collectively (see Figure 2.5). This means that emphasis will be on actions of firm A and B performed either within the partnership/relationship (i.e.

collective actions), or outside the partnership/relationship (i.e. individual actions). It is assumed that the members of the relationship project are responsible for getting various decision-makers from firm A and B to base their actions on a relationship-oriented information base and concerns created through bilateral dialogues and co-operation within the dyad. It is also assumed that both firms believe when they entered into the partnership that they needed to pursue collective actions in areas that were deemed crucial for their joint industrialisation projects. In this way the relationship project (and not the business relationship per se) functions as an arena where the parties determine what those areas are. The communication process between firm A and B includes efforts to inform, present ideas, discuss, influence and negotiate solutions: The nature of firms’ actions ultimately impacts the ways resources are organised and economised on at different stages in the industrialisation process.

Figure 2.5 – Individual and/or collective actions within dyadic relationships

* Firm A (subcontractor); firm B (product developer); firm A and B (business relationship) Firm A and B

Firm A Firm B

Collective Action Individual

Action

Individual Action Individual and/or

collective actions

Resource combinations The focal business relationship

Implications

54 2.4.3 Changes in resources combinations as outcomes

The distinction between individual and collective actions is central to the case analysis. These actions are interesting due to their impact on the firms’

ability to organise and therefore also economise on resources. In line with the ARA-model, the focal firms will each have a distinctive resource collection, where some resources are tied to those of the counterpart as resources are combined in different ways across firm boundaries. The changes in these resource combinations are treated as the outcome of the firms’ actions. An important distinction, however, is made between organising resources differently and being able to economise on them differently. The basic assumption is that firms can organise resources in different ways without this necessarily leading to changes in the economising of the same resources. The term economising is here referred to as “to make prudent use of money or the means of having or acquiring property” (The New Webster Encyclopaedic Dictionary). In this study the term ‘prudence’ is understood as “acting only after careful thought and planning” (Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English – see also Jahre et al., 2006). The analysis in this study therefore deals with how Kitron (firm A) and KDC (firm B) can organise and/or economise on resources within their business relationship after interacting after careful thought and planning.

2.4.4 The analytical focus of the study

This researcher is aware that the choice of theoretical concepts and models applied will highly influence what is seen in the case and how the data is interpreted and understood. These elements also affect the output of the case analysis, both in terms of the findings and what conclusions that are reached.

Lundgren (1995, p. 70) addresses the problem in this way: “The underlying frame of reference does not only affect what we will see, it also indirectly determines the results”. As previously argued, this research study follows in the tradition of the INA. This means that many of the views and assumptions within this paradigm will form a foundation for the study and frame what is

‘seen’ in the analysis. The analytical focus of this study is then illustrated in Figure 2.6.

Figure 2.6 – The analytical framework of the study

2.4.4.1 Individual and/or collective actions

The firms’ individual and collective actions are in focus and are considered as the heart of the analysis and interpretation of the empirical material. The

questions of “who is acting and interacting” are essential to the analysis. Several actors will perform actions on both sides of the dyad, and the study focuses on actions made by actors on either the firm-level or the department-level. The individual actor, whether viewed as a single firm or a single department will have a unique position in the business relationship.

These actors will also have a distinctive view of how the firms should act and interact in order to support a systematic and efficient use of resources.

An important assumption in the study is that actions will be influenced by the position and views of the actors. The actors also possess the ability to learn from past experiences from acting and interacting, and they will obtain more insight into the economising properties of resources as they try and

re-Interaction within a business relationship

Economising in a business relationship

Outcomes of interaction Individual and/or

collective actions Analysis and

interpretations

1 2

Four Resource Interaction Model - Economising as changes in resource

combinations Descriptions of

empirical case

56 try different ways of organising resources. Furthermore, as the focal firms interact through dialogues they may also influence each other to behave and act in certain ways. The learning and influencing aspects are two essential aspects that will be focused on in the analysis. As Figure 2.6 illustrates, the description of the empirical material presented in the case study focuses on the interaction within the business relationship, economising within the relationship and the outcomes of interaction for the relationship. These three areas will be examined in a circular manner, opposed to in a sequential manner even though the actual structuring of the analysis may follow this sequential structure. The empirical material will be analysed based on the link between the individual and/or collective actions and these three areas.

2.4.4.2 Interaction within business relationship

The focal relationship is multi-faceted, which means that the two focal firms will act and interact with each other on different levels in the dyad as part of their everyday co-operation. The focal business relationship consists of several individuals and departments from different levels of the organisations that interact with each other on a regular basis, both directly and indirectly in relation to their joint industrialisation projects. However, the study focuses on the interaction within the dyad with emphasis on those actors that are directly or indirectly involved in the partnership arrangement.

Examining the contact patterns related to, for instance, decision-making is one way to capture the relevant inter-firm communication.

In line with the research question devised for this study, special interest is given to capturing the factors that support and hinder firms from economising on resources in a desirable manner within the focal business relationship. Of equally interest is to obtain insight into the tension that can occur when firms determine what actions to do individually and collectively.

It is assumed that the firms can learn how to interact as the relationship evolves, and they can also learn how to influence the counterpart to presume certain positions and views when acting and interacting. The revised interaction model (Jahre et al., 2006) that was introduced earlier in this chapter is applied to capture the distinctive nature of the firms’ interactions at specific points in time (see Figure 2.2). It is modified in order to capture the interaction that occurs both on the firm and department level. The time element is furthermore emphasised, as the interaction within the dyad at a specific point in time can focus on dialogues regarding past episodes, how to interact today in relation to current situations, or how to interact in the future. The model is applied to illustrate who is acting, how the parties

57 interact at different points in time and how the nature of their interactions may shift character over time. The model will be used to present snap shots of the interaction within the focal dyad at different points in time. In line with what was discussed in relation to Figure 2.2, this is deemed suitable in order to capture the circular process of strategy as process.

2.4.4.3 Economising in a business relationship

It is assumed that the individual firm will view situations and episodes that arise within the relationship in a unique way. Their views will influence how they decide to act and interact in relation to the situation. The analytical framework builds on the idea that firms will act and interact based on how they believe they can best economise on resources available to them. The changes in how resources are economised on within the dyad, however, are a result of changes in the way resources are organised between the firms. As noted earlier, the parties may organise resources differently without this necessarily leading to changes in the way these resources are economised on.

Nevertheless, the assumption is that the firms’ views regarding resource organisation and economising is what determines whether they decide to act individually or collectively. Thus, special attention is given to how actors view⁹ the status quo of resources, the opportunities that exist from combining resources in a certain way and the possible impacts on the future economising on resources from their actions and interactions today.

The case analysis will provide descriptive pictures of how the firms view the way resources are organised within the business relationship when acting and interacting. These pictures can be viewed as snap shots of the actors’

views at specific points in time. It is important to note that the presentation of the resource pictures comes as a result of how the researcher interprets the firms’ views. Håkansson and Waluszewski (2002) underline this point when arguing that the researcher will only understand and grasp fragments of the process, and that what is ‘seen’ will be highly influenced by the research tools and methodology used. They also state: “to strive for “consciousness”

appears, on one hand, as an important quality demand and, on the other, as totally impossible ever to fulfil. If the research tools are the only possible fixed points of reference, then these and their uses are the only ways in which we can extend our knowledge” (p. 25). The four resource interaction model is applied, and the resource pictures represent how the firms’ perceive the nature of the resources that are available to them and how these should

9 Referring to the term view as the actors’ sense making or network pictures presented earlier.

58 be exploited (Wedin, 2001; Håkansson and Waluszewski, 2002). This model represents a way to describe how resources are combined, and also how the parties wish to change the resource combinations in order to achieve specific economising outcomes. This includes their concerns regarding what resources to adapt, how to adapt them, when to adapt them, and also what they believe the potential economising outcome will be. The four resource interaction model is particularly useful to capture snap shots regarding resource interfaces at different points in time, and can in this way be used to capture the ‘before and after’ situations as changes in resource combinations (i.e. outcomes of interaction).

2.4.4.4 Outcomes of interaction

The outcome of interaction is viewed from an economising perspective, where economising is understood as changes in resource combinations and use. The analysis will focus on economising as the firms see it, and a problematic issue that immediately arises is how one can measure and/or monitor economising within the relationship. The analysis and interpretations will be drawn from the manner in which the firms handle and relate to the issue. In some situations, the four resource interaction model could be useful to describe how the outcomes of interactions are understood by the firms, whereas in other situations other illustrations might be more useful. An important part of the analysis is to discuss the outcomes as changes in resource combinations. Attempts will be made to describing how I interpret these outcomes. The analysis of outcomes will focus on the organisational resources and combinations of these, and the technical resources will be used to exemplify how the firms are able to economise on their organisational resources¹⁰.

10 The organisational resources control the technical resources, which mean that the technical resources will be viewed as embedded in the organisational resources.

Chapter Three Methodology

3.0 Introduction

This chapter describes and discusses the methodological approach that has been used in the study. The case study methodology was found the most suitable for the thesis. The method used in the research to collect data included interviews, participation in business meetings, etc. Furthermore, this thesis should be viewed as an outcome of a large research project called NETLOG at the Department of Logistics and Strategy at the Norwegian School of Management BI.

Chapter Three is divided into five sections. Section 3.1 introduces the case study research methodology as the research strategy. Section 3.2 presents the research design, and illustrates the frame in which the research process has been carried out. In Section 3.3 the research process is described in detail.

This involves describing how the research topic and issues were selected (Section 3.3.1), how the case was selected (Section 3.3.2) and how the case study itself was structured (Section 3.3.3). Section 3.4 describes the data collection process with particular emphasis on how the interviews were carried out (Section 3.4.1), how the business meetings I attended were set up (Section 3.4.2), how the feedback to the respondents was organised (section 3.4.3), and the use of other sources of data (Section 3.4.4). Finally, Section 3.5 contains some reflections regarding the trustworthiness of the research.

3.1 Case study research

The research strategy chosen for this research project is the case study. This is a type of qualitative research design that is often descriptive in nature, and has been deemed highly suitable for studies whereby the researcher aims at investigating specific issues in depth and detail (Easton, 1995; Patton, 2002).

Some researchers argue that the qualitative case study opens up for interpretative sense making in that it allows the researcher to seek meaning rather than causal explanations. In addition, the qualitative case study is considered to be particularly well-suited for exploratory studies where the researcher has little control over the actual events occurring during the research process and when the research is built on “how” and “why”

questions (Yin, 2003, p. 1). Both arguments are highly applicable for this study.

60 The case study can be used in many situations where it can contribute with knowledge of individuals, groups, organisations, social, political, and related phenomenon. It has been a preferred research strategy in fields such as psychology, sociology, political science, social work, business and community planning (Yin, 2003, p.1). In business and economic studies, the case study has been used to investigate and provide explanatory insights into individual or a small number of variables. In other situations, whole structures of a given industry or region has been investigated using this method. The case study approach has also been the most frequently used method in studies conducted within the IMP tradition (Easton, 1995; Dubois and Gadde, 2002; Dubois and Araujo, 2004). Easton (1995) argues that industrial network researchers “have been driven to cases because they make sense of the phenomenon we have sought to understand” (p. 385-6).

A common understanding is that there are endless varieties of possible cases.

Punch (1998, p. 150) introduces an interesting definition of what a case is and can be summed up in the following statement; The basic idea is that one case (or perhaps small number of cases) will be studied in detail, using whatever methods seem appropriate. While there may be a variety of specific purposes and research questions, the general objective is to develop as full an understanding of that case as possible. The ‘case’ in case study research is often a combination of theoretical and empirical insights. Here a theoretical framework is used to make sense of the empirical realities.

Eisenhardt (1989) views the case study research as a useful strategy in the development of theory. The author highlights the idea that the process allows the researcher to gain further knowledge and insights that can lead to clarifications of “unanswered” and “unresolved” issues and problems, or to redefine specific concepts or models.

Some theoretical assumptions often form the starting point for a case study.

A common argument is that this enables the researcher to focus and to know what to look for in the empirical world (Dubious and Araujo, 2004). A case may be viewed as a methodological “product” (Ragin, 1992) and as a “tool”

(Dubois and Gadde, 2002). The research purpose remains one of the most challenging aspects regarding case studies. Here the goal of the researcher is to design ‘good’ case studies where data is collected, presented and analysed in a “truthful” and fair fashion. Another challenging issue is how to draw boundaries to what is studied. Boundaries represent the frame that depicts what the case is a case of. Dubois and Araujo (2004) argue that knowing what the case is of should not be the starting point, but rather one of the final steps in the research process. The authors underline this when stating: “What constitutes the phenomenon of interest and its boundaries is often the outcome of the study rather than a decision that can be firmed up prior to

61 conducting the study” (Dubois and Araujo, 2004, p. 225). Thus, drawing boundaries to the case is possible when the researcher knows what the case is an example of.

In this study, a decision was made to have one ‘big’ single case study. The desire to explore and understand strategic behaviour, while at the same time appreciating the uniqueness that this case had to offer, made it seem appropriate to let the research journey draw its own boundaries and reveal interesting features with what constitutes strategy in this particular setting. In line with Andersen (1997), a case could be an example of several empirical phenomenons. I jumped into the empirical inquires early in the PhD studies.

Due to this, having the focal business relationship and the partnership arrangement set the preliminary boundaries seemed appropriate.

This single case study would represent a powerful example in its own right, in that it may open up for comparison with other case studies carried out within related fields of research. In addition, this study concerns a case that has been limited to a particular set of interactions whereby the way the case study is organised allows us to examine how particular sayings and doings are embedded in particular patterns of interaction.

Dubois and Araujo (2007) argue that there are no ready-made ways to analyse the social world. This researcher experienced how difficult it was to devise an analytical framework at the outset of the research process. This challenge was dealt with by progressively trying to construct the context and boundaries of the phenomenon under investigation as the empirical reality evolved over time (Ibid., p. 171). I relied on flexibility in terms of changing the sample size and the direction of the case during the course of the research. Sometimes new factors were revealed that motivated me to gather more data about events that had happened in the past, whereas other times other unexpected issues appeared that made me want to seek out new

In document Interacting Strategically within Dyadic Business Relationships: A case study from the Norwegian Electronics Industry (sider 66-0)