Clarifying the Dominant Logic Construct by Disentangling and Reassembling its Dimensions

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.     

Serve or skip: the power of rejection in online bottleneck matching

We consider the online matching problem, where n server-vertices lie in a metric space and n request-vertices that arrive over time each must immediately be permanently assigned to a server-vertex. We focus on the egalitarian bottleneck objective, where the goal is to minimize the maximum distance between any request and its server. It has been shown that while there are effective algorithms for the utilitarian objective (minimizing total cost) in the resource augmentation setting where the offline adversary has half the resources, these are not effective for the egalitarian objective. Thus, we propose a new Serve-or-Skip (SoS) bicriteria analysis model, where the online algorithm may reject or skip up to a specified number of requests, and propose two greedy algorithms: GriNN(t) and \({{\textsc {Grin}}^*(t)}\). We show that the SoS model of resource augmentation analysis can essentially simulate the doubled-server-capacity model, and then examine the performance of GriNN(t) and \({\textsc {Grin}^*(t)}\).     

Using the End‐User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS) Instrument to Measure Satisfaction with a Web Site

The purpose of this study is to revise and revalidate the End‐User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS) instrument to measure satisfaction with a Web site from a usability perspective. This study is especially important given the increased significance of the Web and the uniqueness of the Web as a computing environment. A total of 176 students participated in a lab simulation that involved a usability evaluation of the Lands' End Web site ( http://www.landsend.com ). Students were asked to complete a set of tasks, record their answers, and then complete the EUCS instrument. Confirmatory factor analysis and invariance analyses were conducted to test the reliability, validity, and generalizability of the revised EUCS. The results show that the EUCS is a valid and robust instrument in the Web environment but that one of the subfactors, timeliness, will need further refinement in the future. Usability practitioners can use the EUCS to measure end‐user satisfaction with a Web site and use the feedback for improving Web‐site design. We describe a case study of an actual usability application that utilized the revised EUCS effectively to support the design of building supply Web sites involving two types of end users, homeowners and contractors. We also propose a typology that researchers can use as a starting point to judge when it is necessary to revalidate an instrument like the EUCS. Finally, we discuss the limitations of our study and present avenues for future research.     

Information-Processing Alternatives for Coping with Manufacturing Environment Complexity

Investment in information systems and technology is often justified as a necessary strategy for coping with the increased complexity and information needs of today/s manufacturing environments. However, the world class manufacturing paradigm suggests that increased complexity is not always necessary to meet the needs of markets and customers. Galbraith/s (1973, 1977) seminal information-processing model is applied to a manufacturing environment, supported by the world class manufacturing paradigm, to test the role of various information-processing alternatives for coping with increased environmental complexity. Moderated regression and multiple discriminant analysis are used to test hypotheses in a sample of 164 manufacturing plants. Environmental complexity was found to be related to manufacturing performance for each of the five dependent variables. This relationship was moderated by at least one information-processing alternative for each dependent variable, including self-contained tasks, lateral relations, and environmental management strategies for reducing manufacturing, supplier, and goal diversity. Investments in information systems and reduction of labor and customer diversity did not moderate this relationship. Practices that were found to be particularly effective in moderating this relationship included the use of multifunctional employees, communication of manufacturing strategy, coordination of decision making, product design simplicity, reduction of parts counts, supervisory interaction facilitation, recruiting and selection for flexible employees, JIT practices, blanket purchase orders, and strong customer relationships.     

Decision-Making and Evidence in Direct Practice

This article presents the results of research designed to explore decision-making by direct practitioners in selected non-profit human service settings. Forty interviews were conducted with workers at front-line, supervisory and higher-management levels. The research questions included; what sources of information are used in decision-making, what variables enhance or impede utilization of evidence-based knowledge in decision-making and what would be important resources for improving availability, access and utilization of evidence-based knowledge in decision-making? Our results indicate that respondents relied most heavily on experience; on their professional values and beliefs, and on an empathic understanding of their clients’ uniqueness. Compared to these sources of information use of research and the professional literature were less enthusiastically endorsed.     

The Great Recession and Welfare State Reform: Is Retrenchment Really the Only Game Left in Town?

By 2010, when the Greek sovereign debt crisis changed into an existential crisis of the euro, all developed democracies entered a phase in which they had to consolidate their budgets, typically implying a politics of austerity. The scholarly literature, as well as the popular press, suggests that – consequently – welfare retrenchment and cost containment became the only games left in town. In this article, we study the welfare state reform measures taken between 2010 and 2012 in four countries characteristic of mature welfare state regimes (liberal, UK; conservative, Germany; social democratic, Denmark; and hybrid, the Netherlands) to examine empirically whether austerity has indeed become the only item left on the policy menu. Our analysis reveals that retrenchment features prominently on the agenda everywhere, but nowhere by itself. While compensation for income loss is rare since 2010, this still happens. More unexpectedly, reforms in line with a social investment agenda (like expansion of child care or active labour market policies) are still being pursued in all our four cases.