This study seeks to advance the literatures on organizational improvisation and unexpected events. It tackles the question of whether the relative presence of improvisation during a startup's response to an ordinary, unexpected event affects the value of that response, an issue of clear importance given the ubiquity of unexpected events in startups. Improvisation in practice typically involves varying degrees of predesigned and extemporaneously designed activity. The study explores the dangers of simultaneously mixing predesigned actions and improvisational activity. It develops theory in the context of startups' action streams in response to 141 unexpected events identified by field informants. Results from hypothesis tests support theory that the relative presence of improvisation in an action stream in response to an unexpected event will have a U-shaped impact on its success resolving that event: a mixed presence shows relatively poorer outcomes than either concentrated predesigned action or a high presence of improvisation. The study also extends prior work by theorizing and finding evidence that two sources of organizational memory-firm-specific experience (proxied by organizational age) and nonfirm-specific experience (proxied by founders' business experience prior to founding)-moderate the value of the presence of improvisation in response to unexpected events in different ways, consistent with greater challenges to rapidly integrating varied knowledge. Finally, it contributes to understanding of improvisation patterns in response to ordinary, unexpected events, suggests areas for additional research, and offers managerial implications for startups such as the value of deliberately raising shared awareness of shifts to organizational improvisation.
It has been recognized that previous experiences can provide different types of feedback. However, it has not been systematically explored why firms are more likely to learn effectively from certain types of experience than others. From a feedback-based learning perspective, we argue that it is useful not only to focus on feedback valence (success or failure experiences) but also to examine feedback saliency (the magnitude of the experience’s influence). Based on a sample of acquisitions by U.S. firms, our results indicate that a firm’s success experience drives up the premium that it pays for a subsequent acquisition, whereas a failure experience reduces this subsequent premium. Moreover, we find that the magnitude of the effects of the four types of experiences—small failure, big failure, small success, and big success—does not follow a symmetrical pattern of inverse effects.
Driving by several internal and external challenges, Jiangsu Huabo Industrial Group Co., Ltd. (“Huabo Group”), a leading provincial distributor of mobile phones incorporated in 2001, have been exploring how to transform its offline distributing business into an online platform from 2013. In April 2014, Huabo Group incubated a new startup, Jiangsu PhoneWin Logistics Management Co., Ltd. (“PhoneWin”), by bringing together offline logistics services (PhoneWin Logistics) and an online platform (51dh.com.cn). Different with large established e-commerce platforms such as Taobao.com and JD.com focusing on individual customers in first- and second-tier cities at that time, PhoneWin was created to exploit opportunities to serve small stores in smaller towns and villages. The basic operation model is: When the small mobile phone stores in rural markets placed their orders on 51dh.com.cn, PhoneWin Logistics would deliver the phones before 4:00 p.m. the next day. By November 11, 2015, PhoneWin has expanded into 13 provinces across China, built partnerships with over 300 suppliers of mobile phones, and had over 80,000 small stores registered on its platform. In October 2015, it completed Series A funding of ￥120 million. However, two Chinese e-business giants, Taobao.com and JD.com, have started to expand their penetration in rural markets, which is becoming an inevitable threat to companies like PhoneWin. As an early entrant in this market, how can PhoneWin compete against such powerful giants? Will it be able to sustain its revenue and profit growth in the coming years?
mobile phone distributor
E-commerce in rural areas
O2O(Online To Offline)
Pressure to meet or beat earnings forecasts from securities analysts leads managers of publicly traded firms to improve short-term earnings by cutting strategic investments at the expense of long-term competitiveness. Drawing on the behavioral theory of the firm, we explore how different dimensions of performance feedback moderate managerial responses to this pressure. We find that the negative impact of earnings pressure on a firm's strategic investments is strengthened when it receives performance feedback from lower stock returns but is weakened when the firm receives performance feedback from lower sales growth. When both dimensions of performance feedback are present, we find that sales growth has a stronger moderating effect. Our paper contributes to the developing literature on multiple dimensions of performance feedback by demonstrating how stock price and sales growth differentially influence managerial responses to earnings pressure. From a management standpoint, we highlight the possibility that performance feedback influences managerial responses to earnings pressures in ways that managers may not fully consider.
77th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management
The coopetition framework posits that conflicting logics can help explain some complex firm strategies. We advance this framework by contrasting the competition and cooperation logics of acquisition to predict a firm’s ownership strategy. We argue that market competition between two firms may increase the level of ownership acquisition to certain extent, whereas cooperation through partnership may lower the level. Moreover, we examine whether cooperation deters rivalrous behavior or competition eclipses cooperation in collaborative ventures. In addition, we also introduce technology gap as a moderator that may alter the relationship between coopetition and ownership strategy. Based on the analyses of a sample of equity acquisitions between U.S. public firms, we find evidence that supports our theory and provides implications for the theoretical development of the coopetition framework.