THE IDEAS AND THE IDEAS AND APPROACH OF THE IMP APPROACH OF THE IMP

GROUPGROUP

HAKAN HAKANSSON AND DAVID FORDHAKAN HAKANSSON AND DAVID FORD

IMP GROUP

BACKGROUND

1976 FIRST MEETINGS

IMP 1 PROJECT – FIVE COUNTRIES, c 1000 INTERVIEWS

FIRST BOOK 1982

CONTINUING………….

FIRST IMP CONFERENCE 1984

IMP 2 PROJECT 1995

impgroup. org

23RD ANNUAL IMP CONFERENCE MANCHESTER 2007

EMPIRICALLY BASED CHALLENGES

ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE PURCHASES

EMPIRICALLY BASED CHALLENGES

ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE PURCHASES: RELATIONSHIPS

EMPIRICALLY BASED CHALLENGES

ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE PURCHASES: RELATIONSHIPS

MANIPULATION OF MIX VARIABLES

EMPIRICALLY BASED CHALLENGES

ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE PURCHASES: RELATIONSHIPS

MANIPULATION OF MIX VARIABLES: INTERACTION

EMPIRICALLY BASED CHALLENGES

ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE PURCHASES: RELATIONSHIPS

MANIPULATION OF MIX VARIABLES: INTERACTION

ATOMISTIC STRUCTURE OF MARKETS

EMPIRICALLY BASED CHALLENGES

ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE PURCHASES: RELATIONSHIPS

MANIPULATION OF MIX VARIABLES: INTERACTION

ATOMISTIC STRUCTURE OF MARKETS: STABILITY

EMPIRICALLY BASED CHALLENGES

ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE PURCHASES: RELATIONSHIPS

MANIPULATION OF MIX VARIABLES: INTERACTION

ATOMISTIC STRUCTURE OF MARKETS: STABILITY

SEPARATE ANALYSIS OF CUSTOMER AND SUPPLIER: SIMILARITY

PUTTING THESE CHALLENGES TOGETHER….

THE CHALLENGE TO STRUCTURE

THE CHALLENGE TO PROCESS

TWO CHALLENGES…..

THE CHALLENGE TO STRUCTURE: COMPANIES AND MARKETS OR NETWORKS AND RELATIONSHIPS

TWO CHALLENGES…..

THE CHALLENGE TO STRUCTURE: COMPANIES AND MARKETS OR

NETWORKS AND RELATIONSHIPS

THE CHALLENGE TO PROCESS:INDEPENDENT ACTION OR

INTERDEPENDENT INTERACTION

WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE REAL WORLD?

DIVERSITY OF MODELSSPECULATION VS POSTPONEMENTGREATER INTERDEPENDENCE

EASIER CO-ORDINATION SEPARATION OF

TECHNOLOGIES/FUNCTIONS BETWEEN COMPANIES

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO OUR CHALLENGE TO

STRUCTURE?

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO OUR CHALLENGE TO

STRUCTURE?

EVERYONE TALKS ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS:

WE BELIEVE THAT THE IDEA OF

RELATIONSHIPS HAS ONLY BEEN

PARTIALLY ADOPTED

EVERYONE TALKS ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS…..

…..BUT AS A TECHNIQUE

LOOKING MORE CLOSELY AT RELATIONSHIPS…

RELATIONSHIPS ARE AS FUNDAMENTAL AS ORGANISATIONS THEMSELVES.

EXISTING INTERDEPENDENCIES FORM CONTEXT FOR RELATIONSHIPS

INTERDEPENDENCIES ARE THE OUTCOME OF RELATIONSHIPS.

DYNAMICS TEND TO OCCUR WITHIN HETEROGENEOUS RELATIONSHIPS,

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO OUR CHALLENGE TO PROCESS?

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO OUR CHALLENGE TO PROCESS?

…..AN INTERACTION VIEW IS DIFFICULT TO RELATE TO A

SINGLE COMPANY VIEW.

INTERACTION…..

IS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF AN INDIVIDUAL ACTOR.

THE EFFECTS OF ANY ACTION DEPEND ON THE PERCEPTIONS AND REACTIONS OF OTHERS.

IT IS INCREMENTAL, NOT DISCONTINUOUS

IT CAN ONLY BE UNDERSTOOD IN ITS RELATIONSHIP/NETWORK CONTEXT.

INTERACTION…..

INTERACTION MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE SENSE OF WHAT HAPPENS BETWEEN COMPANIES BY LOOKING AT JUST ONE OF THEM.

THE DIRECTION OF A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP IS OUTSIDE THE CONTROL OF A SINGLE COMPANY.

SUCCESS OR FAILURE FOR A RELATIONSHIP CANNOT BE EXPRESSED SIMPLY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A SINGLE COMPANY.

WHY HASN’T THE IDEA OF INTERACTION BEEN

ADOPTED?

BUSINESS MODELS START OUT FROM A SINGLE

ACTOR - “MARKETING IS A COMPANY AFFAIR”.

SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH

INTERACTION INVOLVES SPECIFIC OTHERS

INTERACTION IS CLOSELY ROOTED IN THE PAST

ALL INTERACTION IS JOINT

THE TANGIBLE ASPECTS OF BUSINESS ARE ACTUALLY LESS SUBSTANTIAL THAN THE INTERACTION BETWEEN THEM.

STRATEGY IS ABOUT ASSESSING INTERACTIVE PROCESSES IN THEIR WIDEST SENSE

INTERACTION MEANS THAT NO COMPANY IS ANY WHERE NEARLY IN CONTROL OF ITS OWN DESTINY!

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS NETWORKS

EXISTENCE OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS NETWORKS

RESULT OF TWO DIFFERENT TRENDSDEVELOPMENT OF EXTENSIVE

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN BUSINESS PARTNERS

BREAKING UP OF INTEGRATED INTERNATIONAL COMPANIES

NETWORKS – EFFECTS

NEGATIVE: MANIPULATIVE, NON-DEMOCRATIC, POLITICAL (SERVING OWN INTERESTS), DIFFICULT TO SEE THROUGH

POSITIVE: CREATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CO-EVOLUTION WITH EFFECTS ON BOTH EFFICIENCY AND INNOVATIONS

A NETWORK CASE

NETWORKS ARE COMPLEX AND DEVELOPMENT MULTIDIMENSIONAL

A VERY SIMPLE PRODUCT (BARALDI 2003)

IF IMPORTANT NETWORK EFFECTSMORE COMPLEX PRODUCTS CAN BE

EXPECTED TO INCLUDE EVEN MORE OF SUCH EFFECTS

    

The Lack table

 

Enrico Baraldi

1IKEA (in 2003)

IKEA: 65,000 people >550 directly controlled business units180 retail outlets (30 countries), 230 million visitors/year25 Distribution Centres40 Purchase Offices (in 33 countries)12,000 products, SEK100 billion turnoverIKEA catalogue: 110 million copies

Strategic heart: “IKEA of Sweden”, 600 people, 12 GBAs (>30 “Istras”)

A production-led retailer: Develop & design products for affordability, manufacturing, logistics and last-mile in cooperation with

>2,000 direct suppliers, 10,000 (?) indirect ones

Enrico Baraldi

2”Lack”: an unusual coffee table

“Lack”: Retail price SEK99 for basic version. CONSTANT for 22 years!

Sales: 2.5 million pieces, SEK300 million

Sole supplier: Swedwood Poland (IKEA-owned)

Technology: “board-on-frame”

Inputs: HDF, honeycomb filling, lacquers, chipboard, veneers

•Constantly developed: technology & concept, for sales & costs

•Hundreds of projects in close cooperation with key suppliers

•Technology then applied to other IKEA products

Enrico Baraldi

3”Lack”: an interactive development story

>20 B. units involved, mostly outside IKEA

GBA2 at IKEA of Sweden: complete responsibility on “Lack”

Swedwood BoF-division, Poland (three plants): produce

IKEA TSO, Poland : purchase

Wicoma, Poland: engineering partner

KronoPol, Poland: HDF, chipboard supplier

Becker-Acroma and Akzo-Nobel, Sweden: lacquer suppliers

Sorbini, Italy, Bürkle, Germany: coating line suppliers

IKEA Sales Organizations, Retail Units, Distribution Centres

Enrico Baraldi

4”Lack”: complex technology under the surface

Board-on-frame: more components and complex construction

Coating technology: expensive, delicate and highly adapted

Necessary close interaction with technology specialists/suppliers

Key facilities affecting Lack (costs, quality etc.): Leg line, 3 bordering lines, veneering line6 coating lines, 2 print-on-wood linesWarehouses at production plant and distribution centresTransport equipment (damages, costs, time)Retail stores

Hard to balance and tune the effects of all facilities, components etc: Impossible to “optimise” or “adapt” everything: 10,000 other PsSmall but continuous steps and experimenting!

TSO Poland

Local IkeaDistribution Centres

GBA2/IOS

3 Swedwood plants (PL)

BeckerAcroma

Lacquer

Surface line

Warehouse

DC house

Akzo-Nobel

Ikea Stores

RetailStore

Border line

Krono (PL)

HDF

Local Ikea Sales Organiz.

"Lack"

-Product

-Facility

-Businessunit-Businessrelationship

The “resource network” involved in producing and marketing Lack

CONTENT OF BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS

WHAT DOES A WELL-DEVELOPED BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP LOOK LIKE?

LONG TERM AND BROAD INFORMAL ADAPTATIONS CO-OPERATION BUT ALSO CONFLICTS BUT ALSO “BURDEN OF RELATIONSHIPS”

CONTENT OF BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS (CONT.)

DEVELOPMENT – CO-EVOLUTION OF THE TWO PARTIES

TECHNICAL CONNECTIONS SOCIAL BONDS KNOWLEDGE – LEARNING, TEACHING, JOINT

KNOWLEDGE BUT THEY ARE NOT ISOLATED DYADS!

EFFICIENCY IN NETWORKS

CONNECTED RELATIONSHIPS AS A MEAN TO LINK INTERDEPENDENT ACTIVITIES

PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES LOGISTIC ACTIVITIES (TRANSPORTATION AND

HANDLING) ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES ECONOMIZING ON EXISTING AND CREATED

INTERDEPENDENCIES

EFFECTIVENESS IN NETWORKS

CONNECTED RELATIONSHIPS AS A MEANS TO TIE RESOURCES

PHYSICAL RESOURCES SUCH AS FACILITIES OR PRODUCTS

ORGANIZATIONAL RESOURCES SUCH AS KNOWLEDGE AND CAPABILITIES

SUCCESSIVELY CHANGING AND DEVELOPING THE EMERGING ECONOMIC STRUCTURE

MARKET AND ACTION: NETWORK AND INTERACTION

STRUCTURE AND PROCESS

Defined by product. Anonymous members

Atomistic Heterogeneity inside units Competitive Competition/independent

companies Vendors and customers separate Stable (except counterparts) Change from external sources. Product life cycles within market

STRUCTURE AND PROCESS

Defined by threads, nodes. Individually identifiable members Particular Heterogeneity also between units Conflictful and cooperative Relationships/ inter-dependent

companies Multiple/unclear roles Changing (except in counterparts) Different trends and changes All mediated through relationships

MARKET AND ACTION: NETWORK AND INTERACTION

ACTIONS

ACTIONS OF SINGLE ACTORS

COMMON MODES OF BEHAVIOUR ACTIONS A RESULT OF

INDIVIDUAL STRATEGY HOMOGENEOUS PRODUCTS FOR

MULTIPLE CUSTOMERS SINGLE SUPPLIER CONTROLS

MARKETING MIX DISTRIBUTION MANAGED BY

PRODUCER MARKET IS DEMAND DRIVEN DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES FOR

SUPPLIERS AND CUSTOMERS

INTERACTIONS

INTERPLAY BETWEEN ACTORS. INDIVIDUAL MODES OF

BEHAVIOUR INTERACTIONS A RESULT OF HOW

COMPANIES RELATE HETEROGENEOUS OFFERINGS FOR INDIVIDUAL CUSTOMERS MULTIPLE COMPANIES INVOLVED

IN OFFERINGS. COORDINATION OF OFFERING

ABSENT /MANAGED ANYONE NETWORK IS PROBLEM DRIVEN ALL COMPANIES ENGAGED IN

NETWORKING