中山管理評論

  期刊全文閱覽

中山管理評論  2017/3

第25卷第1期  p.219-268

DOI:10.6160/2017.03.06


題目
逆勢拼湊:化資源制約為創新來源
Making-do within Adversity: Resource Constraints as a Source of Innovation
(131_M5a1e69b1a1c6c_Full.pdf 1,898KB)

作者
蕭瑞麟、歐素華、吳彥寬/國立政治大學科技管理與智慧財產研究所、東吳大學企業管理學系、國立政治大學科技管理與智慧財產研究所
Ruey-Lin Hsiao, Su-Hua Ou, Yen-Kuan Wu/

Graduate Institute of Technology, Innovation and Intellectual Property Management, National Chengchi University、Department of Business Administration, Soochow University、Graduate Institute of Technology, Innovation and Intellectual Property Management, Na


摘要(中文)

累積資源以建立企業優勢,在現實是不可高攀的期望。當代企業其實只能追求短暫優勢,更多中小企業則是常常身處劣勢,只求謀生之道。當企業資源有限,又受到層層制約,是否還能找到脫困之道?隨創(bricolage)文獻指出,弱勢者如果學會拼湊身旁的資源,仍有可能於制約中解套。不過,隨創理論卻尚未考量,來自環境的制約會讓弱勢者缺資源而不知所措,或有資源拼湊不得。資源少已經不甚幸運,再套上各種制約,對弱勢者更是不幸。所以,分析資源拼湊方式如何解套制約成為當前重要議題。本研究調查一家電視台的戲劇部門如何以有限資源回應制約。理論上,相對於目前文獻提倡的資源拼湊或是資源建構論點,本文則提出另一種「資源轉化」觀點以豐富隨創理論的內涵。「資源轉化」包括識別時機、資源衝突性的權衡組合、資源價值的連動轉變。實務上,本研究提出資源轉化的原則,藉由主動化解制約成為制高點,弱勢者將可找出化阻力為助力的方法。當制約被重新定義時,創意將悄悄浮現,資源的價值可以因而牽動轉變,拼湊資源變得有意義,解套的可能性也呼之欲出。

(131_M5a1e69b1a1c6c_Abs.pdf(檔案不存在))

關鍵字(中文)

隨創理論、劣勢創新、資源拼湊、制約、機會識別


摘要(英文)

Accumulating resources as a way to establish competitive advantage is in reality an unachievable expectation. In fact, modern enterprises could only strive for transient advantage; and more firms often would find themselves in adversity and merely struggle for survival. When firms have limited resources and restricted by various constraints, could they still find ways to turnaround the situations? The literature of bricolage suggests that, if low-power actors learn to making-do with resources surrounding them, it is possible to identify solutions to extricate themselves from the constraints. However, the theories of bricolage have yet to consider that constraints from the business environment will disable low-power actors, as resources are frugal, or hamper them from making-do with limited resources. It is unlucky enough to behold parsimonious resources; it is even more a misfortune when low-power actors are entrapped by constraints. Therefore, an immediate inquiry is concerned with in what ways making-do with tight resources could lead to disentangling of constraints. This research investigates how a Drama Production Department of a television company responded to various constraints with inadequate resources. Theoretically, in relation to current theses on resource making-do and resource construction, this paper indicates an alternative ‘resource conversion’ perspective to enrich the repertoire of bricolage theory. Conversion is interpreted as identifying opportunities, balancing conflicts in using resources, and embarking on a series of value transformation via resources. In practice, this research proposes principles for resource conversion; by converting constraints into commanding heights, low-power actors could identify how to turn a stumbling-block into a stepping-stone. When resources are in shortage, it is unwise to fight against adversity hastily; rather, low-power actors should observe timing for constraint translation. When constraints are redefined, creative ideas emerge; value of resources could be transformed in series, making-do with resources become meaningful; and resolutions would seem ready to come out at one’s call.

(131_M5a1e69b1a1c6c_Abs.pdf(檔案不存在))

關鍵字(英文)

Bricolage, Resource Making-do, Innovation under Adversity, Constraints, Opportunity Identification


領域
General management

政策與管理意涵

企業身處制約時,如何以有限資源來解套,是劣勢創新的重要議題。「隨創」強調以資源拼湊與資源建構等作法,去回應劣勢。可是,隨創文獻卻尚未有機會解釋資源拼湊或建構是如何找到時機的,拼湊前又是如何轉換資源的價值。本研究以三立電視台戲劇部門為案例,探討三立如何在面對一線藝人短缺、編劇人才荒、與收視率稀釋的劣勢時,卻能發展出藝人部頭約、集體編劇共創、家族頻道及三播模式等創新作法,逐步建立偶像劇量產模式。 本文指出,隨創過程中,資源拼湊或建構必須搭配時機辨識與資源轉換的作法,才能找出化阻力為助力的策略。本案例解釋時機的相對性、資源的衝突性以及價值的連動性這三個面向的議題;同時點出了時間脈絡、人際脈絡及歷程脈絡對於資源拼湊的重要性。將「制約」視為識別創新的時機;調和資源的衝突特質,以進行重組;進行一系列,而非一次性的價值轉化;是本文對隨創理論提出的新觀點,也是補強創業、組織變革文獻著重策略、結構、流程,而忽視微觀資源轉化的新嘗試。 就管理實務上而言,變動的環境經常讓企業原有的優勢瞬間轉為劣勢;各種有形與無形的制約,更是企業成長過程中的必經路障。隨創是企業回應制約的重要策略作為。面對制約時,企業可敏銳地辨識機會,重新定義制約,弱勢者才能讓制約成為創新的來源,化危機為轉機。由於視角的轉變,看似無用的資源可以被轉化,轉換其價值,再進行巧思的拼湊,形成創新方案。隨機應變,反而能讓企業能重思資源的應用方式,由制約中解套。 最後,本文也提醒,企業必須留意隨創可能帶來的隱性危機。資源拼湊作法雖可變成組織制度,但卻也可能種下不利後果,讓企業忽略長期成長的基礎工作。逆勢察機以善用資源之際,企業需由近看遠,蓄積長期資源。本文探討的雖是影視產業與娛樂業,但這些作法亦是所有面對劣勢的企業不可忽視的創新原則。


參考文獻

吳妮珊,2014,微型企業的組織隨創力:希嘉文化的個案研究,淡江大學企業管理學系碩士班學位論文。(Wu, N. S., 2014, Organizational Bricolage in Microenterprises: A Case Study of CAMPOBAG, Master Thesis, Tamkang University.)
呂珮羽,2014,偶像劇的組織作為:以三立電視台為例,東吳大學企業管理學系碩士論文。(Lu, P. Y., 2014, Organizing of Trendy Drama: in Sanlih E-Television (SET), Master Thesis, Soochow University.)
邱啟紋,2008,電視偶像劇操作置入型態分析:三立《命中註定我愛你》個案研究,國立政治大學廣告研究所碩士論文。(Chiu, C. W., 2008, An Analysis of Product Placement in TV Trendy Drama: A Case Study of "Fated to Love You", Master Thesis, National Chengchi University.)
邱國碩,2014,創業資源、創業階段與資源拼湊之研究:以微型創業為例,淡江大學資訊傳播學系碩士班學位論文。(Chiu, K. S., 2014, A Study of Entrepreneurial Resources, Start-up Stage and Resource Bricolage: The Case of Micro-enterprise, Master Thesis, Tamkang University.)
張依雯,1999,「三立頻道家族之經營策略初探:一個收視率意義解讀取向的分析」,新聞學研究,61期:179~222。(Chang, Y. W., 1999, “Rating Analysis, Dual Product Market, Value Theory, Channel Group, and Management Strategies,” Mass Communication Research, No. 61, 179-222.)
莊佳瑋,2013,從拼貼資源觀點探討政策行銷:以165反詐騙諮詢專線為例,國立臺灣大學國際企業學研究所學位論文。(Chuang, C. W., 2013, Exploring Policy Marketing from the Perspective of Bricolage-A Case Study of Anti-fraud Hotline 165, Master Thesis, National Taiwan University.)
陳怡伶,2011,台灣自製偶像劇產製策略研究:以三立原創偶像劇之合作製播為例,國立政治大學廣播電視學研究所碩士論文。(Chen, Y. L., 2011, The Production and Broadcasting Strategy Analysis of SET’s Original Trendy Drama, Master Thesis, National Chengchi University.)
陳意文、吳思華、項維欣,2010,「資源基礎觀點下之資源拼湊與價值創造:以台灣翅帆開發創新產品為例」,科技管理學刊,15卷2期:1~20。(Chen, Y. W., Wu, S. H., and Hsiang, W. H., 2010, “The Resource-based View of the Resource Bricolage and Value Creation for the Innovative Product Development: A Case of "Taiwan Opens Up the Wings",” Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1-20.)
黃怡苹,2011,以拼貼資源觀點探討新興品牌網路社群經營:以K品牌為例,國立台灣大學國際企業管理組學位論文。(Huang, Y. P., 2011, Building New Brand Online Community from the Perspective of Bricolage: An Example of Brand K, Master Thesis, National Taiwan University.)
廖珮君,2006,電視台數位加值服務之整合行銷傳播研究:以三立電視台為例,國立台灣師範大學大眾傳播研究所碩士論文。(Liao, P. C., 2006, A Study of digital value-added service in TV by Integrated Marketing Communication: A Case Study of Sanlih E-Television (SET), Master Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.)
劉幼琍,2013,電訊傳播:CEO的經營策略,初版,新北市:威仕曼文化。(Liu, Y. L., 2013, Telecommunication: CEOs’ Business Strategy, 1st, New Taipei City, TW: Wiseman Publishing Co..)
劉麗惠,2013,劣勢隨創:資源制約下娛樂產業的創新回應,國立政治大學經營管理碩士學程學位論文。(Liu, L. H., 2013, Bricolage under Disadvatage: the Entertainment Industry’s Innovative Response to Resource Constraints Situations, Master Thesis, National Chengchi University.)
鄭硯中,2014,兩個資源拼湊觀點下的創業歷程,國立成功大學企業管理學系學位論文。(Cheng, Y. C., 2014, Two Entrepreneuring Processes from A Resource-Bricolage Perspective, Master Thesis, National Chengkung University.)
蕭瑞麟、歐素華、陳蕙芬,2014,「劣勢創新:梵谷策展中的隨創行為」,中山管理評論,22卷2期:323~367。(Hsiao, R. L., Ou, S. H., and Chen, H. F., 2014, “Innovating under Disadvantages: Bricolage Behaviors in van Gogh Art Curation,” Sun Yat-sen Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 2, 323-367.)
Baker, T., Miner, A. S., and Eesley, D. T., 2003, “Improvising Firms: Bricolage, Account Giving and Improvisational Competencies in the Founding Process,” Research Policy, Vol. 32, No. 2, 255-276.
Baker, T. and Nelson, R. E., 2005, “Creating Something from Nothing: Resource Construction through Entrepreneurial Bricolage,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 50, No. 3, 329-366.
Barney, J. B., 1986, “Strategic Factor Markets: Expectations, Luck, and Business Strategy,” Management Science, Vol. 32, No. 10, 1231-1241.
Baum, J. A. and Korn, H. J., 1996, “Competitive Dynamics of Interfirm Rivalry,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39, No. 2, 255-291.
Bechky, B. A. and Okhuysen, G. A., 2011, “Expecting the Unexpected? How SWAT Officers and Film Crews Handles Surprises,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 54, No. 2, 239-261.
Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T., 1966, The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, 1st, New York: Anchor Books.
Bicen, P. and Johnson, W. H. A., 2014, “How Do Firms Innovate with Limited Resources in Turbulent Markets?” Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, Vol. 16, No. 3, 430-444.
Bingham, C. B. and Eisenhardt, K. M., 2008, “Position, Leverage and Opportunity: A Typology of Strategic Logics Linking Resources with Competitive Advantage,” Managerial & Decision Economics, Vol. 29, No. 2-3, 241-256.
Bolton, M. K., 1993, “Organizational Innovation and Substandard Performance: When Is Necessity the Mother of Innovation?” Organization Science, Vol. 4, No. 1, 57-76.
Bouquet, C. and Birkinshaw, J., 2008, “Managing Power in The Multinational Corporation: How Low-power Actors Gain Influence,” Journal of Management, Vol. 34, No. 3, 477-508.
Boxenbaum, E. and Rouleau, L., 2011, “New Knowledge Products as Bricolage: Metaphors and Scripts in Organizational Theory,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 36, No. 2, 272-296.
Burt, R. S., 2001, “The Social Capital of Structural Holes” in Guillen, M. F., Collins, R., England, P., and Meyer, M. (eds.), New Directions in Economic Sociology, First Edition, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 202-246.
Chakravorti, B., 2010, “Finding Competitive Advantage in Adversity,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 88, No. 11, 102-108.
Child, J. and Smith, C., 1987, “The Context and Process of Organizational Transformation: Cabury Limited in Its Sector,” Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 24, No. 6, 565-593.
Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S., 1994, Handbook of Qualitative Research, 1st, London: Sage.
Desa, G. and Basu, S., 2013, “Optimization or Bricolage? Overcoming Resource Constraints in Global Social Entrepreneurship,” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 7, No. 1, 26-49.
Deuze, M., 2006, “Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture,” Information Society, Vol. 22, No. 2, 63-75.
Dutton, J. E., Roberts, L. M., and Bednar, J., 2010, “Pathways for Positive Identity Construction at Work: Four Types of Positive Identity and The Building of Social Resources,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 35, No. 2, 265-293.
Gargiulo, M., 1993, “Two-step Leverage: Managing Constraint in Organizational Politics,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 38, No. 1, 1-19.
Garud, R. and Karnøe, P., 2003, “Bricolage Versus Breakthrough: Distributed and Embedded Agency in Technology Entrepreneurship,” Research Policy, Vol. 32, No. 2, 277-300.
Gibbert, M., Hoegl, M., and Välikangas, L., 2007, “In Praise of Resource Constraints,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 48, No. 3, 15-17.
Gladwell, M., 2013, David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and The Art of Battling Giants, 1st, New York: Little, Brown and Company.
Graebner, M. E., 2004, “Momentum and Serendipity: How Acquired Leaders Create Value in The Integration of Technology Firms,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25, No. 8-9, 751-777.
Grant, A. M. and Berry, J. W., 2011, “The Necessity of Others Is The Mother of Invention: Intrinsic and Prosocial Motivations, Perspective Taking, and Creativity,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 54, No. 1, 73-96.
Halme, M., Lindeman, S., and Linna, P., 2012, “Innovation for Inclusive Business: Intrapreneurial Bricolage in Multinational Corporations,” Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 49, No. 4, 743-784.
Hannan, M. T., Pólos, L., and Carroll, G. R., 2003, “Cascading Organizational Change,” Organization Science, Vol. 14, No. 5, 463-482.
Hirsch, P. M., 1986, “From Ambushes to Golden Parachutes: Corporate Takeovers as An Instance of Cultural Framing and Institutional Integration,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 91, No. 4, 800-837.
Ibarra, H., 1995, “Race, Opportunity and Diversity of Social Circles in Managerial Networks,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, No. 3, 673-703.
Keupp, M. M. and Gassmann, O., 2013, “Resource Constraints as Triggers of Radical Innovation: Longitudinal Evidence from The Manufacturing Sector,” Research Policy, Vol. 42, No. 8, 1457-1468.
Lee, T. W., Mitchell, T. R., and Satlynski, C. J., 1999, “Qualitative Research in Organizational and Vocational Psychology: 1979-1999,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 55, No. 2, 161-187.
Leonard-Barton, D., 1992, “Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13, Summer Special Issue, 111-125.
Levi-Strauss, C., 1968, The Savage Mind, 1st, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lounsbury, M. and Glynn, M. A., 2001, “Cultural Entrepreneurship: Stories, Legitimacy, and The Acquisition of Resources,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22, No. 6-7, 545-564.
Martens, M. L., Jennings, J. E., and Jennings, P. D., 2007, “Do The Stories They Tell Get Them The Money They Need? The Role of Entrepreneurial Narratives in Resource Acquisition,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50, No. 5, 1107-1132.
Mitchell, J. C., 1983, “Case and Situation Analysis,” The Sociological Review, Vol. 31, No. 1, 187-211.
Nelson, R. E., 1989, “The Strength of Strong Ties: Social Networks and Intergroup Conflict in Organizations,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 12, No. 1, 105-124.
Orlikowski, W. J., 2000, “Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations,” Organization Science, Vol. 11, No. 4, 404-428.
Penrose, E. T., 1959, The Theory of The Growth of The Firm, 1st, Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
Pettigrew, A., 1990, “Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and Practice,” Organization Science, Vol. 1, No. 3, 267-292.
Pettigrew, A. M., 1988, The Management of Strategic Change, 1st, Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Porter, M. E., 1990, The Competitive Advantage of Nations, 1st, London: Macmillan.
Powell, E. E. and Baker, T. E. D., 2014, “It's What You Make of It: Founder Identity and Enacting Strategic Responses to Adversity,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 57, No. 5, 1406-1433.
Reger, R. K., Gustafson, L. T., DeMarie, S. M., and Mullane, J. V., 1994, “Reframing The Organization: Why Implementing Total Quality Is Easier Said than Done,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19, No. 3, 565-584.
Rugman, A. M. and Verbeke, A., 2002, “Edith Penrose's Contribution to The Resource-based View of Strategic Management,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23, No. 8, 769-780.
Senyard, J., Baker, T., Steffens, P., and Davidsson, P., 2014, “Bricolage as A Path to Innovativeness for Resource-constrained New Firms,” Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 31, No. 2, 211-230.
Shaker A Zahra, D. O. N., 1998, “Environmental Adversity and the Entrepreneurial Activities of New Ventures,” Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, Vol. 3, No. 2, 123-140.
Shane, S., 2000, “Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities,” Organization Science, Vol. 11, No. 4, 448-469.
Singh, J. V., Tucker, D. J., and House, R. J., 1986, “Organizational Legitimacy and the Liability of Newness,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 2, 171-193.
Sonenshein, S., 2014, “How Organization Foster the Creative Use of Resources,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 57, No. 3, 814-848.
Stinchfield, B. T., Nelson, R. E., and Wood, M. S., 2013, “Learning from Levi-Strauss' Legacy: Art, Craft, Engineering, Bricolage, and Brokerage in Entrepreneurship,” Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, Vol. 37, No. 4, 889-921.
Tang, J., Kacmar, K. M., and Busenitz, L., 2012, “Entrepreneurial Alertness in the Pursuit of New Opportunities,” Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 27, No. 1, 77-94.
Tyre, M. and Orlikowski, W. J., 1994, “Windows of Opportunity: Temporal Patterns of Technological Adaptation in Organizations,” Organization Science, Vol. 5, No. 1, 98-118.
Vaghely, I. P. and Julien, P. A., 2010, “Are Opportunities Recognized or Constructed? An Information Perspective on Entrepreneurial Opportunity Identification,” Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 25, No. 1, 73-86.