This paper focuses on the relation between the network changes and the strategy of an organization. It also provides a description of the links between those two concepts. The network change is an essential part of the understanding of industrial network. Its importance is related to the fact that a network is something stable but always in movement. This concept is useful to analyse and understand the strategy of an organization related to its relationships. Based on the studies of the IMP group on industrial network and on the strategy theorists, we can conclude that the concepts of strategy and network changes have many characteristics in common. Furthermore, they are dependent on each other in the way that network changes modify the strategy and the strategy influences the network. The studies that have been performed in the field of strategy have demonstrated that many actions can be taken by an organization in order to make choices and changes. In this point of view, organizations have a certain degree of freedom. On the other hand, many studies on the organization and its environment have been performed and demonstrated that the organizations are not totally independents and do not have that much freedom. The environment in which a firm performed cannot be controlled. The environment is always changing and firm has to face those changes and adapted to its environment.
[...] Both the periods of stability and the periods of major modification are important for the survival of the firm Network change and Strategy: common characteristics After defining and characterizing network changes, some parallels and common aspects with strategy can be highlighted. Indeed, network changes and strategy reveal likeness in the vocabulary used and the characteristics studied by the members of the IMP group and the organizational strategy theorists Importance of strategic change and network change The first comparison between strategy and network change is the question to what extent strategic changes influence its environment and to what extent the network changes can modify the relationships of a firm. [...]
[...] This new parallel between network change and strategy shows how both subjects are linked Industry context versus role of firms in network change Finally, a third common characteristic between strategy and network change is the role of firms confronted to their environment. Both strategy and network change wonder if companies can and/or have to play a role of driver to get an influence on the environment or if they are more followers. From the strategy perspective, this debated point is summed up in the paradox between choice and compliance in reaction to the industry context. [...]
[...] The central question of this paper is how the network change and the strategy are linked. We will base our argumentations on the researches of the IMP group in the field of industrial network and on the strategy theorists. The structure of this paper is as follows. First, we want to explain the main characteristic of the network changes and its importance in the field of network studies. Than we want to focus on the common characteristics of the network changes and the strategy. [...]
[...] how strategy and network change are linked. It would be so a failure to conclude that strategy and industrial network focus exactly on the same questions and are two identical subjects. A second limit of the paper and critic that can be made is the problem of comparing network change with the whole domain of strategy and not only strategic change. Indeed, the paper shows how strategy, which is a complex set of thoughts, decisions and actions depending on the context (the industry and organizational context), is linked with network change, that is more focused on the idea of transformation and a moving state. [...]
[...] The three elements of the ARA model are influenced by strategic decisions, which lead to network changes Limits and critics of the study This paper shows how strategy and network change are linked. The works of the IMP group and the strategy theorists seem to focus on mutual points, like the common characteristics of strategy and network change and the reciprocal interaction of the both study subjects. Raising similar questions, using same models like the punctuated equilibrium one or pointing out identical paradoxes, the two study domains are linked and help them mutually. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
