PL EN
PRACA POGLĄDOWA
Pozycja sieciowa firmy a wyniki biznesowe
 
Więcej
Ukryj
1
Department of International Marketing, Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poland
AUTOR DO KORESPONDENCJI
Łukasz Małys   

Department of International Marketing, Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poland
Data nadesłania: 17-11-2020
Data ostatniej rewizji: 08-02-2021
Data akceptacji: 18-03-2021
Data publikacji: 29-06-2021
 
GNPJE 2021;306(2):51–66
 
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
KODY KLASYFIKACJI JEL
M10
M20
 
STRESZCZENIE
Koncepcja sieci biznesowych cieszy się w ostatnich latach coraz większym zainteresowaniem. Zakłada, że przewaga konkurencyjna firmy zależy m.in. od jej relacji biznesowych z różnymi podmiotami. Jakość i liczba utrzymywanych przez firmę relacji biznesowych kształtują jej pozycję w sieci, która wpływa na wyniki firmy. Celem artykułu jest zaproponowanie ram analizy procesu kształtowania pozycji firmy w sieci biznesowej w kontekście wyników firmy. W artykule zastosowano jedną z metod przeglądu literatury ukierunkowaną na tworzenie nowych koncepcji. Opierając się na krytycznej analizie literatury i wcześniejszych badaniach autorów, zaproponowana koncepcja zakłada, że pozycja firmy w sieci stale się zmienia ze względu na ciągłe zmiany w opisanych determinantach pozycji sieci oraz ciągłe zmiany zachowania formy w odniesieniu do rozwoju pozycji w sieci. Z kolei zmiany w pozycji sieci mają wpływ na wyniki firmy.
 
REFERENCJE (59)
1.
Andersson U., Forsgren M., Holm U. [2015], Balancing Subsidiary Influence in the Federative MNC: A Business Network View, in: M. Forsgren, U. Holm, J. Johanson (eds.), Knowledge, Networks and Power, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
 
2.
Anderson H., Havila V., Andersen P., Halinen A. [1998], Position and role: conceptualizing dynamics in business networks, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Pergamon, 14 (3): 167–186.
 
3.
Baraldi E., Brennan R., Harrison D., Tunisini A., Zolkiewski J. [2007], Strategic thinking and the IMP approach: A comparative analysis, Industrial Marketing Management, 36 (7): 879–894.
 
4.
Baraldi E. [2008], Strategy in Industrial Networks: Experiences from IKEA, California Management Review, 50 (4): 99–126.
 
5.
Baraldi E., Proença J. F., Proença T., De Castro, L. M. [2014], The supplier’s side of outsourcing: Taking over activities and blurring organizational boundaries, Industrial Marketing Management, Elsevier, 43 (4): 553–563. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.02.012.
 
6.
Baraldi E., Ratajczak-Mrozek M. [2019], From supplier to center of excellence and beyond: The network position development of a business unit within “IKEA Industry”, Journal of Business Research. Elsevier, 100: 1–15.
 
7.
Björk J., Magnusson M. [2009], Where do good innovation ideas come from? Exploring the influence of network connectivity on innovation idea quality, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Wiley Online Library, 26 (6): 662–670.
 
8.
Borgatti S. P., Brass D., Halgin, D., [2014], Social Network Research: Confusions, Criticisms, and Controversies, Contemporary Perspectives on Organizational Social Networks (Research in the Sociology of Organizations), 40: 1–29.
 
9.
Borgatti S. P., Foster P. C., [2003], The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 29 (6): 991–1013.
 
10.
Bresciani S., Ferraris A. [2016], Innovation-receiving subsidiaries and dual embeddedness: impact on business performance, Baltic Journal of Management, 11 (1): 108–130. doi: 10.1108/ BJM-11-2014–0200.
 
11.
Cantner U., Joel K. [2011], Network Position, Absorptive Capacity and Firm Success, IUP Journal of Knowledge Management, Hyderabad: IUP Publications, 9 (1): 57–83.
 
12.
Carrington P. J., Scott J., Wasserman S. (eds.) [2005], Models and methods in social network analysis, 28, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
 
13.
Chen F., Li X., Meng Q. [2019], Integration, network and industrial innovation in technology sourcing overseas M&A: a comparison between China and South Korea, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 31 (1): 1168–1183.
 
14.
Child J., Möllering G. [2003], Contextual confidence and active trust development in the Chinese business environment, Organization Science, 14 (1): 69–80.
 
15.
Ciabuschi F., Holm U., Martín O. [2014], Dual embeddedness, influence and performance of innovating subsidiaries in the multinational corporation, International Business Review, 23 (5): 897–909.
 
16.
Czakon W., Kawa A. [2018], Network myopia: an empirical study of network perception, Industrial Marketing Management, 73: 116–124.
 
17.
Figueiredo P. N. [2011], The Role of Dual Embeddedness in the Innovative Performance of MNE Subsidiaries: Evidence from Brazil, Journal of Management Studies, 48 (2): 417–440.
 
18.
Fahy J., Hooley G. J., Cox T., Beracs J., Fonfara K., Snoj, B. [2000], The development and impact of marketing capabilities in Central Europe, Journal of International Business Studies, 31 (1): 63–81.
 
19.
Fonfara K., Małys Ł., Ratajczak-Mrozek M. (eds.) [2018], The Internationalisation Maturity of the Firm – A Business Relationships Perspective, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
 
20.
Fonfara K., Ratajczak-Mrozek M., Leszczyński, G. [2018], Change in business relationships and networks: Concepts and business reality, Industrial Marketing Management, 70 (October 2017): 1–4.
 
21.
Ford D., Gadde L. E., Håkansson H., Snehota I. [2011], Managing business relationships, 3 rd ed., Chicester, UK: Wiley.
 
22.
Gadde L. E., Hjelmgren D., Skarp F. [2012], Interactive resource development in new business relationships, Journal of Business Research, 65 (2): 210–217.
 
23.
Gilson L. L., Gilberg C. B. [2015], Editors’ Comment: So, What Is a Conceptual Paper?, Group and Organization Management, 40 (2): 127–130.
 
24.
Håkansson H., Ford D., Gadde L. E., Snehota I., Waluszewski A. [2009], Business in Networks, Chichester: Wiley.
 
25.
Håkansson H., Eriksson A. K. [1993], Getting innovations out of the supplier networks, Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, Taylor and Francis, 1 (3): 3–34.
 
26.
Håkansson H., Ford D. [2002], How should companies interact in business networks?, Journal of Business Research, 55 (2): 133–139.
 
27.
Håkansson H., Snehota I. [1995], Developing Relationships in Business Networks, London: Routledge.
 
28.
Hilmersson M., Jansson H. [2012], International network extension processes to institutionally different markets: Entry nodes and processes of exporting SMEs, International Business Review, 21 (4): 682–693.
 
29.
Holm D. B., Eriksson K., Johanson J. [1999], Creating value through mutual commitment to business network relationships, Strategic Management Journal, 20 (5): 467–486.
 
30.
Hooley G. J., Möller K., Broderick A. [1997], Competitive Positioning and the Resource Based View of the Firm, RP9726, Aston Business School, Birmingham.
 
31.
Hoque Z., James W. [2000], Linking balanced scorecard measures to size and market factors: impact on organizational performance, Journal of Management Accounting Research, 12 (1): 1–17.
 
32.
Jackson M. [2008], Social and Economic Networks, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
 
33.
Jiang X., Liu H., Fey C., Jiang F. [2018], Entrepreneurial orientation, network resource acquisition, and firm performance: A network approach, Journal of Business Research, 87: 46–57.
 
34.
Johanson J., Mattsson L. G. [1987], Interorganizational Relations in Industrial Systems: A Network Approach Compared with the Transaction-Cost Approach, International Studies of Management and Organization, 17 (1): 34–48.
 
35.
Johanson J., Vahlne J. E. [2009], The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership, Journal of International Business Studies, 40 (9): 1411–1431.
 
36.
Kennedy M. M. [2007], Defining a Literature, Educational Researcher, 36 (3): 139–147.
 
37.
Kim H. S. [2019], How a firm’s position in a whole network affects innovation performance, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 31 (2): 155–168.
 
38.
Leonidou L. C., Katsikeas C. S., Hadjimarcou J. [2002], Executive insights: Building successful export business relationships: A behavioral perspective, Journal of International Marketing, 10 (3): 96–115.
 
39.
Małys Ł., Fonfara K. [2019], From intermediary relationship to multiple relationships – option of developing the network position in the internationalisation process. An exploratory study of a Polish food company, Olsztyn Economic Journal, 14 (2): 209–221.
 
40.
Matear S., Gray B. J., Garrett T. [2004], Market orientation, brand investment, new service development, market position and performance for service organisations, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 15 (3): 284–301.
 
41.
Mota J., de Castro L. M., Brito C. [2016], “Powered by… whom?” A network perspective on replication as strategy, Journal of Business Research, Elsevier Inc., 69 (11): 4732–4736.
 
42.
Morgan R. M., Hunt S. D. [1994], The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing, Journal of Marketing, 58 (3): 20–38.
 
43.
Olsen P. I., Prenkert F., Hoholm T., Harrison D. [2014], The dynamics of networked power in a concentrated business network, Journal of Business Research, Elsevier Inc., 67 (12): 2579–2589.
 
44.
Pierścionek Z. [2011], Zarządzanie strategiczne w przedsiębiorstwie, Warszawa: WN PWN.
 
45.
Porter M. E. [1985], Competitive Advantage, The Free Press, New York, NY.
 
46.
Ratajczak-Mrozek M. [2015], The SME perspective on motives and success factors in cross-border mergers: The importance of network position, IMP Journal, 9 (2): 136–162.
 
47.
Ratajczak-Mrozek M. [2017], Network Embeddedness. Examining the Effect on Business Performance and Internationalization, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
 
48.
Rocco T. S., Plakhotnik M. S. [2009], Literature Reviews, Conceptual Frameworks, and Theoretical Frameworks: Terms, Functions, and Distinctions, Human Resource Development Review, 8 (1): 120–130.
 
49.
Seiler A., Papanagnou C., Scarf P. [2020], On the relationship between financial performance and position of businesses in supply chain networks, International Journal of Production Economics, 227: 107–690.
 
50.
Siemieniako D., Mitręga M. [2018], Improving power position with regard to non-mediated power sources – the supplier’s perspective, Industrial Marketing Management, 70: 90–100.
 
51.
Söderqvist A., Chetty S. [2013], Strength of ties involved in international new ventures, European Business Review, 25 (6): 536–552.
 
52.
Tichy N. M., Tushman M. L., Fombrun C. [1979], Social network analysis for organizations, Academy of Management Review, 4 (4): 507–519.
 
53.
Torraco R. J. [2005], Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples, Human Resource Development Review, 4: 356–367.
 
54.
Tsai W. [2001], Knowledge Transfer in Intraorganizational Networks: Effects of Network Position and Absorptive Capacity on Business Unit Innovation and Performance, Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5): 996–1004.
 
55.
Ulaga W., Eggert A. [2006], Relationship value and relationship quality: Broadening the nomological network of business-to-business relationships, European Journal of Marketing, 40 (3–4): 311–327.
 
56.
Wasserman S., Faust K. [1994], Social network analysis: Methods and applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
 
57.
Yamin M., Kurt Y. [2018], Revisiting the Uppsala internationalization model: Social network theory and overcoming the liability of outsidership, International Marketing Review, 35 (1): 2–17.
 
58.
Zabkar V., Brencic M. M. [2004], Values, trust, and commitment in business-to-business relationships, International Marketing Review.
 
59.
Zaheer A., Bell G. G. [2005], Benefiting from network position: Firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance, Strategic Management Journal, 26 (9): 809–825.
 
eISSN:2300-5238
ISSN:0867-0005