Conceptual Framework - Essay Example

Conceptual framework Theoretical or Conceptual Framework In qualitative studies, the conceptual framework illustrates the ideas from the literature that grounds the research being conducted. This is embodied on the determination of an appropriate theory that will illustrate the concepts under study in a subjective manner. Theories are general knowledge bodies that help in explaining and predicting a phenomenon and showing how the study will be related to the existing knowledge. This study is informed by the Disruptive Innovation Theory.

This is a theory that was coined by Clayton M. Christensen in the year 1995 (Ekekwe & Islam, 2012). The disruptive innovation theory describes the process by which a product or service takes root initially in the market, in the form of uncomplicated applications, and then moves up the market in a relentless manner. The new product disrupts the entire market and existing value network and as well displaces the earlier technology and competitors. A disruptive innovation allows the whole population access to a whole new product that was initially historically accessible to a specific set of consumer with a lot of money.

Business or companies can also be disruptive, and when in this nature the expected characteristics would be that, at least in the initial stages, of smaller target markets, lower gross margin, and products or services that may appear simple and unattractive solutions when compared to the traditional performance metrics (Fannin, 2012). Usually companies tend to innovate faster even than the rate at which their customers’ lives change. In such instances, an organization would end up eventually producing the products and services that are too expensive, good, and inconvenient for most of the customers.

Pursuit of sustainable innovation has perpetuated what has helped companies historically to be established in new market such as India and succeed in their production endeavors. Ideally, companies have unwittingly, in most occasions, opened their doors to disruptive innovations and not sustaining innovation which in itself does not lead to the creation of new markets or value networks but, evolve the existing ones with better value. Generally, according to this theory, companies that are well managed and quick to respond to their clientele and have exceptional research and improvement can be impaired by disruptive innovation (Evans, 2002).

The relation of this theory to my study is based on the apprehension of the actuality that, in India, new companies have sprang up in the recent past that have introduced new products in the market and targeted consumers from a different perspective all together than that which was initially in existence. Basing on the range of unique factors that have contributed to the growth of companies in India based on the relevance to international trade, processes such as economic liberalization and globalization that have contributed to growth in the country have been based on the adoption of disruptive innovation theory principles by the various organizations in the country (Kachru, 2005).

This theory further offers a deeper understanding of the business culture in a country in relation to technological adoption, and as such when engaged in India, it offers an immediate demand for a deeper connection to the culture, attitude, and philosophies underlying performance of business in the country. It is on this foundation that I have chosen this theory to relate it to the organizational growth strategies in India and the various negotiation styles as discussed in this study. The expectation of the research is to analyze the negotiation styles in India that organizations can adopt, and this management theory ties up to that by ensuring that the country remains an international destination for commerce by new foreign companies.

By changing the performance portfolio of a technology firms can be able to provide new value propositions to the existing network of customers in India (Hitt, Ireland, & Hoskisson, 2008).ReferencesEkekwe, N., & Islam, N. (2012). Disruptive technologies, innovation and global redesign: Emerging implications. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.Evans, N. D. (2002). Business innovation and disruptive technology: Harnessing the power of breakthrough technology-- for competitive advantage. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times Prentice Hall.Fannin, R. A. (2012). Startup Asia: Top strategies for cashing in on the Asian innovation boom.

Hoboken, N.J: Wiley.Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2008). Strategic management: Competitiveness and globalization. Mason, Ohio: South-Western.Kachru, U. (2005). Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases. New Delhi: Excel Books.