How the Network Models Affect the Relational Models - Essay Example

Article review Name Course University Date Objectives of the article One of the objectives of this article is to determine what combination of models and initiatives industries can employ to ensure success of the organizations in network development. Some industries always lead in giving direction of network development. They are always informed of any new network developments and become the leader in using and shaping the directions the networks will take (Low and Johnston, 2011, p.3). Other firms prefer to retain their existing network positions so that their operations are not affected by the new network developments. These firms risk losing the benefits of the new technology. They also risk failing to meet their clients’ needs leading to declined profits and opportunities. This article, aims to shed light on how organizations can use different models and initiatives to build for the future while at the same time, maintaining a strong commitment to the past (Day and Schoemaker, 2004, p.32). The second objective of this paper is to demonstrate how the network models affect the relational models in which different businesses find themselves into (Low and Johnston, 2011, p.3). As different firms start taking actions on the new and emerging technologies, tension tends to build up. The article seeks to explain how a firm’s network structure and position through juxtaposition creates the tension in the organization. This tension, in return, influences all the actions taken by the organization with relation to future actions on emergent technology. Every organization operates within the tension resulting from the actions and structure of the firm or from the firms’ structural positions, which are affected by the actions of other firms. The third objective is to determine the importance of an organization staying in the leading front on emerging technologies (Low and Johnston, 2011, p.7). As the technologies and business network structures and positions change, so does the competition with new and emergent markets and technologies. For this reason, it is important for the firms to be able to plan for new technologies. This article aims to give information to the managers on how to make decisions relating to the new technologies in the midst of problems arising from trying to balance the familiar market trends and positions and the unfamiliar market trends presented by the new technologies. Successful firms always go through these problems but emerge successful. They set the trend for other firms to follow, and by the time other firms are going through the problems, the leading firms are already established and enjoying the benefits of the new networks (Low and Johnston, 2011, p.3). Underlying theories of the article The main theory in this article relates to the networks. New technologies and network are developing every day and firms have to make decisions as to whether to retain the same technological networks in place or to invest in new technologies that will ensure efficiency in resource utilization and effectiveness of the firm with relation to how they relate with firms that need their resources (Low and Johnston, 2011, p.6). The article holds that firms should go for network models that ensure that the firms retain their past models while at the same time integrating new network models and structures. Firms will experience some problems when trying to integrate the new network and emergent technologies but eventually they benefit from effectiveness and efficiency in resource utilization and allocation. Network positions and structure of a firm are constantly characterized by tension. The structure of the firm is a result of the actions taken by the firm. As the firms try to balance the internal and external interdependencies, tension arises. The result of this is that the network structure in the organization changes. There are also tensions with the network positions of a firm. Firms constantly build, replicate, and change network positions due to the activities and actions of other firms. The position of the networks is greatly determined by the positions of other firms and this creates tensions. This is because, most firms follow the actions of others and this creates some sort of instability in the position, before the firms can get accustomed to the new networks (Low and Johnston, 2011, p.6). Network positions are a continuous process and changes from time to time. The network structure and position in a firm shape and reshape frequently due to the actions by the management of the firms. The paradoxical tensions also define the shape and structure of networks in different firms. These tensions provide limitations and opportunities for the firms’ consequent actions (Ford, 2002, p.251). From this analysis, this article illustrates the theory that network positioning and structures are a continuous process, which will remain as so, for as long as there are new and emerging technologies. Networks position and structure of a firm are also determined by the actions of other firms in the same industry. For this reason, companies form partnerships and mergers with other companies in the same industry. This results to some companies influencing and controlling others to their benefit. This affects the effectiveness of the operations of the firm and the whole network (Ford, 2002, p.253). Managerial implications It is important for the management of firms to realize that there is no single best approach in determining the network position and structure (Day and Schoemaker, 2004, p.33). While a conservative firm may prefer to ignore the new technologies and networks to retain their supply mechanisms and service delivery, they may not benefit from opportunities presented by new technologies and networks like faster service delivery and effective supply mechanisms. On the other hand, the leading firms in adopting new technologies may experience problems with integrating new system into the existing one, since it cannot be done all at once. Therefore, it is important for the firm to come up with strategies that assist the firm to integrate new networks while retaining the existing ones with minimal problems (Burgelman, Christensen and Wheelwright, 2008, p.379). According to Day and Schoemaker (2004, p.34) another managerial implication is technological and network changes takes place across different companies. Therefore, it is important for the firm to analyze its positions with relation to other firms in the same industry. Firms must realize that change cannot be achieved though a single firm but through all the firms in the industry. Another managerial implication with network paradoxes is that with network developments, relationships, and interactions between firms is strengthened. This provides opportunities for investments in resources and capabilities. However, this great interaction may limit the firms’ capability to act independently and impose limitations on the firm’s autonomy. As networks and technologies continue to develop, firms develop relationships with other firms using the same networks. Some managers will establish relationships with other firms for manipulative purposes only. In this case, the managers want to take advantage of the networks to develop their firms (Burgelman, Christensen and Wheelwright, 2008, p.357). These self-centred actions by some companies can become dysfunctional when other firms realize this intention. The other firms will hold their strategic intent of the relationship and lock out the firms with selfish intentions. This firms stands to lose from the benefits got from the relations. Managers should realize when the relationships are built for the purposes of the networks; there are chances of being influenced by other firms (Day and Schoemaker, 2004, p.33). Managers should also realize that there are companies in the network that tend to control others. This can be a counter-productive strategy and may affect the operations of the whole network and the firm seeking to control the others. The truth is, whenever a firm tries to gain control over other firms, the more ineffective the network becomes. Limitations of the article This article gives theoretical illustrations of how firms can manage their industrial networks, how to manage network paradoxes and contradictions that influence business relation models and discusses the importance of a firm being on the edge of emerging technology. The article describes the tensions that companies go through in structuring and positioning their networks (Low and Johnston, 2011, p.6). However, this article has several limitations. One of the limitations is that the article uses rational comprehensive approach in its theory. The theoretical practices may not be applicable in reality since such practices assume intellectual capacities and sources of information that most firms may not possess. The article also gives the theoretical review of the causes of tension relating to the network positions and structures. However, the article does not address the solutions to these tensions. It fails to give suggestions to the managers on how to manage and deal with the tensions and how they can use the tension to develop the best networks for the company (Geersbro and Ritter, 2010, p.93). Limitation of this methodology is that cases used are ideal and critical and the process of interest is transparently observable. This is a limitation because most firms operate under normal conditions and it is not easy to get a firm that operates under an ideal condition. Companies embrace this technology in different ways (Koons, 1992, p.46). This paper is up to standard and it is very necessary especially in networking companies that need a comprehensive knowledge on networking structure. It is also recommended for managers who need to develop a strategy on how to face the current emerging technology (Koons, 1992, p.49). The other limitation of this article is that the paper fails to give detailed information on some issues, while it places so much emphasis on other. This article was about Emergent technologies, network paradoxes, and incrementalism. However, the article concentrates more on the network paradoxes and emergent technologies. The article gives details of network paradoxes and emergent technologies and how they affect the operations of the company. However, Very little information is given about incrementalism in the article and this leaves the reader wondering what the author intended to say about it (Geersbro and Ritter, 2010, p.91). It only appears at the end of the article without detailed information about it. References Burgelman, R, Christensen, C and Wheelwright, S 2008. Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation, London: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Day, S and Schoemaker, P 2004. Wharton on Managing Emerging Technologies, London: John Wiley and Sons. Ford, D 2002. Understanding business marketing and purchasing: an interaction approach, New York, Centage Learning EMEA. Geersbro, J and Ritter, T 2010, External performance barriers in business networks, New York, Cengage Learning. Koons, R 1992 Paradoxes of belief and strategic rationality, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Low, B and Johnston, W 2011, Emergent technologies network paradoxes and Incrementalisms, New York, Sage. Read More