مقاله سال ۲۰۱۶

There have been few productive attempts to study both the structure and process of thought simultaneously. Studying one has meant deemphasizing or assuming away the other. Thus, there are few theoretical frameworks for linking structure and process together in a meaningful and useful way. (Meindl, Stubbart, & Porac, 1994) In the 1990s, many traditional production-sector companies in Europe moved their production operations to emerging markets. Traditional paper industries in Northern Europe suffered from this investment-allocation shift, which caused difficult setbacks for affected localities and regions. The studied case concerns the reorganization of one of the Swedish industrial sites of the multinational corporation (MNC) MoDo, located on the northwestern shore of the Gulf of Bothnia. The shift in investment allocation led to a reorganization process driven by a group of managers cooperating in a network context.

This paper contributes to business network theory by examining the dynamic process of network reconfiguration. As claimed by Tikkanen and Alajoutsijarvi (2002 € , p. 26), “it is essential to learn about how relationships and networks have emerged and developed in order to be able to understand their current forms and the related problems fully”. The aim is to identify critical events in the reconfiguration process, including the sensemaking (Weick, 1995) and sensegiving processes of key actors, and how these events and processes in turn advance network-related actions and thus the process of reconfiguration (Halinen, Medlin, & Tornroos, 2012; € Pettigrew, 1992, 1997; Van de Ven & Poole, 1995). In line with previous studies of network dynamics (e.g. Halinen, Tornroos, € & Elo, 2013; Havila & Salmi, 2000; Havila, Salmi, & Havila, 1999; Quintens & Matthyssens, 2010), we define critical events as those with a decisive impact on relationship development in a dyad or connected network of business actors.

The business network approach acknowledges markets as sets of connected exchange relationships (Anderson, Håkansson, & Johanson, 1994; Cook & Emerson, 1978; Håkansson & Snehota, 1995). It has been observed that the role of individual actors may be very important (Alajoutsijarvi, M € oller, € & Rosenbroijer, 1999 € ) and that “using different levels of analysis is a positive endeavour as long as the different results are connected to a greater picture” (Wilke & Ritter, 2006, p. 45). Nevertheless, most research has concentrated on business dyads (Henneberg, Naude,
& Mouzas, 2010) and downplayed the role of individuals, predominantly referring to the company as an actor. The scope of this paper is broader, addressing a historical reconfiguration in terms of a shift from a single basic industrial activity in a specific location to another, network-based and R&D-focused, one. We thereby also contribute by addressing the gap in studies of different dimensions of network orchestrating (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Olander, & Blomqvist, 2012). The key concepts that add to previous knowledge of network development are: timeespace relatedness, the unfolding of a process comprising the initiatives of individual actors, how they handle critical events, and the joint agency of their network cooperation.