Go to main content
Harvard Business School
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions

Faculty & Research

  • HOME
  • FACULTY
  • RESEARCH
    • Global Research Centers
    • HBS Case Collection
    • HBS Case Development
    • Initiatives & Projects
    • Publications
    • Research Associate (RA) Positions
    • Research Services
    • Seminars & Conferences
    Close
  • FEATURED TOPICS
    • Business and Environment
    • Business History
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Finance
    • Globalization
    • Health Care
    • Human Behavior and Decision-Making
    • Leadership
    • Social Enterprise
    • Technology and Innovation
    Close
  • ACADEMIC UNITS
    • Accounting and Management
    • Business, Government and the International Economy
    • Entrepreneurial Management
    • Finance
    • General Management
    • Marketing
    • Negotiation, Organizations & Markets
    • Organizational Behavior
    • Strategy
    • Technology and Operations Management
    Close

Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2019

Field-Level Paradox and the Co-Evolution of an Entrepreneurial Vision

by Ryan Raffaelli and Richard DeJordy

  • Print
  • Email

Abstract

This paper examines how entrepreneurs embrace field-level paradoxes in order to adapt and preserve aspects of a field’s past success in the wake of technological change. Drawing on the decline and rise of Swiss watchmaking in response to competition from less expensive quartz watches from Japan, we characterize how field-level paradoxes can foster adaptation after an environmental jolt. Prior research has focused on organizational-level paradox management; by contrast, we induce a set of four paradoxes at the field level: two based in tensions over material aspects of the field (paradoxes of production and profit) and two whose tensions are substantively symbolic in nature (paradoxes of the profession and the past). Grounded in ethnographic interviews, archival data, and immersive field work, our model and findings trace how two actors influential in the evolution of the field—Nicolas Hayek and Jean-Claude Biver—each created an organization that embraced a pair of paradoxes in the material and symbolic realms respectively. Unexpectedly, the subsequent merger of these organizations triggered accommodation of these paradoxes via various dialectics. We advance a novel process whereby leaders who accommodate cross-realm paradoxes and divergent visions can establish templates that allow for field adaptation through sustained paradox.

Keywords: Paradox; industry evolution; strategic contradiction; qualitative methods (general); institutional entrepreneurship; institutional guardianship; Adaptation; Leading Change; Technology Adoption; Manufacturing Industry; Switzerland;

Language: English Format: Print 66 pages Read Now

Citation:

Raffaelli, Ryan, and Richard DeJordy. "Field-Level Paradox and the Co-Evolution of an Entrepreneurial Vision." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 16-003, July 2019.

Related Work

  1. Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2019

    Field-Level Paradox and the Co-Evolution of an Entrepreneurial Vision

    Ryan Raffaelli and Richard DeJordy

    This paper examines how entrepreneurs embrace field-level paradoxes in order to adapt and preserve aspects of a field’s past success in the wake of technological change. Drawing on the decline and rise of Swiss watchmaking in response to competition from less expensive quartz watches from Japan, we characterize how field-level paradoxes can foster adaptation after an environmental jolt. Prior research has focused on organizational-level paradox management; by contrast, we induce a set of four paradoxes at the field level: two based in tensions over material aspects of the field (paradoxes of production and profit) and two whose tensions are substantively symbolic in nature (paradoxes of the profession and the past). Grounded in ethnographic interviews, archival data, and immersive field work, our model and findings trace how two actors influential in the evolution of the field—Nicolas Hayek and Jean-Claude Biver—each created an organization that embraced a pair of paradoxes in the material and symbolic realms respectively. Unexpectedly, the subsequent merger of these organizations triggered accommodation of these paradoxes via various dialectics. We advance a novel process whereby leaders who accommodate cross-realm paradoxes and divergent visions can establish templates that allow for field adaptation through sustained paradox.

    Keywords: Paradox; industry evolution; strategic contradiction; qualitative methods (general); institutional entrepreneurship; institutional guardianship; Adaptation; Leading Change; Technology Adoption; Manufacturing Industry; Switzerland;

    Citation:

    Raffaelli, Ryan, and Richard DeJordy. "Field-Level Paradox and the Co-Evolution of an Entrepreneurial Vision." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 16-003, July 2019.  View Details
    CiteView Details Read Now Related

About the Author

Photo
Ryan L. Raffaelli
Assistant Professor of Business Administration
Organizational Behavior

View Profile »
View Publications »

 

More from the Author

  • Article | Administrative Science Quarterly | September 2019

    Technology Reemergence: Creating New Value for Old Technologies in Swiss Mechanical Watchmaking, 1970-2008

    Ryan Raffaelli

    In 1983, 14 years after the introduction of the battery-powered quartz watch, mechanical watches and the Swiss watchmakers who built them were predicted to be obsolete (Landes, 1983). Unexpectedly, however, by 2008 the Swiss mechanical watchmaking industry had rematerialized to become the world’s leading exporter (in monetary value) of watches. This study reveals the process and mechanisms associated with technology reemergence, i.e., the resurgence of substantive and sustained demand for an old (legacy) technology following the introduction of a new dominant design. Drawing on the case of mechanical watchmaking, it reveals how technology reemergence is a decidedly cognitive process, unfolding in two phases: a first phase marked by a redefinition of the meanings and values associated with the legacy technology and facilitated by mechanisms of value recombining, temporal distancing, identity marking, and conceptual bridging and a second phase marked by a redefinition of market boundaries and facilitated by mechanisms of competitive set reclaiming and enthusiast consumer mobilizing. For mechanical watchmakers, the process culminated in competitive and consumer differentiation that ushered in innovation reinvestment and a period of substantive and sustained demand growth for mechanical watches. This paper contributes to research on technology cycles, cognition, and incumbent responses to discontinuous change.

    Keywords: technology reemergence; technology cycles; cognition and market redefinition; legacy technology trajectories; Technology; Demand and Consumers; Organizational Change and Adaptation; Identity; Change; Consumer Products Industry; Switzerland;

    Citation:

    Raffaelli, Ryan. "Technology Reemergence: Creating New Value for Old Technologies in Swiss Mechanical Watchmaking, 1970-2008." Administrative Science Quarterly 64, no. 3 (September 2019): 576–618.  View Details
    CiteView DetailsFind at Harvard Read Now Related
  • Article | Strategic Management Journal

    Frame Flexibility: The Role of Cognitive and Emotional Framing in Innovation Adoption by Incumbent Firms

    Ryan Raffaelli, Mary Ann Glynn and Michael Tushman

    Why do incumbent firms frequently reject nonincremental innovations? Beyond technical, structural, or economic factors, we propose an additional factor: the degree of the top management team's (TMT) frame flexibility, i.e., their capability to cognitively expand an innovation's categorical boundaries and to cast the innovation as emotionally resonant with the organization's identity, competencies, and competitive boundaries. We argue that inertial forces generally constrict how TMTs perceive innovations but that frame flexibility can overcome these constraints, increasing the likelihood of adoption and broadening the organization's innovation practices. We advance a theoretical model that relaxes the assumption that cognitive frames are static, showing how they become flexible via categorical positioning, and introduce a role for emotional frames that appeals to organizational members' sentiments and aspirations in innovation adoption.

    Keywords: innovation adoption; cognition; framing; emotional resonance; incumbent inertia; Innovation and Invention; Technology Adoption; Organizational Change and Adaptation; Change Management;

    Citation:

    Raffaelli, Ryan, Mary Ann Glynn, and Michael Tushman. "Frame Flexibility: The Role of Cognitive and Emotional Framing in Innovation Adoption by Incumbent Firms." Strategic Management Journal 40, no. 7 (July 2019): 1013–1039.  View Details
    CiteView DetailsFind at HarvardPurchase Related
  • Case | HBS Case Collection | April 2016 (Revised March 2019)

    Moleskine (A)

    Ryan Raffaelli, Raffaella Sadun and Kathy Qu

    Describes the founding and growth challenges facing Moleskine, an Italian-based consumer products company known for its oilcloth-covered notebooks once used by Ernest Hemingway and Vincent van Gogh. CEO Arrigo Berni and co-founder Maria Sebregondi aim to transform the company from a founder-led company to a professionally managed firm by expanding into new geographies, product categories, and distribution channels. They have also recently developed several strategic partnerships with Silicon Valley firms to expand into an array of digital products. However, after going public, stock prices continue to fluctuate below analysts' expectations, raising concerns about whether the company has grown too quickly. The leaders must now decide how to expand the firm's capabilities while continuing to preserve its organizational identity and creative culture.

    Keywords: Creative Industries; brand building; Digital Innovation; digital services and strategy; process improvement; culture; Identity Construction; innovation; Growth and Development Strategy; Leadership; Organizational Change and Adaptation; Organizational Culture; Innovation Strategy; Consumer Products Industry;

    Citation:

    Raffaelli, Ryan, Raffaella Sadun, and Kathy Qu. "Moleskine (A)." Harvard Business School Case 716-407, April 2016. (Revised March 2019.)  View Details
    CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase Related
ǁ
Campus Map
Campus Map
Harvard Business School
Soldiers Field
Boston, MA 02163
→ Map & Directions
→ More Contact Information
→ More Contact Information
→ More Contact Information
→ More Contact Information
  • HBS Facebook
  • Alumni Facebook
  • Executive Education Facebook
  • Michael Porter Facebook
  • Working Knowledge Facebook
  • HBS Twitter
  • Executive Education Twitter
  • HBS Alumni Twitter
  • Michael Porter Twitter
  • Recruiting Twitter
  • Rock Center Twitter
  • Working Knowledge Twitter
  • Jobs Twitter
  • Social Enterprise Twitter
  • HBS Youtube
  • Michael Porter Youtube
  • Executive Education Youtube
  • HBS Linkedin
  • Alumni Linkedin
  • Executive Education Linkedin
  • MBA Linkedin
  • Linkedin
  • HBS Instagram
  • Alumni Instagram
  • Executive Education Instagram
  • Michael Porter Instagram
  • HBS iTunes
  • Executive Education iTunes
  • HBS Tumblr
  • Make a Gift
  • Site Map
  • Jobs
  • Harvard University
  • Trademarks
  • Policies
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Use
Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College