An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective

An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.An investigation into the logic of artisan product innovation: An institutional logics perspective.

NATIONAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY



NGUYEN VAN DAI

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE LOGIC

OF ARTISAN PRODUCT INNOVATION:

AN INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS PERSPECTIVE

PHD DISSERTATION

IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

(E-PHD PROGRAM)

HANOI - 2023

NATIONAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY



NGUYEN VAN DAI

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE LOGIC

OF ARTISAN PRODUCT INNOVATION:

Specialization: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

(E-PhD Program) Specialization code: 9340101

PHD DISSERTATION

Supervisors:

1 PROFESSOR NGUYEN THI TUYET MAI

2 DR NGUYEN QUYNH HOA

HANOI - 2023

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this PhD dissertation is my work To the best of my knowledge, this dissertation has never been submitted, in whole or in part, to any other educational institution for a degree or a diploma Except where specified otherwise by acknowledgment or reference, the work presented is entirely my own I also certify that all of this PhD dissertation’s references have been properly credited

I have read and comprehended the University’s policy on plagiarism and academic integrity violations With my honor, I certify that the current PhD dissertation does not violate regulations on academic integrity

PhD candidate

(Signed)

First of all, being part of E-PhD Program at the Institute for Sustainable Development (ISD) is a wonderful and fortunate chance for me E-PhD Program is not only a program, but also a research community of talented researchers who like to challenge themselves with PhD (Permanent Head Damage, just kidding!) Although I had an initial background in research in my previous studies, I found myself more mature, understanding more about research as well as the limitations of my research ability Professor Thang.V Nguyen, Professor Nguyen Thi Tuyet Mai, Assoc Prof Le Quang Canh, Assoc Prof Nguyen Vu Hung, Assoc Prof Bach Ngoc Thang and ISD staffs are my teachers, brothers and sisters whom I admire for their talents, research ethics, dedication and great support for PhD students like me

I would like to thank leaders and staff of NEU Graduate School for their great support during my PhD journey Special thanks go to Assoc Prof Le Trung Thanh, Assoc Prof Vu Thanh Huong, Dr Giao Thi Khanh Ngoc and Dr Do Tuyet Nhung for their wonderful support I thank my colleagues at the Faculty of Planning and Development for their valued support in my PhD journey

I would like to express my sincerest and deepest gratitude to my academic supervisors, Professor Nguyen Thi Tuyet Mai (Institute for Sustainable Development, NEU), Assoc Prof Phan Thi Thuc Anh (AIC, VinUniversity) and Dr Nguyen Quynh Hoa (Head of Department of Development Economics, NEU) My instructors have provided valuable support and contributions to my dissertation They not only give me suggestions and support to develop my ideas but also challenge the ideas that I come up with by a constructive and open attitude For me, Assoc Prof Phan Thi Thuc Anh has always been a great academic supervisor She created an important connection for me

to access key informants in the research community I have great respect for her work ability and kindness Dr Nguyen Quynh Hoa is not only my academic supervisor, but also my great boss She supported me in the process of doing this dissertation and facilitated my work in the department allowing me to have more time for this research Thank you so much, Professor Nguyen Thi Tuyet Mai, you came at a time when I needed more research directions and you gave me more confidence in my research journey

I would like to express my respect and gratitude to Professor Thang.V Nguyen who commented and challenged my early research ideas His academic ability, attitude

towards colleagues, students and his work are a shining example for fellow students like

me

I would like to express my sincere thanks to the leaders of the faculty and the department as well as my colleagues in the Faculty of Planning and Development for creating a good condition for me to focus on completing the research Fellows of the E-PhD Program, especially the E-PhD04 became an important part of my PhD life They bring peer pressure, smile and spirit that pushed me forward Reviewers of the boards since I presented research proposals, research essays, faculty-level defense and even reviewers of the journals have provided me with important suggestions and critiques that help me complete my dissertation and papers though I sometimes felt stressful and skeptical about my ability

Thank you, Dr Trinh Mai Van, for your support and useful advice during my work and the implementation of this dissertation Thank you very much Thuy, Thao, Hieu and Ngoc for accompanying both before and during the crafting of this dissertation with delicious meals, funny hang-out and the sincerest words of encouragement

Special thanks go to the local community members who have given their valuable time and enthusiasm to share information and their view on the research topic I could not have completed the research without the enthusiasm and support of lecturer-cum-artist Ngo Ba Hoang and his wife, architect Van Anh, and local community member Dang Dinh Tuc I would like to express my deep gratitude to the artisans, ABOs, business owners, local citizens and customers who participated in this research as informants

I would like to thank my Sweetie Thank you for accompanying me on this arduous journey with joy, happiness, smiles and tears The past journey has been both a challenge but also an important and necessary milestone for us to grow together I feel guilty for not sharing my PhD journey with my parents I would like to thank my parents and younger brother for always being there for me and because they are healthy and safe, I am able to focus on my research

I have also received a generous and valuable financial support for the research process of the dissertation from the VINIF domestic master's and doctoral scholarship fund of VinGroup

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vii

APPENDICES viii

LIST OF FIGURES ix

LIST OF TABLES x

ABSTRACT xi

GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS xii

INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rationale of the research 1

2 Research objectives and questions 3

3 Subject and scope of the research 3

4 Research method 4

5 Structure of the dissertation 5

CHAPTER 1 THEORETICAL FOUNDATION AND LITERATURE REVIEW 7 1.1 Product innovation 7

1.1.1 Key definitions 7

1.1.2 Significance of product innovation 8

1.1.3 Degrees of product innovation 10

1.1.4 Sources of product innovation 11

1.2 Institutional logics 18

1.2.1 Institutional logics as a perspective 18

1.2.2 Review of logics in the existing literature 20

1.2.3 Compatibility between logics 28

1.2.4 Hybridity 29

1.2.5 Review of responses to logics 30

1.3 Artisan business as a hybrid organization 34

1.3.1 Artisan business in the contemporary context 34

1.3.2 Hybridity of artisan business 35

1.4 Counter-institutional identity 38

1.4.1 Conception of counter-institutional identity 39

1.4.2 Counter-institutional identities among artisan business 40

1.5 Research gap 42

1.6 General Analytical Framework 43

CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 45

2.1 Research context 45

2.1.1 Craft industry and development policy towards craft industries 45

2.1.2 Bat Trang as a Research Context 51

2.2 Research paradigm 52

2.3 Case study as research design 53

2.4 Sampling 54

2.5 Data collection 56

2.5.1 Preparatory phase 57

2.5.2 Official data collection phase 59

2.5.3 Description of Selected Cases 63

2.6 Data analysis 65

2.7 Validity and reliability of qualitative research 67

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH RESULTS 69

3.1 Product innovation 69

3.1.1 Product innovation as a Selective coupling 69

3.1.2 Core-Satellite as a new strategic response embedded in product innovation 74 3.2 Logics and institutional demands of logics 77

3.2.1 Matching process between practical data and ideal-type market logic and artisan logic 77

3.2.2 Institutional demands towards craft products 83

3.2.3 Compatibility between market logic and artisan logic 87

3.3 Counter-institutional identities among artisan business owners 93

3.3.1 Oppositional identity 94

3.3.2 Relational identity 102

3.4 Comparative counter-institutional Identities and Product Innovation 108

3.5 Summary of research results and findings 114

CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATION 114

4.1 Discussion of results 114

4.1.1 Varied nature of product innovation among artisan business 114

4.1.2 Fluid compatibility between logics 115

4.1.3 Ambidexterity of artisan businesses 117

4.2 Theoretical contributions of the research 118

4.2.1 Contribution to Institutional Logics Perspective 118

4.2.2 Contribution to Artisan Business Literature 120

4.3 Practical implications 120

4.3.1 Managerial implications 121

4.3.2 Government policy implications 124

4.4 Limitations and Future Research Agenda 127

4.4.1 Limitations of the research 127

4.4.2 Future Research Agenda 128

CONCLUSION 130

LIST OF WORKS RELATED TO THE DISSERTATION THAT THE PHD CANDIDATE HAS PUBLISHED 131

REFERENCES 132

APPENDICES 158

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABO(s) Artisan Business Owner(s)

API Artisan product innovation

CSR Corporate Social Responsibility

EC European Commission

MNC Multinational Companies

OECD The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development R&D Research and Development

ROA Return on Assets

SMEs Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises

The UK The United Kingdom

The USA The United States of America

UN The United Nations

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: The list of journals in the pool of reviewed papers 158

Appendix 2: Interview guideline 160

Appendix 3: Some further photos of research field trips 165

Appendix 4: Coding frame for market logic and artisan logic 166

Appendix 5: Coding frame for counter-institutional identity 167

Appendix 6: Coding frame for strategic response embedded in product innovation 167

Appendix 7: Example of coding process 168

Appendix 8: Example of Core-Satellite 172

Appendix 9: The claim of the ABO for their self 173

Appendix 10: Data triangulation that emphasizes customers’ tastes 174

Appendix 11: Matrix of nexus between identities and strategic responses embedded in product innovation among artisan businesses 174

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Research Process 5

Figure 1.1: The trend in key publications from 1991-2022 21

Figure 1.2: The sample of reviewed papers by research context 23

Figure 1.3: The number of context-specific studies 24

Figure 1.4: Analytical framework of product innovation in artisan business 44

Figure 2.1: Visualization of Research Procedure 45

Figure 2.2: Overview of key policy milestones for the artisan industry in Vietnam 48

Figure 2.3: Overview of data collection 57

Figure 2.4: Annual traditional village festival 62

Figure 2.5: Visitors in ceramic exhibition 62

Figure 2.7: Shaping vignette by manual labor 62

Figure 2.6: Shaping raw ceramics by manual labor 62

Figure 2.8: Overview of data analysis 66

Figure 3.1: Homeware ceramic with a new glaze 71

Figure 3.2: World-record craft plate and toad with a unique glaze and story 75

Figure 3.3: Contrast between two separated production sites 76

Figure 3.4: The engagement of two opposing views by ABO 91

Figure 3.5: Boundary of Market logic and Artisan Logic in product innovation 93

Figure 3.6: Manual work in ceramics production 96

Figure 3.7: local sharing of ceramic products 98

Figure 3.8: Legendary Tales and Village Convention in Bat Trang 100

Figure 3.9: Recognition of Bat Trang’s traditional ceramic community 101

Figure 3.10: Electric lamp made from ceramic with the drawing on historical legendary tales 106

Figure 3.11: Proposed framework of API in the multiple-logic context 111

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: In-brief statistics on small-scale business and manual labors in craft villages

in Vietnam in 2022 46

Table 2.2: Top exporters and importers of ceramic products in the world between 2018 and 2022 47

Table 2.3: In-brief demographic details of ABOs up to 2022 64

Table 2.4: In-brief demographic details of other informants 65

Table 3.1: Overview of the data structure for strategic responses embedded in product innovation 69

Table 3.2: Comparative analysis of product innovation among groups 73

Table 3.3: Attributes of market logic 78

Table 3.4: Attributes of Artisan Logic 82

Table 3.5: Institutional demands from market logic for craft products 84

Table 3.6: Institutional demands from artisan logic for craft production 86

Table 3.7: Perception of local citizens and customers 88

Table 3.8: The view of local artisans and business owners toward artisan ceramic products 90

Table 3.9: Overview of the data structure for oppositional identity 94

Table 3.10: Overview of the data structure for relational identity 102

Table 3.11: Matrix of comparative counter-institutional identity and strategic response embedded in product innovation 108

ABSTRACT

The main purpose of this PhD dissertation is to develop an analytical framework

to better understand how artisan products are innovated in artisan businesses Building

on institutional logics as an umbrella theory that incorporates counter-institutional identities, this study qualitatively investigates how artisan businesses undertake product innovation in light of direct guidance from counter-institutional identities in a multiple-logic context of the artisan industry

Applying a multi-case research design, this PhD dissertation scrutinizes product innovation among artisan businesses based in Bat Trang, Gia Lam, Hanoi, Vietnam as case studies Artisan ceramic products are reported to be more open to newness and also face the challenges of oldness The data sources of this study are comprised of a series of in-depth interviews with 15 ABOs in addition to interviews and talks with business owners, artisans, customers, and local citizens; notes (observation) through some research community visits; historical documents borrowed from the former local community leader which not only help triangulate data but also provide the author a better understanding of the research topic Qualitative primary data through interviews, talks, and notes are qualitatively coded and analyzed by employing thematic analysis (Gioia et al., 2012) and pattern-matching techniques (Reay & Jones, 2016) to examine product innovation in an institutionally complex context

The research findings of this dissertation have some contributions to the state of the art of institutional logics, identities, product innovation, and artisan business literature Accordingly, the current research identifies a wide range of degrees to which artisan businesses make changes to their products based on counter-institutional identities that show either who they are or who they are not as responding to different logics The current study also expands how compatibility of logics is conceptualized in the existing literature

by identifying the existence of a blended relationship between logics that creates a better condition for ABOs to traverse the larger room of product innovation A new response embedded in product innovation, Core-Satellite, identified in this research contributes to the literature of strategic responses to institutional logics The findings suggest that the comparative strength between counter-institutional identities will directly determine how product innovation is introduced to respond to logics The research findings can offer important implications for the ceramic industry and other artisan sub-industries that face

a dilemma between business growth and tradition

GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS

Artisan

To customize the notion and ensure consistency with the Vietnamese context, when the word “artisan” or “artisans” stands alone, it refers to those who are legally certified by state authorities and hold one of the certificates such as village, city, meritorious or people’s levels

Artisan business In this research, an artisan business implies a business owned by an artisan

who is legally certified by the Vietnamese legal system

Artisan/craft

product

UNESCO and ITC (1997, p.6) define craft or artisanal products “are those

produced by artisans, either completely by hand or with the help of hand tools or even mechanical means, as long as the direct manual contribution

of the artisan remains the most substantial component of the finished product These are produced without restriction in terms of quantity and using raw materials from sustainable resources The special nature of artisanal products derives from their distinctive features, which can be utilitarian, aesthetic, artistic, creative, culturally attached, decorative, functional, traditional, religiously and socially symbolic and significant.”

Counter-institutional

identity

“Values and principles that run counter to those associated with the

dominant institution and practices that are proudly construed in direct contrast to field norms” (Chreim et al., 2020, p.4)

Hybridity “The structural embodiment or incarnation of multiple logics” Kraatz and

Block (2008, p.244)

Institutional

demand

“Various pressures for conformity exerted by institutional referents on

organizations in a given field” (Pache & Santos, 2010, p.457)

Institutional logic

“The socially constructed, historical patterns of material practices,

assumptions, values, beliefs, and rules by which individuals produce and reproduce their material subsistence, organize time and space, and provide meaning to their social reality” (Thornton & Ocasio, 1999, p.804)

Product

innovation

“Product innovation can run the gamut from new products and product-line

extensions to product improvements and style changes” (Heany, 1983, p.3)

INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale of the research

The author of the current dissertation wants to start the dissertation with his

favorite quote: “Blindly following ancient customs and traditions doesn’t mean that the

dead are alive, but that the living are dead” was stated by Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a

well-known Arabian philosopher He was among the ones who early concerned not only about the perpetuation of traditions but also about the consequences of inertia anchored

to such traditions His concern speaks volumes about the need for change as the initial form of innovation

Product innovation is a much-researched topic in the literature and it is important

to businesses in various ways Production innovation can boost the survivability and competitiveness of a business in a competitive market (Holt, 2002) It helps businesses improve performance (Prajogo, 2006), sales, and profit (Forés & Camisón, 2016) Compared to process innovation, product innovation prevails regarding productivity growth (Peters et al., 2017), revenue productivity (Hall, 2011), and demand boosting (Jaumandreu & Mairesse, 2017)

Despite the significance of product innovation in business and management literature, it has not been a fashionable theme in artisan business literature compared to themes such as collaboration, value, competition, growth, and capital (Pret & Cogan, 2019) Whilst, artisan business has also been overlooked in the mainstream of business and management literature (Pret & Cogan, 2019) Further, the key studies on artisan business have disproportionately analysed Western countries rather than developing countries which makes a case for researchers to see the actions of artisan businesses In contrast, the existing literature has given a varied nature of innovation in artisan business (Girón et al., 2007; Väänänen & Pöllänen, 2020) Along with a very long history, the nature of craft is varied from pure craft, and technical craft to creative craft which are divided into traditional craft and industrialized craft (Kroezen et al., 2021) While pure craft strongly emphasizes human labor, skills and passion, local tradition, and low interest in the market, technical craft is characterized by a moderate interest in professionalism and the market, with great importance on mechanization Creative craft

focuses more on aesthetics and creativity The craft can become a national identity beyond the place of origin (Costin, 1998; Scrase, 2003)

Product innovation is contingent on many antecedents Some studies focused on market factors such as competition, customers, materials, and technology (Chang & Chen, 2014; Vega-Jurado et al., 2008; Zhang & Duan, 2010) In contrast, some scholars mainly focused on intangible factors such as national culture (Evanschitzky et al., 2012)

or institutions (Tebaldi & Elmslie, 2013) Unfortunately, a gap in the current literature

is that if the business is simultaneously facing great but different pressures from the market (e.g customer taste and competition) and the inertia of institutional factors, (e.g traditional values), how will products change? Such a puzzle is still left unanswered by the current literature, particularly artisan business (Pret & Cogan, 2019)

From a theoretical view, since the call from Thornton and Ocasio (2008), key scholars in this field, referring to consideration of the role of identity in the institutional logics perspective to better understand how agents manage logics, the extant literature has left it unexplored (Onishi, 2019) The existing literature emphasizes that the institutional logics perspective widens the room for further discussion and explanation

of how entities change their practices As defined by “the socially constructed, historical

patterns of material practices, assumptions, values, beliefs, and rules” (Thornton &

Ocasio, 1999, p.804), institutional logics help us better understand organizational responses in an institutionalized context because they prescribe the institutional demands or instructions for agents to act upon to avoid the unexpected negative consequence or gain benefits (Pache & Santos, 2010) Unfortunately, we still have a dearth in our understanding of why some agents in a unique context take actions they

come up with As concluded by Binder (2007, p.568), “Logics are not purely top-down:

real people, in real contexts, with consequential past experiences of their own, play with them, question them, combine them with institutional logics from other domains, take what they can use from them, and make them fit their needs.” We still lack depth in our

understanding in terms of how agents respond to logics strategically and how they confirm who they are in such a process

Market logic and artisan logic have been selected for further analysis in the current study to address the puzzle of how product innovation takes place in artisan businesses First, they are well-established in the literature Second, the exploration

phase in the field with Hoang, Van Anh, and Tuc suggests that market logic and artisan logic are in line with the status quo of the researched community which witnesses the simultaneous phenomena including the inertia of traditional artisan values passing over generations and the permeation of market rules that replace the old rules of collectivism

Bat Trang is a good case for shedding light on product innovation in an institutionally complex context Not only has a part of artisan ceramic products changed over time, but also others have remained unchanged in Bat Trang Selecting artisan business owners as key informants for analyzing product innovation, this study is expected to (i) Identify the level of product innovation among artisan businesses; (ii) Develop an analytical framework to investigate how artisan businesses innovate their products by interweaving product innovation, counter-institutional identity, and institutional logics in a broader and systematic framework

2 Research objectives and questions

Research objectives and questions

The general research objective of this PhD dissertation is to develop a framework that builds on an institutional logics perspective to analyze API

The general research objective will be broken down further into some specific research objectives:

Research objective 1: Identify the extent to which artisan businesses innovate their products

Research objective 2: Develop a framework based on an institutional logics perspective to understand API

Research questions:

Research question 1: What is the pattern of product innovation of artisan businesses? Research question 2: How is API grounded in market logic and artisan logic?

3 Subject and scope of the research

The object of the research is the logic of API which refers to the pattern with

which degrees of API occur This PhD dissertation first identifies the degree to which artisan businesses undertake product innovation Then, it tracks the pattern of API based

on the application of institutional logics perspective

Subjects that participate in the current research include ABOs as the main data

source in addition to business owners, local artisans, and citizens of the selected community and customers The reason why these research subjects are included will be further explained in detail in the Research Method chapter (Chapter 2)

Scope of the research:

Scope of space: This is an empirical study selecting artisan businesses in Bat Trang, a local artisan ceramic community, in Hanoi, Vietnam

Scope of the timeline: primary data collected from 2021 October to 2022 June,

in addition to the informal talks and observations conducted before and after this period

Scope of content: This PhD dissertation is to (1) identify product innovation at different levels; (2) exploration of logics based on a detailed description of logics’ attributes and their compatibility; (3) exploration of entrepreneurial identity and artisan identity; (4) development of an analytical framework for API

Figure 1: Research Process

Source: developed by the author

5 Structure of the dissertation

Not to mention the Acknowledgement, Declaration, Abbreviation, Abstract, Introduction section, Conclusion, Appendix, and References, this dissertation is divided into 4 chapters as follows:

Chapter 1: Literature Review and Theoretical Framework draws on the review of product innovation, institutional logics, and counter-institutional identity to develop a general framework for this dissertation First, it defines key concepts and responds to why product innovation and what are sources of product innovation Then, it proceeds with an extensive review of institutional logics, responses to institutional logic(s), and identity The research gap and a general theoretical framework will conclude Chapter 1

In the Research Method chapter, key issues in terms of the research context, research paradigm and methodology, source of data, data collection tool and process, data analysis technique, reliability, and validity of qualitative research are comprehensively discussed

Chapter 3 presents the results of the current dissertation’s research This chapter begins with a presentation of product innovation among artisan ceramic businesses Then, the matching process’ result helps clarify the existence of the logics and their

relationship The boundary between institutional logics is important for innovation because it relates to the competition or synergy between logics that is inertial or innovative towards innovation (Oliveira & Holland, 2013) Their boundary helps further explain why role conflict can be avoided Then, chapter 3 continues to portray the counter-institutional identities of artisan businesses embedded in product innovation A proposed framework for API that satisfies the aim of the current dissertation will conclude this chapter

Chapter 4 will conclude the dissertation On the one hand, it attempts to connect the findings of this dissertation through discussion with key findings of the existing literature On the other hand, it confirms the theoretical and practical contributions of the current study In addition to the limitation of the research and future research agenda, chapter 4 also offers practical implications for businesses and policymakers

CHAPTER 1 THEORETICAL FOUNDATION AND LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 Product innovation

1.1.1 Key definitions

Product innovation has long concerned academia The previous literature has conceptualized product innovation in both ways, directly by itself or indirectly by innovation which is a broader term referring to products (service) or process The below typology of product innovation will give us an overview of key definitions up to date

Product innovation can be portrayed in multiple forms It is part of innovation that refers to “a process that begins with an invention, proceeds with the development

of the invention, and results in the introduction of a new product, process or service to the marketplace” (Edwards & Gordon, 1984, p.1) Heany (1983, p.3) focused on product innovation rather than innovation in its broadest sense and defined that product innovation “can run the gamut from new products and product-line extensions to product

improvements and style changes” Similarly, other studies have delved into the analysis

of product innovation as a specific form of innovation Product innovation was perceived as the newness of technology that brings different levels of newness to products from low, to moderate to high levels (Johnson & Jones, 1957; Kleinschmidt & Cooper, 1991) Product innovation can be presented through the newness of the market and technology, particularly a wide range of technological change from non-change level, to alteration to new technology (Veryzer, 1998) Product innovation continues to

be perceived as the ability of the product to penetrate the market through new categories of the existing line of products or new products that satisfy market needs (Ansoff, 1965)

sub-Most recently, product innovation has been clarified in a broader sense of innovation by OECD and EUROSTAT with which innovation is defined as “a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users

(product) or brought into use by the unit (process)” (OECD & EUROSTAT, 2018, p.20)

Accordingly, this approach acknowledges the significant changes rather than small changes in products as innovation

In the current dissertation, product innovation will take the definition proposed

by Heany (1983, p.3) which includes “the gamut from new products and product-line extensions to product improvements and style changes” This definition of product innovation fits well in the small-scale artisan business while the approach introduced by OECD and AUROSTAT has been widely used, it is somewhat hard to apply to the artisan field The empirical data will further justify this argument The Community Innovation Survey conducted by The European Commission in 2021 revealed that showed that larger firms will tend to be more innovation than smaller firms Only 46% of firms whose firm size is between 10 and 49 employees are innovative in some type while 77% of large firms that employ more than 250 workers undertake innovations Further, product innovation has been the most frequently implemented innovation of firms in many high-income countries rather than in low-income countries UNESCO, 2015) For example, nearly 46% of Canadian manufacturing firms are product innovators while only 12.5% of Hungarian manufacturing firms undertake product innovation in 2015

Based on the technical configuration, products can be further divided into artisan

or craft products and mass-produced products The current study follows the definition

of artisan or craft products introduced by UNESCO and ITC (1997) with which artisan

or craft products are defined as “those produced by artisans, either completely by hand

or with the help of hand tools or even mechanical means, as long as the direct manual contribution of the artisan remains the most substantial component of the finished product These are produced without restriction in terms of quantity and using raw materials from sustainable resources The special nature of artisanal products derives from their distinctive features, which can be utilitarian, aesthetic, artistic, creative, culturally attached, decorative, functional, traditional, religiously and socially symbolic and significant” (UNESCO & ITC, 1997, p.6) The definition of artisan products itself is important for the current study because it literally refers to the embodiment of the oldness and newness in artisan products So, in the current study,

API can be understood as the improvements of the existing artisan products or the

introduction of artisan products that are new to existing ones

1.1.2 Significance of product innovation

First, product innovation is critical to business survival and development The

research results from Oke et al (2017) and Forés and Camisón (2016) demonstrate that both incremental and radical innovation benefit firms through the increase in sales and profit Innovation can help firms gain a higher probability of survival by enhancing the

competitiveness of firms (Holt, 2002) because it makes firms distinctive from their rivals (Lee & Liu, 2017) Product innovation is considered a warrant for the survival of firms

in the contemporary world Innovative firms in the UK have been found to have a better chance of survival by making more patents that are commercialized (Helmers & Rogers, 2010) Product innovation helps boost business performance (Prajogo, 2006), and even firms in transition economies in Europe (Ramadani et al., 2019) Danneels (2002) found

a positive synergistic relationship between product innovation and high-tech firms’ competence because product innovation is undertaken in projects that strongly relate to technology and customer competence Further, Artz et al (2010) found that the announcement of new products can have a positive impact on economic indicators like the ROA of firms When firms bring new products to the market, they can have better access to foreign markets with a wider customer base (Paul et al., 2017) As indicated

by Zhou and Li (2012), radical innovation can help firms to change not only the status quo of competition but also the more opportunities to enter new markets Falahat et al (2020) found that Malaysian exporting firms can rely on product innovation to better satisfy the market needs to end up with a more sustained competitive advantage that in turn allows exporting firms to gain more profit In the case of innovative exporting firms, product innovation can increase export volume and profit than un–innovative ones (Cassiman et al., 2010) Thus, product innovation is a must in the contemporary era because firms face more challenges of global and glocal competition, the shortened cycle of products’ life, and the new transnational entrants with strong financial and knowledge-creating abilities (Castaño et al., 2016)

Second, product innovation is found to have more benefits for firms than process innovation In comparison with the ambiguous impacts of process innovation, Hall

(2011) insisted that product innovation has an economically significant effect on

‘revenue productivity’ Similarly, with the panel data of more than 20 thousand Spanish firms, Jaumandreu and Mairesse (2017) demonstrated that the impact of product innovation that helps significantly push the demand in every researched industry is around 3.3% while the impact of process innovation on firms’ demand is unclear By the same token, Peters et al (2017) found that product innovation not only boosts an average of 8.6% of the productivity of German firms that have strong financial capability but also helps firms with the lowest credit ranking increase their productivity by 0.8%

The logic behind the impacts of product innovation on businesses has been identified in the existing literature Cohen and Klepper (1996) indicate that innovation

can help the firm reduce production costs by introducing a more productive process and eliminating excessive parts Furthermore, innovation strengthens the absorptive abilities

of firms and helps firms be more flexible in their strategy to cope with government policies (Costantini & Mazzanti, 2012) Particularly, when struggling with the institutional barriers in developing countries characterized by dependency on the legacies of historical regimes, conservatism, and low investment (Maksimov et al., 2017), firms that are open to innovation can seek a variety of ways to slip through the harsh institutional context Therefore, innovation is a cornerstone in firms’ management issues in rapidly changing contexts (Dixon et al., 2014) All in all, the aggregate result

of organizational-level innovation can significantly contribute to the development of nations (WIPO, 2022)

1.1.3 Degrees of product innovation

Product innovation is categorized as incremental and radical varying according

to the level of the newness of the products (Tidd & Bessant, 2022) Henderson and Clark (1990) claimed that product innovation can be expressed through small changes in products in addition to a radical level that requires a huge investment in R&D Product innovation can present improved products, an extension of product lines, or new products (Cooper et al., 1997; Schmidt & Calantone, 1998) So, the dissertation will consider these two degrees of product innovation as follows

First, radical product innovation highlights the newness of products at a high level so that such products are new to the market Radical product innovation refers to

the introduction of breakthrough products or services to the market that are completely different from the existing products (Tidd & Bessant, 2022) Yoon and Lilien (1985) indicated that product innovation is original or new products with a reformulation OECD and EUROSTAT (2018, p.21) define product innovation as “a new or improved good or service that differs significantly from the firm’s previous goods or services and that has been introduced on the market.” Stoneman et al.’s 2018 analysis suggests that producers can bring an original product that is completely new to the global market That means that the same products have never been introduced on earth before This is global product innovation that is the largest level that is called ‘new-to-the-world’ products At a lower level, a product from a producer can be new to a context that is narrower than the global market A new product can incorporate more functions and different designs that are new to markets at national, regional, and local levels and is often known as a ‘new-to-market’ product Radical product innovation can benefit the adopting units very well but it is difficult to make it happen because radical product

innovation requires a lot of conditions such as financial capability, appropriate leadership, and organizational characteristics, to name a few (Slater et al., 2013)

In contrast, incremental product innovation refers to the insignificant improvements of the existing product (Henderson & Clark, 1990; Tidd & Bessant, 2022;

OECD & EUROSTAT, 2018) Incremental product innovation is easier to conduct in adopting organizations than radical product innovation (Noone et al., 2022) That is because incremental product innovations represent the slow and small changes related

to the existing products It is not money-consuming for firms to adopt this type of innovation So, it is a feasibly preferrable option for small-scale businesses that struggle for financial sources or technological capacity (Vermeulen, 2005) It can be composed

of changes in the design, color, or function of existing products The current dissertation adopts this approach for the analysis of API

1.1.4 Sources of product innovation

1.1.4.1 Demand-pull

Market demand is important for product innovation Innovation, especially

product innovation is risky because innovative firms cannot anticipate whether innovation is accepted on the market (Stoneman et al., 2018) Grinstein's 2008 meta – analysis confirmed that demands can pull innovation in some dimensions First, firms need to come up with innovations to better respond to market demands (Jaworski & Kohli, 1993) by identifying the changing diverse, and latent tastes of customers (Narver

et al., 2004) While pursuing satisfying customers’ tastes sometimes renders the firm marginal innovation, customer orientation can urge firms to introduce new-to-the-world products rather than me-too products (Lukas & Ferrell, 2000) Similarly, Lewrick et al (2011) only found the positive impact of customer orientation on radical innovation among startup firms That is because firms that focus on customer needs will concentrate

on innovation that rapidly reacts to the ever-changing needs of customers (Kandampully, 2002; Olson et al., 2005) If firms are anchored to their conventional production of products, the mismatch due to cultural and geographical differences may lead to misunderstanding and confusion among customers who are not familiar with the culture where products are made (Obadia, 2013)

Different consumption practices and preferences between the domestic market and foreign market increase the pressure on firms to innovate products more (Arikan et al., 2019; De Mooij, 2019) Further, the research on the internationalization path has identified a large number of challenges facing manufacturing firms The review of

Leonidou (2004) indicates that the diverse customer preferences in foreign markets will entail the exporting firms to innovate their products and services The distinctive tastes and cultural characteristics of foreign customers urge exporting firms to introduce new products or changes in either style or design Further, exported products are subject to adaptation due to the export standards in terms of health issues, quality standards, or even product labeling (Cateora & Graham, 2001)

Although the previous works analyzed how market demand affects the change of products, these quantitative studies did not give a full explanation for the question of why products should be changed The analysis of market logic was poorly developed while market demands were not clarified That is because these studies only focused on measurement and quantification of the impact rather than on an explanation of the mechanism underlying organizational decisions regarding product innovation Further, these studies tend to overrate the role of the market by giving it a decisive role in the way products are innovated Thus, they often ignore the active position of firms and firm owners

1.1.4.2 Knowledge and technology push

First, product innovation can be the output of the knowledge push The term

knowledge-push here means a causal effect starts from knowledge-based sources to changes in products at different levels The heart of knowledge-push is R&D because it may make firms’ ideas not only more economically viable but also more feasible to alternate functions and utilities (Stoneman et al., 2018) Moreover, knowledge created through R&D is critical because it sheds light on how firms can create new or improved products Knowledge can flow across geographical boundaries and fields to put the foundation for firms to innovate their products (Stoneman et al., 2018) Knowledge may come from either inside or outside firms African firms’ innovation activities benefited significantly from the knowledge spillover from OECD countries (Lamperti et al., 2016) Further, foreign suppliers that have a transnational business network may be helpful in the R&D relationship with firms because they are aware of global needs (Fossas-Olalla et al., 2015; Makhija et al., 1997) Customers’ specialized knowledge and experience can support firms in the innovation process through R&D collaboration because firms can better understand their customers’ needs and then internalize them in the innovations (Cohen et al., 2002; Flores, 1993; Griffin & Hauser, 1993)

Second, technology can make firms’ hope in product innovation happen It

directly responds to how technology can be used as a needed tool to generate products

that “cater to an emerging or hitherto unfulfilled need” (Vyas, 2005, p.113) Vega-Jurado

et al (2008) found that Spanish manufacturing firms that have better access to technological opportunities will be more likely to innovate than their counterparts Technological opportunities in each industry may push firms forward in innovation by introducing new products The most updated reports on innovation also provide us with interesting results Advanced-technology and green technology-based innovation have become fashionable trends in firms across countries worldwide by creating hope for new jobs, trading activities, and new products to better satisfy users’ needs and grand challenges of poverty and inequality (UN, 2021 & 2023) However, Foucart and Li (2021) found the difference in the impact of technology on innovation If the standards applied for technology last long, technology will be good for incremental product innovation but detrimental to radical product innovation among UK manufacturing firms

The previous studies have attempted to specify one of the important sources of product innovation by showing the role of knowledge and technology For firms, these sources are important because they are the necessary source for product innovation However, knowledge and technology are not sufficient conditions for product innovation to happen Product innovation is hard to occur if the contextual factors including institutions are ignored Also, knowledge and technology capabilities between large-scale businesses and small-scale businesses (artisan businesses) are different These studies applied linear reasoning that emphasizes a direct causal effect from input (knowledge and technology) to output (product innovation) So, the role that knowledge and technology play in artisan product innovation is still unclear

1.1.4.3 Learning

The learning process of firms determines how innovative products are Learning

lessons from others reserves an important position among firms, particularly small firms The learning process or orientation refers to how firms can make use of the knowledge they learn (Harrison & Leitch, 2005) Sok and O’Cass (2011, p.1287) define learning capability “as the bundles of interrelated routines and processes firms have in place to undertake learning-related activities.” The learning process not only affects the strategic responses of the firm for knowledge and ideas creation (Hurley & Hult, 1998) but also gives rise to sustained innovation of firms (Morgan et al., 1998) Calatone et al (2002) found that learning orientation can be reflected through 4 proxies: (1) commitment to learning that is embedded in the advocation of firms towards learning with short-term

or longer-term investments; (2) shared vision that refers to the extent to which organizational divisions and individuals have the common thoughts on learning; (3) open-mindedness that relates to the degree of firm readiness to the new things that are often uncertain or unpredictable; (4) intra-organizational knowledge sharing that relies

intra-on how different units and individuals in an organizatiintra-on practice knowledge sharing across the parts of the organization All of these four factors have positive impacts on firm innovation Noticeably, Sheng and Chien (2016) note that the impact of learning orientation is found to be more pronounced on incremental innovation rather than radical innovation

We can see that learning has been acknowledged as an important source of product innovation However, how intra-organization learning can happen and the nature of intra-organization learning are rarely clarified Moreover, business cases of large firms prevail in previous studies That caused an incomplete reasoning for the relationship between learning and product innovation, particularly in artisanship

1.1.4.4 Leadership

Product innovation is found to have a link with leadership that refers to the attitude of the business owners and their policy implementation towards organizational practices At times innovation carries financial and technical risks and thus is not cared for by risk-averse business owners Not all styles of leadership support the creation of firm innovation The existing literature has produced nuanced results on the relationship between leadership and innovation Transformational, motivational, laissez-faire, and entrepreneurial leadership styles are likely to encourage firm innovation while autocratic leadership hampers innovation For example, the laissez-faire leadership style refers to how business owners empower their employees and give them either authority or autonomy to generate new ideas without concern the opposition or tit-for-tat from leaders (Li & Zhang, 2016) Similarly, entrepreneurial and transformational leadership styles are based on relatively horizontal sharing between leaders and their employees and thus give more room for novel thoughts in problem-solving (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Kirkman et al., 2009; Newman et al., 2018)

Such styles of leadership help managerial practices not only avoid stress burdens and conflicts between leaders and employees but also lay a reliable and robust bond between them based on the sense of the inspirational and supportive image of the leaders (Bass, 1985; Hughes et al., 2018) In contrast, autocratic leadership tends to destroy firm innovation (Matzler et al., 2008; Gu et al., 2016) because the business owners

“assert absolute authority and control over subordinates and demand unquestionable obedience” (Cheng et al., 2004, p.91) In place of promoting innovativeness, autocratic leadership encourages organizational individuals to passively abide by the rules and the status quo to avoid the risks resulting from potential conflicts with the business owners (Kiewitz et al., 2016)

The reviewed studies have portrayed different ways products can be changed varying according to different leadership styles Unfortunately, there are two critical issues First, leaders in previous studies only show their role in the decision-making process That will not help us fully understand the role of artisan business owners who not only take decisive roles in their business but also get involved closely in how product innovations look Second, previous leadership-based studies did not allow us to see the varied nature of leadership Leaders in these studies are those who decide on their own and only follow a unidimensional leadership style That led to the lame analysis of the multi-dimensional perspective of leadership

to kick the existing ones out of the competition battle So, the competition will continue with innovations from both new firms and old firms (Lee et al., 2000)

There is still no conclusive result from previous works on the relationship between competition and innovation The first stream of the literature concluded that competition

harms innovation Kamien and Schwartz (1982) show that severe competition may discourage firms from innovating their products because competition may be exacerbated by innovation Innovation can push the competition to escalate and thus quickly ruin the advantage of the existing innovation The firms also need to undertake product innovation which is often known as defensive innovation when products of other firms have advantages of superior qualities or competitive prices (Gabszewicz & Tarola, 2012; Stoneman et al., 2018) Copying products from first movers will create pressure or push them to take further steps in undertaking more innovations That is because being a first mover produces advantages in terms of market expansion and good use of inputs (Lambkin, 1988; Lieberman & Montgomery, 1988) However, followers,

early or late, will benefit from emulating the way that the pioneering agents take with their products, especially when such products make an impressive chance of profit (Lanzolla et al., 2010) That creates an iterative chasing process in which the later innovations will be pushed by emulation, again and again

However, another stream of the literature revealed a positive impact of competition on innovation Kraft (1989) stated that higher competition from the local

concentration may encourage firms to innovate more to gain sustained competitiveness over their competitors A firm existing in an industry consisting of firms with similar technology levels will have more motivation to innovate its products or processes to take the first-mover advantage (Aghion et al., 2005) while firms in highly competitive industries will innovate to survive (Schumpeter, 1947) However, the lagging-behind firms are not interested in innovation if it costs firms more than benefits them which only has a low marginal profit The industry heterogeneity or similarity can be related

to the technological regime or sectoral patterns of technical change (Malerba & Orsenigo, 1996; Nelson, 1985; Pavit, 1984)

On the one hand, previous studies focused on how competition affects product strategy among large firms The nature of competition between large-scale businesses and small-scale businesses is different Small-scale business, especially artisan business

is characterized by the concentration of production sites Further, artisan businesses show dual competition when they support and compete directly with each other at the same time The previous works have not provided a sufficient explanation for the hybrid form of competition

1.1.4.6 Institution

Different from the economics approach to innovation, social sciences have been highly emphasizing the critical role of institutions for innovation at national and firm levels (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2013) As stated by Padgett and Powell (2012, p.3), “All new organizational forms, no matter how radically new, are combinations and permutations of what was there before It is a thick and tangled bush of branchings, recombinations, transformations, and sequential path-dependent trajectories, just as Darwin said it was Invention “in the wild” cannot be understood through abstracting away from concrete social context, because inventions are permutations of that context because inventions are permutations of that context” The newness only can be elaborated on when it is put in the context where it comes from For example, Wu (2013) and Ma et al (2015) found a significant impact of institutional factors on product

innovation among Chinese firms and international manufacturing firms operating in China, respectively The meaning and nature of innovation are thus context-dependent Previous scholars have found that institutions are an important factor in knowledge accumulation or creation (Davis, 2010; Rodrik, 2000) Institutional quality has positive impacts not only on the number of patents for innovative products in the country with high-level technology but also on the patent count in low-level technological ones (Tebaldi & Elmslie, 2013) The review of Turker and Vural (2017) discovers that all three levels of social innovation are influenced by institutional frames The firms intentionally focus their innovation effort on human issues, environmental or other challenges if the rules of social welfare control them

Prior studies also suggest that a country that has a higher level of democracy, appreciation of entrepreneurship, and individual freedom tends to experience a higher level of innovation (Barnett, 1953; Foster, 1962) Further evidence of the impact of cultural factors on innovation is found in studies by Rothwell and Wissema (1986) and Shane (1995) For example, a society that encourages its members to dare to take high-risk activities or to be deviant from traditions will yield better results in innovation To explain the nuance of innovation between Japan and the USA, Herbig and Miller (1991) reveal that they differ in institutional features The higher level of homogeneity of the society and lower level of power distance frame Japan’s miniaturization trend of their products Individualism enables people to make independent decisions and thus value newness rather than old traditions in their comfort zone (Bradley et al., 2013)

Although previous studies emphasized the role of institutions in explaining the direction of innovation, they did not go further to break down different levels of institutions They often employed institutional quality at the national and gave an oversimplified answer to innovation strategy among firms So, institutions at lower levels have been rarely analyzed in the traditional approach Further, the institution in the traditional institutional theory does not allow us to see the autonomy of the agents who are in an institutional environment In other words, they institution in the traditional approach of institutional theory considers agents as passive ones who must follow signals from the institution without any resistance Therefore, it refuses the chance for institutional change resulting from the active response of agents

1.2 Institutional logics

The juxtaposition of the institutional approach and other influential approaches such as the economics approach (Felman, 1999), path dependency (Coombs & Hull, 1998), and resource-based view (Bakar & Ahmad, 2010) does not undermine the role of the institutional approach in explaining innovation The institution is located at the heart

of the analysis of innovation in the existing literature (Edquist, 1997) Premised on the institutional approach, the institutional logics perspective has been an emerging lens to analyze innovation (Vargo et al., 2015; Browder et al., 2022)

The institutional logics perspective has been selected for analyzing artisan product innovation for some reasons First, the institutional logics perspective is well-established and premised on an influential approach to institutional theory Second, the institutional logics perspective has made a further step by allowing room for the autonomy of agents at a certain level Different from institutional theory, the institutional logics perspective has authorized the role of agents as those who actively react to the

‘rules of the game’ in an institutional context This perspective fits the analysis of artisan business because many business owners in the current dissertation are artisans who directly get involved in the production of products They run their business and control production at the same time Third, the institutional logics perspective identifies specific logics at various levels Market logic and artisan logic well-fit product innovation in the artisanship context because the market demands and ‘rules of the game’ in the artisanship context is pronounced Further reasoning for the selection of the institutional logics perspective is presented in detail in section 1.2.1

The below sections will provide a review of institutional logics as a selected perspective for product innovation of this dissertation as well as show the research gap

to further justify the rationale of the research topic step by step

1.2.1 Institutional logics as a perspective

Institutional logics has emerged as one of the influential frameworks for analyzing organizational and individual behaviors, particularly innovation practices

since it was premised on the work of Scott (1983), Alford and Friedland (1985), and Friedland and Alford (1991) However, institutional logics had been unclearly described until Thornton and Ocasio (1999, p.804) defined institutional logics as “the socially constructed, historical patterns of material practices, assumptions, values, beliefs, and rules by which individuals produce and reproduce their material subsistence, organize time and space, and provide meaning to their social reality” By going further, Lok

(2010, p.1307) defined an institutional logic “as a set of material practices and symbolic constructions that constitute organizing principles for broader suprarational orders.” Lok has clarified the approach of institutional logics by emphasizing that the ‘rules of the game’ of logics go beyond the rationality approach

The institutional logics perspective still permits the identity of agents to exist because it allows agents to strategically take actions to respond to institutional pressures rather than considering them powerless agents For Lok (2010, p.1308), the

role of institutional logics in explaining human and organizational actions can be embodied in the way they “only direct what social actors want (interests) and how they

are to proceed (guidelines for action), but also who or what they are (identity)” Lok’s

approach makes the identity of agents clearly present in the institutional logics perspective This approach puts the identity of agents in the right place in a well-established perspective that is different from traditional institutional theory

As a meta-theory or perspective, the institutional logics perspective has some

assumptions The first assumption is embedded agency (Battilana, 2006) That means

that actions, beliefs, and values at different levels of individuals and organizations are embedded in the institutional context where dominant institutional logics will be more likely to take control (Granovetter, 1985; Thornton & Ocasio, 2008) This assumption helps differentiate the institutional logics perspective from Neo-classical Economics which emphasizes the rationality-based decision of agents In a multiple-logic context, individuals or businesses may not be rational as described in the traditional economics with which they decide the reasoning that they will put effort into achieving the optimal choice of profit or utility based on the consideration of cost and benefit In contrast, the institutional logics perspective insists that institutionalized environments where multiple logics co-exist will drive actors away from rational choice If one institutional logic predominates others, actors will be more likely to try to react to it over the other peripheral ones This assumption emphasizes the way agents in an institutionalized context identify, consciously react to a set of ethos, values, or norms, and then become partly autonomous in such context (Friedland & Alford, 1991)

Another theoretical assumption of the institutional logics perspective is that it is based on two features of the material and non-material premises This assumption

suggests that institutional orders are interdependent systems where both cultural and material practices, and rules of the game interact with each other and collectively condition actions and ways of thinking among agents By partly denying the core

assumption of rational choice in the Neo-classical economics approach, Granovetter (1985, p.504) demonstrated that most of the behaviors are “closely embedded in networks of interpersonal relations and that such an argument avoids the extremes of under-and over-socialized views of human action” He further added that the level of embeddedness of human (economic) action is found to be low in non-market societies

It is hard to find a context where only one logic exists and continues to live long over time without any contradictions from other logics that newly enter such context This assumption brings back the role of cultural aspects in institutional scholarship

Third, historical contingency is an important assumption from the institutional logics perspective The institutional logics perspective emphasizes the role of a

historical context where socio-politico events occur The nature of each context is determined by a large number of key events ranging from economic, social to political aspects This assumption paves for the broader space of changes in institutions when institutional logics changes over time varying according to historical contexts That means that institutions may be subject to transformation when practices and institutional logics change For example, as examined in Thornton’s 2004 book on the higher-education publishing field, the shift from editorial logic that emphasizes the nexus between the editor and the authors and sale increase to a market logic that focuses on business growth, profit increase, and competition causes the significant changes in executive succession Thorn (2004, p.83) wrote that “when, whether and how leaders deploy their power to affect succession in organizations is conditional on the prevailing institutional logic in an industry” Similarly, Ruef and Scott (1998) found that the meaning of medical care, particularly in hospitals experienced a gradual transformation since the chance for survival became a critical issue concerning the hospital Such requirements of surrounding environments led to the modification of managerial practices that were later conditioned by market forces

1.2.2 Review of logics in the existing literature

In this section, the author attempts to provide a review of logics in previous works

in terms of method, unit of analysis, research context, research field, type of logics, relationship between logics, and the response to logics In each part of the analysis, the author also reports on the limitations and/or issues that call for further study

The pool of selected papers for the review of logics, and the relationship between logics and strategic response to logics below was extracted from Google Scholar, the largest scholarly database The study used keywords such as logic(s), institution,

strategic response, and identity for the search process To ensure the quality of the review, only academic papers that are published in quality journals are retained More specifically, only papers published in journals that are listed in ABS, ISI (SSCI, SCIE, A&HCI), or Scopus (Q2 and Q1) were used to provide the overview as well as the research trend of this review The final list includes 108 papers after the screening process for the title, keywords, abstract of the paper, and deep reading of the whole paper

(see further in Appendix 1 for the list of quality journals of the papers selected for this

review)

This part of the current study will give insights based on the review of the literature on logics from 1991 to 2022

Figure 1.1: The trend in key publications from 1991-2022

Source: the own visualization of the author

Since the year 1991 marked the starting point for the institutional logics perspective, the attention of previous scholars has not been much paid to the institutional logics perspective during the 10 years from 1991 to 2001 In contrast, the number of key academic papers has boomed from 2010 to 2017

1.2.2.1 Methods

68.5% of the pool of key papers applied empirical research while 31.5% used the review method In 74 empirical papers, qualitative studies accounted for 56.8% of the total (42 papers, e.g Lok, 2010; Solomon & Mathias, 2020; Battilana et al., 2015; Jaskiewicz et al., 2016; Tracey et al., 2011) while 35.1% (26 papers, e.g Zellweger

et al., 2016; Delmas & Toffel, 2008; Westphal & Zajac, 2001; Lyon & Maxwell, 2011; Marquis & Lounsbury, 2007; Rao & Giorgi, 2006) were done with quantitative methodology 8.1% of the pool of papers applied mixed methodology (e.g Thornton, 2002; Zhao & Wry, 2016) In other words, the number of published papers revealed

1 2

4

3 2

17

8 6 3 1

that scholars have tended to use qualitative methodology when applying an institutional logics perspective

In sum, the qualitative method that is much preferred for the analysis of social sciences only accounts for 39% of the total number of studies Further, previous qualitative studies often used one technique for data analysis, particularly in-depth interviews Although it is no problem with in-depth interviews because it is a commonly used technique in qualitative research, the unique research context of artisanship may require the combination of some techniques beyond the simple use of in-depth interviews That is because the artisan business includes both material and non-material presentations Production sites, production processes, and products are material practices while a display of products and subtle meaning of products may convey values beyond material presentation So, further qualitative research can employ a combination

of various commonly used techniques such as in-depth interviews, observations, etc to better capture the logics

1.2.2.2 Unit of analysis

In general, the organization is the most commonly used unit of analysis in the existing academic works that apply an institutional logics perspective Not to mention papers that refer to organizational response as the aggregation of an individual response, the unit of analysis at the ‘pure’ organizational level stands for 52.8% of papers (57 out

of 108 papers, e.g Onishi, 2019; Bondy et al., 2012; Knutsen, 2012; Zhou et al., 2016; Battilana & Dorado, 2010; Lewis & Carlos, 2022; Delmas & Toffel, 2008) Individuals are also the carriers of institutional logics and become the unit of analysis of 13% of papers in this review (14 out of 108 papers, e.g Lindbergh & Schwartz, 2021; McVey

et al., 2020; Currie & Spyridonidis, 2015) The individuals are considered the sub-unit

of analysis and then aggregated to the organization level and the interlink between these two has been included in 6 papers (Gümüsay et al., 2020; Mangen & Brivot, 2015; Glover et al., 2014; Mair et al., 2012; Reay & Hinings, 2009; Wang et al., 2016) Some other scholars chose teams as the unit of analysis (Reay et al., 2013; Almandoz, 2012; Glynn & Lounsbury; 2005; Chung & Luo; 2008; Durand & Jourdan; 2012) The previous studies also pay attention to the industry as the unit of analysis with 11.1% of the pool of papers covering publishing (Thornton & Ocasio, 1999; Thornton et al., 2005; Cai & Mountford, 2021), healthcare (Kitchener, 2002), and energy (York et al., 2016)

Although the previous studies have chosen organizations as unit of analysis, the nature of organizations is varied and left unaddressed For example, private firms try

their best to maximize profit as their ultimate goal while artisan businesses or firms not only care about profit but also about traditional values and the iconic meaning they show

to the public So, the hybrid form of artisan businesses may make them distinctive from other types of organizations

1.2.2.3 Research context

Developed countries as the only research context in the studies being considered and account for 60.2% of all 108 papers if counting all papers in this pool (review and empirical papers) The studies that only select developing countries represent 5.6% of the sample In a sub-sample of 74 empirical studies, studies that only selected developed countries as the research context accounted for 81.1% while developing countries only represented 6.8%

Figure 1.2: The sample of reviewed papers by research context

Source: the own visualization of the author

Academic empirical works published in quality journals focused on the USA, the

UK, Canada, France, and Germany, to name a few Whilst, only a few studies have selected developing countries like China (Zhou et al., 2016), Bangladesh (Mair et al., 2012), Brazil (Teixeira et al., 2017), Taiwan (Chung & Luo, 2008), and Latin America (Cobb et al., 2016)

The disproportionate attention of previous studies towards developed countries that dominate the pool of papers hinders our understanding of the logics in developing countries where cultural and social norms are still influential in social life In other words, the findings from developed countries cannot be easily generalized to developing

countries Thus, we are still unclear about what logics look like and how they work in developing contexts

Figure 1.3: The number of context-specific studies

Source: the own visualization of the author 1.2.2.4 Research field

The artisan field has been under-researched in the current literature (Solomon

& Mathias, 2020; Lindbergh & Schwartz, 2021) A few studies have selected craftsmanship as the context for the analysis For example, Lindbergh and Schwartz (2021) analyze the complex situation in which the artisans in the food industry are placed On the one hand, they try to react to market logic by scaling up their business growth On the other hand, they control the expansion of their business growth to prevent the image as a food artisan from being ruined

Previous scholars have applied institutional logics perspective in some other fields such as sustainability (York et al., 2016; Lounsbury, 2001; Hestad et al., 2020;

Lee & Lounsbury, 2015; Lyon & Maxwell, 2011), judicial/law (Lee & Zhang, 2013;

McPherson & Sauder, 2013; Smets & Jarzabkowski, 2013; Mangen & Brivot, 2015;

Malhotra et al., 2021), entertaining (Jourdan et al., 2017; Glynn & Lounsbury, 2005; Durand & Jourdan, 2012); marketing (Klinger & Svensson, 2015; Vargo & Lusch, 2015); education (Luo, 2007; Cai & Mountford, 2021; Perkmann et al., 2019; Dunn & Jones, 2010), healthcare (Reay et al., 2013; McVey et al., 2020; Reay & Hinings, 2009;

Currie & Spyridonidis, 2015; Kitchener, 2002; Sonpar et al., 2009; Nigam & Ocasio, 2010; Pratt & Rafaeli, 1997)

Innovation and technology have recently been emerging fields for the analysis that applies institutional logics perspective In addition to studies on ICT (Gawer &

Phillips, 2013; Ponte & Pesci, 2022; Schildt, 2022), some studies have examined the logics and responses of agents regarding their innovation (Vargo et al., 2015; Lusch & Nambisan, 2015; Barrett et al., 2015; Berrone et al., 2013; Browder et al., 2022) For instance, Browder et al (2022) demonstrate that to cope with institutional complexity between corporate and community logics, the MakerHub follows a so-called hybrid logic The authors emphasize the role of the structural bridging that affects how a corporate with traditional R&D conforms to hybridity Further, in the interaction with stakeholders (users), identity linking plays a critical role

Finance is a preferrable research theme from the institutional logics perspective

While some studies (Bruton et al., 2015; Gümüsay et al., 2020; Smets et al., 2012; Smets

et al., 2015; Yan et al., 2018; Westphal & Zajac, 2001; Lounsbury, 2002) analyze the behavior of agents in finance as a general term, others focus on micro-finance (Battilana

& Dorado, 2010; Cobb et al., 2016; Zhao & Wry, 2016) The finance-related topic is also specified to include how the firms in the financial industry run mutual funds under institutional constraints (Lounsbury & Crumley, 2007; Lounsbury, 2007), banking, accounting, and auditing (Almandoz, 2012; Thornton et al., 2005; Anderson-Gough et al., 2022; Quattrone, 2015; Marquis & Lounsbury, 2007)

CSR has been paid much attention as a promising field for the application of institutional logics Many social enterprises have been selected (Battilana & Lee, 2014;

Onishi, 2019; Doherty et al., 2014; Jay, 2013; Pache & Santos, 2013; Mair et al., 2015; Battilana et al., 2015; Ramus et al., 2017) Other scholars also emphasize how CSR has been implemented under an institutional complexity (Bondy et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2016; Ioannou & Serafeim, 2014; Lewis & Carlos, 2022; Tracey et al., 2011) The expanded version of CSR can refer to development issues with which organizations serve society to show their compliance to a community or social logic (Mair et al., 2012; Knutsen, 2012; Binder, 2007) For example, Mair et al (2012) reveal that institutional voids in Bangladesh in terms of development area have put BRAC (one of the largest development organizations) in an institutionally complex context where they need to respond well to autonomy and property rights (market logic), the corrupt behavior (politics), religious belief and community norms

The existing literature has paid very little attention to logics in artisanship Previous studies focused more on other fields including CSR, finance, and sustainability rather than a promising field of artisanship Again, artisanship has been left in doubt and

we do not clearly know how artisanship in general and products in this field have transformed Further, innovation studies that applied institutional logics tend to ignore the artisanship context where local values and traditions may play an important role That creates a unique characteristic of innovation in artisanship Unfortunately, innovation in artisanship has not been well examined

1.2.2.5 Identification of logics

Market logic is at the core of the analysis of the existing literature Market logic

is a meso-level logic that affects actions at different levels from industry level (Thornton

& Ocasio, 1999; Kitchener, 2002; Lounsbury, 2002; Thornton et al 2005; Green et al.,

2008, Greenwood et al., 2010), fields in energy (York et al., 2016) and education (Cai

& Mountford, 2021), individual level (Meyer & Hammerschmid, 2006; Sonpar et al., 2009; Oostervink et al., 2016), organization level (Thornton, 2002; Shipilov et al., 2010; Nigam & Ocasio, 2010; Jay, 2013; Pache & Santos, 2013; Mair et al., 2015; Jaskiewicz

et al., 2016; Zellweger et al., 2016; Cobb et al., 2016; Dalpiaz et al., 2016; Jourdan et al., 2017; Ramus et al., 2017; Teixeira et al., 2017; Yan et al., 2018; Frenken et al., 2020; Hestad et al., 2020; Malhotra et al., 2021; Yan et al., 2021; McLoughlin & Meehan, 2021; Browder et al., 2022; Anderson-Gough et al., 2022; Ponte & Pesci, 2022; Schildt, 2022); individual-organization interlink (Reay & Hinings, 2009; Mair et al., 2012; Glover et al., 2014; Mangen & Brivot, 2015; Wang et al., 2016) to multi-level analysis (Seo & Creed, 2002; Greenwood et al., 2011) Some other studies did not exactly use the term market logic but the logics they applied could be grouped into the market-based logics such as industrial manufacturing logic (Dalpiaz et al., 2016) and supply chain

logic (Gawer & Phillips, 2013)

Many studies considered market-based logics (Kitchener, 2002; Meyer &

Hammerschmid, 2006; Green et al., 2008) such as commerce (Pache & Santos, 2013; Mair et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2016; Ramus et al., 2017; Perkmann et al., 2019; Cai & Mountford, 2021; Hestad et al., 2020; Anderson-Gough et al., 2022), business (Reay & Hinings, 2009; Jay, 2013); corporate (Thornton et al., 2005; Sonpar et al., 2009; Oostervink et al., 2016; Frenken et al., 2020; Malhotra et al., 2021; Browder et al., 2022), economic (York et al., 2016; McLoughlin & Meehan, 2021); finance (Almandoz, 2012; Durand & Jourdan, 2012; Cobb et al., 2016; Yan et al., 2018; Yan et al., 2021; Schildt, 2022), efficiency (Seo & Creed, 2002), service-dominant (Akaka et al., 2013; Smets & Jarzabkowski, 2013; Barrett et al., 2015; Vargo & Lusch, 2015), either cost reduction or profit maximization (Glover et al., 2014), and for-profit retail (Tracey et al., 2011)