請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92374完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 謝明慧 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Ming-Huei Hsieh | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 李竺姮 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Chu-Heng Lee | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-03-22T16:11:55Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2024-03-23 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2024-03-22 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2023-09-11 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Aarikka-Stenroos, L., & Lehtimäki, T. (2014). Commercializing a radical innovation: Probing the way to the market. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(8), 1372–1384.
Abernathy, W.J. & Clark, K.B. (1985). Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction. Research Policy, 14(1), 3–22. Akaka, M. A., Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vargo, S. L. (2021). Formalizing service-dominant logic as a general theory of markets: Taking stock and moving forward. AMS Review, 11, 375–389. Akaka, M. A., Vargo, S. L., & Schau, H. J. (2015). The context of experience. Journal of Service Management, 26(6/7), 206–223. American Marketing Association. (2017). Definition of marketing approved 2017. https://www.ama.org/the-definition-of-marketing-what-is-marketing/ Andersson, P., Aspenberg, K., & Kjellberg, H. (2008). The configuration of actors in market practice. Marketing Theory, 8(1), 67–90. Araujo, L., Kjellberg, H., & Spencer, R. (2008). Market practices and forms: Introduction to the special issue, Marketing Theory, 8(1), 5–14. Arnold, S. J., & Fischer, E. (1994). Hermeneutics and consumer research. Journal of consumer Research, 21(June), 55–70. Astley, W. G., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1983). Central perspectives and debates in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 245–273. Baker, J. J., Storbacka, K., & Brodie, R. J. (2019). Markets changing, changing markets: Institutional work as market shaping. Marketing Theory, 19(3), 301–328. Barnhart, M., & Peñaloza, L. (2013). Who are you calling old? Negotiating old age identity in the elderly consumption ensemble. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(6), 1133–1153. Baron, S., Patterson, A., Maull, R., et. al. (2018). Feed people first: A service ecosystem perspective on innovative food waste reduction, Journal of Service Research, 21(1), 135–150. Berry, L. L., Shankar, V., Turner Parish, J., et al. (2006). Creating new markets through service innovation. Sloan Management Review, 47(2), 56–63. Blomberg, J., Kjellberg, H., & Winroth, K. (2012). Marketing shares, sharing markets. Experts in investment banking. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Biraghi, S., Gambetti, R., & Pace, S. (2018). Between tribes and markets: The emergence of a liquid consumer-entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Research, 92, 392–402. Bower, J. L. & Christensen, C. M. (1995). Disruptive technologies: Catching the wave. Harvard Business Review video. Callon, M. (1998). The laws of the market. Oxford: Blackwell. Chandler, J. D., & Vargo, S. L. (2011). Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange. Marketing Theory, 11(1), 35–49. Chandler, J. D., Danatzis, I., Wernicke, C., et al. (2019). How does innovation emerge in a service ecosystem? Journal of Service Research, 22(1), 75–89. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of Qualitative Research, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Corsaro, D., & Mattsson, L. G. (2018). Untangling the a priori differentiation of service-exchanging actors. In S. L. Vargo, & R. F. Lusch (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic (pp. 431–448). London, UK: SAGE Publications Inc. Coskuner-Balli, G., & Ertimur, B. (2017). Legitimation of hybrid cultural products: The case of American Yoga. Marketing Theory, 17(2), 127–147. Davis, J. B. (2006). Heterodox economics, the fragmentation of the mainstream and embedded individual analysis, In R. Garnett & J. Harvey (Eds.). Future directions in heterodox economics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48,147–160. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.). The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (pp. 1-40). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Dolbec, P. Y., & Fischer, E. (2015). Refashioning a field? Connected consumers and institutional dynamics in markets. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(6), 1447–1468. Dunn, M. B., & Jones, C. (2010). Institutional logics and institutional pluralism: The contestation of care and science logics in medical education, 1967-2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 114-49. Edvardsson, B., Kleinaltenkamp, M., Tronvoll, B., et al. (2014). Institutional logics matter when coordinating resource integration. Marketing Theory, 14(3), 291–309. Ellis, N., Jack, G., Hopkinson, G., et al. (2010). Boundary work and identity construction in market exchanges. Marketing Theory, 10(3), 227–236. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management, 14(4), 532–550. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1991). Better stories and better constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic. Academy of Management Review, 16, 620–627. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32. Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American journal of sociology, 103(4), 962–1023. Fligstein, N. (1996). Markets as politics: A political-cultural approach to market institutions. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 656–673. Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In W. W. Powell, & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.). The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (pp.232–263). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Felin, T.; Foss, N. J., & Ployhart R. E. (2015). The microfoundations movement in strategy and organization theory. Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 575–632. Garud, R., Gehman, J., Kumaraswamy, A., et al. (2017). From the process of innovation to innovation as process. In A. Langley, & H. Tsoukas (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Process Organization Studies (pp. 451–465). London, UK: Sage Publishing. Geiger, S., & Kjellberg, H. (2021). Market mash ups: The process of combinatorial market innovation. Journal of Business Research, 124, 445–457. Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press. Giesler, M. (2008). Conflict and compromise: Drama in marketplace evolution. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(6), 739–753. Giesler, M. (2012). How Doppelgänger brand images influence the market creation process: Longitudinal insights from the rise of Botox cosmetic. Journal of Marketing, 76(November), 55–68. Giesler, M., & Fischer, E. (2017). Market system dynamics. Marketing Theory, 17(1), 3–8. Giesler, S., Kjellberg, H., & Spencer, R. (2012). Shaping exchanges, building markets. Consumption Markets & Culture, 15(2), 133–147. Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2012). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: The Sociology Press. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., et al. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317–371. Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., et al. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317–371. Gummesson, E. (2005). Qualitative research in marketing: Road‐map for a wilderness of complexity and unpredictability. European Journal of Marketing, 39(3/4), 309–327. Hietanen, J., & Rokka, J. (2015). Market practices in countercultural market emergence. European Journal of Marketing, 49(9/10), 1563–1588. Hoffman, A. J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. The Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 355–371. Holm, P. (1995). The dynamics of institutionalization: Transformation process in Norwegian fisheries. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 398–422. Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children's education? Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 3–42. Humphreys, A. (2010). Megamarketing: The creation of markets as a social process. Journal of Marketing, 74(March), 1–19. Humphreys, A. & Carpenter, G. S. (2018). Status games: Market driving through social influence in the U.S. wine industry. Journal of Marketing, 82(5), 141–159. Humphreys, A., & Latour, K. A. (2013). Framing the game: Assessing the impact of cultural representations on consumer perception of legitimacy. Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (4), 773–795. Hunt, S. D. (2020). Indigenous theory development in marketing: The foundational premises approach. AMS Review, 10(1–2), 8–17. Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (2017). Conducting field-based, discovery-oriented research: Lessons from our market orientation research experience. AMS Review, 7(1–2), 4–12. Jaworski, B., Kohli, A. K., & Sahay, A. (2000). Market-driven versus driving markets. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 45–54. Jefferies, J. G., Bishop, S., & Hibbert, S. (2019). Customer boundary work to navigate institutional arrangements around service interactions: Exploring the case of telehealth. Journal of Business Research, 105, 420–433. Karepn, I. O., & Kleinaltenkamp, M. (2018). Coordinating resource integration and value cocreation through institutional arrangements: A phenomenological perspective. In S. L. Vargo, & R. F. Lusch (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic (pp. 284–298). London, UK: SAGE Publications Inc. Keller, H. (2000). Human parent-child relationships from an evolutionary perspective. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(6), 957–969. Kjellberg, H. & Helgesson, C. F. (2006). Multiple versions of markets: multiplicity and performativity in market practice. Industrial Marketing Management, 35, 839–855. Kjellberg, H. & Helgesson, C. F. (2007). On the nature of markets and their practices. Marketing Theory, 7(2), 137–162. Kjellberg, H. & Murto, R. (2021). Theorizing markets. AMS Review, 11, 207–215. Kjellberg, H., Azimont, F., & Reid, E. (2015). Market innovation processes: Balancing stability and change. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 4–12. Kjellberg, H., Nenonen, S., & Thomé, K. M. (2018). Analyzing service processes at the micro level: Actors and Practices. In S. L. Vargo, & R. F. Lusch (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic (pp. 411–430). London, UK: SAGE Publications Inc. Kjellberg, H., Storbacka, K., Akaka, M., et al. (2012). Market futures/future markets: Research directions in the study of markets. Marketing Theory, 12(2), 219–223. Kjeldgaard, D., Askegaard, S., Rasmussen, J. Ø., & Østergaard, P. (2017). Consumers’ collective action in market system dynamics: A case of beer. Marketing Theory, 17(1), 51–70. Kleinaltenkamp, M., Corsaro, D., & Sebastiani, R. (2018). The role of proto-institutions within the change of service ecosystems. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 28(5), 609–635. Koskela-Huotari, K., & Siltaloppi, J. (2020). Rethinking the actor in service research: Toward a processual view of identity dynamics. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 30(4/5), 437–457. Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vargo, S. L. (2016). Institutions as resource context. Journal of Services Theory and Practice, 26 (2), 163–178. Koskela-Huotari, K., Vink, J., & Edvardsson, B. (2020). The institutional turn in service research: taking stock and moving ahead. Journal of Services Marketing, 34 (3), 373–387. Koskela-Huotari, K., Edvardsson, B., Jonas, J., et al. (2016). Innovation in service ecosystems: Breaking, making, and maintaining institutionalized rules of resources integration. Journal of Business Research, 69 (8), 2964–2971. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. (2006). Marketing Management (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Pearson Prentice Hall. Kolter, P., Pfoertsch, W., & Sponholz, U. (2021). H2H Marketing: The Genesis of Human-to-Human-Marketing. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Kumar, N., Scheer, L., & Kotler, P. (2000). From market driven to market driving. European Management Journal, 18(2), 129–142. Lawrence, T. B. & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies 2nd ed (pp. 215–254). London: Sage. Lawrence, T. B., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. (2009). Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Levitt, T. (1965). Exploit the product life cycle. Harvard Business Review, 43, 81–94. Lusch, R. F., & Nambisan, S. (2015). Service innovation: A service-dominant logic perspective. MIS Quarterly, 39, 155–175. Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2014). Service-dominant logic: Premises, perspectives, possibilities. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2018). An overview of service-dominant logic. In S. L. Vargo, & R. F. Lusch (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic (pp. 3–21). London, UK: SAGE Publications Inc. Martin, D. M., & Schouten, J. W. (2014). Consumption-driven market emergence. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), 855–870. Mazzucato, M. (2016). From market fixing to market-creating: A new framework for innovation policy. Industry and Innovation, 23(2), 140–156. Mele, C., & Russo-Spena, T. (2015). Innomediary agency and practices in shaping market innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 42–53. Mele, C., Pels, J., & Storbacka, K. (2015). A holistic market conceptualization. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 100–114. Meyer, John W. and Brian Rowan (1977), “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony,” American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–63. Moorman, C., van Heerde, H. J., Moreau, C. P., et al. (2019). Challenging the boundaries of marketing. Journal of Marketing, 83(5), 1–4. Mowery, D., & Rosenberg, N. (1979). The influence of market demand upon innovation: A critical review of some recent empirical studies. Research Policy, 8(2), 102–153. Nenonen, S. & Storbacka, K. (2020). Don't adapt, shape! Use the crisis to shape your minimum viable system – And the wider market. Industrial Marketing Management, 88, 265–271. Nenonen, S., Storbacka, K., & Windahl, C. (2019). Capabilities for market-shaping: triggering and facilitating increased value creation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47, 617–639. Nenonen, S., Kjellberg, H., Pels, J., et al. (2014). A new perspective on market dynamics: Market plasticity and the stability-fluidity dialectics. Marketing Theory, 14(3), 269–289. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. O’Connor, G. C., & Rice, M. P. (2013). New market creation for breakthrough innovations: Enabling and constraining mechanisms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(2), 209–227. O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–13. Pan, S. L., & Tan, B. (2011). Demystifying case research: A structured–pragmatic–situational (SPS) approach to conducting case studies. Information and Organization, 21(3), 161－176. Parrott, T. M., & Bengtson, V. L. (1999). The effects of earlier intergenerational affection, normative expectations and family conflict on contemporary exchanges of help and support. Research on Aging, 21(1), 73–105. Polese, F., Mele, C., & Gummesson, E. (2017). Value co-creation as a complex adaptive process. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 27(5), 926–929. Pop, O.M., Leroi-Werelds, S., Roijakkers, N., et al. (2018). Institutional types and institutional change in healthcare ecosystems, Journal of Service Management, 29(4), 593–614. Prahalad, C.K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creating unique value with customers. Strategy & Leadership, 32(3), 4–9. Read, S., Dew, N., Sarasvathy, S. D., et al. (2009). Marketing under uncertainty: The logic of an effectual approach. Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 1–18. Rosa, J. A., Porac, J. F., Runser-Spanjol. J., et al. (1999). Sociocognitive dynamics in a product market. Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 64–77. Sarasvathy, S. D., & Dew, N. (2005). New market creation through transformation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 15, 533–565. Scaraboto, D., & Fischer, E. (2013). Frustrated fatshionistas: An institutional theory perspective on consumer quests for greater choice in mainstream markets. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(6), 1234–1257. Schatzki, T. R., Knorr-Cetina, K., & von Savigny, E. (2001). The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London: Routledge. Scherer, F.M., & Ross, D. (1990). Industrial Market Structure and Economic Prformance, 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Localism and globalism in institutional analysis: The emergence of contractual norms in venture finance. In W. R. Scott, & S. Christensen (Eds.). The Institutional Construction of Organizations (pp. 39–63). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Schumpeter, J.A. (1947). The creative response in economic history. The Journal of Economic History, 7(2), 149–159. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. London: Foundations for organizational science. Scott, W. R. (2013). Institutions and Organizations, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Seo, M. & Creed, W. E. D. (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical Perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 27 (2), 222–247. Shekhar, S., Manoharan, B., & Rakshit, K. (2020). Going cashless: Change in institutional logic and consumption practices in the face of institutional disruption. Journal of Business Research, 114, 60–79. Siggelkow, N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 20–24. Siltaloppi, J., & Wieland, H. (2018). Institutional change in service ecosystem. In S. L. Vargo, & R. F. Lusch (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic (pp. 299–316). London, UK: SAGE Publications Inc. Siltaloppi, J., Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vargo, S. L. (2016). Institutional complexity as a driver for innovation in service ecosystems. Service Science, 8(3), 333–343. Spiggle, S. (1994). Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(December), 491–503. Sprong, N., Driessena, P. H., Hillebrand, B., & Molner, S. (2021). Market innovation: A literature review and new research directions. Journal of Business Research, 123 (C), 450–462. Stern, B. B., Thompson, C. J., & Arnould, E. J. (1998). Narrative analysis of marketing relationship: The consumer’s perspective. Psychology and Marketing, 15(3), 195–214. Storbacka, A., & Nenonen, S. (2011). Scripting markets: From value propositions to market propositions. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 255–266. Storbacka, A., & Nenonen, S. (2015). Learning with the market: Facilitating market innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 73–82. Thompson, C. J. (1997). Interpreting consumers: A hermeneutical framework for deriving marketing insights from the texts of consumers’ consumption stories. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(4), 438–455. Thronton, P. H. (2004). Markets from Culture: Institutional Logics and Organizational Decisions in Higher Education Publishing. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958– 1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843. Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (2008). Institutional logics. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.). The Sage handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 99–129). London: Sage. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure, and Process. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1996). The institutionalization of institutional theory. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.). Handbook of Organization Studies (pp. 179–190). London: Sage Publications. Vargo, S. L. (2007). On a theory of markets and marketing: From positively normative to normatively positive. Australasian Marketing Journal, 15(1), 53–60. Vargo, S. L., & Akaka, M. A. (2012). Value cocreation and service systems (re)formation: A service ecosystems view. Service Science, 4(3), 207–217. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 1–10. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2011). It's all B2B…and beyond: Toward a systems perspective of the market. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 181–187. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(4), 5–23. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2017). Service-dominant logic 2025. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1), 46–67. Vargo, S. L., Akaka, M. A., & Wieland, H. (2020a). Rethinking the process of diffusion in innovation: A service-ecosystems and institutional perspective. Journal of Business Research, 116(C), 526–534. Vargo, S. L., Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vink, K. (2020b). Service-Dominant Logic: Foundations and Applications. In E. Bridges & K. Fowler (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Service Research Insights and Ideas (pp. 3–12). Routledge. Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 63–72. Vargo, S. L., Koskela-Huotari, K., Baron, S., et al. (2017). A systems perspective on markets ‐ Toward a research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 79(C), 260–268. Vargo, S. L., Peters, L., Kjellberg, H., et al. (2022). Emergence in marketing: An institutional and ecosystem framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-022-00849-8. Vink, J., Edvardsson, B., Wetter-Edman, K., et al. (2019). Reshaping mental models – Enabling innovation through service design. Journal of Service Management, 30(1), 75–104. Voronov, M., Clercq, D. D., & Hinings, C. R. (2013). Institutional complexity and logic engagement: An investigation of Ontario fine wine. Human Relations, 66(12), 1563–1596. Wallin, A. J., & Fuglsang, L. (2017). Service innovations breaking institutionalized rules of health care. Journal of Service Management, 28(5), 972–997. Weber, K., Heinze, K. L., & DeSoucey, M. (2008). Forage for thought: Mobilizing codes in the movement for grass-fed meat and dairy products. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(3), 529–567. Webster, F. E., Jr., & Lusch, R. F. (2013). Elevating marketing: marketing is dead! Long live marketing! Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41, 389–399. Wieland, H., Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vargo, S. L. (2016). Extending actor participation in value creation: An institutional view. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(3-4), 210–226. Yin, R.K. (2014), Case study research: Design and methods, 5th ed. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Zietsma, C., & Lawrence, T. B. (2010). Institutional work in the transformation of an organizational field: The interplay of boundary work and practice work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(2), 189–221. Zietsma, C., & McKnight, B. (2009). Building the iron cage: Institutional creation work in the context of competing proto-institutions. In R. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.). Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations (pp.143–177). New York: Cambridge University Press. Zilber, T. B. (2002). Institutionalization as an interplay between actions, meanings, and actors: The case of a rape crisis center in Israel,” Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 234–254. Zucker, L. G. (1977). The Role of Institutionalization in Cultural Persistence. American Sociological Review, 42(5), 726–743. Zucker, L. G. (1991). Postscript: Microfoundations of institutional thought. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.). The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (pp. 103-106). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92374 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 當今行銷學者更加重視市場的本質具備複雜性與動態性，進而影響市場創新的學術研究開始探問，何以型塑根本結構改變的市場創新。然而，從消費者作為個體行動者的視角，探討造成結構性變化的市場創新機制研究甚少。本研究奠基於服務主導邏輯的制度與服務生態理論觀點，將市場創新視為一系列的制度調和歷程。本研究以解構影響制度複雜度的多重脈絡來源，以及來源間的相容性，深入探討制度複雜度的內涵如何影響個體行動者的制度調和程序，以理解處於多重制度脈絡的個體行動者如何協調出不同的制度安排，進而影響早期市場創新的結果。據此研究目的，本研究透過兩個處於萌芽初期的新興市場個案，同時受到市場與家庭兩種不同制度脈絡來源交織的制度複雜度所影響，分析個體行動者如何協調多重制度安排之間的不一致。
研究結論顯示，行動者的制度調和程序是一個持續循環的動態歷程，歷經進入反思、調動資源、與使實踐規範化等三個階段。受到不同制度複雜度的影響，致使個體行動者的制度調和程序的發展進程，與協調出的制度安排結果各不相同。其中，當個體行動者所處的多重脈絡來源為局部相容時，更能驅使其完成三個階段的制度調和程序，進而有機會創造出新型態的制度安排。本研究據此提出制度脈絡的來源、個體行動者所處的多重制度安排、以及協調制度安排間不一致的制度調和程序，皆會影響市場創新初期發展的成功或失敗。本研究成果除填補市場創新的研究缺口外，也為市場創新的制度複雜性研究奠定了個體觀點的基礎。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Recently, marketing scholars increasingly recognize market’s nature of complexity and dynamics. This inspires market innovation studies to shift the research focus on the exploration of fundamental changes in market structure. However, the existing market innovation literature overlooks individual actors’ agency for contributing to structural changes. This paper extends S-D logic’s institutional and service ecosystems perspective to market innovation which is a process of institutional reconciliation within institutional complexity. The research further defines institutional complexity according to the incompatibility of institutional arrangements originating from different contexts. By decomposing contextual sources and their incompatibilities, this paper aims to investigate institutional reconciliation across contexts at the micro level wherein individual actors reconcile multiple and incompatible institutional arrangements that can lead to or inhibit macro-level market innovation. Two case studies of new market emergence are used to illustrate how individual actors reconcile institutional incompatibility under institutional complexity across the market and the family contexts.
The findings reveal that individual actors pass through a recursive three-phase institutional reconciliation process under institutional complexity: engaging in reflexivity, mobilizing resources, and normalizing practices. Individual actors are embedded within institutional complexity with variable (in)compatibility among different but interrelated institutional arrangements across contexts, which affects their reconciliation processes. The findings show that the partial institutional incompatibility across contexts enable individual actors to proceed through three-phase institutional reconciliation process at one go, creating novel institutional arrangements. The current study affirms the contextual source, the surrounding institutional arrangements, and the process through which actors reconcile themselves with the incompatible institutional arrangements have important impacts on market innovation outcomes. This paper contributes to the market innovation literature by explaining that institutional complexity affects the institutional reconciliation process at the individual level, leading to uncertain market innovation outcomes at early stages. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-03-22T16:11:55Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-03-22T16:11:55Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 i
謝辭 ii 中文摘要 iii ABSTRACT iv 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 7 2.1 Market Innovation 7 2.2 Institutional and Service-ecosystems Perspective of Market Innovation 23 2.3 Institutional Complexity 31 2.4 Institutional Reconciliation 39 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 45 3.1 Sampling and Data Collection 45 3.2 Data Analysis 49 4. FINDINGS 53 4.1 Institutional Arrangements of The Two Cases 53 4.2 Engaging in Reflexivity 57 4.3 Mobilizing Resources 65 4.4 Normalizing Practices 72 5. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS 79 6. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH SUGGESTIONS 88 7. CONCLUSIONS 90 REFERENCES 92 APPENDIX 113 | - |
| dc.language.iso | en | - |
| dc.subject | 個體觀點 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 制度調和 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 制度複雜 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 制度安排 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 服務主導邏輯 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 市場創新 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Individual perspective | en |
| dc.subject | Market innovation | en |
| dc.subject | Institutional reconciliation | en |
| dc.subject | Institutional complexity | en |
| dc.subject | Institutional arrangements | en |
| dc.subject | Service-dominant logic | en |
| dc.title | 從制度調和歷程探討市場創新 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Market Innovation as A Process of Institutional Reconciliation | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 112-1 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 博士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 黃恆獎;陳厚銘;陳瑀屏;黃秀英 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Heng-Chiang Huang;Ho-Min Chen;Yu-Ping Chen;Hsiu-Ying Huang | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 市場創新,制度調和,制度複雜,制度安排,服務主導邏輯,個體觀點, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Market innovation,Institutional reconciliation,Institutional complexity,Institutional arrangements,Service-dominant logic,Individual perspective, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 114 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202304214 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2023-09-11 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 國際企業學系 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2024-09-07 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 國際企業學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-112-1.pdf | 2.82 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。