Economic vs. Organisational perspective on inter-organisational relations’ analysis – are economists on the dead-end track?

0Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Inter-organizational relations (IORs), complex constructs existing on the verge of companies’ boundaries, are a popular area of managerial and aca-demic investigation, due to their ability to create sustainable competitive ad-vantage. The aim of the article is to show applicability, insights and limitations of economic perspective in IORs analysis. By reviewing advances of selected economic and organizational theories exploring IORs, we will try to answer the following questions: − Can economic thought add any novelty to IOR analysis in the era of dynamic global shifts in competitive environment? Are economic lenses still useful and applicable here? − Do organizational sciences’ academics take more practical, down to earth approach, or have they just moved forward (or blurred the clarity of) their theories by employing advances from social sciences, like sociology and psycholo-gy? − Are these two perspectives contradictory or supplementary? The article is divided into four parts. Firstly, we propose an analytical framework to study inter-organizational relations, secondly we analyze the theories focused on IORs as results of rational choices; thirdly, we move to theories exploring the reasons why IORs are built in a specific way, and then to concepts looking for conditions, methods and key drivers of IORs successful management. In con-clusion, we give a brief summary of the main findings together with the limitations and areas open for further investigation of inter-organizational relations.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stępień, B., & Sulimowska-Formowicz, M. (2016). Economic vs. Organisational perspective on inter-organisational relations’ analysis – are economists on the dead-end track? Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 11(1), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.12775/EQUIL.2016.008

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free