學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 共生到創生：區域生態系的調適歷程
From Coexistence to Co-creation: The Adaptive Process of Regional Ecosystems作者 陳懿軒
Chen, Yi-Syuan貢獻者 蕭瑞麟
Hsiao, Ruey-Lin
陳懿軒
Chen, Yi-Syuan關鍵詞 生態系
永續發展
組織識別
組織印象
利害關係人
Ecosystem
Sustainability development
Organization identification
Organization image
Stakeholder日期 2023 上傳時間 1-Sep-2023 14:51:25 (UTC+8) 摘要 生態系的願景是讓成員共榮，但考量各成員利益，要達成此目標需化解諸多挑戰。本研究探討生態系建構的過程，分析不同階段的挑戰及統籌者的回應方式。雖然目前文獻強調生態系的構成與成員的互動，但是比較少考量統籌者的角色。透過瞭解組織調適過程，本研究分析統籌者與利害關係人之間的互動，並且藉由這樣的互動，理解組織識別與組織印象之間的衝擊如何促成統籌者的調適行動。本文以臺灣水泥為案例，分析該企業在花蓮和平工業區發展過程中所遭遇到的在地抗爭，並追溯發展的五個階段。由調適的視角，本文分析臺灣水泥在每個階段如何回應利害關係人的挑戰，以逐步取得當地的信任。在理論貢獻上，本研究解釋組織識別如何引導維護行動，造成對利害關係人的衝擊。該衝擊又如何形成利害關係人對統籌者的組織印象，而正面或負面的印象如何促成統籌者的反思，進一步調整其修補的行動。在實務啟發上，本研究提出生態系的經營必須要擁抱因地制宜的思維。治標不治本的補償做法效果有限，師心自用的永續方案難以獲得認可。企業必須時常關注自己在利害關係人眼中的形象，反思自身的做法，才能資源投入在最恰當之處，讓企業與地方共榮，也讓生態系得以永續發展。
This research explores the development process of ecosystem construction and analyzes the challenges facing at different stages. Although the current literature emphasizes the composition of ecosystem and the interaction of players, it pays insufficient attention to the role of ecosystem’s orchestrator. By tracing the organization adaptive process, this study examines the interaction between orchestrator and stakeholders. Through such interaction, it explains how the adaptive action leads to the formation of organization image on its impact on identity. This article examines Taiwan Cement Corporation as a case study to analyze the local struggle encountered by the company in the process of operating in Hualien Hoping industrial park, trace the five stages of development. From the adaption perspective this paper analyzes how the firm respond to the challenges of stakeholder at each stage and gradually gain local trust. Theoretically, this study contributes to how organization identity may guide maintenance action and how it would impact on stakeholders. Moreover, it explains how such impact shapes the stakeholder’s perception of the orchestrator. We also need to explore when the image is formed, whether it is good or bad, would lead to the orchestrator’s reflection and eventually adjust its repair actions. So practical implication this study proposes that the management of ecosystem must embrace the logics of localization. One-off compensation is not desirable, and opinionated solutions for sustainability are not sensible. Enterprises should be vigilant against their impression in the eyes of stakeholders by reflecting on their own sustainability practices, so that resources can be invested in the most appropriate areas, enterprises may thrive with the local, and sustainable ecology can be invested in the most appropriate place. Therefore, enterprises and places can prosper together, and ecosystem can be sustained.參考文獻 中文文獻翁晶晶、易莉翔，2022，「制度邏輯之演化：從企業社會責任的發展探討商業永續」，《中山管理評論》，第5期，第30卷，809-856頁。許永明，2021，「從學術文獻探討CSR作為企業策略性運用工具：過去，現在與未來」，《管理學報》，第4期，第38卷，477-495頁。趙雨潔、廖翊翔，2021，「集體隨創與展演共創：185農夫市集生態系統」，《中山管理評論》，第3期，第29卷，515-550頁。鄭至甫、康瓈云，2022，「創生不息：新創企業與創業生態系統之互動」，《組織與管理》，第2期，第15卷，55-112頁。謝美珍、林婷鈴、陳逸媛，2021，「物資循環、共創共享價值及生態系統建立：以小型社會企業『贈物網』為例」，《中山管理評論》，第3期，第29卷，467-514頁。蕭瑞麟，2020，《不用數字的研究：質性研究的思辨脈絡》，台北：五南學術原創專書系列。蕭瑞麟，2020，《服務隨創：少力設計的邏輯思維》，台北：五南學術原創專書系列。英文文獻Adner, R. 2006. Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard Business Review, 84(4): 98-107.Adner, R. 2017. Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1): 39-58.Adner, R. 2022. Sharing value for ecosystem success. Sloan Management Review, 63(2): 85-90.Altman, E., & Nagle, F. 2020. Accelerating innovation through a network of ecosystems: What companies can learn from one of the world’s largest networks of accelerator labs. Sloan Management Review, 61(4): 24-30.Ansari, S., Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. 2015. The disruptor`s dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 1829-1853.Brannen, M. Y. 2004. When Mickey loses face: Recontextualization, semantic fit, and the semiotics of foreignness. Academy of Management Review, 29(4): 593-616.Chesbrough, H., Kim, S., & Agogino, A. 2014. Chez Panisse: Building an open innovation ecosystem. California Management Review, 56(4): 144-171.Dattée, B., Alexy, O., & Autio, E. 2017. Maneuvering in poor visibility: How firms play the ecosystem game when uncertainty is high. Academy of Management Journal, 61(2): 466–498.Decreton, B., Monteiro, F., Frangos, J.-M., & Friedman, L. 2021. Innovation outposts in entrepreneurial ecosystems: How to make them more successful. California Management Review, 63(3): 94-117.DeJordy, R., Scully, M., Ventresca, M., & Creed, W. E. 2020. Inhabited ecosystems: Propelling transformative social change between and through organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65(4): 931-971.Dukerich, J. M., Golden, B. R., & Shortell, S. M. 2002. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: The impact of organizational identification, identity, and image on the cooperative behaviors of physicians. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(3): 507.Dutton, J., & Dukerich, J. 1991. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 517-554.Fuller, J., Jacobides, M. G., & Reeves, M. 2019. The myths and realities of business ecosystems. Sloan Management Review, 60(3): 1-9.Furr, N., & Shipilov, A. 2018. Building the right ecosystem for innovation. Sloan Management Review, 59(4): 59-64.Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M., & Corley, K. G. 2000. Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability. Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 63-81,.Gioia, D. A., & Thomas, J. B. 1996. Identity, image and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 370-403.Hampel, C., Tracey, P., & Weber, K. 2020. The art of the pivot: how new ventures manage identification relationships with stakeholders as they change direction. The Academy of Management Journal, 63(2): 440-471.Hargadon, A. B., & Douglas, Y. 2001. When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of the electric light. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3): 476-514.Holgersson, M., Baldwin, C., Chesbrough, H., & Bogers, M. 2022. The forces of ecosystem evolution. California Management Review, 64(3): 5-23.Ihrig, M., & MacMillan, I. 2017. How to get ecosystem buy-in. Harvard Business Review, March–April 2017: 102-107.Iyer, B., Lee, C.-H., & Venkatraman, N. 2006. Managing in a "small world ecosystem": Lessons from the software sector. California Management Review, 48(3): 28-47.Jacobides, M. G. 2019. In the ecosystem economy, what is your strategy? Harvard Business Review, 97(5): 128-137.Jacobides, M. G. 2022. How to compete when industries digitize and collide: An ecosystem development framework. California Management Review, 64(3): 99-123.Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. 2018. Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8): 2255-2276.Kanter, R. 2012. Enriching the ecosystem. Harvard Business Review, 90(3): 140-147.Kramer, M. R., & Pfitzer, M. W. 2016. The ecosystem of shared value. Harvard Business Review, 94(10): 80-89.Lingens, B., Böger, M., & Gassmann, O. 2021. Even a small conductor can lead a large orchestra: how startups orchestrate ecosystems. California Management Review, 63(3): 118-143.Moore, J. 1993. Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3): 75-86.Peloza, J., Loock, M., Cerruti, J., & Muyot, M. 2012. Sustainability: How stakeholder perceptions differ from corporate reality. California Management Review, 55(1): 74-97.Randhawa, K., West, J., Skellern, K., & Josserand, E. 2021. Evolving a value chain to an open innovation ecosystem: cognitive engagement of stakeholders in customizing medical implants. California Management Review, 63(2): 101-134.Schmeiss, J., Hölzle, K., & Tech, R. 2019. Designing governance mechanisms in platform ecosystems: Addressing the paradox of openness through blockchain technology. California Management Review, 62(1): 121-143.Sebastian, I. M., Weill, P., & Woerner, S. L. 2020. Driving growth in digital ecosystems. Sloan Management Review, 62(1): 58-62.Siggelkow, N., & Levinthal, D. A. 2003. Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation. Organization Science, 14(6): 650-669.Skarmeas, D., & Leonidou, C. 2013. When consumers doubt, watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10): 1831-1838.Stonig, J., Schmid, T., & Müller-Stewens, G. 2022. From product system to ecosystem: How firms adapt to provide an integrated value proposition. Strategic Management Journal, 43(9): 1927-1957.Visnjic, I., Neely, A., Cennamo, C., & Visnjic, N. 2016. Governing the city: Unleashing value from the business ecosystem. California Management Review, 59(1): 109-140.Wessel, M., Levie, A., & Siegel, R. 2016. The problem with legacy ecosystems. Harvard Business Review, November 2016: 68-74.Williamson, P., & De Meyer, A. 2012. Ecosystem advantage: How to successfully harness the power of partners. California Management Review, 55(1): 24-46.Zaoual, A.-R., & Lecocq, X. 2018. Orchestrating circularity within industrial ecosystems: Lessons from iconic cases in three different countries. California Management Review, 60(3): 133-156.Zeng, M. 2018. Alibaba and the future of business. Harvard Business Review, 96(5): 88-96. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
110364126資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110364126 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 蕭瑞麟 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Hsiao, Ruey-Lin en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 陳懿軒 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chen, Yi-Syuan en_US dc.creator (作者) 陳懿軒 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Chen, Yi-Syuan en_US dc.date (日期) 2023 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Sep-2023 14:51:25 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Sep-2023 14:51:25 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Sep-2023 14:51:25 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0110364126 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/146879 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 科技管理與智慧財產研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 110364126 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 生態系的願景是讓成員共榮，但考量各成員利益，要達成此目標需化解諸多挑戰。本研究探討生態系建構的過程，分析不同階段的挑戰及統籌者的回應方式。雖然目前文獻強調生態系的構成與成員的互動，但是比較少考量統籌者的角色。透過瞭解組織調適過程，本研究分析統籌者與利害關係人之間的互動，並且藉由這樣的互動，理解組織識別與組織印象之間的衝擊如何促成統籌者的調適行動。本文以臺灣水泥為案例，分析該企業在花蓮和平工業區發展過程中所遭遇到的在地抗爭，並追溯發展的五個階段。由調適的視角，本文分析臺灣水泥在每個階段如何回應利害關係人的挑戰，以逐步取得當地的信任。在理論貢獻上，本研究解釋組織識別如何引導維護行動，造成對利害關係人的衝擊。該衝擊又如何形成利害關係人對統籌者的組織印象，而正面或負面的印象如何促成統籌者的反思，進一步調整其修補的行動。在實務啟發上，本研究提出生態系的經營必須要擁抱因地制宜的思維。治標不治本的補償做法效果有限，師心自用的永續方案難以獲得認可。企業必須時常關注自己在利害關係人眼中的形象，反思自身的做法，才能資源投入在最恰當之處，讓企業與地方共榮，也讓生態系得以永續發展。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) This research explores the development process of ecosystem construction and analyzes the challenges facing at different stages. Although the current literature emphasizes the composition of ecosystem and the interaction of players, it pays insufficient attention to the role of ecosystem’s orchestrator. By tracing the organization adaptive process, this study examines the interaction between orchestrator and stakeholders. Through such interaction, it explains how the adaptive action leads to the formation of organization image on its impact on identity. This article examines Taiwan Cement Corporation as a case study to analyze the local struggle encountered by the company in the process of operating in Hualien Hoping industrial park, trace the five stages of development. From the adaption perspective this paper analyzes how the firm respond to the challenges of stakeholder at each stage and gradually gain local trust. Theoretically, this study contributes to how organization identity may guide maintenance action and how it would impact on stakeholders. Moreover, it explains how such impact shapes the stakeholder’s perception of the orchestrator. We also need to explore when the image is formed, whether it is good or bad, would lead to the orchestrator’s reflection and eventually adjust its repair actions. So practical implication this study proposes that the management of ecosystem must embrace the logics of localization. One-off compensation is not desirable, and opinionated solutions for sustainability are not sensible. Enterprises should be vigilant against their impression in the eyes of stakeholders by reflecting on their own sustainability practices, so that resources can be invested in the most appropriate areas, enterprises may thrive with the local, and sustainable ecology can be invested in the most appropriate place. Therefore, enterprises and places can prosper together, and ecosystem can be sustained. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 聲明頁 I感謝誌 II中文摘要 III英文摘要 IV圖目錄 VIII表目錄 IX壹、緒論 10第一節 研究動機 10一、實務動機 10二、理論動機 12第二節 研究目的 13一、理解階段性演化 13二、探索多樣性回應 13三、分析動態性調適 14第三節 預期效益 14一、論文章節佈局 14二、預期學術貢獻 15三、預期實務貢獻 16貳、文獻回顧 18第一節 專有名詞定義 18一、定義生態系：不同角色與類型 18二、定義調適：識別與形象 20三、文獻回顧統整 20第二節 生態系的構成觀點 22ㄧ、成員組成 22二、互補資源 24三、價值主張 25第三節 生態系的互動觀點 27一、利害關係人的認知 27二、夥伴的認知 28三、跨域合作的認知 29第四節 理論缺口─統籌者的調適 31一、統籌者與其他角色的互動 31二、不同階段的挑戰與調適 32三、識別與印象的衝突 34參、研究方法 35第一節 理論取樣 35一、具備完整的基本元素 35二、互利共榮的前提為化解矛盾 36三、統籌者需有自我調適機制 37第二節 案例選擇 38第三節 資料分析架構 39一、分析架構發展 39二、資料分析步驟 40第四節 資料蒐集過程 42肆、研究發現 46第一節 案例背景─DAKA的瞭望 46第二節 第一階段調適 48一、識別與維護行動 49二、印象與修補行動 51第三節 第二階段調適 53一、識別與維護行動 54二、印象與修補行動 55第四節 第三階段調適 58一、識別與維護行動 59二、印象與修補行動 60第五節 第四階段調適 61一、識別與維護行動 62二、印象與修補行動 63第六節 第五階段調適 66一、識別與維護行動 67二、印象與目前成果 71伍、討論 75第一節 學術意涵 75一、反思生態系中的組織識別 75二、分析利害關係人的衝擊與印象的形成 76三、觀察永續生態系中如何持續維護識別與修補印象 77第二節 實務啟示 78一、對生態系的啟發：理解在地需求才能有效回應利害關係人 78二、對統籌者的啟發：生態系建構的關鍵在於組織形象的調適 79三、對永續的啟發：永續發展需考量在地脈絡的特殊性 80第三節 研究限制與未來方向 81一、探索生態系中統籌者的角色變化 81二、探索調適過程的維護與修補 82三、探索永續方案的再脈絡議題 83陸、結論 85參考文獻 86附錄：論文口試答覆稿 90 zh_TW dc.format.extent 3251791 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110364126 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 生態系 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 永續發展 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 組織識別 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 組織印象 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 利害關係人 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Ecosystem en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Sustainability development en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Organization identification en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Organization image en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Stakeholder en_US dc.title (題名) 共生到創生：區域生態系的調適歷程 zh_TW dc.title (題名) From Coexistence to Co-creation: The Adaptive Process of Regional Ecosystems en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文文獻翁晶晶、易莉翔，2022，「制度邏輯之演化：從企業社會責任的發展探討商業永續」，《中山管理評論》，第5期，第30卷，809-856頁。許永明，2021，「從學術文獻探討CSR作為企業策略性運用工具：過去，現在與未來」，《管理學報》，第4期，第38卷，477-495頁。趙雨潔、廖翊翔，2021，「集體隨創與展演共創：185農夫市集生態系統」，《中山管理評論》，第3期，第29卷，515-550頁。鄭至甫、康瓈云，2022，「創生不息：新創企業與創業生態系統之互動」，《組織與管理》，第2期，第15卷，55-112頁。謝美珍、林婷鈴、陳逸媛，2021，「物資循環、共創共享價值及生態系統建立：以小型社會企業『贈物網』為例」，《中山管理評論》，第3期，第29卷，467-514頁。蕭瑞麟，2020，《不用數字的研究：質性研究的思辨脈絡》，台北：五南學術原創專書系列。蕭瑞麟，2020，《服務隨創：少力設計的邏輯思維》，台北：五南學術原創專書系列。英文文獻Adner, R. 2006. Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard Business Review, 84(4): 98-107.Adner, R. 2017. Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1): 39-58.Adner, R. 2022. Sharing value for ecosystem success. Sloan Management Review, 63(2): 85-90.Altman, E., & Nagle, F. 2020. Accelerating innovation through a network of ecosystems: What companies can learn from one of the world’s largest networks of accelerator labs. Sloan Management Review, 61(4): 24-30.Ansari, S., Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. 2015. The disruptor`s dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 1829-1853.Brannen, M. Y. 2004. When Mickey loses face: Recontextualization, semantic fit, and the semiotics of foreignness. Academy of Management Review, 29(4): 593-616.Chesbrough, H., Kim, S., & Agogino, A. 2014. Chez Panisse: Building an open innovation ecosystem. California Management Review, 56(4): 144-171.Dattée, B., Alexy, O., & Autio, E. 2017. Maneuvering in poor visibility: How firms play the ecosystem game when uncertainty is high. Academy of Management Journal, 61(2): 466–498.Decreton, B., Monteiro, F., Frangos, J.-M., & Friedman, L. 2021. Innovation outposts in entrepreneurial ecosystems: How to make them more successful. California Management Review, 63(3): 94-117.DeJordy, R., Scully, M., Ventresca, M., & Creed, W. E. 2020. Inhabited ecosystems: Propelling transformative social change between and through organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65(4): 931-971.Dukerich, J. M., Golden, B. R., & Shortell, S. M. 2002. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: The impact of organizational identification, identity, and image on the cooperative behaviors of physicians. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(3): 507.Dutton, J., & Dukerich, J. 1991. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 517-554.Fuller, J., Jacobides, M. G., & Reeves, M. 2019. The myths and realities of business ecosystems. Sloan Management Review, 60(3): 1-9.Furr, N., & Shipilov, A. 2018. Building the right ecosystem for innovation. Sloan Management Review, 59(4): 59-64.Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M., & Corley, K. G. 2000. Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability. Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 63-81,.Gioia, D. A., & Thomas, J. B. 1996. Identity, image and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 370-403.Hampel, C., Tracey, P., & Weber, K. 2020. The art of the pivot: how new ventures manage identification relationships with stakeholders as they change direction. The Academy of Management Journal, 63(2): 440-471.Hargadon, A. B., & Douglas, Y. 2001. When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of the electric light. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3): 476-514.Holgersson, M., Baldwin, C., Chesbrough, H., & Bogers, M. 2022. The forces of ecosystem evolution. California Management Review, 64(3): 5-23.Ihrig, M., & MacMillan, I. 2017. How to get ecosystem buy-in. Harvard Business Review, March–April 2017: 102-107.Iyer, B., Lee, C.-H., & Venkatraman, N. 2006. Managing in a "small world ecosystem": Lessons from the software sector. California Management Review, 48(3): 28-47.Jacobides, M. G. 2019. In the ecosystem economy, what is your strategy? Harvard Business Review, 97(5): 128-137.Jacobides, M. G. 2022. How to compete when industries digitize and collide: An ecosystem development framework. California Management Review, 64(3): 99-123.Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. 2018. Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8): 2255-2276.Kanter, R. 2012. Enriching the ecosystem. Harvard Business Review, 90(3): 140-147.Kramer, M. R., & Pfitzer, M. W. 2016. The ecosystem of shared value. Harvard Business Review, 94(10): 80-89.Lingens, B., Böger, M., & Gassmann, O. 2021. Even a small conductor can lead a large orchestra: how startups orchestrate ecosystems. California Management Review, 63(3): 118-143.Moore, J. 1993. Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3): 75-86.Peloza, J., Loock, M., Cerruti, J., & Muyot, M. 2012. Sustainability: How stakeholder perceptions differ from corporate reality. California Management Review, 55(1): 74-97.Randhawa, K., West, J., Skellern, K., & Josserand, E. 2021. Evolving a value chain to an open innovation ecosystem: cognitive engagement of stakeholders in customizing medical implants. California Management Review, 63(2): 101-134.Schmeiss, J., Hölzle, K., & Tech, R. 2019. Designing governance mechanisms in platform ecosystems: Addressing the paradox of openness through blockchain technology. California Management Review, 62(1): 121-143.Sebastian, I. M., Weill, P., & Woerner, S. L. 2020. Driving growth in digital ecosystems. Sloan Management Review, 62(1): 58-62.Siggelkow, N., & Levinthal, D. A. 2003. Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation. Organization Science, 14(6): 650-669.Skarmeas, D., & Leonidou, C. 2013. When consumers doubt, watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10): 1831-1838.Stonig, J., Schmid, T., & Müller-Stewens, G. 2022. From product system to ecosystem: How firms adapt to provide an integrated value proposition. Strategic Management Journal, 43(9): 1927-1957.Visnjic, I., Neely, A., Cennamo, C., & Visnjic, N. 2016. Governing the city: Unleashing value from the business ecosystem. California Management Review, 59(1): 109-140.Wessel, M., Levie, A., & Siegel, R. 2016. The problem with legacy ecosystems. Harvard Business Review, November 2016: 68-74.Williamson, P., & De Meyer, A. 2012. Ecosystem advantage: How to successfully harness the power of partners. California Management Review, 55(1): 24-46.Zaoual, A.-R., & Lecocq, X. 2018. Orchestrating circularity within industrial ecosystems: Lessons from iconic cases in three different countries. California Management Review, 60(3): 133-156.Zeng, M. 2018. Alibaba and the future of business. Harvard Business Review, 96(5): 88-96. zh_TW
