management theory case study

Management: Theory and Practice, and Cases

• A novel-based series of books is incorporating the "hero's journey" classic story structure along with the creation of associated fictional case characters designed to engage readers in the dimensions of human behavior, decision making, and judgments in carrying out the work of the modern corporation.

Author Abstract

This working paper reports on a major Harvard Business School project designed to enhance MBA and practicing executives in case learning. The work is built on the foundation of HBS field cases employing the monomyth "hero's journey" classic story structure along with the creation of associated fictional case characters designed to engage readers in the dimensions of human behavior, decision making, and judgments in carrying out the work of the modern corporation. A most fortuitous event in starting the project was the engagement of our research assistant who has a theater academic background and experience as a scriptwriter and director at a repertory theater. Shannon O'Connell noted that our collection of field cases on learning to become a successful functional manager had the potential to be organized into an executive's "hero's journey." This set off a process: (1) completing our field cases to encompass the issue domain of an IT functional manager; (2) recrafting the cases from multiple industries to include one industry; (3) integrating the key characters of monomyth hero's journey; and (4) writing the case dialogue for the protagonist, Jim Barton, hero's journey. The result was our novel-based Harvard Business Press book: Adventures of an IT Leader (2009). In our Adventures book, we experimented with mechanisms to facilitate active learning such as Jim Barton's "living whiteboard," whereby Barton kept a running list of ideas associated with a set of evolving principles of IT management. Another mechanism we used to facilitate reader/student introspection was end-of-chapter/cases Reflections. Also, we experimented with audio versions of book chapters in the classroom. We went on to continue Jim Barton's hero's journey in a second Harvard Business Press book using the same novel format but a different industry and executive context: Harder Than I Thought: Adventures of a Twenty-First Century Leader (2013). The book focuses on CEO leadership in the global economy and the fast-changing IT-enabled pace of business. We extended the mechanism of Barton's living whiteboard to interludes in the book of simulations and avatars to explore CEO decision making.

Paper Information

• Full Working Paper Text
• Working Paper Publication Date: September 2013
• HBS Working Paper Number: 14-026
• Faculty Unit(s): General Management
• 25 Jun 2024
• Research & Ideas

Rapport: The Hidden Advantage That Women Managers Bring to Teams

• 11 Jun 2024
• In Practice

The Harvard Business School Faculty Summer Reader 2024

How transparency sped innovation in a $13 billion wireless sector.

• 24 Jan 2024

Why Boeing’s Problems with the 737 MAX Began More Than 25 Years Ago

• 27 Jun 2016

These Management Practices, Like Certain Technologies, Boost Company Performance

• Business Education
• Innovation Leadership
• Leadership Development
• Management Analysis, Tools, and Techniques

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

What the Case Study Method Really Teaches

• Nitin Nohria

Seven meta-skills that stick even if the cases fade from memory.

It’s been 100 years since Harvard Business School began using the case study method. Beyond teaching specific subject matter, the case study method excels in instilling meta-skills in students. This article explains the importance of seven such skills: preparation, discernment, bias recognition, judgement, collaboration, curiosity, and self-confidence.

During my decade as dean of Harvard Business School, I spent hundreds of hours talking with our alumni. To enliven these conversations, I relied on a favorite question: “What was the most important thing you learned from your time in our MBA program?”

• Nitin Nohria is the George F. Baker Jr. and Distinguished Service University Professor. He served as the 10th dean of Harvard Business School, from 2010 to 2020.

Change Management: From Theory to Practice

Jeffrey phillips.

1 University Libraries, Florida State University, 116 Honors Way, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA

James D. Klein

2 Department of Educational Psychology & Learning Systems, College of Education, Florida State University, Stone Building-3205F, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4453 USA

This article presents a set of change management strategies found across several models and frameworks and identifies how frequently change management practitioners implement these strategies in practice. We searched the literature to identify 15 common strategies found in 16 different change management models and frameworks. We also created a questionnaire based on the literature and distributed it to change management practitioners. Findings suggest that strategies related to communication, stakeholder involvement, encouragement, organizational culture, vision, and mission should be used when implementing organizational change.

Organizations must change to survive. There are many approaches to influence change; these differences require change managers to consider various strategies that increase acceptance and reduce barriers. A change manager is responsible for planning, developing, leading, evaluating, assessing, supporting, and sustaining a change implementation. Change management consists of models and strategies to help employees accept new organizational developments.

Change management practitioners and academic researchers view organizational change differently (Hughes, 2007 ; Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Saka ( 2003 ) states, “there is a gap between what the rational-linear change management approach prescribes and what change agents do” (p. 483). This disconnect may make it difficult to determine the suitability and appropriateness of using different techniques to promote change (Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Hughes ( 2007 ) thinks that practitioners and academics may have trouble communicating because they use different terms. Whereas academics use the terms, models, theories, and concepts, practitioners use tools and techniques. A tool is a stand-alone application, and a technique is an integrated approach (Dale & McQuater, 1998 ). Hughes ( 2007 ) expresses that classifying change management tools and techniques can help academics identify what practitioners do in the field and evaluate the effectiveness of practitioners’ implementations.

There is little empirical evidence that supports a preferred change management model (Hallencreutz & Turner, 2011 ). However, there are many similar strategies found across change management models (Raineri, 2011 ). Bamford and Forrester’s ( 2003 ) case study showed that “[change] managers in a company generally ignored the popular change literature” (p. 560). The authors followed Pettigrew’s ( 1987 ) suggestions that change managers should not use abstract theories; instead, they should relate change theories to the context of the change. Neves’ ( 2009 ) exploratory factor analysis of employees experiencing the implementation of a new performance appraisal system at a public university suggested that (a) change appropriateness (if the employee felt the change was beneficial to the organization) was positively related with affective commitment (how much the employee liked their job), and (b) affective commitment mediated the relationship between change appropriateness and individual change (how much the employee shifted to the new system). It is unlikely that there is a universal change management approach that works in all settings (Saka, 2003 ). Because change is chaotic, one specific model or framework may not be useful in multiple contexts (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992 ; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1991 ). This requires change managers to consider various approaches for different implementations (Pettigrew, 1987 ). Change managers may face uncertainties that cannot be addressed by a planned sequence of steps (Carnall, 2007 ; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1991 ). Different stakeholders within an organization may complete steps at different times (Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Although there may not be one perspective change management approach, many models and frameworks consist of similar change management strategies.

Anderson and Ackerman Anderson ( 2001 ) discuss the differences between change frameworks and change process models. They state that a change framework identifies topics that are relevant to the change and explains the procedures that organizations should acknowledge during the change. However, the framework does not provide details about how to accomplish the steps of the change or the sequence in which the change manager should perform the steps. Additionally, Anderson and Ackerman Anderson ( 2001 ) explain that change process models describe what actions are necessary to accomplish the change and the order in which to facilitate the actions. Whereas frameworks may identify variables or theories required to promote change, models focus on the specific processes that lead to change. Based on the literature, we define a change strategy as a process or action from a model or framework. Multiple models and frameworks contain similar strategies. Change managers use models and frameworks contextually; some change management strategies may be used across numerous models and frameworks.

The purpose of this article is to present a common set of change management strategies found across numerous models and frameworks and identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these common strategies in practice. We also compare current practice with models and frameworks from the literature. Some change management models and frameworks have been around for decades and others are more recent. This comparison may assist practitioners and theorists to consider different strategies that fall outside a specific model.

Common Strategies in the Change Management Literature

We examined highly-cited publications ( n  > 1000 citations) from the last 20 years, business websites, and university websites to select organizational change management models and frameworks. First, we searched two indexes—Google Scholar and Web of Science’s Social Science Citation Index. We used the following keywords in both indexes: “change management” OR “organizational change” OR “organizational development” AND (models or frameworks). Additionally, we used the same search terms in a Google search to identify models mentioned on university and business websites. This helped us identify change management models that had less presence in popular research. We only included models and frameworks from our search results that were mentioned on multiple websites. We reached saturation when multiple publications stopped identifying new models and frameworks.

After we identified the models and frameworks, we analyzed the original publications by the authors to identify observable strategies included in the models and frameworks. We coded the strategies by comparing new strategies with our previously coded strategies, and we combined similar strategies or created a new strategy. Our list of strategies was not exhaustive, but we included the most common strategies found in the publications. Finally, we omitted publications that did not provide details about the change management strategies. Although many of these publications were highly cited and identified change implementation processes or phases, the authors did not identify a specific strategy.

Table ​ Table1 1 shows the 16 models and frameworks that we analyzed and the 15 common strategies that we identified from this analysis. Ackerman-Anderson and Anderson ( 2001 ) believe that it is important for process models to consider organizational imperatives as well as human dynamics and needs. Therefore, the list of strategies considers organizational imperatives such as create a vision for the change that aligns with the organization’s mission and strategies regarding human dynamics and needs such as listen to employees’ concerns about the change. We have presented the strategies in order of how frequently the strategies appear in the models and frameworks. Table ​ Table1 1 only includes strategies found in at least six of the models or frameworks.

Common strategies in the change management literature

A = ADKAR (Hiatt, 2006 ); AA = Ackerman Anderson and Anderson ( 2001 ); B = Bridges ( 1991 ); BB = Buchanan and Boddy ( 1992 ); BH = Beckhard and Harris ( 1987 ); C = Carnall ( 2007 ); CW = Cummings and Worley ( 1993 ); FB = French and Bell ( 1999 ); GE = GE CAP model (Neri et al., 2008 ; Polk, 2011 ); K = Kotter ( 2012 ); KSJ = Kanter et al. ( 1992 ); L = Lewin’s Three-step model (Bakari et al., 2017 ; Lewin, 1951 ); LK = Luecke ( 2003 ); M = McKinsey’s 7-S framework (Cox et al., 2019 ; Waterman et al., 1980 ); N = Nadler and Tushman ( 1997 ); PW = Pettigrew and Whipp (1993)

Strategies Used by Change Managers

We developed an online questionnaire to determine how frequently change managers used the strategies identified in our review of the literature. The Qualtrics-hosted survey consisted of 28 questions including sliding-scale, multiple-choice, and Likert-type items. Demographic questions focused on (a) how long the participant had been involved in the practice of change management, (b) how many change projects the participant had led, (c) the types of industries in which the participant led change implementations, (d) what percentage of job responsibilities involved working as a change manager and a project manager, and (e) where the participant learned to conduct change management. Twenty-one Likert-type items asked how often the participant used the strategies identified by our review of common change management models and frameworks. Participants could select never, sometimes, most of the time, and always. The Cronbach’s Alpha of the Likert-scale questions was 0.86.

The procedures for the questionnaire followed the steps suggested by Gall et al. ( 2003 ). The first steps were to define the research objectives, select the sample, and design the questionnaire format. The fourth step was to pretest the questionnaire. We conducted cognitive laboratory interviews by sending the questionnaire and interview questions to one person who was in the field of change management, one person who was in the field of performance improvement, and one person who was in the field of survey development (Fowler, 2014 ). We met with the reviewers through Zoom to evaluate the questionnaire by asking them to read the directions and each item for clarity. Then, reviewers were directed to point out mistakes or areas of confusion. Having multiple people review the survey instruments improved the reliability of the responses (Fowler, 2014 ).

We used purposeful sampling to distribute the online questionnaire throughout the following organizations: the Association for Talent Development (ATD), Change Management Institute (CMI), and the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI). We also launched a call for participation to department chairs of United States universities who had Instructional Systems Design graduate programs with a focus on Performance Improvement. We used snowball sampling to gain participants by requesting that the department chairs forward the questionnaire to practitioners who had led at least one organizational change.

Table ​ Table2 2 provides a summary of the characteristics of the 49 participants who completed the questionnaire. Most had over ten years of experience practicing change management ( n  = 37) and had completed over ten change projects ( n  = 32). The participants learned how to conduct change management on-the-job ( n  = 47), through books ( n  = 31), through academic journal articles ( n  = 22), and from college or university courses ( n  = 20). The participants had worked in 13 different industries.

Characteristics of participants

( n  = 49)

Table ​ Table3 3 shows how frequently participants indicated that they used the change management strategies included on the questionnaire. Forty or more participants said they used the following strategies most often or always: (1) Asked members of senior leadership to support the change; (2) Listened to managers’ concerns about the change; (3) Aligned an intended change with an organization’s mission; (4) Listened to employees’ concerns about the change; (5) Aligned an intended change with an organization’s vision; (6) Created measurable short-term goals; (7) Asked managers for feedback to improve the change, and (8) Focused on organizational culture.

Strategies used by change managers

Table ​ Table4 4 identifies how frequently the strategies appeared in the models and frameworks and the rate at which practitioners indicated they used the strategies most often or always. The strategies found in the top 25% of both ( n  > 36 for practitioner use and n  > 11 in models and frameworks) focused on communication, including senior leadership and the employees in change decisions, aligning the change with the vision and mission of the organization, and focusing on organizational culture. Practitioners used several strategies more commonly than the literature suggested, especially concerning the topic of middle management. Practitioners focused on listening to middle managers’ concerns about the change, asking managers for feedback to improve the change, and ensuring that managers were trained to promote the change. Meanwhile, practitioners did not engage in the following strategies as often as the models and frameworks suggested that they should: provide all members of the organization with clear communication about the change, distinguish the differences between leadership and management, reward new behavior, and include employees in change decisions.

A comparison of the strategies used by practitioners to the strategies found in the literature

Common Strategies Used by Practitioners and Found in the Literature

The purpose of this article was to present a common set of change management strategies found across numerous models and frameworks and to identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these common strategies in practice. The five common change management strategies were the following: communicate about the change, involve stakeholders at all levels of the organization, focus on organizational culture, consider the organization’s mission and vision, and provide encouragement and incentives to change. Below we discuss our findings with an eye toward presenting a few key recommendations for change management.

Communicate About the Change

Communication is an umbrella term that can include messaging, networking, and negotiating (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992 ). Our findings revealed that communication is essential for change management. All the models and frameworks we examined suggested that change managers should provide members of the organization with clear communication about the change. It is interesting that approximately 33% of questionnaire respondents indicated that they sometimes, rather than always or most of the time, notified all members of the organization about the change. This may be the result of change managers communicating through organizational leaders. Instead of communicating directly with everyone in the organization, some participants may have used senior leadership, middle management, or subgroups to communicate the change. Messages sent to employees from leaders can effectively promote change. Regardless of who is responsible for communication, someone in the organization should explain why the change is happening (Connor et al., 2003 ; Doyle & Brady, 2018 ; Hiatt, 2006 ; Kotter, 2012 ) and provide clear communication throughout the entire change implementation (McKinsey & Company, 2008 ; Mento et al., 2002 ).

Involve Stakeholders at All Levels of the Organization

Our results indicate that change managers should involve senior leaders, managers, as well as employees during a change initiative. The items on the questionnaire were based on a review of common change management models and frameworks and many related to some form of stakeholder involvement. Of these strategies, over half were used often by 50% or more respondents. They focused on actions like gaining support from leaders, listening to and getting feedback from managers and employees, and adjusting strategies based on stakeholder input.

Whereas the models and frameworks often identified strategies regarding senior leadership and employees, it is interesting that questionnaire respondents indicated that they often implemented strategies involving middle management in a change implementation. This aligns with Bamford and Forrester’s ( 2003 ) research describing how middle managers are important communicators of change and provide an organization with the direction for the change. However, the participants did not develop managers into leaders as often as the literature proposed. Burnes and By ( 2012 ) expressed that leadership is essential to promote change and mention how the change management field has failed to focus on leadership as much as it should.

Focus on Organizational Culture

All but one of the models and frameworks we analyzed indicated that change managers should focus on changing the culture of an organization and more than 75% of questionnaire respondents revealed that they implemented this strategy always or most of the time. Organizational culture affects the acceptance of change. Changing the organizational culture can prevent employees from returning to the previous status quo (Bullock & Batten, 1985 ; Kotter, 2012 ; Mento et al., 2002 ). Some authors have different views on how to change an organization’s culture. For example, Burnes ( 2000 ) thinks that change managers should focus on employees who were resistant to the change while Hiatt ( 2006 ) suggests that change managers should replicate what strategies they used in the past to change the culture. Change managers require open support and commitment from managers to lead a culture change (Phillips, 2021 ).

In addition, Pless and Maak ( 2004 ) describe the importance of creating a culture of inclusion where diverse viewpoints help an organization reach its organizational objectives. Yet less than half of the participants indicated that they often focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Change managers should consider diverse viewpoints when implementing change, especially for organizations whose vision promotes a diverse and inclusive workforce.

Consider the Organization’s Mission and Vision

Several of the models and frameworks we examined mentioned that change managers should consider the mission and vision of the organization (Cummings & Worley, 1993 ; Hiatt, 2006 ; Kotter, 2012 ; Polk, 2011 ). Furthermore, aligning the change with the organization’s mission and vision were among the strategies most often implemented by participants. This was the second most common strategy both used by participants and found in the models and frameworks. A mission of an organization may include its beliefs, values, priorities, strengths, and desired public image (Cummings & Worley, 1993 ). Leaders are expected to adhere to a company’s values and mission (Strebel, 1996 ).

Provide Encouragement and Incentives to Change

Most of the change management models and frameworks suggested that organizations should reward new behavior, yet most respondents said they did not provide incentives to change. About 75% of participants did indicate that they frequently gave encouragement to employees about the change. The questionnaire may have confused participants by suggesting that they provide incentives before the change occurs. Additionally, respondents may have associated incentives with monetary compensation. Employee training can be considered an incentive, and many participants confirmed that they provided employees and managers with training. More information is needed to determine why the participants did not provide incentives and what the participants defined as rewards.

Future Conversations Between Practitioners and Researchers

Table ​ Table4 4 identified five strategies that practitioners used more often than the models and frameworks suggested and four strategies that were suggested more often by the models and frameworks than used by practitioners. One strategy that showed the largest difference was provided employees with incentives to implement the change. Although 81% of the selected models and frameworks suggested that practitioners should provide employees with incentives, only 25% of the practitioners identified that they provided incentives always and most of the time. Conversations between theorists and practitioners could determine if these differences occur because each group uses different terms (Hughes, 2007 ) or if practitioners just implement change differently than theorists suggest (Saka, 2003 ).

Additionally, conversations between theorists and practitioners may help promote improvements in the field of change management. For example, practitioners were split on how often they promoted DEI, and the selected models and frameworks did not focus on DEI in change implementations. Conversations between the two groups would help theorists understand what practitioners are doing to advance the field of change management. These conversations may encourage theorists to modify their models and frameworks to include modern approaches to change.

Limitations

The models and frameworks included in this systematic review were found through academic research and websites on the topic of change management. We did not include strategies contained on websites from change management organizations. Therefore, the identified strategies could skew towards approaches favored by theorists instead of practitioners. Additionally, we used specific publications to identify the strategies found in the models and frameworks. Any amendments to the cited models or frameworks found in future publications could not be included in this research.

We distributed this questionnaire in August 2020. Several participants mentioned that they were not currently conducting change management implementations because of global lockdowns due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Because it can take years to complete a change management implementation (Phillips, 2021 ), this research does not describe how COVID-19 altered the strategies used by the participants. Furthermore, participants were not provided with definitions of the strategies. Their interpretations of the strategies may differ from the definitions found in the academic literature.

Future Research

Future research should expand upon what strategies the practitioners use to determine (a) how the practitioners use the strategies, and (b) the reasons why practitioners use certain strategies. Participants identified several strategies that they did not use as often as the literature suggested (e.g., provide employees with incentives and adjust the change implementation because of reactions from employees). Future research should investigate why practitioners are not implementing these strategies often.

Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic may have changed how practitioners implemented change management strategies. Future research should investigate if practitioners have added new strategies or changed the frequency in which they identified using the strategies found in this research.

Our aim was to identify a common set of change management strategies found across several models and frameworks and to identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these strategies in practice. While our findings relate to specific models, frameworks, and strategies, we caution readers to consider the environment and situation where the change will occur. Therefore, strategies should not be selected for implementation based on their inclusion in highly cited models and frameworks. Our study identified strategies found in the literature and used by change managers, but it does not predict that specific strategies are more likely to promote a successful organizational change. Although we have presented several strategies, we do not suggest combining these strategies to create a new framework. Instead, these strategies should be used to promote conversation between practitioners and theorists. Additionally, we do not suggest that one model or framework is superior to others because it contains more strategies currently used by practitioners. Evaluating the effectiveness of a model or framework by how many common strategies it contains gives an advantage to models and frameworks that contain the most strategies. Instead, this research identifies what practitioners are doing in the field to steer change management literature towards the strategies that are most used to promote change.

Declarations

This research does not represent conflicting interests or competing interests. The research was not funded by an outside agency and does not represent the interests of an outside party.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Jeffrey Phillips, Email: ude.usf@spillihpbj .

James D. Klein, Email: ude.usf@nielkj .

• Ackerman-Anderson, L. S., & Anderson, D. (2001). The change leader’s roadmap: How to navigate your organization’s transformation . Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
• Anderson, D., & Ackerman Anderson, L. S. (2001). Beyond change management: Advanced strategies for today’s transformational leaders . Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
• Bakari H, Hunjra AI, Niazi GSK. How does authentic leadership influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions: Integration of theory of planned behavior and Lewin’s three step model. Journal of Change Management. 2017; 17 (2):155–187. doi: 10.1080/14697017.2017.1299370. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bamford DR, Forrester PL. Managing planned and emergent change within an operations management environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. 2003; 23 (5):546–564. doi: 10.1108/01443570310471857. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beckhard, R., & Harris, R. T. (1987). Organizational transitions: Managing complex change (2 nd ed.). Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
• Bridges, W. (1991). Managing transitions: Making the most of change . Perseus Books.
• Buchanan DA, Boddy D. The expertise of the change agent. Prentice Hall; 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bullock RJ, Batten D. It's just a phase we're going through: A review and synthesis of OD phase analysis. Group & Organization Studies. 1985; 10 (4):383–412. doi: 10.1177/105960118501000403. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burnes, B. (2000). Managing change: A strategic approach to organisational dynamics (3 rd ed.). Prentice Hall.
• Burnes B, By RT. Leadership and change: The case for greater ethical clarity. Journal of Business Ethics. 2012; 108 (2):239–252. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-1088-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carnall, C. A. (2007). Managing change in organizations (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.
• Connor, P. E., Lake, L. K., & Stackman, R. W. (2003). Managing organizational change (3 rd ed.). Praeger Publishers.
• Cox AM, Pinfield S, Rutter S. Extending McKinsey’s 7S model to understand strategic alignment in academic libraries. Library Management. 2019; 40 (5):313–326. doi: 10.1108/LM-06-2018-0052. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (1993). Organizational development and change (5 th ed.). West Publishing Company.
• Dale, B. & McQuater, R. (1998) Managing business improvement and quality: Implementing key tools and techniques . Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
• Doyle T, Brady M. Reframing the university as an emergent organisation: Implications for strategic management and leadership in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management. 2018; 40 (4):305–320. doi: 10.1080/1360080X.2018.1478608. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2014). Survey research methods: Applied social research methods (5 th ed.). Sage Publications Inc.
• French, W. L., & Bell, C. H. Jr. (1999). Organizational development: Behavioral science interventions for organizational improvement (6 th ed.). Prentice-Hall Inc.
• Gall, M., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7 th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
• Hallencreutz, J., & Turner, D.-M. (2011). Exploring organizational change best practice: Are there any clear-cut models and definitions? International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences , 3 (1), 60–68. 10.1108/17566691111115081 [ CrossRef ]
• Hiatt, J. M. (2006). ADKAR: A model for change in business, government, and our community . Prosci Learning Publications.
• Hughes M. The tools and techniques of change management. Journal of Change Management. 2007; 7 (1):37–49. doi: 10.1080/14697010701309435. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kanter, R. M., Stein, B. A., & Jick, T. D. (1992). The challenge of organizational change . The Free Press.
• Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change . Harvard Business Review Press.
• Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers . Harper & Brothers Publishers.
• Luecke R. Managing change and transition. Harvard Business School Press; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• McKinsey & Company. (2008). Creating organizational transformations: McKinsey global survey results . McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved August 5, 2020, from http://gsme.sharif.edu/~change/McKinsey%20Global%20Survey%20Results.pdf
• Mento AJ, Jones RM, Dirndorfer W. A change management process: Grounded in both theory and practice. Journal of Change Management. 2002; 3 (1):45–59. doi: 10.1080/714042520. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (1997). Competing by design: The power of organizational architecture . Oxford University Press.
• Neri RA, Mason CE, Demko LA. Application of Six Sigma/CAP methodology: Controlling blood-product utilization and costs. Journal of Healthcare Management. 2008; 53 (3):183–196. doi: 10.1097/00115514-200805000-00009. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Neves P. Readiness for change: Contributions for employee’s level of individual change and turnover intentions. Journal of Change Management. 2009; 9 (2):215–231. doi: 10.1080/14697010902879178. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pettigrew AM. Theoretical, methodological, and empirical issues in studying change: A response to Starkey. Journal of Management Studies. 1987; 24 :420–426. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pettigrew, A., & Whipp, R. (1991). Managing change for competitive success . Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
• Phillips, J. B. (2021). Change happens: Practitioner use of change management strategies (Publication No. 28769879) [Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
• Pless N, Maak T. Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business Ethics. 2004; 54 (2):129–147. doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-9465-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Polk, J. D. (2011). Lean Six Sigma, innovation, and the Change Acceleration Process can work together. Physician Executive, 37 (1), 38̫–42. [ PubMed ]
• Pollack J, Pollack R. Using Kotter’s eight stage process to manage an organizational change program: Presentation and practice. Systemic Practice and Action Research. 2015; 28 :51–66. doi: 10.1007/s11213-014-9317-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Raineri AB. Change management practices: Impact on perceived change results. Journal of Business Research. 2011; 64 (3):266–272. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.11.011. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saka A. Internal change agents’ view of the management of change problem. Journal of Organizational Change Management. 2003; 16 (5):480–496. doi: 10.1108/09534810310494892. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Strebel P. Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business Review. 1996; 74 (3):86–92. [ Google Scholar ]
• Waterman RH, Jr, Peters TJ, Phillips JR. Structure is not organization. Business Horizons. 1980; 23 (3):14–26. doi: 10.1016/0007-6813(80)90027-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• Case Studies

Case Study Basics

What is a case study *.

A case study is a snapshot of an organization or an industry wrestling with a dilemma, written to serve a set of pedagogical objectives. Whether raw or cooked , what distinguishes a pedagogical case study from other writing is that it centers on one or more dilemmas. Rather than take in information passively, a case study invites readers to engage the material in the case to solve the problems presented. Whatever the case structure, the best classroom cases all have these attributes: (1)The case discusses issues that allow for a number of different courses of action – the issues discussed are not “no-brainers,” (2) the case makes the management issues as compelling as possible by providing rich background and detail, and (3) the case invites the creative use of analytical management tools.

Case studies are immensely useful as teaching tools and sources of research ideas. They build a reservoir of subject knowledge and help students develop analytical skills. For the faculty, cases provide unparalleled insights into the continually evolving world of management and may inspire further theoretical inquiry.

There are many case formats. A traditional case study presents a management issue or issues calling for resolution and action. It generally breaks off at a decision point with the manager weighing a number of different options. It puts the student in the decision-maker’s shoes and allows the student to understand the stakes involved. In other instances, a case study is more of a forensic exercise. The operations and history of a company or an industry will be presented without reference to a specific dilemma. The instructor will then ask students to comment on how the organization operates, to look for the key success factors, critical relationships, and underlying sources of value. A written case will pre-package appropriate material for students, while an online case may provide a wider variety of topics in a less linear manner.

Choosing Participants for a Case Study

Many organizations cooperate in case studies out of a desire to contribute to management education. They understand the need for management school professors and students to keep current with practice.

Organizations also cooperate in order to gain exposure in management school classrooms. The increased visibility and knowledge about an organization’s operations and culture can lead to subsidiary benefits such as improved recruiting.

Finally, organizations participate because reading a case about their operations and decision making written by a neutral observer can generate useful insights. A case study preserves a moment in time and chronicles an otherwise hidden history. Managers who visit the classroom to view the case discussion generally find the experience invigorating.

The Final Product

Cases are usually written as narratives that take the reader through the events leading to the decision point, including relevant information on the historical, competitive, legal, technical, and political environment facing the organization. A written case study generally runs from 5,000 to 10,000 words of text supplemented with numerous pages of data exhibits. An online raw case may have less original text, but will require students to extract information from multiple original documents, videos of company leaders discussing the challenges, photographs, and links to articles and websites.

The first time a case is taught represents something of a test run. As students react to the material, plan to revise the case to include additional information or to delete data that does not appear useful. If the organization’s managers attend the class, their responses to student comments and questions may suggest some case revisions as well.

The sponsoring professor will generally write a “teaching note” to give other instructors advice on how to structure classroom discussion and useful bits of analysis that can be included to explicate the issues highlighted in the case study.

Finally, one case may inspire another. Either during the case writing process or after a case is done, a second “B” case might be useful to write that outlines what the organization did or that outlines new challenges faced by the organization after the timeframe of the initial case study.

* Portions of this note are adapted from E. Raymond Corey, “Writing Cases and Teaching Notes,” Harvard Business School case 399-077, with updates to reflect Yale School of Management practices for traditional and raw cases.

What are Management Theories?

At a glance, popular management theories, why study management theories, key takeaway, additional resources, management theories.

Concepts surrounding recommended management strategies

Management theories are concepts surrounding recommended management strategies, which may include tools such as frameworks and guidelines that can be implemented in modern organizations . Generally, professionals will not rely solely on one management theory alone, but instead, introduce several concepts from different management theories that best suit their workforce and company culture .

Until the day that machines are able to think, talk, and experience emotions, humans will remain the most complicated beings to manage. Humans can never achieve the kind of error-free performance that machines provide. On the upside, there are tons of things that machines aren’t capable of doing, making humans indispensable assets. For such reason, proper management is one of the most crucial things for an organization.

For a long time, theorists have been researching the most suitable forms of management for different work settings. This is where management theories come into play. Although some of these theories were developed centuries ago, they still provide stable frameworks for running businesses.

1. Scientific Management Theory

American mechanical engineer Frederick Taylor , who was one of the earliest management theorists, pioneered the scientific management theory. He and his associates were among the first individuals to study work performance scientifically. Taylor’s philosophy emphasized the fact that forcing people to work hard wasn’t the best way to optimize results. Instead, Taylor recommended simplifying tasks so as to increase productivity.

The strategy was a bit different from how businesses were conducted beforehand. Initially, a factory executive enjoyed minimal, if any, contact with his employees. There was absolutely no way of standardizing workplace rules and the only motivation of the employees was job security.

According to Taylor, money was the key incentive for working, which is why he developed the “fair day’s wages for a fair day’s work” concept. Since then, the scientific management theory has been practiced worldwide. The resulting collaboration between employees and employers evolved into the teamwork that people now enjoy.

2. Systems Management Theory

Systems management offers an alternative approach to the planning and management of organizations. The systems management theory proposes that businesses, like the human body, consists of multiple components that work harmoniously so that the larger system can function optimally. According to the theory, the success of an organization depends on several key elements: synergy, interdependence, and interrelations between various subsystems.

Employees are one of the most important components of a company. Other elements crucial to the success of a business are departments, workgroups, and business units. In practice, managers are required to evaluate patterns and events in their companies so as to determine the best management approach. This way, they are able to collaborate on different programs so that they can work as a collective whole rather than as isolated units.

3. Contingency Management Theory

The main concept behind the contingency management theory is that no one management approach suits every organization. There are several external and internal factors that will ultimately affect the chosen management approach. The contingency theory identifies three variables that are likely to influence an organization’s structure: the size of an organization, technology being employed, and style of leadership.

Fred Fiedler is the theorist behind the contingency management theory. Fiedler proposed that the traits of a leader were directly related to how effectively he led. According to Fiedler’s theory, there’s a set of leadership traits handy for every kind of situation. It means that a leader must be flexible enough to adapt to the changing environment. The contingency management theory can be summed up as follows:

• There is no one specific technique for managing an organization.
• A leader should be quick to identify the particular management style suitable for a particular situation.
• The primary component of Fiedler’s contingency theory is LPC – the least preferred co-worker scale. LPC is used to assess how well oriented a manager is.

4. Theory X and Theory Y

Do you believe that every individual gets maximum satisfaction from the work they do? Or are you of the opinion that some view work as a burden and only do it for the money? Such assumptions influence how an organization is run. The assumptions also form the basis of Theory X and Theory Y.

Douglas McGregor is the theorist credited with developing these two contrasting concepts. More specifically, these theories refer to two management styles: the authoritarian (Theory X) and participative (Theory Y).

In an organization where team members show little passion for their work, leaders are likely to employ the authoritarian style of management. But if employees demonstrate a willingness to learn and are enthusiastic about what they do, their leader is likely to use participative management. The management style that a manager adopts will influence just how well he can keep his team members motivated.

Theory X holds a pessimistic view of employees in the sense that they cannot work in the absence of incentives. Theory Y, on the other hand, holds an optimistic opinion of employees. The latter theory proposes that employees and managers can achieve a collaborative and trust-based relationship.

Still, there are a couple of instances where Theory X can be applied. For instance, large corporations that hire thousands of employees for routine work may find adopting this form of management ideal.

1. Increasing Productivity

One of the reasons why managers should be interested in learning management theories is because it helps in maximizing their productivity. Ideally, the theories teach leaders how to make the most of the human assets at their disposal. So, rather than purchase new equipment or invest in a new marketing strategy, business owners need to invest in their employees through training.

It can be seen in Taylor’s scientific management theory. As mentioned earlier, Taylor proposed that the best way to boost workers’ productivity was by first observing their work processes and then creating the best policies.

2. Simplifying Decision Making

Another area where management theories have proven to be useful is in the decision-making process. Max Weber proposed that hierarchical systems encourage informed decision-making. A report written by the Institute for Employment Studies suggests that flattening the hierarchy paves the way for local innovation while speeding up the decision-making process. Flattening out entails getting rid of job titles and senior positions so as to inspire a cohesive work environment.

3. Encouraging Staff Participation

Management theories developed in the 1900s, aimed at encouraging interpersonal relationships in the workplace. One such theory that encouraged a collaborative environment is the human relations approach. According to this theory, business owners needed to give their employees more power in making decisions.

Throughout history, companies have been putting different management theories into practice. Not only have they helped to increase productivity but they have also improved the quality of services. Although these management theories were developed ages ago, they help in creating interconnected work environments where employees and employers work hand-in-hand. Some of the most popular management theories that are applied nowadays are systems theory, contingency theory, Theory X and Theory Y, and the scientific management theory.

Thank you for reading CFI’s guide to management theories. To learn more and expand your career, explore the additional relevant resources below:

• Fundamental Law of Active Management
• Having Difficult Conversations
• Interpersonal Skills
• Leadership Theories
• Management Skills
• See all management & strategy resources

• Share this article

Create a free account to unlock this Template

Access and download collection of free Templates to help power your productivity and performance.

Already have an account? Log in

Supercharge your skills with Premium Templates

Take your learning and productivity to the next level with our Premium Templates.

Upgrading to a paid membership gives you access to our extensive collection of plug-and-play Templates designed to power your performance—as well as CFI's full course catalog and accredited Certification Programs.

Already have a Self-Study or Full-Immersion membership? Log in

Access Exclusive Templates

Gain unlimited access to more than 250 productivity Templates, CFI's full course catalog and accredited Certification Programs, hundreds of resources, expert reviews and support, the chance to work with real-world finance and research tools, and more.

Already have a Full-Immersion membership? Log in

What Is the Importance of Studying Management Theories & Practice?

• Small Business
• Managing Employees
• ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Pinterest" aria-label="Share on Pinterest">
• ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Reddit" aria-label="Share on Reddit">
• ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Flipboard" aria-label="Share on Flipboard">

How Effective Is Simulation Training in HR?

Principles of organizational leadership, structural contingency theory in human resources.

• Theories on Organization & Developmental Planning
• Stages of Paradigm Shift in an Organization

People who create management theories rely upon observation and mathematics in order to construct a model for business activities. Management practice relies upon case studies and the individual experiences of managers when dealing with workplace situations. Since both schools of management have flaws and benefits, a business owner should study both styles of management in order to improve profitability.

Benefits of Learning

Employees most commonly leave their jobs due to poor management practices, a situation that increases costs and lowers the talent present in a business. Business owners should understand good management practices through personal research or formal education in order to create a business model that can improve employee productivity, eliminate redundancy in processes and increase retention rates.

Limitations of Theory and Practice

Management theories face limitations, because models of human behavior in a business do not consider all of the variables that can impact profitability. Different businesses face different issues with employees, financial resources and the use of technology.

For example, a workplace of single mothers requires a company to focus more on family leave, a consideration that a theorist might not work into a general business model. Management practice can also result in flawed management behavior, because managers cannot see the business as a whole and instead rely solely upon their own experience.

Creating Uniformity of Management

Management theories work best from a macro perspective, such as when a business determines the appropriate model for management as a whole or starts a large project that it has never attempted before. The formal structure of this type of management works best for large corporations that have a top-down management structure which requires uniformity in order to accomplish goals, even if this model slightly decreases productivity.

Personalized Management Style

Since management practices rely upon the opinions of managers and employees or a case study in a particular area of business, they work best for informal organizations. Little doubt exists as to whether a management model will work, because the track record of the model speaks for itself. Management practices focus more on dynamics between groups, which allows managers more flexibility in making decisions and helps employees function together as a unit when they work together on a project.

Putting Theory Into Application

Business owners should mix management practices and theories together based upon their business model. A small business owner will usually study and implement management practices, because he requires flexibility to sustain his business mode. As his business grows, he may add some elements of management theory in order to formalize the decision making and leadership qualities of management.

• Washington State University: Agribusiness Management, Management Theories and Practices

Chris Hamilton has been a writer since 2005, specializing in business and legal topics. He contributes to various websites and holds a Bachelor of Science in biology from Virginia Tech.

Related Articles

Importance of management theory, explain the management science approach, difference between business & applied management, flat line management techniques, the x&y management theory, threat vs. support & how to motivate staff, what is the product approach vs. the process approach, principles of organizational theory, how to convert pps to ppt, most popular.

• 1 Importance of Management Theory
• 2 Explain the Management Science Approach
• 3 Difference Between Business & Applied Management
• 4 Flat Line Management Techniques

• Free Case Studies
• Business Essays

Write My Case Study

Buy Case Study

Case Study Help

• Case Study For Sale
• Case Study Services
• Hire Writer

Case Study on Classical Management Theory

Classical management theory case study:.

Classical Management Theory was invented in the middle of the 19th century but was applied into practice only in the 20th. This management theory was very popular in the previous century and it many aspects are used in other management theories nowadays.Classic Management Theory is characterised with the strict structure and organization of business and the sphere of management. The major criterion of the theory is the strict hierarchy of the managing staff.

For example, the managing staff always consists of the several levels of managers who are interconnected with one another. The managers of the lower level always obey and follow the instructions of the managers of the higher level. The highest level of managers is called the board of directors or the executives of the company. This hierarchical model of management is quite useful because it enables the process of training and development of the novice managers by the senior ones.The next point is the division of labour.

We Will Write a Custom Case Study Specifically For You For Only $13.90/page!

Managers divide their tasks into the small logical parts and fulfill them gradually solving the major problem step by step. It is obvious that the quality of management depends directly on the type of motivation. Nowadays the most adequate and useful motivation is money or the personal benefit of the manager. Finally, the last important component of Classical Management theory is the autocratic leadership. Every famous and prosperous company is associated with the name of its leader.

If the leader is wise and professional, he would be able to manage his business well and organize the work of the company according to the right norms.Classical Management Theory is a basic theory of management which was the beginning of the logical and systematic management. Students are able to investigate the direct cases related with the theory preparing Classical Management Theory case study. One should explain the meaning of the theory, define its core laws and peculiarities, learn about the structure and hierarchy of the theory and dwell on its advantages and disadvantages. It is reasonable to compare several management theories to the classical one and understand its effectiveness and relevance in the modern conditions.

One must learn about the cause of the suggested problem on Classical Management Theory and analyse its effect and brainstorm the best solutions.It is not easy to complete a successful case study possessing poor writing skills and writing experience. The student has the chance to improve his knowledge with the help of the free example case study on Classical Management Theory prepared online. One can improve his knowledge and catch the most appropriate manner of writing and analysis of the problem just reading a free sample case study on classical Management Theory in the Internet.

Related posts:

• Case Study on Game Theory
• Case Study on Piaget’s Theory
• Case Study on Queuing Theory
• Classical and Operant Conditioning Case Study
• Rational Choice Theory Case study
• H-E-B Central Market Management Theory Analysis
• Hence ELM theory case study

Quick Links

Privacy Policy

Terms and Conditions

Testimonials

Our Services

Case Study Writing Services

Case Studies For Sale

Our Company

Welcome to the world of case studies that can bring you high grades! Here, at ACaseStudy.com, we deliver professionally written papers, and the best grades for you from your professors are guaranteed!

[email protected] 804-506-0782 350 5th Ave, New York, NY 10118, USA

Acasestudy.com © 2007-2019 All rights reserved.

Hi! I'm Anna

Would you like to get a custom case study? How about receiving a customized one?

Haven't Found The Case Study You Want?

For Only $13.90/page

Value creation across organizational borders: towards a value gap theory

European Business Review

ISSN : 0955-534X

Article publication date: 16 August 2024

This study aims to explore and theorize value gaps within value chain management (VCM) by extending the service quality gap model to the context of global manufacturing value chains.

Design/methodology/approach

Drawing upon a case study of a small, family-owned Swedish furniture wholesaler, Alpha, this research adapts the service quality gap model and integrates it into the VCM framework. The investigation examines the value creation and delivery processes across a network of actors, highlighting how various gaps emerge at different stages of the value chain.

The study identifies and describes several value gaps, including those related to consumer understanding, manufacturing capabilities and coordination across the value chain. Value creation gaps arise from poor communication about consumer needs and product features, whereas value delivery gaps are mainly tied to manufacturing capacity and material restrictions. These gaps can result in misalignment between consumer expectations and the delivered value.

Research limitations/implications

Although this study provides insights into the emergence of value gaps, further research is needed to determine the magnitude and reduction strategies for these gaps. In addition, understanding how consumers evaluate new products remains a critical area for investigation.

Practical implications

The research highlights the significance of a coordinated approach to managing value creation and delivery processes. It underscores the need for companies to capture accurate consumer data, consider manufacturing capabilities and engage in effective coordination with various actors in the value chain.

Social implications

By addressing value gaps, companies can enhance consumer satisfaction and minimize potential dissatisfaction caused by misalignment between consumer expectations and delivered value. This, in turn, can lead to improved relationships with consumers and other actors within the value chain.

Originality/value

This research offers a novel perspective on value gaps in VCM, extending the service quality gap model to the realm of manufacturing. It underscores the importance of managing both value creation and delivery processes for enhancing competitive advantage in a global market.

• Value chain management
• Value creation
• Value delivery
• Coordination
• Service gaps
• Supply chain management

Eriksson, D. , Hilletofth, P. , Tate, W. and Tan, K.H. (2024), "Value creation across organizational borders: towards a value gap theory", European Business Review , Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-02-2024-0086

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2024, David Eriksson, Per Hilletofth, Wendy Tate and Kim Hua Tan.

Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial & non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

1. Introduction

competition based on the lowest price;

competition based on value; or

competition based on a combination of both ( Porter, 1979 ; Jüttner et al. , 2007 ; Khan et al. , 2016 ; Lii and Kuo, 2016 ).

The decision between these strategies has been the center of much research, including how to match strategy with market. Internally at the company, the strategies need to be supported by activities on tactical and operational level, to make sure that there are not inefficiencies caused by poor alignment ( Tamas, 2000 ; Eriksson and Hedenstierna, 2012 ). Whichever strategy is chosen, companies need to be able to respond to external changes, which relies on well-functioning and integrated sourcing ( Dubey et al. , 2018 ; Ketchen and Craighead, 2020 ).

Choosing strategy and developing the suitable value proposition is a central part of attracting consumers ( Bustinza et al. , 2015 ). In highly volatile markets, companies need to develop responsive capabilities, which relies on deep consumer knowledge ( Cooper, 2011 ; Hansen and Grunow, 2015 ). The ability to understand the market and translate this understanding into product offerings is crucial for identifying and maintaining a competitive advantage within the market. In these efforts, companies focus on two main value-chain processes, here discussed in terms of value creation and value delivery ( Hilletofth, 2010 ). Value creation and value delivery is part of value chain management (VCM). In much research, VCM is often conducted within a focal-firm perspective.

Broadening the level of analysis to a supply chain or network levels allows for a different understanding ( Miemczyk et al. , 2012 ). As VCM processes cut across organizational borders, it is important to understand them from such a perspective. Research with this approach do exist, for example, Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004) discussed customer involvement, Wu (2021) focused on supplier involvement and Kang et al. (2021) looked at both customer and supplier involvement. Despite some notable examples, there is still a need for more qualitative research focusing on interorganizational new product development (NPD) strategies ( Yan and Azadegan, 2017 ). Such research can help to better understand how companies form strategies, and how the strategy is realized across organizational borders, specifically across multiple organizations. There is also an opportunity for new research to increase understanding by not taking a focal-firm perspective and going beyond the dyad or triad levels ( Seno et al. , 2019 ) seen in earlier research.

A notable case that has been published focuses on Zara. The research highlights the importance of alignment across and between value creation and value delivery processes. Alignment allows the company to reduce time-to-market and avoid stock-outs, thereby gaining a competitive advantage ( Walker et al. , 2000 ; Ferdows et al. , 2004 ; Lee, 2004 ; Christopher et al. , 2006 ). However, Zara, part of the Inditex group, is a large company that also controls its retail outlets, putting it at an advantage over less integrated firms. Apart from this example, there is limited insight into the importance of an aligned value chain that truly captures the voice of the consumer and that transforms it into product offerings garnering greater perceived consumer value and increased sales performance. Insight is needed for smaller companies and across value chains where the actors operate more independently.

The Swedish furniture industry is an example of a mature market where some companies seek to compete based on best value. One way to develop premium product is through an increased focus on consumer preferences, especially during the early stages of NPD ( Cooper, 1990 ; Hilletofth and Eriksson, 2011 ; Chen et al. , 2021 ). Having such an approach makes coordination between NPD and sourcing and distribution critical. In the Swedish market, except for two large players, IKEA and Jysk, most of the Swedish industry consists of wholesalers and retailers that are much smaller and independent. In many instances, these companies have outsourced manufacturing to low-cost countries, necessitating a focus on sourcing and VCM.

Current research on VCM predominantly focuses individual firms or examines interactions in limited dyadic or triadic relationships. Although this provides insights into direct interactions, there is a critical gap in understanding how strategies and value creation processes are executed across broader, more complex networks. Particularly in mature industries, where smaller players and outsourced manufacturing are prevalent, the need to explore how strategic alignments and value creation are managed across extensive organizational boundaries is acute. This gap is especially noticeable when considering how companies respond to consumer demands and how these responses are integrated across the entire supply chain to enhance competitive advantage and operational efficiency.

Moreover, the prevailing literature often lacks depth in discussing how smaller companies, unlike giants such as Zara or IKEA, manage their value chains when they cannot control every aspect of their operations from production to retail. Insights into how these companies navigate value chain complexities, synchronize inter-organizational efforts and optimize product development through collaborative strategies remain limited. The purpose of this research is:

To develop a framework for identifying and managing value gaps across value chains.

What value gaps can be identified in the value creation?

What value gaps can be identified in the value delivery?

How do these gaps influence the value chain?

These questions are examined through a longitudinal single case study of a Swedish company in the furniture industry (Alpha). Data was gathered using in-depth and semi-structured interviews with key personnel representing senior and middle management, as well as secondary data from Alpha, including public financial reports, strategy documents, meeting protocols, historical cost data, collaborative forecasts performed with retailers and more.

2. Literature review

Throughout the research, literature was reviewed based on the principles of systematic combining ( Dubois and Gadde, 2002 ; Eriksson and Engström, 2021 ), which is an approach geared toward a continuous reconfiguration of the framework as the case evolves. New literature was reviewed and used as a grounding for the investigation, with the primary goal to support the iterative research process. Although the literature search was initially focused on demand creation and demand delivery, it later expanded to include the literature on service quality gaps, which are recontextualized as value gaps. The literature review was thus structured to follow the theoretical progression of the research, commencing with VCM, the coordination of value creation and delivery, followed by the identification of a model and culminating in a conceptual model that was later used in the research.

2.1 Value chain management

To create a sustainable competitive advantage, firms need to “exploit their internal strengths, through responding to environmental opportunities, while neutralizing external threats and avoiding internal weaknesses” ( Barney, 1991 , p. 99). Competitive advantage can be created by offering consumers a superior value, which can be accomplished by providing the same benefits as competitors but at a lower price (cost advantage), by providing benefits that exceed those of competing offerings at the same price (value advantage) or a combination of both ( Porter, 1996 ). The motivation for these approaches is founded in their ability to differentiate from the competition ( Nilsson and Dernroth, 1995 ; Christopher, 1998 ), which can be achieved by organizing the firm around cost-efficient consumer value creation processes, cost-efficient consumer value delivery and the coordination of these processes ( Ellinger, 2000 ; Hilletofth, 2011 ; Salmela and Huiskonen, 2019 ; Trentin et al. , 2020 ). Even though these ideas are not new, they are probably more important today than they have ever been ( Chang et al. , 2016 ; Gregory et al. , 2016 ; Paolucci et al. , 2021 ).

Croxton et al. (2001) view value creating and value delivering processes as those that span across the entirety of the chain between raw material and customers. A value chain is defined as a network of autonomous or dependent entities involved in the activities necessary to create value by responding to consumer wants and needs ( Rainbird, 2004 ; Jüttner et al. , 2007 ; Esper et al. , 2010 ; Eriksson et al. , 2013 ). Specifically, value creation is responsible for the processes necessary to understand, create and stimulate consumer demand ( Walters and Rainbird, 2004 ; Jüttner et al. , 2007 ; Charlebois, 2008 ). In contrast, value delivery consists of a network of autonomous or dependent entities involved in the processes necessary to fulfill consumer demand through sourcing processes ( Lummus and Vokurka, 1999 ; Mentzer et al. , 2001 ; Gibson et al. , 2005 ). This framework puts value delivery as responsible for the processes necessary to fulfill demand.

The separation between value creation and delivery is useful as it facilitates a finer-grained investigation into firms’ processes. Although there is not necessarily a major difference between value creation and delivery when it comes to the network of firms involved, the two management direction encompass different processes ( Jacobs, 2006 ), requiring different management and coordination approaches to enhance their respective effectiveness and efficiency ( Lambert and Cooper, 2000 ; Croxton et al. , 2001 ; Walters, 2008 ).

2.2 Value gaps

Kotler et al. (2009) define customer perceived value as a customer’s evaluation of the benefits and costs of an offering, whereas Parasuraman et al. (1985) define the quality of a service offering as the ratio between perceived service and expected service, denoting this as a service quality gap. The nature of these two definitions is similar, as both are based on the intangibility and inseparability of product and service and the importance of focusing on consumer perceptions. Combining these two notions, the value experienced by a consumer can be defined as the ratio between consumer-perceived value and consumer-expected value. What this does not capture is that consumer satisfaction may be the result of joint efforts by a chain of companies, which is, however critical, as firms do not compete in a vacuum by themselves ( Christopher, 2000 ).

Related research on value gaps includes Rajagopal (2006) , who investigated value creation in retail, concluding that value gaps can occur if strategic positioning, product delivery and new product launch are not properly coordinated. Such gaps are created by a mismatch between the expectation of consumers and the value offered by companies. Moreover, value gaps can also occur due to conflicting goals internally ( Van Hoek et al. , 2014 ), rending the issue both intra- and interorganizational.

Based on the definition of value, it may seem straightforward to convert consumers’ value expectations into associated offerings. However, Parasuraman et al. (1985) note that the process of identifying customer expectations and then translating them into aspects that are appreciated by customers is hurdled with obstacles. The authors captured this in a service delivery model, which serves as the foundation for our work to assess value gaps. Specifically, Parasuraman et al. (1985 , pp. 44–46 for detailed description) present five gaps that can lead in a reduction of service quality ( Table 1 ).

From a VCM perspective, the gaps are influenced by several actors in the chain and are not confined to the intraorganizational domain. It is important to understand what type of value is needed to be able to deliver this value and to continue identifying new needs ( Flint et al. , 1997 ; Veryzer and Borja De Mozota, 2005 ).

Service quality gaps focuses on service delivery in one company. As argued, VCM includes multiple companies and to fully understand how to best manage the value chain, a network perspective is necessary. The complexity inherent to a network of actors can impede value creation across the value chain ( Handfield et al. , 2015 ), generating potential value gaps. This can for instance be reflected in limited resource availability in sourcing ( Kraljic, 1983 ) or the competition among manufacturers and retailers when both interact directly with consumers ( Kim et al. , 2015 ).

3. Methodology

To gain deeper insights into the alignment of VCM, an in-depth case study, including 29 companies, centered around one main case company, was undertaken. The main company is a Swedish wholesaler in the furniture industry. A longitudinal case study helps to better understand underlying research issues, as suggested by Eisenhardt (1989) and Miles and Huberman (1984) . Whereas the case study methodology has been shown a strong following, the application of longitudinal case studies is scarce due to their resource intensity ( Barratt et al. , 2011 ).

The case study was initially intended to be a “snapshot”, but the case kept evolving and the need for more empirical data to understand newly emerging phenomena became apparent. The main benefits of the longitudinal approach here is that it provided researchers with a greater familiarity of the company, including the context and the associated processes. In addition, it was possible to capture KPIs of multiple companies within the focal firm’s ecosystem across several years, enabling more holistic and comprehensive insights ( Dubois and Gadde, 2002 ).

A further benefit of exploring a single case study with multiple supporting value chain partners was that more time could be invested in researching and understanding the issue. Ragin (1992) notes that a case is the result of a process called “casing”, which is the delimitation of the empirical data included in the investigation. A case is delimitated based on the interest of the research and what is practically feasible. As such, this case grew to provide a detailed description of the studied company, its supply processes and the context in which focal company (Alpha) is operating ( Dyer and Wilkins, 1991 ; Eisenhardt, 1991 ). In this context, a continuously evolving framework, case, theory and frame of reference is called “systematic combining” ( Dubois and Gadde, 2002 ) and is a central part of the abductive research methodology ( Kovács and Spens, 2005 ; Eriksson, 2015 ). This approach is frequently used within a critical realist research ontology ( Aastrup and Halldórsson, 2008 ) and has been applied in recent studies ( Rotaru et al. , 2014 ; Eriksson and Svensson, 2016 ).

The main methods of data collection and sources of data, as well as the efforts to increase reliability and validity ( Lincoln and Guba, 1985 ; Eriksson, 2014 ) are presented in Tables 2 – 4 .

The research was initiated in 2009 when the company, due to its efforts to change strategy, was introduced to the researchers. The specific goal at that time was to map the early stages of the NPD process. Semi-structured interviews with the CEO and managers were conducted alongside the study of documents produced by Alpha and interviews with consumer scouts during five NPD projects. The interviews and documents resulted in several flow charts describing information and material flows, enabling a good understanding of the NPD process. In 2010, it was decided to continue the research collaboration with Alpha, as it was evident that more interesting findings could be made.

The data collection was expanded to include the firm’s economic performance, which was done through accessing internal economic and supply systems. The performance was also extended to include the success of products, which was investigated through interviews at Alpha, analysis of sales figures for 16 retailers and visits to 12 of these retailers. Comparing sales data and discussing with retailers helped with contextualization and to better understand how to interpret the data. In one specific case, it was possible to identify a retailer that, whereas selling many products, was not successful in selling according to Alpha’s new strategy. To better understand the entire value chain, suppliers and a company in China tasked with monitoring and helping with quality and sourcing (serving team) were visited.

One issue with the research was that it was difficult to discern causality. To try and get a sense of the efficacy of the new strategy, Alpha was compared with other companies working in the same industry. The research was expanded to include nine main competitors of Alpha. Public financial statements from the companies were compared, looking at metrics such as return on investment, inventory turnover and used capital. The competitors were contacted to better understand their performance and interviews were completed via telephone with seven of the nine competitors. This part of the research made it possible to compare Alpha’s sense of success with the industry and to make comparisons between companies with different sourcing and manufacturing strategies (manufacturing location and make-or-buy decisions).

The research then continued over the course of several years at a slower pace, where the main goal was to update what happened at the company and within their industry. In 2016, a new round of semi-structured interviews was conducted, with a new researcher performing interviews to identify factors that help or restrict the NPD process. The duration of the case study via the foundation established earlier on made it possible to investigate a value chain, including more actors than what is commonly seen in value chain research. The duration and close connection with Alpha also made it possible to allow ideas to develop and be discussed multiple times, reaching a greater maturity of the findings. Interactions with the case company has since continued through continued discussions with the CEO regarding strategic, tactical and operational decisions and problems.

An important part of this research is the development of a specific model, extending the service quality gap model by Parasuraman et al. (1985) into a value gaps model and departing from an exclusive intraorganizational perspective to include an interorganizational perspective.

4. Case study findings

This section presents the case company, which includes its organizational structure, challenges and value chain and how value is developed. In particular, the company’s new strategy is described. To understand value gaps, it is important to understand the company as well as its new and old processes. One significant definition is that Alpha, and this research, refers to retailers as customers. A consumer is the individual using the product, and often thought of as the one buying the product from the retailer.

4.1 Company and strategy information

Alpha is a small, family-owned, wholesaler in the Swedish furniture industry. The headquarters and its distribution center are in the same building in Sweden. In 2004, a strategic decision was taken to shift from a product-oriented to a consumer-oriented strategy to respond to an emerging fierce cost-based competition. This is reflected in the following quote by Alpha’s quality manager:

Before we had a lot of generic products. We just bought products in China and had little own product development. At that time, we wanted four chairs and a table for 5900 Swedish kronor [∼€590]. That was the only requirement.

The new strategy focused on understanding consumers, especially needs that consumers cannot express, and subordinate product specification to those needs. As a result, the company moved from offering generic furniture to offering complete, unique collections. The supply processes included products being manufactured in China and shipped to Alpha’s headquarters, with retailers purchasing display pieces with the objective to generate consumer sales. When a consumer makes a purchase, the retailer places an order to Alpha and retailers and consumers agree on the final delivery to the consumer. Alpha addresses these needs via several different sourcing and distribution solutions. A small part of the sales consists of products that are sourced or made-to-order from China, when a retailer uses Alpha as a middleman. However, almost all other products are ordered based on forecasts and kept in inventory. These are stored as components (assemble-to-order [ATO]) or as complete products (make-to-stock), in anticipation of a final order from a retailer. The customer order point can thus happen at different locations in the supply process. Direct shipments from China directly to retailers, and from China to Alpha, are managed under lean management, with deliveries from Alpha to retailers being managed in an agile manner. A more detailed mapping of the processes is presented in Figure 1 .

Consumer opportunities identification. Scouts are required to photo-document consumer’s homes to identify and formulate opportunities for differentiation based on consumer insight, i.e. a profound insight into the consumers’ context.

Primary development . Freelance designers produce sketches, restricted however by a selection of materials and colors.

Concept development. Alpha decides on issues such as positioning and pricing.

Product development. Specifications are finalized and manufacturing capabilities are monitored together with a serving team in China.

Commercial launch preparation. Marketing ideas are prepared.

Commercial launch execution. Premarketing and sales activities are performed.

Range management. The performance of active products is monitored.

Phase out . Products are discontinued and sale campaigns are determined.

The actors that take part in the eight-step process are included in what Alpha calls their “productive borderless organization” ( Figure 2 ). Other actors that do not work with product development are also included, such as IT services. The CEO considers the productive borderless organization to be the total sum of the competencies that are needed to create value for the consumer.

The purpose of the NPD process is to develop innovative furniture that offer enhanced perceived consumer value. In one of multiple cases studied, scouts focused on bedrooms. The scouts discovered that dirty laundry often was placed on the floor and that consumers desired a place for a laptop in the bedroom due to the confluence of work and personal life. This highlighted that furniture tends to be designed for intended use and not actual use. As a result, a bed chest with compartments for laundry and space for the laptop was designed. Between 2004 and 2009, the number of stock keeping units increased by 150% as a result of the gathered information. The impact of this initiative is nicely illustrated with the following quote by the founder:

Through this technique, we have developed very profitable and successful furniture that we would have never thought about otherwise […] I always thought that a bedroom should include a bed, nightstands, a closet, and a drawer. But now we are selling a multi-purpose bed chest where consumer can store laundry, place their laptop, and sit down while getting dressed. (Interview report)

An ATO strategy was also adopted. Table legs and tabletops was designed to match, regardless of size and product family. As such, it was possible to combine different tabletops and legs, enabling the offering of a wide variety of end-user options without to having display them all in the store. Similarly, the range of materials and colors used is limited and consistent across all product lines. It is therefore not necessary to show all color/product combinations, but to have only one display piece of each material and color, regardless of product ( Dapiran, 1992 ; Trentin and Forza, 2010 ).

4.2 Mapping the value chain

Lambert and Cooper (2000) used value delivery mapping to identify and understand how value is created and delivered across the value chain. In Figure 3 , a similar approach is taken based on the case data. The value delivery of Alpha is rather straightforward to illustrate. It consists of manufacturer, Alpha, retailers and consumers. More actors could be added, for example, raw-material suppliers or component suppliers of metal parts such as hinges and knobs but these are managed by the manufacturer.

What is interesting is that the actors included in value delivery ( Figure 3 ) only constitute a small part of all the types of actors included in the productive borderless organization ( Figure 2 ). Potential consumers hold explicit and implicit demands, which are captured by scouts and transformed into product sketches and prototypes by designers. Activities with manufacturers are managed together with a serving team in China.

We also identified two categories of retailers that distinguish themselves based on their level of collaboration with Alpha. Retailers that collaborate more with Alpha tend to exhibit greater sales of display pieces and are better at generating sales on ATO products that are not displayed. These more collaborative retailers are also better at using consumer insight captured through the NPD process and using that knowledge to show and sell products. These more collaborative retailers are thus part of both value creation and delivery.

4.3 Identifying value gaps

consumer opportunities;

primary development;

concept development;

product development;

commercial launch preparation;

commercial launch execution;

range management; and

During the first stage of demand flow, consumer opportunities, Alpha tries to capture the needs that consumers are not able to articulate. Scouts are used to overcome this problem, but it is still possible that the scouts only see opportunities that they themselves can relate to. As such, there might still be some issues with bias. What could potentially counteract the risk of bias is that photo documentation is presented to other members of the organization. There is also uncertainty regarding how homes were selected for such photo documentation (the scouts were responsible for this selection themselves, without a clear guidance from Alpha, thus being prone to a biased selection as well). The reason why Alpha did not provide more specific guidance was based on the belief that development areas could be identified in any home. Furthermore, instead of doing large, generalizable consumer investigations, Alpha held the position that insight into one consumer’s experience can also serve as the basis for NPD. The efficacy of this approach is evidenced by retailers’ positive attitudes toward the new products and an increase in sales during the investigation period, because of new product launches. This is captured in the following illustrative quotes:

[Name of CEO], you are unique as you focus on consumer needs. – Store manager (notes from meeting)

You [Alpha] are extremely talented in realizing new concepts. – Store manager (notes from meeting)

The identification of consumer opportunities and the ensuing development has some overlap. Specifically, one of the final parts involved in identifying consumer opportunities is that scouts present their findings, including photos and technical reports, to managers at Alpha, including the design engineers ultimately responsible for making the concept a reality. The handover is thus made in a cross-functional manner, intended to speed up and improve the process.

During the primary development, designers are not always able to convert the opportunities into sketches due to misunderstandings in the communication from the scouts to the designers. Also, restrictions imposed from other managers limit the designer’s ability to act upon what is discovered. The preferences of the specific designer are also affecting the work, as not all designers are used to or comfortable with this process. In addition, restrictions in production, materials and colors may be limiting, which is illustrated in the following quote from the designer:

If we would be able to use a new technique. And if we would have a new material. And if we were able to connect these two […] Then all of the sudden I see opportunities to create a new product which would be very unique. – Designer for Alpha

The designer was internationally recognized for furniture produced under their private brand, and thus they were accustomed to choosing their preferred materials that may also result in a higher price range. With the more restrictive approach pursued by Alpha, the designer may feel constrained. Nevertheless, the Alpha’s CEO felt that this strategy was the way to go, as it enabled consistent color schemes across collections and the ability to secure materials. The decision was also based on negative experiences with materials from new suppliers in the past.

Concept development has overlaps with some of the previous phases. In concept development, it is decided what consumer group to target. Consumer groups are based on psychological traits and design styles. For operational purposes, the company is not able to introduce new products in all target segments at once, which in some sense is an inability to convert consumer insights to value propositions. Target prices are also set at this stage, with the price having a big impact on what is possible to produce. This might mean that some features desired by the consumers or aspects proposed by designers are not economically viable. Product development is then done together with the serving team in China, which in turn depends on the capabilities of the manufacturers. The final drawings are thus not always an accurate representation of the earlier sketches, as reflected in the following quote:

Designers do not always have the knowledge. They design, but they do not know what will work practically or logistically. – Quality Manager Alpha

Commercial launch preparation and execution, which includes the retailers, helps determine how the products should be marketed, with the value of the product being communicated to the consumer via the retailer. At this stage, it is possible that the marketing material is inspired by the earliest discovered consumer opportunities, which might not be consistent with how the final product is designed. Launch preparation and execution also includes a timeline that might be prone to delays. Manufacturers have, for example, experienced problems with floods and the relocation of manufacturing facilities. For instance, in 2011, one manufacturer was about to locate to an economic development area, but in June of that year the new factory had not yet been established.

Additional issues included the inability of furniture manufactures to produce the desired quality, which is however very important for the Swedish market. As such, a poor finish on some products lead to decreased consumer satisfaction. One employee at a retailer admitted that he did not want to sell furniture from a wholesaler that had quality problems, as this is likely to create a lot of added work dealing with warranty claims, which was not incentivized in his pay structure. There were also instances when a new product line was launched, and the first manufacturing batch had issues with how the wood in the tables was glued, resulting in an undulated surface. One retailer had one such table placed in front of a window and the poor quality in the surface was visible at first glance. Consequently, the furniture produced had not always been consistent with the specifications. This is reflected in the following illustrative quote:

It has been a problem to find screws and veneer of the right quality in China. We need to convince Alpha to increase and ensure the quality of products. – Designer for Alpha

Once the product is on the market, Alpha relies heavily on retailers using the marketing material and displaying the products in the best way. This stage is called range management and is centered on making sure that the products offered attract a variety of different consumers and that the products will be economically successful. As such, some of the added value is not identifiable if the products are not correctly displayed. Media furniture, for example, include several features on the backside and bottom of the furniture ( Figure 4 ). However, these are not visible in the way media furniture is usually presented at a retailer. Similarly, it is important that the retailer displays and informs consumers about the possibilities of combining different parts of tables and how colors are consistent across product lines. Not all retailers are able to do this successfully.

Even with an ideal line of communication, problems might still arise. One illustrative example was mentioned by a store owner reporting the experience of a consumer who bought one of Alpha’s more expensive dining tables. After viewing the table that was on display at the retailer, the consumer bought it in oiled oak. However, wood is a natural material, and the table that was delivered had graining and knots that were not identical to the table on display. This caused the consumer to cancel the purchase. Similar stories kept appearing across several product categories. For example, one store manager was infuriated about the price of a chair constructed using high grade wood, while complaining about the low quality of the wood in a chair of a product line with lower cost. Clearly, retailers have difficulties communicating some of the design choices and their inherent effects on price and quality, leading to a cancellation of orders. Alpha did not have a strategy to address this, but tried to build strong relations with their retailers by having sales staff visit them frequently, making sure that everything was as good as possible. The discussion in the management team was focused on in-store marketing-material, for example, folders and wood samples, and how these should be better used to generate sales. Manufacturing problems and poor alignment between Alpha and retailers can, consequently, cause dissatisfied consumers through poor value delivery and false expectations. Manufacturing problems can also act as a catalyst for reduced information about product value to consumers, especially if the retail sales staff is deterred from pushing the products from Alpha.

When asked how the company follows up with consumers after their purchases, the CEO stated that they do not, acknowledging that it might be an oversight to only focus on potential consumers. Communicating with consumers requires that retailers facilitate this connection with Alpha. Doing so, however, is perceived as sensitive. Consumers might not want to be contacted by Alpha, and it might affect the overall experience toward both Alpha and the retailer. This topic remained unexplored and despite discussing this several times over many years, Alpha has yet to do anything related to this.

The final phase of the demand flow process is the phase out. Products that do not perform as desired are first placed on a watchlist, after which they are discontinued. Due to the strong dependence on retailers and their investments in display pieces, this step is tricky. Retailers might feel that they have not generated the expected number of sales on a specific product, and there is a risk of conflict if Alpha decides to hold their own sales to empty inventories.

5. Analysis

As was addressed in the previous sections there are several potential pitfalls in demand creation and delivery where product value might be lost. These include activities focused on understanding consumers and are also related to manufacturing capabilities. These potential gaps will be discussed based on the model of service quality gaps ( Parasuraman et al. , 1985 ), considering value gaps in value creation and delivery ( Figure 5 ). The main difference between the value gaps, as identified in this study, and service quality gaps, as described by Parasuraman et al. (1985) , is that value gaps are centered on physical products in a value chain, instead of services in a company. Although the gaps are similar, important differences need to be noted. Value gaps are defined as a misalignment between inter- and intraorganizational functions, ultimately negatively affecting value creation and delivery.

5.1 Value gaps

The identified value gaps are described in Table 5 . Please see Figure 5 for an overview of their relationship.

5.2 Answering the research questions

This paper set out to answer the following questions: “What value gaps can be identified in value creation?” “What value gaps can be identified in value delivery?” and “How do these gaps influence the value chain?” In Figures 4 and 5 , value creation and delivery and value gaps are outlined. Value creation is primarily prone to gaps that occur due to the inability to communicate wants and needs from the potential consumers, with the gaps stemming from poor communication about the product features. Information flows are distorted in “demand pull”, that is, when information is gathered and used to develop value offerings, and in “demand push”, that is, when the value offering is already created and is presented to the market.

Distortion in demand pull stems from the objectivity of the scouts, the interpretation of designers, limitations in materials and colors and manufacturing capabilities. Distortion in demand push stems from quality issues in manufacturing and commercial information communicated to the consumer. The gaps in value delivery are mainly related to manufacturing capacity and material restrictions and are concentrated to a smaller part to the value chain. One important aspect to consider is that the gaps presented may occur but there is not a determination of their magnitude. As an example, a designer showed some discomfort with material restrictions, which can affect the creative process. These gaps might be restricted to the closed system that the process constitutes. In the beginning of the process, there is not a strict protocol dictating how to choose scouts and consumers for observation, and at the end of the process, there is no control on how consumers perceive the quality. As such, minimizing the value gaps inside this process may lead the process becoming better at realizing the incorrect value offering.

Value creation and delivery are two distinct but somewhat overlapping parts. As they are intertwined, the gaps in either will have an impact on the other. The initial conceptual framework illustrated how demand creation can cause value gaps in value delivery. For example, when NPD impacts how the product will be delivered. The case study shows that value delivery can cause value gaps in value creation. For example, when there are only limited sourcing options restricting what is possible in NPD. Another source for value gaps was coordination, as is evidenced by Alpha experiencing problems with producing the desired white finish and had problems with adjusting production volumes according to the new product line.

During the analysis, the number of unique components and products doubled, whereas the sales remained rather consistent. Due to minimum production quantities, the inventories increased and because of the need to have high fill rates in shipping, the efforts needed to consolidate materials increased. Moreover, what was intended for manufacturing might already be subject to value gaps in the demand chain. This was the case when there was a poor understanding of consumer needs or poor specifications of components. Accordingly, poor value creation can cause gaps that are exacerbated by poor value delivery, causing even bigger value gaps in the value chain ( Figure 6 ).

6. Concluding remarks

The purpose of this research was to develop a framework for identifying and managing value gaps across value chains. The main conclusion is thus the model development presented in this chapter. The intraorganizational, service focused model by Parasuraman et al. (1985) served as a foundation to develop our framework integrating demand creation and delivery. Our investigation further differentiated itself to Parasuraman et al. (1985) in that unlike services, a product is not created by a single company, and that value creation requires the organization to have a vertical depth ( Brahm et al. , 2021 ). To adapt the service quality model, the same gaps were used as a starting point, but emphasis was placed on how the different actors in the value chain were related to each gap.

6.1 Model development

The service quality gaps model traditionally focuses on internal organizational processes, where it is presumed that all activities are regulated under unified internal policies despite recognized challenges in internal coordination ( Pedroso et al. , 2016 ). This model, primarily aimed at services, has been adapted in our research to apply to products and extended to incorporate the dynamics of a networked production environment. This adaptation has led to the development of the value gaps model, which assesses value creation and delivery across organizational borders. In this model, the roles of various actors within the value chain either enhance or diminish value, depending on their involvement in managing distorted information flows during demand pull – such as misunderstandings of consumer needs – and demand push, including how retailers communicate product value to consumers, or constraints like manufacturing capacities impacting production volumes or quality.

Transitioning from focusing on service quality gaps to addressing value gaps in product-based industries is crucial and warrants further explanation. This shift is vital for practitioners as it highlights the fragmented nature of value creation across a network that spans organizational, geographical and cultural boundaries. The case study illustrates how these boundaries significantly affect value creation processes. Not all stakeholders contribute equally; for example, our findings indicate notable variations among retailers in their readiness to engage collaboratively with the manufacturer, Alpha. Enhanced collaboration among supply chain members lays the groundwork for more integrated demand and supply processes ( Stolze et al. , 2015 ).

It has become evident that value creation and delivery activities transcend the confines of the focal company, involving retailers in both functions. Lambert and Cooper (2000 , p. 81) emphasize that for a company to achieve superior competitiveness and profitability, the structure of the value chain along with its business processes and management components must be cohesively integrated with key stakeholders. The framework developed in this study demonstrates how failures in achieving such integration can create value gaps, ultimately compromising competitiveness and profitability.

6.2 Implications

Some of the most important issues for practitioners within the field have been described as matching demand with supply, producing and selling the right volumes of the correct product mix at the right time. Accordingly, it is natural to separate the chain of actors into those that are upstream and those that are downstream. The view adopted here involved extending value creation and delivery between raw material extraction and consumers, with a focus on how different actors contribute to or counteract the overall value chain. For example, in the case of the Swedish furniture wholesaler Alpha, the company’s strategic shift from a product-oriented to a consumer-oriented approach highlighted the critical role of retailers in the value creation process. By involving scouts to capture consumer insights and designers to translate these insights into product offerings, Alpha managed to develop unique furniture collections that resonated with consumers. This perspective allows for a better understanding of the dynamics across the value chain. It also facilitates the analysis to understand the strengths and weaknesses in certain parts of the chain.

From a practical perspective, the main implication lies in the interconnectedness of value creation and value delivery across multiple organizations. Value creation involves responding to consumer wants through the specification of value offerings and spans several organizational layers. Mismanagement or misalignment within these layers can lead to inefficient value creation. For instance, during Alpha’s product development, restrictions in materials and colors posed challenges for designers, leading to potential misalignments between consumer expectations and final product offerings. Similarly, value delivery, tasked with fulfilling consumer demand, extends across various organizational boundaries. Inefficiencies in this domain often result from poor management or misalignment, mirroring the challenges seen in value creation. An example of this can be seen in Alpha’s difficulties with ensuring consistent product quality from their manufacturers in China, which affected the perceived value of their products among consumers.

The intertwining of value creation and value delivery is critical; consumer wants identified during value creation depend heavily on the capabilities available in value delivery. For example, Alpha’s success in developing innovative furniture relied on coordinating with manufacturers in China to ensure that product specifications could be met despite material and production constraints. Therefore, effectively managing value creation requires a thorough understanding of value delivery capabilities. Strategic competitive advantage depends on the coherent management of both processes. Alpha’s shift to a consumer-oriented approach demonstrated that failing to align product design with manufacturing capabilities could lead to significant value gaps. If one process begins to overshadow the other, there is a risk that operational outputs could diverge from strategic intentions, leading to ad hoc operations. This issue was evident when Alpha faced quality problems with their products, highlighting the need for continuous alignment between value creation and delivery to maintain competitiveness.

This research underscores the utility of service quality theory in understanding value creation and delivery processes. The research suggests that managers should not view these processes in isolation or solely from within a single organization’s perspective. Instead, they are dynamic and reciprocal, significantly affecting each other. Alpha’s experiences showed that misalignments between product design and manufacturing capabilities led to value gaps. Therefore, value creation and delivery must be identified, aligned and managed across interconnected organizations to minimize and prevent such gaps.

Identifying specific value gaps provides managers with clear targets for interventions. Enhancing communication within the value chain, improving coordination among different actors and refining the capture and use of consumer data are all strategies that can substantially mitigate these gaps. For instance, Alpha’s use of consumer scouts to gather detailed consumer insights helped address potential gaps early in the product development process. These enhancements can facilitate more informed strategic decision-making, especially critical in global value chains where alignment is both challenging and essential for maintaining competitive advantage.

By addressing and closing value gaps, companies can increase consumer satisfaction levels. This can lead to stronger brand loyalty and consumer trust, crucial in today’s competitive market environment. Improved product quality and alignment with consumer expectations, as demonstrated by Alpha’s strategic initiatives, can enhance overall stakeholder engagement, including suppliers, manufacturers and retailers, fostering a more sustainable business environment.

From a theoretical perspective, the primary implications of this study relate to the scope of analysis required to comprehensively understand VCM and the inherently fragmented nature of value chains. VCM complexities extend beyond traditional categorizations such as upstream, downstream, internal, dyad, chain or network levels. Researchers must discern the level of analysis being used and consider how integrating multiple analytical perspectives can enrich the understanding of VCM dynamics and the associated value gaps.

Furthermore, this research contributes to VCM theory by adapting the service quality gaps model, traditionally applied within service industries, to the manufacturing sector. This adaptation not only tests the model’s utility across different industrial contexts but also extends its applicability. By doing so, it invites deeper scholarly examination into how these theoretical models handle interorganizational boundaries and whether they need to be revised or expanded to better capture the nuances of manufacturing.

Moreover, by incorporating organizational boundaries into the analysis of value creation and delivery, this study highlights the critical role of cross-functional and cross-organizational integration. For instance, successful product development often requires close collaboration between design teams, suppliers and marketing departments to ensure that consumer needs are accurately translated into deliverable products. This interplay between different organizational units significantly impacts the effectiveness of value creation and delivery processes. This interdependence necessitates a more nuanced approach to studying VCM, one that acknowledges and addresses the complexity of managing interactions across diverse organizational landscapes.

The extension of the service quality gaps model suggests the potential for interdisciplinary research that merges insights from operations management, marketing and organizational theory. Such research could explore how different management disciplines influence each other within the context of VCM, potentially leading to innovative approaches to managing value chains. For example, studying how coordinated efforts between marketing and logistics can streamline product launches, or how collaboration between R&D and production can enhance product quality, underscores the value of a holistic approach to VCM.

The case highlights several ways in which consumer information can be gathered and several potential downfalls where it can deteriorate. Following the demand flow process, it is necessary for companies to be able to capture consumer data and disseminate it to important actors during NPD. The importance of considering the capabilities of the manufacturers when products are developed is also shown. In this case, designers were restricted in materials and colors, but designs also required some adjustments when discussing them with manufacturers. Evaluation related to what extent it is acceptable to restrict designers and how much the restrictions affect the consumer perceived value are needed. It is also important to have a good overview of manufacturing capabilities, to avoid superfluous design-rework. The case also highlights the importance of the retailers. Alpha did not have a differentiated retailer strategy, but the company works with retailers that are heterogeneous, which is reflected by sales data. Failure to consider this affects how the product is received by the consumer, which is evidenced in the case study. As such, the alignment of demand creation and delivery needs to span across the case company, both upstream and downstream.

6.3 Contributions and future research

This paper provides a valuable empirical illustration of how the effective management of both value creation and delivery processes is crucial to enhancing the perceived consumer value of products. By adapting the widely used service quality model of Parasuraman et al. (1985) to the manufacturing context within global value chains, this research bridges traditional service-oriented frameworks with the complex realities of modern manufacturing. For practitioners, the findings underscore the necessity of a coordinated approach to managing both demand creation and delivery processes. It also reveals that deficiencies in value creation management can adversely affect value delivery, potentially harming the organization's overall performance.

The focus of this research has been on exploring how management of value chain processes can amplify competitive advantages within a specific market. While identifying the importance of mitigating value gaps and recognizing where these gaps typically emerge within the value chain, this study does not extensively delve into strategies for reducing these gaps or assess how such reductions could enhance profitability. Furthermore, questions remain about the limits of the model, particularly whether consumer observations accurately capture essential data and how consumers assess the quality of products. This method, often referred to as “empathic design” ( Leonard and Rayport, 1997 ), suggests that a deeper engagement with co-creation strategies ( Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004 ) and aligning the objectives of all stakeholders ( Gunasakaran et al. , 2017 ) might mitigate some identified gaps. In addition, leveraging tools like social media could offer new insights into consumer preferences and behaviors ( Bharati et al. , 2015 ), potentially bypassing traditional barriers in VCM.

This research also prompts a reassessment of how new products are evaluated by consumers, contributing to a better understanding of value creation from the perspective of both the company and the consumers. The advocated coordination of value creation and delivery is further supported by the findings, suggesting that while the current model offers preliminary insights, extensive further research is necessary. Future studies could benefit from exploring adjacent areas, such as organizational boundaries ( Wang and Chen, 2018 ), to enhance our understanding of these complex phenomena ( Sayer, 1992 ).

Alpha's supply processes

Actors included in what is described as a productive borderless organization

Alpha’s value chain showing value creation and delivery

An early sketch of new functions in media furniture

Value gaps in VCM and value creation and delivery

Conceptual framework for value gaps, value creation and value delivery

Service quality gaps with examples from Parasuraman et al. (1985)