EXPLOITING LIMITATIONS: EXAMINING THE CONCEPT OF “BRICOLAGE” IN MANAGEMENT STUDIES THROUGH A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 554 - 584, 06.12.2024

Merve Gerçek

https://doi.org/10.54452/jrb.1470459

Öz

Bricolage, a novel concept derived from anthropology, has a significant impact on contemporary management practices by promoting the use of available resources to deal with challenges and exploit resources. Previous research has highlighted the importance of bricolage in encouraging innovative thinking and adaptability in organizations, particularly in developing nations where resources are scarce. Although the notion is very adaptable, researchers could encounter the difficulty of combing through the diverse range of publications to find essential academic sources and articles on management. Therefore, a bibliometric analysis is necessary to thoroughly review and assess current trends in the management literature on bricolage. This study examines the existing literature on bricolage in management studies to identify research trends and potential gaps. The study's sample consisted of 209 publications published between 2003 and March 2024 in the Web of Science database. VOSviewer was used to analyze and display the associations among journals, authors, countries, and keywords. According to the results, bricolage is an important tool for businesses to overcome limitations within the entrepreneurial domain. The findings indicate that the United States, England, and China are significant research hubs in the research network. Also, keyword analysis revealed that a growing body of research is bridging the gap between entrepreneurship and other fields, such as technology, innovation, policy, and society, according to the relationships discovered. This study provides a comprehensive overview of bricolage research in management studies and practical suggestions for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to enhance the application of bricolage in various organizational and management contexts.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bricolage, innovation, entrepreneurship, creativity, bibliometric analysis.

Sınırlılıklardan Faydalanmak: Yönetim Çalışmalarında “Brikolaj” Kavramının Bibliyometrik Analiz ile İncelenmesi

Öz

Brikolaj, antropolojiden türetilmiş yenilikçi bir kavram olup, mevcut kaynakların kullanımını teşvik etmesi bağlamında çağdaş yönetim uygulamaları üzerinde önemli bir etkiye sahiptir. Araştırmalar, özellikle kaynakların kıt olduğu gelişmekte olan ülkelerde, brikolaj kavramının örgütlerde yenilikçi düşünceyi ve uyum yeteneğini arttırdığını vurgulamaktadır. Bu kavramın çok yönlülüğüne rağmen, araştırmacılar yönetim alanında birkolaj odaklı yayınları incelemede kritik öneme sahip akademik kaynakları ve makaleleri belirleme zorluğu ile karşı karşıya kalabilirler. Bu nedenle, brikolaj üzerine yazında yer alan güncel eğilimleri kapsamlı bir şekilde gözden geçirip değerlendirmek için bibliyometrik bir analize ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Bu çalışma, yönetim çalışmalarında mevcut brikolaj yazınını inceleyerek araştırma eğilimlerini ve potansiyel boşlukları belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmanın örneklemini, 2003’ten Mart 2024'e kadar Web of Science veritabanında yayımlanan toplam 209 makale oluşturmaktadır. VOSviewer, dergiler, yazarlar, ülkeler ve anahtar kelimeler arasındaki ilişkileri analiz etmek ve göstermek için kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgulara brikolaj kavramı, girişimcilik alanındaki sınırlamaların üstesinden gelmek için örgütler için önemli bir araçtır. Ayrıca bulgulara göre Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, İngiltere ve Çin araştırma ağındaki önemli merkezlerdir. Bununla birlikte, anahtar kelime analizi, brikolaj kavramının yönetim alanında girişimcilik ile teknoloji, inovasyon, politika ve toplum gibi diğer alanlar arasında köprü kurmaya başladığını göstermiştir. Bu çalışma, yönetim çalışmalarında brikolaj araştırmalarına ilişkin kapsamlı bir genel bakış sunmanın yanı sıra, çeşitli örgütsel ve yönetim bağlamlarında brikolaj anlayışını geliştirmek için akademisyenlere, uygulayıcılara ve politika yapıcılara uygulamaya yönelik önerilerde bulunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Brikolaj, yenilikçilik, girişimcilik, yaratıcılık, bibliyometrik analiz

Kaynakça

• Abid, N., Dowling, M., Ceci, F., & Aftab, J. (2023). Does resource bricolage foster SMEs’ competitive advantage and financial performance? A resource‐based perspective. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(8), 5833-5853.
• An, W., Zhang, J., You, C., & Guo, Z. (2018). Entrepreneur’s creativity and firm-level innovation performance: bricolage as a mediator. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(7), 838-851.
• Archer, G. R., Baker, T., & Mauer, R. (2009). Towards an alternative theory of entrepreneurial success: Integrating bricolage, effectuation and improvisation. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 29(6), 1-23.
• Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei–Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both?. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1-22.
• Baker, T. (2007). Resources in play: Bricolage in the Toy Store (y). Journal of Business Venturing, 22(5), 694-711.
• Baker, T., & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 329-366.
• Baker, T., Miner, A. S., & Eesley, D. T. (2003). Improvising firms: Bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process. Research policy, 32(2), 255-276.
• Banerjee, P. M., & Campbell, B. A. (2009). Inventor bricolage and firm technology research and development. R&D Management, 39(5), 473-487.
• Beckett, R. C. (2016). Entrepreneurial bricolage—developing recipes to support innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(05), 1640010.
• Bojica, A., Jiménez, J., Nava, J., & Fuentes-Fuentes, M. (2018). Bricolage and growth in social entrepreneurship organisations. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 30, 362 – 389.
• Boxenbaum, E., & Rouleau, L. (2011). New knowledge products as bricolage: Metaphors and scripts in organizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 272-296.
• Ciborra, C. (2002). The labyrinths of information: Challenging the wisdom of systems: Challenging the wisdom of systems. OUP Oxford.
• Cunha, M. P. E., Rego, A., Oliveira, P., Rosado, P., & Habib, N. (2014). Product innovation in resource‐poor environments: Three research streams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 202-210.
• Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 34(4), 681-703.
• Dos Santos, L. L., Borini, F. M., & Pereira, R. M. (2021). Bricolage as a path towards organizational innovativeness in times of market and technological turbulence. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 13(2), 282-299.
• Duymedjian, R., & Rüling, C. C. (2010). Towards a foundation of bricolage in organization and management theory. Organization Studies, 31(2), 133-151.
• Epler, R., & Leach, M. (2021). An examination of salesperson bricolage during a critical sales disruption: Selling during the Covid-19 pandemic. Industrial Marketing Management, 95, 114 – 127.
• Ferneley, E., & Bell, F. (2006). Using bricolage to integrate business and information technology innovation in SMEs. Technovation, 26(2), 232-241.
• Fisher, G. (2012). Effectuation, causation, and bricolage: A behavioral comparison of emerging theories in entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(5), 1019-1051.
• Frankel, M. S., Leshner, A. I., & Yang, W. (2016). Research integrity: perspectives from China and the United States. Handbook of Academic Integrity, 847-866.
• Fuglsang, L. (2010). Bricolage and invisible innovation in public service innovation. Journal of Innovation Economics, (1), 67-87.
• Garud, R., & Karnøe, P. (2003). Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 32(2), 277-300.
• Gebauer, H., Gustafsson, A., & Witell, L. (2011). Competitive advantage through service differentiation by manufacturing companies. Journal of business research, 64(12), 1270-1280.
• Gerçek, M. (2023). Çevik/Agile örgütler: Kuram ve uygulama. Nobel Akademik.
• Guo, H., Su, Z., & Ahlstrom, D. (2016). Business model innovation: The effects of exploratory orientation, opportunity recognition, and entrepreneurial bricolage in an emerging economy. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 33, 533-549.
• Halme, M., Lindeman, S., & Linna, P. (2012). Innovation for inclusive business: Intrapreneurial bricolage in multinational corporations. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4), 743-784.
• Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929-964.
• Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., Tjahjono, H. K., Nasim, A., Muqaddis, M. M., & Palupi, M. (2020). Enhancing business performance of pakistani manufacturing firms via strategic agility in the industry 4.0 era: The role of entrepreneurial bricolage as moderator. In Innovative Management and Business Practices in Asia (pp. 77-97). IGI Global.
• Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., & Halim, H. A. (2021). Insights on entrepreneurial bricolage and frugal innovation for sustainable performance. Business Strategy & Development, 4(3), 237-245.
• Kincheloe, J. (2001). Describing the Bricolage: Conceptualizing a New Rigor in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 679 – 692.
• Lanzara, G.F. & Patriotta, G. (2001). Technology and the courtroom: An inquiry into knowledge making in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 38, 943–971.
• Linna, P. (2013). Bricolage as a means of innovating in a resource-scarce environment: A study of innovator- entrepreneurs at the BOP. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 18(03), 1350015.
• Liu, W., Hu, G., Tang, L., & Wang, Y. (2015). China’s global growth in social science research: Uncovering evidence from bibliometric analyses of SSCI publications (1978-2013). Journal of Informetrics, 9(3), 555- 569
• Lvi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind. University of Chicago Press.
• Magobe, M. J., Malfense-Fierro, A. C., Li, M., & Johnson, S. (2024). The antecedents of bricolage in innovative firms: An empirical study in Tanzania. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 146.575.03241238690.
• Molecke, G., & Pinkse, J. (2017). Accountability for social impact: A bricolage perspective on impact measurement in social enterprises. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(5), 550-568.
• Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228. https://doi.org/106(1), 213-228.
• Park, J. H., & Seo, R. (2024). A contingent value of bricolage strategy on SMEs’ organizational resilience: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-13.
• Pearce, J. (2003). Social enterprise in anytown. London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. Penrose, E. T. (2009). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford university press.
• Perkmann, M., & Spicer, A. (2014). How emerging organizations take form: The role of imprinting and values in organizational bricolage. Organization Science, 25(6), 1785-1806.
• Perrow, C. (1986). Economic theories of organization. Theory and society, 11-45.
• Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348 – 349.
• Rogers, G., Szomszor, M., & Adams, J. (2020). Sample size in bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 125, 777 – 794.
• Salunke, S., Weerawardena, J., & McColl-Kennedy, J. R. (2013). Competing through service innovation: The role of bricolage and entrepreneurship in project-oriented firms. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1085- 1097.
• Santos, F. M. (2012). A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 335-351.
• Scazziota, V., Serra, F., Sarkar, S., & Guerrazzi, L. (2023). The antecedents of entrepreneurial action: A meta- synthesis on effectuation and bricolage. Journal of Business Research, 155, 113411.
• Senyard, J., Baker, T., & Davidsson, P. (2009). Entrepreneurial bricolage: Towards systematic empirical testing. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 29(5), 5.
• Senyard, J., Baker, T., Steffens, P., & Davidsson, P. (2014). Bricolage as a path to innovativeness for resource‐ constrained new firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 211-230.
• Senyard, J., Baker, T., Steffens, P., & Davidsson, P. (2014). Bricolage as a path to innovativeness for resource‐ constrained new firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 211-230.
• Sharmelly, R., & Ray, P. K. (2018). The role of frugal innovation and collaborative ecosystems: The case of Hyundai in India. Journal of General Management, 43(4), 157-174.
• Simba, A., Ojong, N., & Kuk, G. (2021). Bricolage and MSEs in emerging economies. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 22(2), 112-123.
• Singh, M., Dhir, S., & Mishra, H. (2023). Analysing the Antecedents of Entrepreneurial Bootstrapping and Bricolage: A Modified Total Interpretive Structural Modelling and MICMAC Approach. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 32, 7 – 38.
• Sivathanu, B., & Pillai, R. (2020). An empirical study on entrepreneurial bricolage behavior for sustainable enterprise performance of startups: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 12(1), 34-57.
• Stinchfield, B. T., Nelson, R. E., & Wood, M. S. (2013). Learning from Levi–Strauss’ legacy: Art, craft, engineering, bricolage, and brokerage in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(4), 889-921.
• Stinchfield, B., Nelson, R., & Wood, M. (2013). Learning from Levi–Strauss’ Legacy: Art, Craft, Engineering, Bricolage, and Brokerage in Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37, 889 – 921.
• Stone, D. (2017). Understanding the transfer of policy failure: bricolage, experimentalism and translation. Policy & Politics, 45(1), 55-70.
• Turnbull, S. (2002). Bricolage as an alternative approach to human resource development theory building. Human Resource Development Review, 1(1), 111-128.
• Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538.
• Vanevenhoven, J., Winkel, D., Malewicki, D., Dougan, W. L., & Bronson, J. (2011). Varieties of bricolage and the process of entrepreneurship. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 14(2), 53-66.
• Visscher, K., Heusinkveld, S., & O’Mahoney, J. (2018). Bricolage and identity work. British Journal of Management, 29(2), 356-372.
• Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 628–52.
• Welter, C., Mauer, R., & Wuebker, R. J. (2016). Bridging behavioral models and theoretical concepts: effectuation and bricolage in the opportunity creation framework. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 10(1), 5-20.
• Witell, L., Gebauer, H., Jaakkola, E., Hammedi, W., Patricio, L., & Perks, H. (2017). A bricolage perspective on service innovation. Journal of Business Research, 79, 290-298.
• Wu, L., Liu, H., & Zhang, J. (2017). Bricolage effects on new-product development speed and creativity: The moderating role of technological turbulence. Journal of Business Research, 70, 127-135.
• Yılmaz D., & Gerçek, M. (2022). Kurumsal yine/yenilenme: Örnek olaylarla örgütsel rezilyans ve krizlere yanıtlar. Nobel Akademik.
• Yu, X., Li, Y., Su, Z., Tao, Y., Nguyen, B., & Xia, F. (2020). Entrepreneurial bricolage and its effects on new venture growth and adaptiveness in an emerging economy. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 37, 1141-1163.
• Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2014). Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18, 429 – 472.