Advertisement

Industry or Field? The Value of the Field Construct to Study Digital Creative Industries

  • Santi FurnariEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter identifies the assumptions underlying the two constructs of industry and field, comparing their usefulness to study the digital transformation of creative industries. Two assumptions of the industry construct make it less useful to understand the blurring of creative industries’ boundaries and roles induced by digital technologies: (1) industry boundaries are defined on the basis of a central product/service; (2) organizations’ positions in an industry are defined on the basis of organizations’ attributes (competencies/resources, cost functions, etc.) vis-à-vis each other. Differently, the field construct draws on a relational and activity-centered definition of boundaries and organizational positions, orienting the researcher’s attention to a broader variety of actors and to the multiple relations (symbolic and material) connecting them. These assumptions underlying the field construct are more useful to study the fluid dynamics shaping the creative industries in the digital era, enabling the researcher to better ‘see’ the processes and mechanisms underneath such dynamics.

Notes

Acknowledgements

I thank the editors Mukti Khaire, Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen and Barbara Slavich, as well as Simone Ferriani, Gino Cattani and Denise Falchetti, for valuable comments on a previous version of this chapter, I also thank Hans Frankort and Gianvito Lanzolla for their help and comments during the development of the chapter.

References

  1. Agarwal, R., Moeen, M., & Shah, S. K. (2017). Athena’s birth: Triggers, actors, and actions preceding industry inception. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 11(3), 287–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alford, R. R., & Friedland, R. (1985). Powers of theory: Capitalism, the state, and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bain, J. S. (1956). Barriers to new competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker, W. E., & Faulkner, R. R. (1991). Role as resource in the Hollywood film industry. American Journal of Sociology, 97(2), 279–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benjamin, W. (2007 [1937]). Illuminations: Essays and reflections. New York: Schocken.Google Scholar
  6. Bettis, R. (1998). Commentary on ‘redefining industry structure for the information age’ by J.L. Sampler. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 357–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bilton, C. (2007). Management and creativity, from creative industries to creative management. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1971). Intellectual field and creative project. In M. F. D. Young (Ed.), Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education (pp. 161–168). London: Collier Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Browder, R. E., Aldrich, H. E., & Bradley, S. W. (forthcoming). The emergence of the maker movement: Implications for entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing.Google Scholar
  12. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society and culture (Vol. 1). London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Cattani, G., Ferriani, S., & Allison, P. D. (2014). Insiders, outsiders, and the struggle for consecration in cultural fields: A core-periphery perspective. American Sociological Review, 79(2), 258–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caust, J. (2003). Putting the “art” back into arts policy making: How arts policy has been “captured” by the economists and the marketers. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 9(1), 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Caves, R. E. (2000). Creative industries: Contracts between art and commerce. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Cunningham, S. (2002). From cultural to creative industries: Theory, industry and policy implications. Media International Australia Incorporating Culture and Policy, 102(1), 54–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis, G. F., & Marquis, C. (2005). Prospects for organization theory in the early twenty-first century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16, 332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). (2008). Creative Britain—New talents for the new economy. London: DCMS.Google Scholar
  19. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dutton, W. H. (Ed.). (2013). The Oxford handbook of internet studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Etter, M., Ravasi, D., & Colleoni, E. (2019). Social media and the formation of organizational reputation. Academy of Management Review, 44, 28–52.Google Scholar
  22. Farjoun, M. (1994). Beyond industry boundaries: Human expertise, diversification and resource-related industry groups. Organization Science, 5(2), 185–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2012). A theory of fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Furnari, S. (2014). Interstitial spaces: Microinteraction settings and the genesis of new practices between institutional fields. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 439–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Furnari, S. (2016). Institutional fields as linked arenas: Inter-field resource dependence, institutional work and institutional change. Human Relations, 69(3), 551–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Furnari, S., & Marti, E. (2018). Umbrella constructs and problem-driven research: A pragmatist approach. In Academy of Management proceedings (Vol. 1, p. 12726). Briarcliff Manor, New York: Academy of Management.Google Scholar
  27. Furnari, S., & Rolbina, M. (2018). Brokerage styles and interaction rituals in creative projects: Toward an interactionist perspective on brokerage. In Frontiers of creative industries: Exploring structural and categorical dynamics (pp. 17–45). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
  28. Galloway, S., & Dunlop, S. (2007). A critique of definitions of the cultural and creative industries in public policy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 13(1), 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Geroski, P. A. (2001). Exploring the niche overlaps between organizational ecology and industrial economics. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 507–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Goertz, G. (2006). Social science concepts: A user’s guide. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Greckhamer, T., Misangyi, V. F., Elms, H., & Lacey, R. (2008). Using qualitative comparative analysis in strategic management research: An examination of combinations of industry, corporate, and business-unit effects. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 695–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J. (1999). Global transformations: Politics, economics and culture. In Politics at the edge. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  33. Hirsch, P. M. (1972). Processing fads and fashions: An organization-set analysis of cultural industry systems. American Journal of Sociology, 77(4), 639–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hirsch, P. M., & Gruber, D. A. (2015). “Digitizing fads and fashions”. In C. Jones, M. Lorenzen, & J. Sapsed (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the creative and cultural industries (pp. 421–438). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Hoffman, A. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 351–371.Google Scholar
  36. Jones, C., Lorenzen, M., & Sapsed, J. (2015). Creative industries: A typology of change. In C. Jones, M. Lorenzen, & J. Sapsed (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the creative and cultural industries (pp. 3–32). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Khaire, M. (2014). Fashioning an industry: Socio-cognitive processes in the construction of worth of a new industry. Organization Studies, 35(1), 41–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Khaire, M. (2015). Art without borders? Online firms and the global art market. In O. Velthuis & S. B. Curioni (Eds.), Cosmopolitan canvases: The globalization of markets for contemporary art (pp. 102–128). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Khaire, M. (2017). Culture and commerce: The value of entrepreneurship in creative industries. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Klepper, S. (1997). Industry life cycles. Industrial and Corporate Change, 6(1), 145–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lampel, J., & Meyer, A. D. (2008). Field-configuring events as structuring mechanisms: How conferences, ceremonies, and trade shows constitute new technologies, industries, and markets. Journal of Management Studies, 45(6), 1025–1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lampel, J., Shamsie, J., & Lant, T. K. (Eds.). (2006). The business of culture: Strategic perspectives on entertainment and media. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  43. Lanzolla, G., & Anderson, J. (2010). The digital revolution is over. Long live the digital revolution! Business Strategy Review, 21(1), 74–77.Google Scholar
  44. Lanzolla, G., Lorenz, A., Miron-Spektor, E., Schilling, M., Solinas, G., & Tucci, C. (2018). Call for special issue: Digital transformation: What is new if anything? Academy of Management Discoveries, 4(3), 378–387.  https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2018.0103.
  45. Mangematin, V., Sapsed J., & Schüßler, E. (2014). Disassembly and reassembly: An introduction to the special issue on digital technology and creative industries. Technology Forecasting and Social Change, 83, 1–9.Google Scholar
  46. Martin, J. L. (2003). What is field theory? American Journal of Sociology, 109, 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Martin, J. L. (2015). Thinking through theory. New York and London: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  48. Mazza, C., & Pedersen, J. S. (2004). From press to E-media? The transformation of an organizational field. Organization Studies, 25(6), 875–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McAdam, D., & Scott, W. R. (2005). Organizations and movements. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Miller, D. (2001). Consumption. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Mische, A. (2008). Partisan publics: Communication and contention across Brazilian youth activist networks. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Moeran, B., & Pedersen, J. S. (Eds.). (2011). Negotiating values in the creative industries: Fairs, festivals and competitive events. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Mohr, J. (2013). Bourdieu’s relational method in theory and in practice: From fields and capitals to networks and institutions (and back again). In F. Dépelteau & C. Powell (Eds.), Applying relational sociology (pp. 101–135). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Munir, K. A., & Phillips, N. (2002). The concept of industry and the case of radical technological change. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 13(2), 279–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Oberg, A., Korff, V. P., & Powell, W. W. (2017). Culture and connectivity intertwined: Visualizing organizational fields as relational structures and meaning systems. Research in the Sociology of Organizations (Vol. 53, pp. 17–47). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
  56. Padgett, J. F., & Powell, W. W. (2012). The emergence of organizations and markets. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Parmentier, G., & Mangematin, V. (2014). Orchestrating innovation with user communities in the creative industries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 83, 40–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Porac, J. F., Thomas, H., & Baden-Fuller, C. (1989). Competitive groups as cognitive communities: The case of Scottish knitwear manufacturers. Journal of Management Studies, 26(4), 397–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  60. Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1132–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Power, D. (2002). ‘Cultural industries’ in Sweden: An assessment of their place in the Swedish economy. Economic Geography, 78(2), 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sampler, J. (1998). Redefining industry structure for the information age. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 343–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schüßler, E., & Sydow, J. (2015). Organizing events for configuring and maintaining creative fields. In C. Jones, M. Lorenzen, & J. Sapsed (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of creative industries (pp. 208–300). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Suddaby, R. (2010). Editor’s comments: Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 346–357.Google Scholar
  65. Townley, B., Beech, N., & McKinlay, A. (2009). Managing in the creative industries: Managing the motley crew. Human Relations, 62(7), 939–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Towse, R., & Handka, C. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook on the digital creative economy. Bingley: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  67. Troilo, G. (2015). Marketing in creative industries: Value, experience and creativity. London: Macmillan International Higher Education.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Winship, C., & Mandel, M. (1983). Roles and positions: A critique and extension of the blockmodeling approach. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological Methodology 1983–1984 (pp. 314–345). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  69. Zietsma, C., Groenewegen, P., Logue, D., & Hinings, C. (2017). Field or fields? Building the scaffolding for cumulation of research on institutional fields. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 391–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cass Business SchoolCity, University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations