ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 3, NO 9
A cognitive approach for analyzing the influence of effectual network on
entrepreneurs actions.
Ghorbel Faiez
Faculty of Economics and Management of Sfax, University of Sfax, Tunisia, Route de Mahdia
km 5, Chez Hamadi Borcheni, Sfax 3011, Tunisie.
Boujelbène Younes
Faculty of Economics and Management of Sfax, University of Sfax, Tunisia, Institut Superieur
D'administration des affaires de Sfax, Route de l'aerodrome km 4,
Sfax BP 1013 Sfax 3018, Tunisie.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the impact of effectual network components in the
decisions and actions of effectual entrepreneurs. An innovative approach is proposed
which is based on cognitive mapping with a series of interviews. The data content
were analyzed and cognitive map was extracted. A total of ten concepts were selected from
literature to represent effectuation principles and effectual network basis. Through a crosssectional design the proposed approach is captured by the inclusion of the different
components. For validation purpose, a sample of seven entrepreneurs from S f a x
(Tunisia) is used. The results show that effectual network components are vital for
oriented entrepreneur actions. This paper can provide assistance to academics and
practitioners to recognize decisions and actions of effectuators in a specific entrepreneurial
environment.
Keywords: Effectuation, Effectual network, Social capital, Entrepreneur, cognitive maps
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1409
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
1. Introduction
An awareness of the actions of entrepreneurs is critical to understanding the entrepreneurial
reasonning. There are two type of entrepreneur thinking: causal and effectual. Many authors, such as
Sarasvathy (2001), Wiltbank et al., (2006), Read et al., (2011), proposed that effectual thinking is
contrasted with causal thinking. According to Sarasvathy (2001), entrepreneurs are entrepreneurial,
as differentiated from managerial or strategic, because they think effectually. In fact, effectuation
originates in ent r epr en e urshi p , na mel y the des ign of new m a r k e t s an d ne w businesses Read et
al., (2011). In the following, we present the example of Sarasvathy (2008), to more explain the
difference between causal and effectual thinking. In the causal case, the chef selects a menu,
comes up with good recipes for each item on the menu, shops for necessary ingredients, arranges
proper implements and appliances, and then cooks the meal. The causal process starts with selecting a
menu as the goal and finding effective ways to achieve the goal.
In the effectual case, the chef begins by looking through the kitchen cupboards for
ingredients and utensils. She then designs possible menus based on those ingredients and utensils.
In fact, the menu often emerges as she is preparing the meal. The effectual chef starts with a
given kitchen, and designs possible, sometimes unintended, even entirely original meals with its
contents (Sarasvathy, 2008; Hoffmann et al., 2008, Fayolle and Hernandez, 2007). Effectuation puts
low emphasis on prediction and high emphasis on control (Wiltbank et al., 2006).
When expert entrepreneurs seek to build a new venture they start with their means. These
means can be grouped into three categories: (1) who I am- my traits, tastes, and abilities (2) what I
know- my education, training, expertise, and experience (3) who I know- my social and professional
network. This last idea is the target of this paper applied in effectual context. In spite of the
importance of the idea of effectual network in the heart of effectuation theory a lack of studies is
pointed.
The purpose of this paper is twofold. Firstly we analyze the importance of effectual network in the
decisions and actions of effectual entrepreneurs as well as we intend to propose a methodology based
on cognitive mapping to detect the influence of the selected concept (Schema 1) in actions of
effectuators entrepreneurs. The preference of the seven entrepreneurs’ s of our case sample to oncept
and not to another is vital to understand the reasoning of entrepreneurs of Sfax.
2. The proposed approach
Recent studies (Sarasvathy 2008; Lee and Jones, 2008; Krueger and Day, 2010; Read et al; 2011),
have turned to a more sophisticated understanding of the cognitive biases of entrepreneurs and their
ability to garner human and social capital as predictors of firm creation and firm success.
The proposed schema 1 is a conceptual thought about the specific items of effectuation theory: bird in
hand principle, Social capital and effectual network that are analyzed in order to explain their
importance in the actions of entrepreneurs from a cognitive register. To achieve this task we exploit
the cognitive maps technics.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1410
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
Figure. 1. Architecture of the proposed approach
Effectuation is action oriented (Sarasvathy, 2008). Each action is a result of a combination between
different elements such as the contingency, resource, circumstance and manner of reasoning. The
cognitive dimension is the core of effectuation theory. The theoretical foundations of an
effectuation approach
lie
in
cognitive
science, particularly the
work
which
emphasizes entrepreneurial framing how entrepreneurs view inputs (relevant or not), make inferences,
perceive alternatives, and attend to constraints (Chandler et al., 2011). The effectuation approach
suggests that thinking and action proceed together in an attempt to create one of several possible
outcomes. Effectuation assumes that the future is unpredictable but that entrepreneurs can control a
value- creating part of it through the use of a given set of means available to them. In this
sense, entrepreneurs can utilize the means at their disposal to influence their future without having
to predict it (Mitchell et al., 2007).
The components of the proposed approach will be analyzed in next sections. Effectuation
(section 2.1), Bird in hand principle (section 2.2), Social network (section 2.3), and effectual network
(section 2.4) and cognitive maps (section 2.5).
2.1. Effectuation
“The society for effectual action” defines effectuation as logic of entrepreneurial expertise. What
makes great entrepreneurs isn’ t genetic or personality traits,risk-seeking behavior, money, or unique
vision. Effectuation research has found that there is a science to entrepreneurship and that great
entrepreneurs across industries, geographies, and time use a common logic, or thinking process, to
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1411
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 3, NO 9
solve entrepreneurial problems. Effectuation is a logic of entrepreneurial expertise that both novice
and experienced entrepreneurs can use in the highly unpredictable start-up phase of a venture to
reduce failure costs for the entrepreneur.
Table .1. Effectuation Principles
Principle
Bird-in-hand principle
Affordable loss principle
Crazy Quilt principle
Lemonade principle
Pilot-in-the-plane
principle
Description
Start with who you are, what you know, and whom you know
Invest what you can afford to lose. Calculate downside
potential and risk no more than can you afford to lose.
Build a network of self-selected stakeholders. This principle
involves negotiating with any and all stakeholders who are
willing to make actual commitments to the project,
without worrying about opportunity costs, or carrying out
elaborate competitive analyses.
Embrace and Leverage surprises. Effectuating new
value through acting on what is available.
Effectuation is action oriented.
The future comes from what people do. Relying on and
working with human agency as the prime driver of
opportunity.
According to Sarasvathy (2008) expert entrepreneurs use the following principles. Each principle
inverts key decision-making criteria in received theories and conventional management practices.
2.2. Bird in hand principle
Effectuation is action oriented. Expert entrepreneurs started with three categories of means: their
identity, their knowledge base, and their social networks (Sarasvathy, 2008). It is important to note
that identity (who I am) depends on and is changed by knowledge (what I know) and networks
(who I know) refers to your social networks and vice versa. The three categories of means are not
mutually exclusive and independent.
One of the greatest assets of an entrepreneur is the people s/he knows. Expert entrepreneurs build
firms by building stakeholders networks-adding others means to their own means. There are people
that are directly accessible to you, and that you can pull in almost immediately friends, family and
acquaintances (Read et al; 2001). There are two other aspects of human interaction that help you add
to your means. The first is that you aften meet people through interaction that are contingencies and
serendipitous. The second is about the fact that you are linked to people you don’ t know by people
you do know (Read et al; 2001).
The network is initiated through an effectual commitment that sets in motion two concurrent cycles of
expanding resources and converging constraints that result in the new market (Sarasvathy and Dew,
2005).
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1412
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
2.3. Social network
For Casson and Dell Giusta (2007) a network is a very general concept – it is far more general than
is suggested by the specific contexts in which it is often used. The defining feature of a network is
‘ connection’ , a set of ‘ elements’ that are connected to each other form ‘ anetwork’ . The
elements a r e t h e ‘ m e m b e r s ’ o f t h e n e t w o r k . The c o n n e c t i o n i s cera t e d b y s o m e
k i n d of ‘ relationship’ betw e en the elements. Every pair of membres is c onn e cted , e i t h e r
‘ directly’ or ‘ indirectly’ ; indirect connections are effectedrothugh other members of the network. The
growth of so many organizations and associations devoted to helping people create and
maintain social networks poses a puzzle for social scientists. Why do people need any help? Social
relations seem fundamental to everyone’ s life and would appear to follownaturally from growing up
in organized social settings. Throughout their life course, people are embedded in social situations
that put them in touch with others, such as kin reunions, gatherings of friends, workplace teams, and
voluntary association meetings (Aldrich and K i m , 2005).
More generally, the idea that individuals and organizations affect and are affected by their social
context is not new (Thornton et al., 2011). Bowey and Easton (2007), think that the social
capital concept has penetrated every corner of sociology (Granovetter, Coleman, Loury, Lin),
political science (Putnam, Fukuyama), and economics (Woolcock). During
the
1990s,
organizational behaviourialists increased their interest in social capital as an explanatory
construct (Burt, Nahapiet and Ghoshal, Uzzi). Recently, social capital has become an important
research focus of entrepreneurial studies (Aldrich, Baron and Markman, Anderson and Jack). In
entrepreneurship social capital and the effectual network are considered as resources. The difference
resides in the nature of the both concept: Social capital aims Successful Startup ≠ Effectual network
aims Successful Growth.
Social network was exploited in the depth of entrepreneurship. An entrepreneur’ s network is a
learning habitat from which to gain understanding about opportunities and resources (Bowey and
Easton, 2007). Modern theory affords a coherent view of the socially embedded entrepreneur
advancing the coordination of activities in a complex economic system. Social networks influence
several different aspects of entrepreneurship. It is useful at the outset to distinguish three aspects of
entrepreneurship: opportunity seeking, resource acquisition, and project implementation. A major
advance in entrepreneurship was the introduction of the theory of effectuation.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1413
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
The social network as a main ingredient of entrepreneurship research is taken again in the effectual
context. Sarasvathy et al., (2001; 2004; 2008; 2011) advance the Effectual Network. Expert
entrepreneurs started w i t h t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s o f means: their identity, their knowledge base,
and their social networks. Commitments from key stakeholders destroy uncertainty by contracting
along certain dimensions for the future, and as the stakeholders act on those contracts and the
network grow. The mutual commitment is the first link in a new chain of stakeholders, the first
dyad in a new network that eventually transforms extant reality into a new market. The chain of
commitments launched at the start of the venture has two impacts: its increases the resources
available to the venture by increasing stakeholders ownership, while at the same time constraining
the venture, crystallizing its goals, and helping it converge towards something specific, which may
or not may not be what the entrepreneur had in mind at the beginning.
2.4. Effectual network
Entrepreneurship requires focused action. The effectuating mind is oriented towards understanding
the gap between current and future reality, and towards traversing the pathway between them.
Creativity may play a role in pioneering a path to be traversed, but that is not necessarily required.
Many entrepreneurs are expert followers or ‘ second movers’ , followingthe pathways blazed by
pioneers (Duening 2010). In their explanations to the effectual network Sarasvathy and Dew
(2003), use Simon’ s (1993) notion of docility and combine it with Sarasvathy’ s (200)1 exposition
of effectuation for dealing with environmental uncertainty. Docility is the tendency to depend on
suggestions, recommendation, persuasion, and information obtained through social channels as a
major basis of choice (Simon, 1993).
A pre-commitment is a self-imposed non-negotiable constraint that stacks the deck in favor of or
against specific future choices. According to Elster (2000), pre-commitment is about why and how
individuals might want to restrict their freedom of choice. The basic idea is that while individuals
might in general prefer to have more options, they might sometimes benefit from having fewer
options, and at other times it might be especially beneficial if some options were somehow made
entirely unavailable. In other words, sometimes less is more, even in the case of freedom (Dew and
Sarasvathy, 2007).
As Blaug (1996: 444) notes, “The beauty of Knight’ s argument was to show that the per sence of
true ‘ uncertainty’ about the future might allow entrepreneurs to earn positiveprofits despite perfect
competition, long-run equilibrium and product exhaustion (Sarasvathy and Kotha; 2001). The
conceptual distinction between ‘ risk’ and ‘ uncertainty’ ix
s pelored by Knight (1921). Knight
introduced a fundamental distinction between risk, which can be observed and, at least in principle,
insured against, and uncertainty, which cannot be estimated according to a known probability
distribution, and can only be resolved by taking some real-world action (Matheus, 2010). Under
conditions of Knightian uncertainty, the enactment process can have the effect of exacerbating
what were originally very small differences in resource uses to create quite substantial differences
over time.
Knight divided unknown distributions into the following three types (Sarasvathy, 2003):
(1) Risk – known distribution, unknown draw: The urn contains five red balls and five green
balls. The expected value of any draw is perfectly calculable through statistical analysis.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1414
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
(2) Uncertainty – unknown distribution, unknown draw: We do not know how many balls are in
the urn, or what color they are. But based on several draws we can learn the underlying
distribution of balls and thereafter calculate the value of any future individual draw.
(3) “True” (Knightian) uncertainty – distribution does not exist or is unknowable. We simple do
not know what we’ ll get when we make a draw.
This may be true of the kinds of resources and capabilities an individual or the resulting
organization accumulates over the opportunity enactment process (Alvarez and Barney 2010). The
interaction of the actor with the environment in an iterative process that enables learning also helps
the actor to define the properties of the opportunity. Thus meaning, understanding, and learning about
the opportunity are defined relative to the individual’ s actions and not through some self contained
or abstract structure (Kogut and Zander, 1996). Boardman (1999) states that: ‘ ‘ When we anticipate
the making of a decision at some future time, pre-commitment is something like stacking the
deck in the present for or against one of the choices which we might make on a future
occasion. The key quality of pre- commitments is that they serve to skew the distribution of future
outcomes in one way, rather than another. As the effectual network grows over time, and includes
more and more of the external world, it tends to become less effectual as it eventually coalesces into
an empirically distinct new market (Sarasvathy and Dew 2005). Sarasvathy and Dew (2003)
note that the pre-commitment approach serves as a mechanism of non-predictive control (at least
partially) irrespective of what exogenous factors might constitute the state-of- nature that actually
comes to be. In other words, the pre-commitment approach rests on our ability to partition future
states into things outside our control and those within, allowing us to act upon those pieces of the
distribution that are a direct result of human action.
The actions of effectuators consist in things which can be done and believed in interaction with other
people. Some of those interactions result in commitments to the new venture But each stakeholder
who comes on board brings to the venture both new means and new goals. And each new
commitment sets in motions two concurrent cycles, one expanding and the other converging
(Sarasvathy, 2008). The effectual commitment i s u s u a l l y l imite d t o what each party can
afford to lose.
According to Srasvathy (2008), members of the effectual network can respond to interactions in one
of three ways:
1. They can ignore them and continue to build the network effectually. (Transform)
2. They can begin exploring alternatives to growing the network effectually. (Explore)
3. They can declare the effectual transformation complete and begin competing with
alternative markets. (Exploit)
In Sarasvathy effectual network conception the particulars of who they are, what they know and
whom they know matter and drive the creation of the final artifact (or pie) that the network
ends up with. Stakeholders selecting into the network have to be willing to negotiate primarily for
the content and shape of the pie rather than its size and subdivision, especially since they cannot
predict what it will eventually turn out to be. At the heart of the dynamic and interactive model of
effectuation is sited a network of stakeholders called “effectual network” that transforms current
realities into new markets (Sarasvathy and Dew, 2001).
From an economics perspective, entrepreneurship researchers have argued that the presence of
market gaps or imperfections creates opportunities for entrepreneurial intervention in re- equilibrating
the market system (Kirzner, 1973). The word ‘ market’ is used in a large vraiety of ways (Menard,
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1415
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
1995). The various descriptions could be divided into three distinct categories: demand,
supply
and institutions (Sarasvathy, 2008). Pacheco et al., (2010) argue that entrepreneurial
opportunities consist of a set of ideas, beliefs, and actions that enable the creation of future goods and
services in the absence of current markets for them. Some scholars embracing the creation view
argue that opportunities do not always preexist as objective phenomena until created by the actions
and perceptions of the entrepreneur. Creation theories embrace entrepreneurial agency and the
endogenous emergence of opportunities. Sarasvathy (2008) argues that new-market creation is not
always a search and selection process in some theoretical space of all possible markets; instead, it is
more likely a transformation of extant realities into new possibilities.
Bala and Goyal (1994) postulate that new markets are constantly “opening up” because of
technological, political or regulatory changes, saying that the emergence of the new market then
depends on the expectations of entrepreneurs and their requisite attempts to enter the market. In
fact the rhetoric of “entry” pervades a substantial portion of the growing literature on new market
creation (Sarasvathy, 2008; Sarsvathy and Dew, 2005). Effectuators start with who they are, what
they know, and whom they know, and begin acting upon whatever they can afford to do
(Sarasvathy, 2001). Most important of what they can do is to call people they know or meet, and
plunge straight into negotiating a series of commitments. Sarasvathy and Dew ( 2005) argue that
The new market, however, gets fabricated, not through the designs of any one person, but as a
chain of interactive commitments that form the interface between the inner environment of the
effectual network (current members of the network), and the outer environment (current nonmembers). At any given point in time, the effectual network is impacted by one of three categories
of things: (1) interactions that become embodied in actual additional commitments; (2) those that
do not; and (3) non-negotiable exogenous states of nature. The resultant artifact, the new market
that comes to be, is an outcome of how the network deals with each of these three categories.
2.5. Cognitive map
Entrepreneurship has been widely studied through management, economics, political science and
psychology frameworks (for example, Baron and Shane, 2005; Levenburg, Lane and Schwarz,
2006). Despite this increasing interest in entrepreneurship research and its recognized importance
in modern societies, there are still limited explanations regarding some aspects of its cognitive and
behavioral processes (Santos and Caetano 2010).
We use in this study the cognitive mapping technique. Downs et al., (1973) define the cognitive
mapping as “a process composed of a series of psychological transformations by which an
individual acquires,codes, stores, recalls, and decodes
information about the relative locations
and attributes of phenomena in their every day spatial environment”.
In more general terms, Arthur and Passini (1992) define cognitive map as “an overall mental
image or representation of the space and layout of a setting” this means that the cognitive mapping is
“the mental structuring process leading to the creation of a cognitive map”.
In his pioneering paper, Tolman (1948) argues that rats, like humans, have a mental representation
of the world he called a cognitive map. These maps hold detailed spatial information that
individuals collect, integrate and use while interacting with the environment. Tolman’ s work has
led to the modern psychological definition of a cognitive map: an overall mental image or
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1416
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
representation of the space and layout of a setting (Arthur and Passini, 1992). Samsonovich and
Ascoli (2007) examine conceptual value maps to represent a human value system with a cognitive map
beyond spatial and temporal dimensions. Different kinds of cognitive maps, they write, can be
"distinguished on the basis of the semantics they represent (logic, values, feelings…) and on the
representation systems they map (one may distinguish contextual and conceptual cognitive maps)".
David Ausubel (Ausubel, 1968) emphasized on the importance of prior knowledge in being able to
learn about new concepts. Drawing on this theory, Novak (1993) concludes that existing cognitive
structures are critical for learning new concepts. A concept map is a graphical representation where
nodes represent concepts, and links represent the relationships between concepts. The links, with
labels to represent the type of relationship between concepts, can be one-way, two-way, or nondirectional. The concepts and the links may be categorized, and the concept map may show
temporal relationships between concepts.
3. Results and validation
3.1. Sample
Our sample consists of 7 effectual entrepreneurs originated from Sfax / Tunisia. For each
entrepreneur, we realize an interview between 30 minutes and one hour. At the beginning of each
interview, we present the aim of our study and we define the different concepts used in the
study. We use a semi-directive interview. Each entrepreneur was invited to talk about the ten
concepts concentrated on the effectual network in
correlation with effectual principles
components: Identity, Knowledge, network, negotiation, and opportunities cost, competitive
analysis, expertise contingency control and uncertaint y. The discuss ion covers the meaning of
these concepts from the entrepreneur’ s point of view and whether they affect in their entrepreneurial
decisions and actions or not.
A paper with the different cited concepts was distributed and which connect between concepts that
can have a relationship between them. He will indicate the orientation of each relationship. The
intensity a relationship between two concepts A and B can be weak (with a value of (1), moderate
(2) or strong (3). During the interview process, we ask entrepreneurs about any relationship that
seemed illogically.
3.2. Cognitive map process
In three sequential phases process appropriate to the situation of our survey was developed. This
process is composed of three phases: explorating, coding and analysing.
Phase I: The exploration phase involves collecting data from entrepreneurs. The collection is made by
individual semi-directive interviews and a questionnaire.
Phase II: Identify and make a list of concepts and relationships of influence between concepts.
Phase III: Following the potential coding of phase II, a cognitive map is created. The analysis of maps
is done individually.
Analysis indicators were proposed: “the centrality of the concepts”, “explanations” and” the
“analysis of loops”. The literature cognitive mapping suggests assessing the relative importance of
each concept in a graph. A concept is considered particularly important when it has many links with
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1417
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 3, NO 9
others.
We proceed with the analysis of the complexity of cognitive representations of entrepreneurs in the
beginning of the next section.
3.3. Discussion and validation
Table . 2. General information about concepts complexity
Case
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Number of concept (C)
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
Number of links (L)
76
87
79
88
81
78
83
L / (C²-C)
0,84
0,96
0,87
0,97
0,9
0,86
0,92
L/C
7,6
8,7
7,9
8,8
8,1
7,8
8,3
The number of concepts contained in the cards for effectuator’ s entrepreneurs is 10. The different
entrepreneurs have the same degree of differentiation for the concepts used in this study.
Presumably, effectuators entrepreneur attach the same importance to the effectual logic in the
context of Sfax. The classification by the number of links, the average is 81.71 links per card and
the number of links on a card links varies between 76 for entrepreneur 1 and 88 for entrepreneur
4. Effectuators entrepreneur in the context of the region of Sfax are not in the same degree of
integration in the theme of effectual network.
The analysis of degree of integration clearly shows that the development of thinking on the subject
effectuation is not the same intensity of an entrepreneur to another. The density measurement does
not indicate the content of cognitive maps but can be useful to determine the robustness of a
speech. Indeed, more ideas are related to someone, more it will take action on several links to be
able to accept change. According to the calculation of the density taken into the number of possible
connections: there are entrepreneurs 2 and 4 in extreme position. As the number of possible links
increases exponentially facing an increase in the number of concepts in the map, it seems more
appropriate to refer here only to the results of the ratio of the number of links on the number of
concepts.
In Bougon et al., (1977), it is implied that the importance of a concept can be assessed by using an
"adjacency matrix" that takes into account many factors that are related directly, or by the use a
“reachabilit matrix” where the indirect links are also taken into consideration.
Our output consists of an adjacency matrix which can be translated to a cognitive map. Table 3
shows the different possible interactions between all considered concepts of the effectual logic.
The adjacency matrix shows different areas of communication between the different basics of
effectual logic. In a first step, we study the impact of influence between concepts then we explore
the impact of this influence on the decisions and actions of entrepreneurs.
The table 3 is a product of the seven personnel matrix (appendix 2) of our sample. We aggregate
personnel card in order to achieve a synthetic representation (figure 2) of the studied phenomena.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1418
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 3, NO 9
Table . 3. The form of the adjacency matrix
Concepts
P1
P2
P3
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
P10
-
2
1,85
1,85
1,14
1,42
3
2,14
1,57
2
1.28
-
2,57
3
2,28
2,57
2
1,85
1,85
1,14
1.14
2,57
-
2,71
1,85
2
1,85
1,85
2
1,28
P4
0,28
1,85
1,85
-
2,57
2
2
1
2,14
1,28
P5
1
0,71
2
3
-
3
1,42
1
2,71
0,85
P6
1,28
1,71
2
3
2,14
-
1,28
1
1
1,57
P7
2,14
3
1,85
2
2,42
2
-
2,14
2,28
1,42
P8
1,57
2,14
1,14
1,85
1,71
1,85
2,71
-
2,14
2
P9
1,42
1
1,71
2,28
1,14
2,28
2
1,71
-
1,71
P10
1,42
1,42
1,85
2,71
2,28
2,57
2,71
2,28
2,14
-
Our results show that the core concept of effectual theory “Expertise” affects the entire different
concept related to effectuation principles (network, contingency...) and effectual network
(Negotiating, Knowledge...). In a cognitive map, a relationship between concept A and B means
that A is the explanation of B or B is the consequence of A (see Prigent et al., 2008). In our case,
for example “Identity” explains “Expertise”. This relationship goes into an intensity of 3.
According to Down and Warren (2008) in the fields of sociology and social psychology there is
increasing consensus that identity is not a stable unit of the individual, but instead is constituted
through ongoing interactions between individual resources and contextual discourses. Løwe Nielsen
and Lassen (2011) indicate that the entrepreneurial effectuation process constantly gives rise to
identity work and that this work speaks back to the entrepreneurial process and thus affects how
the entrepreneur perceives opportunities, generate resources, and approaches new people. In this
manner, identity cannot be seen as a stable core that guides the enterprising individuals in the
entrepreneurial effectuation process as a whole. Entrepreneurs often explain their actions and
decisions in terms of something fundamental about who they are rather than their more superficial
preferences. Sometimes their identities have to do with being an entrepreneur, however
idiosyncratically interpreted… (Sarasvathy, 2008).
In his final analysis an effectual network entrepreneur takes as primitive the categories of means:
Identity, Knowledge and Network.
The “knowledge aim”, “the network aim” and the “identity aim” drive actions and decisions of
entrepreneurs. The
majority of interviews know that “Expertise” is the core of entrepreneurial
activities; this vital element is the guide to “entrepreneurial success”.
The importance of expertise is proved in estimating affordable lose, control, making decisions
in uncertain environment and exploited means. This suggests that non-predictive strategies that
leverage both our own and other people’ s docility may prove at least as effecitve under conditions
of motivational and environmental uncertainty as those built upon more familiar predictive
prescriptions (Sarasvathy, 2001).
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1419
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 3, NO 9
Our result corroborates the theoretical conception of Sarasvathy, the most
intense
relationship is between expertise and knowledge. Discussions with them during the interview let us
concluding that there are more familiar with the “Expertise” concept. The majority of interviewees
know that Entrepreneurial expertise is beneficial in the sense that it can guaranty firm performance
by the control, affordable loss and contingency...
Entrepreneurial expertise gives a comprehensive alternate frame for tackling entrepreneurial
problems (Sarasvathy, 2008). Our results highlight that the negotiation concept and competitive
analysis concept are the result of expertise. This relationship goes until a value of 2. It is clear that the
“Expertise” concept is closed to the entrepreneurial decisions. Network as means for
entrepreneurs exerts an influence in decisions and actions of effectuators from Sfax during
the effectuation cycle. The majority of interviewees affirm that they use network as fundamental
means and sign in their decisions. For example an entrepreneur in his negotiation with stakeholders
exploits his connection in a social network. In the adjacency matrix we note that network has an
intense influence on negotiation (2.71) and knowledge (2.57). The relationship between social
network and entrepreneurial decisions is intense. For opportunists have real opportunity costs
in the form of other more predictable markets with low hanging fruit (as opposed to those
under construction through effectual networks). Joining and working with an effectual network
requires them to forgo those other opportunities that provide more immediate and surer gains
(Sarasvathy, 2008). The concept “network” is very clear in the mind of the majority of effectuators in
our sample. In our case we use a method to calculate the relative importance of each concept
in the cognitive structure of effectual entrepreneurs.
We use weights W’ and W’’ to study the intensity of the influences exerted by the different
concepts.
The influence is measured by this formula: W = W '+ W''
With W ': the influence of weight put up by the concept in cognitive structure.
W'': the weight of influence of the concept to other concepts.
Table . 4. Concepts weights based analysis
Concepts
W'
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
P10
16,97
17,26
16,11
14,69
14,69
13,7
17,11
15,54
13,83
17,96
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
W''
11,53
14,4
14,97
20,55
16,39
18,27
15,97
12,83
16,26
11,25
W'+W''
35,24
33,08
31,97
31,66
31,08
31,08
30,09
29,21
28,5
28,37
1420
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
In our case, the most central themes are negotiation and expertise with a score of 35 and 34. There are
central themes in the speech of entrepreneurs in the region of Sfax. We find that the weight of
concept negotiation and expertise is coherent with Sarasvathy analysis in expertise and effectual
network. Discussions with entrepreneurs from our sample let us deducting that their concept are
very clear in their minds.
We find also that the concept network is more active than the concept opportunity cost. Starting
from this finding, we can note that network is vital elements in entrepreneur decisions and actions.
Table 4 summarizes the received influences weight of concepts. It is observable that the
“Negotiation concept” and the “Expertise concept” are the most receiver concepts. There weights
reflect that they are the most influenced concepts. As it mentioned before, the Sfaxian
entrepreneurs are aware of the role of the expertise and network in their decisions. We notice that
identity of entrepreneurs have a law weight. Our findings may be explained by the fact of their
cognitive nature. The total weight of concepts can be held as a criterion to detect their capacity on
linking effectuation principles and effectual network. Table 4 shows that the “negotiation concept”
can be considered as the best variable of connection that can assure the linking action. The
Expertise concept can reinforce this relationship.
Figure 2 (appendix 1) represents the average cognitive map of entrepreneurs. We draw the cognitive
map in order to detect all the relationships between the different concepts. The most remarkable
thing is that these concepts are combined together in the cognitive schema of entrepreneurs. The
results highlight the impact of psychological factors in entrepreneurial decisions. For example,
the entrepreneur can orient his negotiation with stakeholders from his level of expertise. Our
results confirm the theoretical analysis of Sarasvathy. Network and expertise a f f e c t t he
decisions m akin g b y entrepreneurs.
Our findi n g highli ght s t h at t h e effectual network concept in relation with the effectual
network are present in the spatial cognitive of entrepreneurs but they are influenced by other
dimensions. We can confirm that effectual network and effectual principles are interrelated.
4. Empirical implications
Using causal reasoning, one begins with a specific goal and a given set of means for reaching it.
Using effectual reasoning, one starts with only a set of means; in the process of deploying them,
goals gradually emerge. Human behavior is fundamentally unpredictable, it is also docile. Docility
implies that we are teachable, persuadable, adaptable, and manageable. In our study we find that
entrepreneurs combine between effectual principles and effectual network.
In their cognitive schema, concepts are linked and their intense in term of entrepreneurial decisions
are vital in the performance of firm. Decisions and actions of entrepreneurs are affected by the
means which an entrepreneur disposes. Network, knowledge and identity are the core of effectual
analysis. Effectual network can be interrelated to effectual principles in order to explain his
importance in effectuators decisions. It is time now to generate some models that both analysis
effectual network from the point of view: transform, explore and exploit. Models that should be
useful (practical) and that integrate psychological and cognitive dimensions.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1421
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
Effectual entrepreneurs are convinced by the spirit of the effectuation theory. Entrepreneurs are
faced a complex dimensions, tools and concepts that underpin their decisions and actions that focus
on success and performance of their organizations. However, it is difficult or impossible to master
all principles and dimensions. The object of this work is to clarify the role of the cognitive map in
the understanding of effectuation principles and effectuation tendency.
Let this idea some broad suggestions for future research can be put forth focusing on the application
of the different concept in specific context included psychological, geographical, organizational and
mental dimensions etc...The application of various principles of the theory of effectuation on the
cited context is an interesting work for researchers conducting.
5. Conclusion
In this study we demonstrate that a relationship exist between effectual principles and
effectual network. Decisions and actions of entrepreneurs are affected by the presence of effectual
network in term of negotiation with stakeholders, deciding in critical situation and find a coherent
position between means and contingence in effectual process.
Effectuation consist of non- predictive strategies that combine actual means available with
unanticipated contingencies to construct a series of stockholders commitment. The precommitment approach rests on our ability to partition future states into things outside our control. We
assume that
this research shortage the number of cases which don’ t exceed
7 enrtepreneurs in
Sfax. Notwithstanding this limitation it is believed that this study provides some reasonable
insights and future directions into the cognitive analysis of effectuation and effectual network.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1422
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 3, NO 9
Reference
Axelord, R. (1976), Structure of Decision:
University, NJ.
the Cognitive Maps of Political Elites. Princeton
Bougon, M.; Weick, K ; D. Binkhorst. (1977), Cognition in organization: an analysis of the
Utrecht Jazz Orchestra. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 606-639.
Borroi M., Minoja M; Sinatra A. (1998), The relationship between cognitive maps, industry
complexity and strategies implemented: the case of the carpi textile-clothing industrial
system, Journal of Management and Governance, 2 (3), 233-266.
Bueno,S; Jose L. Salmeron. (2009), Benchmarking main activation functions in fuzzy cognitive
maps. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 5221-5229.
Carlsson C; Walden P. (1997), Cognitive maps and a hyperknowledge support system in strategic
management, Group Decision and Negotiation, 6 (1), 23-44.
Davidsson, Per. (2005), The Entrepreneurial Process as a Matching Problem, Academy of
Management Conference, Hawaii.
Dew N; Sarasvathy S. (2002), what effectuation is not: Further development of an alternative to
rational choice. Presented at the 2002; Academy of Management Conference, Denver,
Dew, Nicholas; Sarasvathy, Saras D ; Venkataraman, S. (2004), The Economic implications of
Exaptation, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14 (1), 69-84.
Dew, Nicholas; Sarasvathy, Saras D. (2007), Innovations, Stakeholders & Entrepreneurship,
Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 267-283.
Dew, Nicholas; Read, Stuart, Sarasvathy, Saras D; Wiltbank,Robert.(2008), Outlines of a
behaviorial theory of the firm, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 66 (1), 37-59.
Dew, Nicholas; Sarasvathy, Saras D. (2008), Of Immortal Firms and mortal Markets: Dissolving
the Innovator's Dilemma, European Journal of Innovation Management, 11 (3), 313-329.
Dew, Nicholas; Read, Stuart; Sarasvathy, Saras D; Wiltbank, Robert. (2009), Effectual versus
predictive logics in entrepreneurial decision-making: Differences between experts and
novices, Journal of business venturing, 24 (4), 287-309.
Dew, Nicholas; Sarasvathy,Saras; Wiltbank, Robert. (2010), Affordable loss: behavorial economic
aspects of the plunge decision, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3 (2), 105-126.
Duening, TN. (2010), Five Minds for the Entrepreneurial Future: Cognitive skills as the intellectual
foundation for next generation entrepreneurship curricula, Journal of Entrepreneurship, 19 (1),
1-22.
Eden C. (1988), Cognitive mapping: a review, European Journal of Operational Research, n 36,
1- 13.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1423
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
Eden, C; F.Ackermann. (2004), Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure or problems.
European Journal of Operational Research, 159, 673-686.
Harmeling, Susan S; Sarasvathy, Saras D; Freeman, R. Edward. (2011), Contingency as an
entrepreneurial resource: How private obsession fulfills public need, Journal of Business
Venturing, 26 (3), 293-305.
Haynie, Shepherd,Dean A; Patzelt Holger . (2010), Cognitive Adaptability and an entrepreneurial
task the role of metacognitive ability and feedback, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, In
press.
Honig, Benson. (2004), Entrepreneurship education: Toward a Model of Contingency-Based
Business Planning, Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3 (3), 258–273.
Klyver,Kim; Hindle,Kevin; Meyer,Denny. (2008), Influence of social network structure on
entrepreneurship participation—A study of 20 national cultures, International Entrepreneurship
and Management Journal, 4 (3), 331-347.
Menard, Claude. (1995), Markets as institutions versus organizations as markets? Disentangling
some fundamental concepts, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization , 28 (2), 161182.
Nielsen , Suna Løwe; Astrid Heidemann, Lassen. (2011), Identity in entrepreneurship effectuation
theory: a supplementary framework, International Entrepreneurship Journal Management,
published online 19 march 2011.
Politis, Diamento. (2005), The process of entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework,
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29 (4), 399-424.
Politis, Diamanto. (2008), Does prior start-up experience matter for entrepreneurs' learning? A
comparison between novice and habitual entrepreneurs, Journal of Small Business and
Enterprise Development, 15 (3), 473-489.
Read, Stuart., Sarasvathy, S.D. (2005), Knowing what to do and doing what you know: effectuation
as a form of entrepreneurial expertise, The Journal of Private Equity, 9 (1), 45–62.
Read, Stuart; Dew, Nicholas; Sarasvathy, Saras D.; Song, Michael; Wiltbank, Robert. (2009),
Marketing under uncertainty: The logic of an effectual approach, Journal of Management, 73
(3), 1-18
Read, S., Dew, N., Sarasvathy, S.D., & Wiltbank, R. (2009). Marketing under uncertainty: The
logic of an effectual approach, Journal of Marketing, 73, 1–18.
Read, Stuart; Song, Michael; Smit,Willem. (2009), A meta-analytic review of effectuation and
venture performance, Journal of Business Venturing, 24 (6), 573-587.
Read, Stuart; Sarasvathy, Saras; Nick, Dew; Wiltbank, Robert; Ohisson, Anne-Valérie. (2011),
Effectual entrepreneurship, Routledge Taylor and Francis London and New York.
Samsonovich, Alexei V; Ascoli, Giorgio A. (2007), Cognitive map dimensions of the human value
system extracted from natural language, Proceeding of the 2007 conference on Advances in
Artificial General Intelligence: Concepts, Architectures and Algorithms.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1424
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 3, NO 9
Sarasvathy, S.D. (2001), Causation and effectuation: toward a theoretical shift from economic
inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26, 243–288.
Sarasvathy, S.D. (2001), Effectual reasoning in expert entrepreneurial decisions: existence and
Bounds. Academy of Management Meeting Best Paper Proceedings.
Sarasvathy, Saras
D. (2001), Entrepreneurship as economics with
Entrepreneurship , 3, 95-112.
imagination,
Ethics
and
Sarasvathy, Saras D.; Dew, Nicholas. (2003), Effectual Networks: A pre-commitment approach
to bridging the gap between opportunism and trust, Working paper.
Sarasvathy, Saras D. (2003), Entrepreneurship as a Science of the Artificial, Journal of
Economic Psychology, 24, 203–220.
Sarasvathy, Saras D. (2004), Making it Happen,
Beyond Theories of the Firm to Theories of
Firm Design, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28 (6), 519-531.
Sarasvathy, Saras D. (2004), The questions we ask and the questions we care about:
reformulating some problems in entrepreneurship research, Journal of Business Venturing, 19 (4),
707-717.
Sarasvathy, Saras D. (2004), Constructing corridors to economic primitives: entrepreneurial
opportunities as demand side artifacts, Opportunity Identification and Entrepreneurial Behavior
Series: Research in Entrepreneurship and Management.
Sarasvathy, Saras D.; Kotha, S. (2004), Effectuation in the management of knightian
uncertainty: evidence from the
realnetworks case, Research on Management and
Entrepreneurship 1, 31-62
Sarasvathy, Saras D; Read,Stuart.(2004), Entrepreneurial Expertise (entry in Encyclopedia of
Entrepreneurship).
Sarasvathy, Saras D.; Dew, Nicholas. (2005), Entrepreneurial logics for a technology of
foolishness, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 21 (4), 385-406.
Sarasvathy, Saras D.; Dew, Nicholas. (2005), New Market Creation through Transformation,
Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 15 (5), 533-565.
Sarasvathy, Saras D.; Dew, Nicholas; Velamuri, S. Ramakrishna; Venkataraman, S. (2005), Three
Views of Entrepreneurial Opportunity, Handbook of entrepreneurship research, International
Handbook Series on Entrepreneurship.
Sarasvathy, S., Dew, N. (2008), Is effectuation Lachmannian? A response to Chiles, Bluedorn
and Gupta (2007). Organization Studies, 29 (2), 239–245.
Sarasvathy, S.D. (2008). Effectuation: Elements of entrepreneurial expertise.
Edward Elgar.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
Cheltenham, UK:
1425
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
Sarasvathy, Saras D; Dew, Nicholas; Read, Stuart; Wiltbank, Robert. (2008), Designing Organizations
that Design Environments: Lessons from Entrepreneurial Expertise, Organization Science, 29 (3),
331-350.
Sarasvathy, Saras D.; Dew, Nicholas. (2008), Effectuation and Over-Trust:
Karri, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32 (4), 727-737.
Debating Goel and
Sarasvathy, Saras D; Venkataraman,Sankaran. (2011), Entrepreneurship as Method: Open Questions
for an Entrepreneurial Future, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35 (1), 113–135.
Schenkel,Mark T;Matthews, Charles H.; Ford, Matthew W. (2009), Making use of 'irrationality'?
Exploring the role of need for cognitive closure in nascent entrepreneurial activity,
Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 21 (1), 51-76.
Swan J. (1997), Using cognitive mapping in management research, British Journal of Management, 8
(2), 183-198.
Tolman, E.C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55, 189-208.
Venkatesh , Bala ; Sanjeev , Goyal. (2003), A noncooperative model of network formation,
Econometrica, 68 (5), 1181–1229.
Weick K.E., Bougon M.G. (1986), Organizations as cognitive maps: charting ways to success
and failure, The Thinking Organization: dynamics of organizational social cognition, Jossey- Bass.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1426
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
Appendix . 1
Figure. 2. Cognitive map
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
1427
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
Ressources
1
VOL 3, NO 9
Perte supportable
Identité
Connaissances
Réseau social
Négociation
Coût de l’opportunité
Analyse compétitive
Expertise
Contingence
Control
Incertitude
Identité
_
1
1
3
0
0
3
2
1
2
Connaissances
1
_
2
3
2
3
2
1
1
0
Réseau social
1
2
_
3
1
2
1
1
2
1
Négociation
0
3
3
_
2
1
0
1
1
1
Coût de l’opportunité
1
0
2
3
_
3
2
1
3
0
Analyse compétitive
2
2
2
3
2
_
1
0
1
1
Expertise
1
3
1
1
2
1
_
1
2
0
Contingence
1
2
0
1
2
1
3
_
2
3
Contrôle
2
1
2
2
0
2
2
2
_
3
Incertitude
0
0
2
3
2
3
3
2
1
_
Ressources
Perte supportbale
Ressources
2
Perte supportable
Identité
Connaissances
Réseau social
Négociation
Coût de l’opportunité
Analyse compétitive
Expertise
Contingence
Control
Incertitude
Identité
_
3
3
3
1
2
3
3
2
3
Connaissances
2
_
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
Réseau social
0
3
_
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
Négociation
0
2
1
_
3
3
3
1
3
3
Coût de l’opportunité
2
2
1
3
_
3
1
1
2
2
Analyse compétitive
1
1
2
3
3
_
2
2
2
1
Expertise
3
3
3
3
3
3
_
3
3
3
Contingence
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
_
3
2
Contrôle
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
_
1
Incertitude
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
_
Ressources
Perte supportbale
1428
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
Ressources
3
VOL 3, NO 9
Perte supportable
Identité
Connaissances
Réseau social
Négociation
Coût de l’opportunité
Analyse compétitive
Expertise
Contingence
Control
Incertitude
Identité
_
1
0
3
0
0
3
2
1
2
Connaissances
1
_
2
3
2
2
2
1
1
0
Réseau social
1
2
_
3
1
2
1
1
2
1
Négociation
0
3
3
_
2
1
2
1
1
1
Coût de l’opportunité
1
0
2
3
_
3
2
1
3
0
Analyse compétitive
2
2
2
3
3
_
1
1
1
1
Expertise
1
3
1
1
2
1
_
1
2
0
Contingence
1
2
0
1
2
1
3
_
2
3
Contrôle
2
1
2
2
0
2
2
2
_
3
Incertitude
1
1
3
3
2
2
3
2
1
_
Ressources
Perte supportbale
Ressources
4
Perte supportable
Identité
Connaissances
Réseau social
Négociation
Coût de l’opportunité
Analyse compétitive
Expertise
Contingence
Control
Incertitude
Identité
_
3
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
1
Connaissances
2
_
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
Réseau social
0
3
_
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
Négociation
0
2
1
_
3
3
3
1
3
3
Coût de l’opportunité
2
2
1
3
_
3
1
1
2
2
Analyse compétitive
2
1
2
3
3
_
2
2
2
1
Expertise
3
3
2
2
2
2
_
3
3
3
Contingence
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
_
3
2
Contrôle
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
_
1
Incertitude
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
_
Ressources
Perte supportbale
1429
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
Ressources
5
VOL 3, NO 9
Perte supportable
Identité
Connaissances
Réseau social
Négociation
Coût de l’opportunité
Analyse compétitive
Expertise
Contingence
Control
Incertitude
Identité
_
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
Connaissances
1
_
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Réseau social
3
3
_
2
2
2
3
3
2
1
Négociation
0
0
1
_
3
3
3
1
3
0
Coût de l’opportunité
0
0
3
3
_
3
1
0
3
1
Analyse compétitive
0
1
2
3
2
_
1
1
1
3
Expertise
3
3
2
3
3
3
_
3
2
2
Contingence
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
_
2
1
Contrôle
0
0
1
3
3
3
2
1
_
1
Incertitude
3
2
1
3
3
3
2
3
3
_
Ressources
Perte supportbale
Ressources
6
Perte supportable
Identité
Connaissances
Réseau social
Négociation
Coût de l’opportunité
Analyse compétitive
Expertise
Contingence
Control
Incertitude
Identité
_
1
1
3
0
0
3
2
1
2
Connaissances
1
_
2
3
2
3
2
1
1
0
Réseau social
1
2
_
3
1
2
1
1
2
1
Négociation
1
3
3
_
2
1
0
1
1
1
Coût de l’opportunité
1
0
2
3
_
3
2
1
3
0
Analyse compétitive
2
2
2
3
2
_
1
0
1
1
Expertise
1
3
1
1
2
1
_
1
2
0
Contingence
1
2
0
1
2
1
3
_
2
3
Contrôle
2
1
2
2
0
2
2
2
_
3
Incertitude
0
1
2
3
2
3
3
2
1
_
Ressources
Perte supportbale
1430
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
Ressources
7
JANUARY 2012
VOL 3, NO 9
Perte supportable
Identité
Connaissances
Réseau social
Négociation
Coût de l’opportunité
Analyse compétitive
Expertise
Contingence
Control
Incertitude
Identité
_
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Connaissances
1
_
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Réseau social
3
3
_
2
2
2
3
3
2
1
Négociation
1
0
1
_
3
3
3
1
3
0
Coût de l’opportunité
0
1
3
3
_
3
1
2
3
1
Analyse compétitive
0
1
2
3
3
_
1
1
1
3
Expertise
3
3
3
3
3
3
_
3
2
2
Contingence
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
_
3
1
Contrôle
0
0
1
3
3
3
2
1
_
1
Incertitude
3
2
1
3
3
3
2
3
3
_
Ressources
Perte supportbale
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1431