Managing integrators where integration matters: insights from symbolic industries

Abstract

Recently, companies have been faced with strong need for integration in order to deal with the trade-offs of the current competitive environments – quick response and customization, technical functionality and stylistic appeal, low cost and top quality. This need has led to the introduction of different integrating positions. Although these positions already exist within the firm, in recent years they have become strategic and therefore have to be carefully managed. The relevance and the management of integrators are particularly evident in the symbolic industries, where the need to combine the symbolic and the functional facets of products and services has become increasingly critical for companies to succeed. We provide evidence based on four case studies conducted in the European fashion industry in order to build an original framework for the effectiveness of the integrators and to highlight the relevance of HRM practices in dealing with these positions.

Keywords:

• fashion context
• integration
• knowledge brokers
• symbolic industry

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Luigi Proserpio, Severino Salvemini, and Paola Varacca Capello for their comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. Financial support from the SDA Bocconi School of Management ‘Claudio Demattè’ International Centre for Advanced Management Studies is gratefully acknowledged.

Notes

1. We prefer the definition of ‘symbolic’ industries instead of ‘cultural’ industries used by Jones and Thornton (2005), since in these contexts the crucial element is represented by the creation of symbols used to communicate belonging to a social community.

2. As our main source of data collection, we used semi-structured interviews. We had two set of interviews within the companies: the first focused on understanding the differences between the departments involved in the core activities and their integration needs; and the second focused on the characteristics of the integration positions. We used different interview protocols, including both closed and open-ended questions. All interviews were taped and transcribed; field notes were collated and observations written up.

3. The four company cases were analysed and compared in order to determine the categories and general patterns; each incident was continually compared with the others within the emergent categories to highlight better both description and explanation. In order to obtain data analysis, themes were identified from the literature mentioned above. The data were examined and explored by the authors separately for details relating to these themes and then compared until convergence was reached.

4. From here onwards, we refer to the integrator by using the singular form, although in most companies there are many different integrators, specialized according to the specific integration task they have to carry out, and to the actors they have to deal with. The number of integrators depends on the complexity of the company, and does not affect the topic we are analysing. This complexity amplifies the integration issue thus adding a problem of coordination among the different integrators.

5. As regards the network structure, we can distinguish between open networks, in which actors are disconnected, and closed networks, in which actors are mutually linked. These two types of networks differ in the kinds of links most commonly found among actors. We can identify direct links (two actors are directly connected), indirect links (the connection between two actors is mediated by the presence of a third) and structural holes (two actors are not connected at all). Direct links are a feature of closed networks and structural holes characterize open networks where knowledge among actors is very differentiated.

6. Although, up to now, the literature has mainly focused attention on external brokers, some studies have also considered the role of internal brokers. Internal brokers have been defined as ‘individuals who provide connections between communities of practice, transfer elements of one practice into another, foster coordination, and through these activities can create new opportunities for learning’ (Wenger 1998, p. 109). Similarly, Brown and Duguid (1991) introduce the concept of brokers as people participating in multiple communities and facilitating the transfer of knowledge between them. Brokers therefore do not merely act as agents or negotiators, but manipulate knowledge before transferring it from one context to another. More precisely, as pointed out by Pawlowski and Robey (2004, p. 649) they initiate a ‘process of translation (that) involves framing elements of one community's world view in terms of another community's world view’. This translation becomes a critical function of internal brokering so that local knowledge can be understood by the different units or communities in the company.