The paper "Own Dimensions of Dominant Logic" is a good example of management coursework. Dominant logic as per many scholarly works relates to the means a company uses in making a profit (Jay, Barney and William 2008, p. p.17 - 29). In essence, it is an explanation of how companies succeed. In the application on individual terms, dominant logic describes the cultural beliefs and norms that the individual espouses. In a negative perspective, dominant logic locks an individual into thinking appropriately about progressing because it gives the individual only a single way of thinking.
It is used often when talking about incompetent reasons for diversification of an individual’ s line of thought (Walters and Shook 2005, p. 19 - 32). This narrowed approach in an individual prevents a perfect environment for supporting innovation and directly stifle creativity. All humans are impacted by our own dominant logic’ . In a world, in which many new opportunities are opening up we need to recognize the limitations of our dominant logic and look for ways to apply different logics. This paper details a personal analysis of dominant logic evaluating how disadvantageous it is in limiting opportunities for advancement and discussing how diversified logic is critical in personal development. In the formation of the construct of dominant logic, Bettis and Prahalad wondered why an individual does not use strategic actions, which would be rational and the most appropriate as strategic moves to advancement (Walters and Shook 2005, p.
19 - 32). Thus, dominant logic is ideally, an investigation into ‘ adaptive rationality’ or ‘ thinking patterns’ of the overriding coalition for more explanation of their planned behavior. In explaining dominant logic Bettis and Wong (2003, p.
165 - 178) analyzes the consistent and prevalent theoretical foundation of the concept being in cognitive psychology. In cognitive psychology, this works specify different sources of dominant logic including the power of paradigms, operant conditioning, cognitive bias and pattern-recognition process (Walters and Shook 2005, p. 19 - 32). The great variance along a dual dimension characterizes the theories, which underlies the four sources: (1) their positioning precisely on the dichotomy of cognitivism and behaviorism and (2) their analysis level. The use of operant conditioning in explaining human behaviour results in practically an individualistic concept (Grant 1988, p.
639 - 642). More purposely, within cognitive psychology, many scholars have an interest in cognitive resistance. This is the theoretical basis of this paper in analyzing dominant logic. Own dimensions of dominant logic I hold various dimensions that are evidence of dominant logic. The most evident dominant logic is being single career-oriented. I have always had the belief that diversification in a career is the loss of focus in life, and it leads to a lack of the required specialization. Out of this, I have always wanted to lead a career as a journalist.
Literally, in this global world, the dominant logic is a negative attribute (Walters and Shook 2005, p. 19 - 32) as it has led to my downfall. I have terraced for over four years in search of a job, and it has literally been difficult in surviving without earning. On a rather sad note, searching for a job in the competitive world has been tedious with many people who have diversity and more qualifications having a competitive advantage and winning the positions at my cost (Prahalad and Bettis 1986, p.
Baron, R 1998, Cognitive Mechanisms in Entrepreneurship: Why and When Entrepreneurs think differently than other People, Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 275-294
Barr, P.S., Stimpert, L.J., and Huff, S 1992, Cognitive changes, strategic action, and organizational renewal, Strategic Management Journal, 13, 15 – 36
Bettis, R. A., and Prahalad, C 1995, the Dominant Logic: Retrospective and Extension, Strategic Management Journal, 16 (1), 5 – 14
Bettis, R 2000, The iron cage is emptying, the Dominant Logic no longer dominates, Economics Meets Sociology in Strategic Management. Eds. Baum, J. and Dobbing, R. Stamford: JAI Press, 2000, 167-174
Bettis, R.A., and Wong, S 2003, Dominant Logic, Knowledge Creation, and Managerial Choice, Economics Meets Sociology in Strategic Management, Eds. Baum, J. and Dobbing, Stamford: JAI Press, 2000, 165-178
Bogner, W.C. and Barr, P 2000, making sense in hypercompetitive environments: A cognitive explanation for the persistence of high velocity competition. Organization Science, 11(2), 212-226
Brännback, M., and Wiklund, P 2001, New Dominant Logic and its Implications for Knowledge Management: A Study of the Finnish Food Industry, Knowledge and Process Management, 8 (4), 197-206
Carley, K 1997, extracting team mental models through textual analysis, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 533-558
Carley, K. and Palmquist, M 1992, Extracting, representing, and analyzing mental models, Social Forces, 70 (3), 601-636
Chinnis, A., and White, K 1999, challenging the dominant logic of emergency departments: Guidelines from chaos theory, Journal of Emergence Medicine, 17 (6), 1049-1054
Clapham, S.E., and Schwenk, C 1991, Self-Serving Attributions, Managerial Cognition, and Company Performance, Strategic Management Journal, 12 (3), 219-229
Cote, L., Langley, A., and Pasquero, J 1999, Acquisition Strategy and Dominant Logic in an Engineering Firm, Journal of Management Studies, 36 (7), 919-952
Grant, R 1988, On ‘Dominant Logic’, Relatedness and the Link between Diversity and Performance, Strategic Management Journal, 9 (6), 639-642
Jay, B., Barney and William, S 2008, Strategic Management and Competitive Advantages, Pearson Prentice Hall, p.17-29
Prahalad, C. and Bettis, R 1986, the Dominant Logic: A New Linkage between Diversity and Performance, Strategic Management Journal, 7, pp. 485-501
Prahalad, C 2004, the Blinders of Dominant Logic, Long Range Planning, 37, 171-179
Walters, BA, and Shook, C 2005, Small Business Manager Scanning Emphases and the Dominant Logic of the Business-Level Strategy, Journal of Small Business Strategy, 15 (2), 19-32