LAUSR

Abstract This paper positions effectuation as a network-driving and network dependent phenomenon and suggests that understanding networks and network processes is essential to understanding the dynamics of effectuation. We argue that the implementation of effectuation is influenced by the nodal, relational, and structural characteristics of pre-existing and emerging networks, and by the processes through which these networks come about. We use these arguments to develop a multi-level, multi-theoretical reconceptualization of effectuation that provides for distributed agency and collective cognition of network members. We allow for the simultaneous and interactional use of effectual and causal logics, as well as the co-construction of knowledge, identity, and social capital within and across network levels. Our model also addresses changing uncertainty as opportunities develop, nuances of effectual interactions, and evolving market dynamics. Our propositions and reflections offer directions for further studies at the intersection of network and effectuation research. Executive summary There is little doubt that effectuation is reshaping how we think about entrepreneurial cognition and behavior. A core argument is that under conditions of uncertainty, entrepreneurs can co-create opportunities by collaborating with other willful agents. This moves us away from classical views of entrepreneurship and positions effectuation as a network-driving and network-dependent phenomenon. Yet, recent debate highlights that effectuation research has paid insufficient attention to the network of external parties involved. As a result, although the extant model of effectuation recognizes the importance of networks, our understanding of the relationship between effectual logic and entrepreneurial networks is far from complete. Several theoretically important and practically relevant questions arise from this knowledge gap. For example if we think about network development, how are potential stakeholders brought to mind and persuaded to commit if end-points and stakeholder preferences are both unknowable? What are the characteristics (i.e. structure, content and governance) of the networks that emerge through these commitments? Reciprocally, how do the characteristics of the emerging network influence effectual processes and outcomes? In this paper, we begin to address this line of questioning by considering effectuation not only at the level of the individual but also through lenses reflective of the three levels of analysis commonly adopted in network research: i) dyadic relationships, ii) the entrepreneurial network, and iii) the market more generally. While we attend to pre-existing networks (the constitution of which is likely to affect the probability of adopting effectual logic), our focus is on linking the individual and emerging networks across these levels. At the level of the individual, we break from prior effectuation research and ascribe new and influential roles to entrepreneurial ideas and instrumental mindsets in focusing an entrepreneur's attention on particular relationships (i.e. the cognitive activation of a cohesive network involving interested and persuadable individuals). At the level of the dyad, we suggest the very nature of interactions between actors can influence individual choice of logic. We specify that stakeholders will expect signs of process legitimacy (e.g. cognitive flexibility on the part of the entrepreneur) before making effectual commitments. We also move away from assumptions about altruistic behavior to suggest that power and influence will accrue to stakeholders whose resources are at risk and/or perceived by others to resolve uncertainty. At the level of the entrepreneurial network, we link effectuation to a brokerage orientation (tertius iungens) that enhances inclusiveness surrounding means and collective cognition. Moreover, we move beyond the narrow view of facilitating and constraining factors portrayed in the effectuation literature to argue that (e.g.) i) with respect to network content, resource specificity will shape possible futures; ii) with respect to governance, trust, supported by social mechanisms will predominate; and, iii) with respect to structure, specific network characteristics will be more supportive of certain aspects of effectuation than others (e.g. cohesive networks are more supportive of collaboration, but may limit the flexibility needed to embrace contingencies). At the market level, we posit that on the one hand, institutions will shape effectual processes. On the other hand, effectual processes are more likely than causal processes to create new institutions and/or supplant existing institutions. Overall, our study contributes to the understanding of both effectuation and networks by offering a multi-level, multi-theoretical re-conceptualization of the dynamics of effectuation. Our arguments should spur research in at least three interdependent areas: i) uncertainty and individual cognition; ii) network processes surrounding interactions and commitments; and iii) the contingent effects of network characteristics on effectuation. For practitioners, our insights should help shape thoughts about i) who to interact with in the face of uncertainty; ii) what stories to tell and how to deal with image management; iii) what to expect during negotiations; iv) how to broker relationships to enhance the ‘co’ in ‘co-creation’; and moreover, v) what network characteristics might facilitate or constrain their efforts.