Content uploaded by Missoum Mohamed Rafik
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Missoum Mohamed Rafik on Mar 26, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Intelligence économique et agilité : Etude de cas Alliance Assurances
Abstract and Figures
The present thesis aims at studding the articulation between the competitive intelligence and the agility within an Algerian company. Even though competitive intelligence and agility share many factors such as foundations, goals, informational resources, and deal with the same competitive environment, few of researches and scientific studies addressed the relation between the two concepts. .
Hence, the present research tries to answer the following question: How does competitive intelligence contribute to the enterprise agility?
Our research is interpretivist and exploratory. Therefore, the qualitative approach has been adopted through a longitudinal study of a single case (Alliance Assurances).
Data analysis has been conducted first using the (Dumez, 2011) template, then through the conceptualizing categories of (Paillé et Mucchielli, 2016).
The concluded results confirmed the existence of a kind of cycle between competitive intelligence practices within thecompany and its agility as a posture; thereafter we proposed a theoretical model grouping together the different conceptualizing categories, describing the articulation between the various competitive intelligence practices and their articulation with the agility of the company.
While the single case limits the external validity of the research, the present thesis proposes an adapted conceptual entities to the Algerian economic and competitive context that mangers can use to achieve the agility through competitive intelligence practices.
Key words: competitive intelligence, enterprise agility, articulation, conceptualizing categories, template.
Figures - uploaded by Missoum Mohamed Rafik
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Missoum Mohamed Rafik
Content may be subject to copyright.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Strategic management has been increasingly characterized by an emphasis on core competences. Firms are advised to divest unrelated businesses and return to core business. Moreover, competitive advantage is now increasingly seen as a matter of efficiently deploying scarce knowledge resources to product markets. Much of this change in emphasis has occurred because of the emergence of a unified and rigorous approach to strategy, often called the resource-based approach. This Reader brings together extracts from the seminal articles that created this dominant perspective in strategic management. It includes the pioneering work of Selznick, Penrose, and Chandler and more recent writing by Wernerfelt, Barney, Teece, and Prahalad and Hamel.
L’objet du présent chapitre est de répondre à la question « Comment je cherche ? » Ce chapitre explicite les deux grands processus de construction des connaissances : l’exploration et le test. Nous appelons exploration, la démarche par laquelle le chercheur a pour objectif la proposition de résultats théoriques novateurs. Le terme tester se rapporte à la mise à l’épreuve de la réalité d’un objet théorique ou méthodologique. La première section présente les caractéristiques des modes de raisonnement propres à chacun de ces processus (déduction et induction). La seconde section traite spécifiquement de trois voies d’exploration possibles (théorique, empirique et hybride). La troisième section propose la démarche de test classique : l’hypothético-déduction. En conclusion, nous proposons de voir comment explorer et tester peuvent être réconciliés dans le cadre général d’une recherche.
For several years, businesses and organizations have faced an increasingly volatile environment, marked with challenges such as increased competition, globalized markets, and individualized customer requirements. These challenges are accompanied by many changes in every organizational field. Such scenarios were already described in the 90s, for instance by Goldman, Nagel, and Preiss (1995) or the Iacocca Institute (1991). As a response, different concepts have emerged that should enable organizations to master these challenges. Agility is the most recent, but others like flexibility and leanness are mentioned often, too.
Many research activities concerning agility and its related concepts have been conducted in the meantime. However, there currently exists no common understanding of what constitutes agility. This makes it difficult for both researcher and practitioner audiences to build upon the insights obtained thus far. On the one hand, researchers are missing a well-founded basis to develop the topic further, while on the other hand, practitioners cannot easily uncover what parts of their organizations have to be changed and in what respect they have to be changed to respond to new market challenges.
