Toward A Better Understanding of Rule Breaking Market Behavior Insights From Performance Breakthroughs in Sports Ann-Kathrin Veenendaal

Toward a Better Understanding of Rule
Breaking Market Behavior Insights from

Performance Breakthroughs in Sports
Ann-Kathrin Veenendaal
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/toward-a-better-understanding-of-rule-breaking-mark
et-behavior-insights-from-performance-breakthroughs-in-sports-ann-kathrin-veenenda
al/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Understanding Ethics in Applied Behavior Analysis

Practical Applications Ann B Beirne
https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-ethics-in-applied-
behavior-analysis-practical-applications-ann-b-beirne/
Photovoltaics From Milliwatts To Gigawatts:

Understanding Market And Technology Drivers Toward
Terawatts Tim Bruton
https://textbookfull.com/product/photovoltaics-from-milliwatts-
to-gigawatts-understanding-market-and-technology-drivers-toward-
terawatts-tim-bruton/
Human Factors in Air Transport: Understanding Behavior

and Performance in Aviation Erik Seedhouse
https://textbookfull.com/product/human-factors-in-air-transport-
understanding-behavior-and-performance-in-aviation-erik-
seedhouse/
Minorities and Small Numbers from Molecules to

Organisms in Biology Toward a New Understanding of
Biological Phenomena Takeharu Nagai
https://textbookfull.com/product/minorities-and-small-numbers-
from-molecules-to-organisms-in-biology-toward-a-new-
understanding-of-biological-phenomena-takeharu-nagai/
Sentiment in the Forex Market Indicators and Strategies
To Profit from Crowd Behavior and Market Extremes 1st
Edition Saettele
https://textbookfull.com/product/sentiment-in-the-forex-market-
indicators-and-strategies-to-profit-from-crowd-behavior-and-
market-extremes-1st-edition-saettele/
Studies on Competition and Antitrust Issues in the

Pharmaceutical Industry 1st Edition Ann-Kathrin
Lehnhausen (Auth.)
https://textbookfull.com/product/studies-on-competition-and-
antitrust-issues-in-the-pharmaceutical-industry-1st-edition-ann-
kathrin-lehnhausen-auth/
Sports Performance Measurement and Analytics: The

Science of Assessing Performance, Predicting Future
Outcomes, Interpreting Statistical Models, and ...
Market Value of Athletes 1st Edition Lorena Martin
https://textbookfull.com/product/sports-performance-measurement-
and-analytics-the-science-of-assessing-performance-predicting-
future-outcomes-interpreting-statistical-models-and-market-value-
of-athletes-1st-edition-lorena-mar/
Understanding Global Higher Education: Insights from

Key Global Publications 1st Edition Georgiana Mihut
https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-global-higher-
education-insights-from-key-global-publications-1st-edition-
georgiana-mihut/
Understanding Higher Education Internationalization:

Insights from Key Global Publications 1st Edition
Georgiana Mihut
https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-higher-education-
internationalization-insights-from-key-global-publications-1st-
edition-georgiana-mihut/
Contributions to Management Science
Toward a Better
Understanding
of Rule-Breaking
Market Behavior
Insights from Performance
Breakthroughs in Sports
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/1505
Toward a Better
Understanding
of Rule-Breaking
Market Behavior
Insights from Performance Breakthroughs
in Sports
Steinbeis University Berlin
Berlin, Germany
Dissertation Steinbeis University Berlin, 2018

All illustrations except Figure 2.7 by Christiane Haas, Leipzig
ISSN 1431-1941 ISSN 2197-716X (electronic)

ISBN 978-3-030-16106-4 ISBN 978-3-030-16107-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16107-1
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or
information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Foreword
This is an extraordinary dissertation.

To begin, the value of the work is exceptional. Although business innovation is
widely desired, the reality is that many more organizations aspire to it than achieve
it. This book provides a deep analysis of the most radical innovations, those that can
both create practical novelty and overcome market resistance. The underappreciated
challenge of succeeding despite habit-driven resistance is what makes these rule-
breaking innovations. The dissertation draws general characteristics from actual
cases of rule-breaking innovations. It then turns these into recommendations for
specific actions that a firm’s employees can use to facilitate rule-breaking
innovations.
The methodological approach of the work is equally extraordinary. The author
wisely chose the domain of sports where the success of rule-breaking innovations is
made transparent through direct competition. At the same time, the market resistance
in a sport can be intense as coaches and rule-makers fight change in the status quo.
The cases under study are carefully chosen, systematically enriched with data, and
subjected to an exemplary analysis.
Finally, the quality of the work is extraordinary. To extract useful guidelines for
business managers from a different domain, rule-breaking innovations in sports, is a
rare achievement. Further, unlike nearly all doctoral theses in marketing science, the
work is not theory-testing but theory-building. Thus, besides its substantive contri-
bution to greater innovation in business, the work provides a model of how a data-
based, comprehensive theory can be constructed where none existed before.
I wish the work widespread visibility in both business and science. It can inspire
every reader interested in disruptive behavioral innovations and encourage the
scientifically minded to pursue unusual ways of understanding complex phenomena.
Berlin Helmut Schneider

November 2018
v
Contents
1 Relevance and Current Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 A Non-technological Perspective on Breakthrough Innovations . . 1
1.2 Rule-Breaking Market Behavior and Related Constructs . . . . . . . 6
1.3 Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.3.1 Research Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.3.2 Method and Analytical Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2 Conceptual and Empirical Exploration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.1 The Nature of Rule-Breaking Market Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.1.1 Feature 1: Is It a Non-technological Innovation? . . . . . . . 38
2.1.2 Feature 2: Does the Innovation Comply with the Formal
Set of Rules? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.1.3 Feature 3: Is the Innovation Radical? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.1.4 Feature 4: Is the Innovation Collectively Accepted? . . . . . 42
2.1.5 Further Elaborations Beyond the Conceptual Features . . . 44
2.1.6 Integration of the Decision Criteria in a Four-Way-Rule-
Breaking Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2.2 Research Setting, Data and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
2.2.1 Rationale of a Multiple Case Study Beyond Business . . . . 47
2.2.2 Research Context and Case Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
2.2.3 Data Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.2.4 Data Collection and Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
2.3 Empirical Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
2.3.1 Single Case Analysis: Insight into Eight Historical Sports
Innovations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
2.3.2 Cross-Case Analysis: In Search of Patterns and General
Explanations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
vii
viii Contents
3 Toward a Rule-Breaking Managerial Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

3.1 Transferring the Insights: From Sports to Business . . . . . . . . . . . 115
3.1.1 Logic and Structure of the Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
3.1.2 Overall Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
3.1.3 Rule-Breaking Market Behavior Challenge 1:
Recognizing the New Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
3.1.4 Rule-Breaking Market Behavior Challenge 2:
Overcoming Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
3.2 A Framework for Rule-Breaking Behavior in Business . . . . . . . . 173
3.2.1 Rationale and Design Principles for Visual Artifacts
in Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
3.2.2 Mechanisms of Rule-Breaking Market Behavior
at a Glance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
3.2.3 Framework of Rule-Breaking Market Behavior . . . . . . . . 177
3.2.4 First Evaluation of the Frameworks’ Value Creation
Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
4 General Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
4.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
4.2 Limitations and Future Research Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
A.1 Three Stages of the Data Analysis: Tabular Display . . . . . . . . . . 214
A.2 Database of Sports Innovations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
A.3 Exemplary Illustration of Quotes Regarding Key Variables . . . . . 229
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
List of Abbreviations
3M Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company

AAU Amateur Athletic Union
APA American Psychological Association
BBC British Broadcasting Corporation
CAIB Columbia Accident Investigation Board
CEO Chief Executive Officer
DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid
e.g. example given
et al. et alii, et aliae, et alia (“and others”)
etc. et cetera (“and the rest”)
FAZ Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (German newspaper)
FIN Finland
FINA Fédération Internationale de Natation (International Swimming
Federation)
FIS Fédération Internationale de Ski (International Ski Federation)
i.e. id est (“that is”)
IAAF International Association of Athletics Federations
ibid. ibīdem (“in the same place”)
IBM International Business Machines Corporation
IOC International Olympic Committee
IQ Intelligence quotient
ISHOF International Swimming Hall of Fame
IT Italy
Jr. junior
LA Los Angeles
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology
n.d. no date
NAAU National Amateur Athletic Union
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NBA National Basketball Association
ix
x List of Abbreviations
NCAA National Collegiate Athletic Association

Newark AC Newark Athletic Club
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
p. page
para. paragraph
PE Physical education
POL Poland
pp. pages
QWERTY keyboard layout for most keyboards in the U.S.
R&D Research and Development
resist. resistance
Sr. senior
SWE Sweden
U.S. United States
USATF USA Track & Field
USC University of Southern California
USMS United States Masters Swimming
viz. videlicet (“namely”)
vs. versus (“against, turned”)
List of Figures
Fig. 1.1 Schematic conceptualization of the focal perspective, variant 1

(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 5
Fig. 1.2 Analytical framework (idea adapted from H. Schneider, source:
author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Fig. 1.3 Process and scope (source: author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Fig. 2.1 Taxonomy of rule-breaking market behavior’s key characteristics
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 38
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 44
Fig. 2.3 Four-Way-Rule-Breaking Test (source: author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Fig. 2.4 Breadth-depth dilemma (idea adapted from Schneider 2015,
source: author) .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. 49
Fig. 2.5 Tradeoff between originality and transfer potential (source:
author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Fig. 2.6 Flowchart of the systematic search to select the source domain
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 53
Fig. 2.7 Olympic sports disciplines (figures from https://www.olympic.
org) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Fig. 2.8 Application of the Four-Way-Rule-Breaking Test (source:
author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Fig. 2.9 Three stages of data collection and analysis—process perspective
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 67
Fig. 2.10 Three stages of data collection and analysis—outcome perspective
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 68
Fig. 2.11 Development of different high-jumping styles (based on Keil
and Killing 2014, p. 15) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Fig. 2.12 Straddle technique (left) vs. Fosbury Flop (right) (source:
author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Fig. 2.13 Old Backstroke Turn (left) vs. Flip Turn (right) (source: author) . . . 75
xi
xii List of Figures
Fig. 2.14 Prior Shot Put Technique (left) vs. O’Brien Shift (right)
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 77
Fig. 2.15 Classic Technique (left) vs. Skating Technique (right)
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 79
Fig. 2.16 Classic Seat (left) vs. Forward Seat (right) (source: author) . . . . . . . 82
Fig. 2.17 Parallel Style (left) vs. V-Style (right) (source: author) . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Fig. 2.18 Set Shot (left) vs. Jump Shot (right) (source: author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Fig. 2.19 Frog Kick (left) vs. Dolphin Kick (right) (source: author) . . . . . . . . 93
Fig. 3.1 Building bridges from sports cases to managerial implications
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 116
Fig. 3.2 Componential theory of organizational creativity and innovation
(adapted from Amabile and Pratt 2016) . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . 121
Fig. 3.3 Interactionist model of organizational creativity
(adapted from Woodman et al. 1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Fig. 3.4 A theory of creative individual action (adapted from Ford
1996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Fig. 3.5 Challenges of rule-breaking behavior in a process view
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 127
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 129
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 153
Fig. 3.8 Evaluation of active and passive innovation diffusion barriers
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 161
Fig. 3.9 22 Prioritization grid to overcome innovation barriers
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 162
Fig. 3.10 Reframing a problem (adapted from Wedell-Wedellsborg 2017,
p. 79) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 164
Fig. 3.11 Reframing ridicule on the example of the V-style
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 164
Fig. 3.12 Misinformation problem 1: continued influence effect
(adapted from Lewandowsky et al. 2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
Fig. 3.13 Misinformation problem 2: familiarity backfire effect
Fig. 3.14 Misinformation problem 3: overkill backfire effect
Fig. 3.15 Misinformation problem 4: worldview backfire effect
Fig. 3.16 Neurological habit loop (according to Duhigg 2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
Fig. 3.17 Framework of rule-breaking market behavior
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 179
Fig. 4.1 Contrasting current research and future research
(source: author) . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . 208
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Brief review of related discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Table 2.1 Combinations of rule-breaking key characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Table 2.2 Essence of sports innovations database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 61
Table 2.3 Case study overview sports . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . 62
Table 2.4 Data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 64
Table 2.5 Summary of cross-case data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Table 3.1 Overview of transfer-related contents and structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Table 3.2 Typology of serendipity (based on Yaqub 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Table 3.3 Sources of active and passive innovation resistance
(adapted from Talke and Heidenreich 2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Table 3.4 Potential barriers of active innovation resistance (based on
Joachim et al. 2018, Talke and Heidenreich 2014) ..... ........... 156
Table 3.5 Mapping the cases according to innovation barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
Table 3.6 Summary table: cueing rule-breaking market behavior . . . . . . . . . 175
Table 3.7 Summary table: mechanisms to overcome innovation
resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
Table A.1 Stage 1 . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . 214
Table A.2 Stage 2 . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . 215
Table A.3 Stage 3 . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . 216
Table A.4 Database of sports innovations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
Table A.5 Exemplary quotes Fosbury Flop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
Table A.6 Exemplary quotes Jump Shot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
Table A.7 Exemplary quotes Forward Seat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
Table A.8 Exemplary quotes Flip Turn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
Table A.9 Exemplary quotes Dolphin Kick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Table A.10 Exemplary quotes Skate Skiing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
Table A.11 Exemplary quotes V-Style . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
Table A.12 Exemplary quotes O’Brien Shift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
xiii
Chapter 1
Relevance and Current Perspectives
Abstract This chapter introduces the research on rule-breaking market behavior. It

includes the relevance of the phenomenon; the objectives and research questions;
and an outline of the methodological approach.
1.1 A Non-technological Perspective on Breakthrough

Innovations
The twenty-first-century business landscape, especially regarding but not limited to

the 35-member countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD), is characterized by rapid change, fierce global competition,
and an increasingly complex and demanding environment. Some minor local diffi-
culties notwithstanding, Europe, from 1945 to the present day, is witnessing its
longest period of peace ever. In this context, at the societal level, innovation is a vital
requirement for continuing economic growth and social progress (e.g. OECD 2015;
The World Bank and OECD 2009). By delivering important benefits to an increas-
ingly wide range of the population, innovation significantly improves people’s lives
(Ahlstrom 2010). Should the stream of innovation dry up, the economy will settle
into a “stationary state” with little or no growth (Metcalfe 1998, as quoted in
Fagerberg 2006, p. 20). At the organizational level, too, it is a commonplace to
assert that innovation is crucial to a firm’s competitive advantage (e.g. Ireland and
Hitt 1999; Porter 1990). The growing importance of innovation as a source of
organizational performance, success, and long-term survival has been increasingly
highlighted in the conceptual and empirical literature (Amabile and Pratt 2016;
Anderson et al. 2014; Shalley and Zhou 2008). In fact, innovation is considered
one of the major topics of interest across management, economics, business research,
sociology and social psychology (Hauser et al. 2006; Martin 2012; Salter and Alexy
2014). However, gaining competitive advantage from innovation is becoming more
and more difficult to maintain for extended periods of time. Thus, companies are
increasingly looking for novel impactful ways to operate in the market.
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 1

A.-K. Veenendaal, Toward a Better Understanding of Rule-Breaking Market
Behavior, Contributions to Management Science,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16107-1_1
2 1 Relevance and Current Perspectives
Starting with Schumpeter’s (1911) seminal work on the central role of innovation,
research in this area has continuously grown. Especially over recent decades, scholars
from various disciplines including sociology, psychology, history, philosophy and
business administration have devoted attention to innovation to an increasing degree,
leading to a plethora of different innovation ontologies and research dimensions
(Fagerberg 2006; Fagerberg and Verspagen 2009). To address the challenging breadth
of innovation research, scholars typically focus on certain facets of innovation such as
specific innovation types (product, process, service, business model, technological,
organizational, etc.), stages in the innovation process (generation, diffusion, adoption,
implementation), and innovations’ consequences (for the firm, industry, community,
economy), mostly at one level of analysis (individual, team, organization, industry,
economy) (Damanpour and Aravind 2012). Typically, innovation is primarily associ-
ated with the domains of technology and the natural, medical and life sciences. The
breadth of innovation reaches far beyond the more technical domains, however. As the
pace of innovation accelerates, human insight and behavior continues to gain decisive
importance in the context of innovation (Sluiter 2017).
Often, innovation takes place within a set of widely accepted rules that are clearly
understood, and companies try to innovate by doing what they do better (Tidd 2006).
For instance, these accepted rules relate to “industry recipes” that form and influence
the commonsense understanding of a particular industry or market. The notion of
doing things better is typically related to a firm’s efficiency and productivity efforts.
Abernathy (1978) was the first to suggest that the focus on productivity gains
contributes positively to performance outcomes but at the same time often inhibits
a company’s flexibility and ability to innovate. He coined this the productivity
dilemma (Benner and Tushman 2003; see Backhaus and Schneider forthcoming,
for an elaborate description in the context of strategic marketing). Apart from these
rather incremental efficiency-related efforts, occasionally something happens that
fundamentally redefines the common framework of widely accepted rules and causes
basic conditions, such as technology, markets, social, and regulatory mechanisms, to
shift dramatically.1 Usually, such dramatic breakthrough shifts are the result of doing
things differently. Illustrated in a David vs. Goliath-fashion,2 doing things differently
would mean to not fight the competition with the same slightly sharper weapon but
to use a completely different approach to succeed. While research on innovation has
predominantly followed a technological imperative with many theories and models
of innovation based on technologically induced change (Černe et al. 2016; Crossan
1
In his original theory of innovation, Schumpeter (1942) refers to this fundamental reframing
process as a process of creative destruction (see Chap. VII “The Process of Creative Destruction”).
2
The story of David and Goliath can be found in First Samuel 17 of the Bible. It tells that Goliath, a
nine-foot soldier heavily armed, was defeated by a small shepherd, David, with just a sling and a
stone. Focusing on the fact that power does not necessarily have to be physical might but can come
in other forms. David substituted speed and surprise for strength. While the story about David and
Goliath is primarily used to refer to situations of improbable victory, as when an underdog
surprisingly defeats a giant, it also nicely illustrates the potential success resulting from a—
seemingly simple—change of behavioral standards (Gladwell 2013).
1.1 A Non-technological Perspective on Breakthrough Innovations 3
and Apaydin 2010; Damanpour 2014; Damanpour and Aravind 2012; Keupp et al.
2012), this work focuses on a non-technological perspective. That is, to perpetuate
the above-stated example, just like David approached his challenge without focusing
on heavy or novel technological equipment, the focus lies on deviating from
fundamental assumptions and changing how one would usually behave. In short,
this work is focusing on behavioral innovations that primarily pay attention to
effectiveness parameters, involving rather high degrees of change, by solving
existing problems in a previously unknown form. The ability to create revolutionary
innovations can represent a sustainable competitive advantage for firms. Despite its
strategic importance, however, little is known about the process by which innovators
achieve these valuable breakthroughs (Mascitelli 2000).
Given its widely acknowledged importance, one might expect the context of
innovation to have a clear meaning, a rich tradition of theoretical development, and a
clear related body of empirical findings. Quite the contrary, conceptual and theoret-
ical work on innovation has been relatively sparse and research is fragmented
(e.g. Anderson et al. 2014; Klausen 2017). According to Klausen (2017),
Schumpeter’s (1934) fundamental work still remains unique in its scope and
depth. Carlile and Christensen (2004, p. 1) also allude to the concerns regarding
the “paucity of theory that is intellectually rigorous, practically useful, and able to
stand the tests of time and changing circumstances” that some of the most respected
members of our research profession, such as Simon (1976) and Solow (1985), have
long been expressing. Calls for more organic, genuine theory-building contributions
are not limited to literature on creativity and innovation but seem to pertain to
scholars across a wide variety of disciplines. In marketing in particular, MacInnis
(2011) and Yadav (2010, 2014) prominently highlight the critical but neglected role
of conceptual contributions for the vitality of knowledge development in the field.
The fundamental question for innovation research is to explain how innovations
occur (Fagerberg 2006). However, in his comprehensive review of the field, Fagerberg
(2006, p. 3) points out that the innovation process has been treated more or less like a
“black box”. Hennessey and Amabile (2010, p. 569) add that a more detailed under-
standing of the creative process is vital if strides are to be made in the sciences and
humanities. A further challenge in the context of creativity and innovation arises from
so-called lay theories, which are everyday informal theories and often implicit beliefs
that lay people hold about a phenomenon and its causes or consequences (Ritter and
Rietzschel 2017, p. 95). Lay beliefs may partly be informed by research but also often
take the shape of stereotypes and “everybody knows that . . .” discussions that are
encountered in daily conversations and popular publications (Ritter and Rietzschel
2017). While lay beliefs can certainly be encountered in several areas (for further
examples see Zedelius et al. 2017), creativity seems particularly receptive because it is
of such great appeal and relevance to people that they strive to make sense of the
phenomenon (Ritter and Rietzschel 2017). Baas et al. (2015) demonstrated that people
have strong beliefs about creativity that are often incomplete and not in line with
science. In the underlying context, this can become problematic when such lay beliefs
wrongly inform the choices that managers and other corporate deciders make.
The starting point for this work is a real-world phenomenon. Thus, the focal
perspective has been motivated by “informed curiosity” (Rozin 2001) emerging
from the observation of several organizational examples, some of which are outlined
subsequently for illustrative purposes.
Ryanair re-invented the European airline industry by deviating from existing
structures and conventions: Provincial instead of major airports, direct flights instead
of complex route systems, focus on short distance instead of long distance, just one
model of aircraft instead of a float consisting of several aircraft types, no business class,
no airport lounge, no check in terminals, no complimentary service on board, no gratis
inflight entertainment, and advertisements on the back of the seats. By acting this way,
CEO Michael O’Leary did not just cut cost dramatically but also focused on different
income sources, envisioning that, in the end, tickets may come at no charge. Although
the ideas were not completely new (Southwest Airlines), these changes not only kept
Ryanair financially viable but also lead to unprecedented consequences for the whole
European transportation industry (Day and Schoemaker 2004; Meffert 2009). The
energy drink Red Bull created an entirely new category in the global beverage market.
Other than existing soft drinks, Red Bull focused on effect (being physically and
mentally fit, wide awake) instead of taste. The original working-class drink from
Thailand conquered the broad masses and became a top selling world brand (Spindler
2016). The QWERTY myth reportedly states that our dominant keyboard deliberately
neglects the most important criteria of keyboard design: When certain combinations of
keys on early typewriters (which were designed according to research on efficient
typing) were struck quickly, the type bars often jammed. Instead of solving this
mechanical problem by improving technical features, the inventors simply redesigned
the keyboard in order to make people type slower (Jánszky and Jenzowsky 2010).
Cirque du Soleil little by little reinvented the circus: No animals, more intellectual wit,
more comfortable tents with high quality sound and lights, introduction of new circus
arts, integrative performances following a leading theme, and multiple productions in
several locations. Hence, Guy Laliberté established a new kind of entertainment by
linking elements from circus and theatre, growing into the largest theatrical producer in
the world (Spindler 2016). IKEA revolutionized the furniture industry by highly
integrating the customer into the purchasing process. Overall, around 80% of the
process steps are outsourced this way. The shopper chooses the piece of furniture,
picks it up from the warehouse shelf, ships and assembles it themselves, to name just a
few (Jungbluth 2006). In 1937, trucker Malcom McLean initiated a transformation of
the global economy by questioning the way cargo is handled at shipping docks. At that
time, all the shippers assumed that the only way to get more productive at transferring
cargo across the ocean was to build faster ships. However, McLane suggested that
instead of building faster boats, build faster docks, unloading whole trailers, not
unloading and reloading every single piece. It took him 20 more years to convince
anyone else that his idea was right, but he finally cut shipping costs significantly and
transformed not only the shipping economy but also the way the whole global economy
works (Duhigg et al. n.d.).
This list could potentially go on and on: Think of self-check-out at the supermar-
ket instead of cashiers, Amazon helping people save time instead of Wal-Mart
helping them save money (The Economist 2016), and making prices dynamic rather
than fixed (as, for example, commonly practiced by hotels and airlines).
1.1 A Non-technological Perspective on Breakthrough Innovations 5
non-technological c c/b
potential
b/c
a1 current options a2 b
in a market
technological
potential
Note: b,c = ways to expand the current options in a market, b indicates technological innovations,
c indicates non-technological innovations; see textual description for further explication
Fig. 1.1 Schematic conceptualization of the focal perspective, variant 1 (source: author)
To more specifically depict the above-explained and explicated phenomenon that

builds the foundation of this work, the focal perspective is conceptualized in Fig. 1.1.
The large grey field a symbolizes all current options in a given market, where a1 are
used options and a2 are idle options. The options are modeled as a function of the
technological potential on the x-axis and the non-technological, behavioral potential on
the y-axis. Under the assumption that a firm has exploited all existing options in field
a (a1 + a2), there are three analytical ways to expand the field, namely, to be innovative.
First, companies can develop novel technologies or adapt existing technologies from
other areas. In the picture, this option is displayed with field b. The red color symbolizes
that this option is not part of the underlying work. For instance, this would be
innovation resulting from or closely related with digitalization. Second, companies
can develop novel non-technological ways of thinking and behaving in the market. In
the picture, this option is displayed with field c. The green color indicates that this
option is part of the underlying work. According to this conceptualization, a third way
to extend the options of a company in a market is a combination of the two aforemen-
tioned parameters. The determining factor of whether the option is considered as part of
this work or not is the order of occurrence. That is, when new ways of behaving lead to
the development of a new technology (c/b), the new option is considered part of this
work, but when the development of new technologies is the major trigger for a novel
non-technological way of behaving in the market (b/c), it is not considered part of this
work. In other words, the red fields basically stand for what is currently impossible from
a technological perspective, and green stands for those options that simply have not
been done before. The latter is exactly what this work is concerned with.
In short, there is a pivotal and growing need for novel and impactful ways to
create a competitive advantage. Moving from that assumption, this work draws on
and analyzes a real-world phenomenon that is considered relevant and worthy of
inquiry: The pursuit of innovative paths above and beyond technological solutions.
Anecdotal evidence from a long list of corporate examples tells compelling success
stories of how companies addressed the challenge of expanding the alleged space of
opportunities, evidently leading to a change in the dominant market logics. While the
importance of gaining perspective and questioning what one knows has likely
increased, such instances of seeing things in a different light and changing prevailing
assumptions remains a challenging and insufficiently understood endeavor. Thus, a
systematic investigation of empirical evidence is needed to recognize patterns that
help us to better understand the process of how novel insight with breakthrough
character comes into play. Based on the phenomenon’s unique focal characteristics
and inspired by Backhaus and Schneider (2009), such purpose and impactful
deviation from behavioral standards is related to as rule-breaking market behavior.
1.2 Rule-Breaking Market Behavior and Related

Constructs
In order to get a systematic understanding of the underlying phenomenon’s specifics,

a first look is taken at the literal meaning of the two fundamental components rule
and breaking. In line with the Oxford English Dictionary, rule is interpreted as the
normal or customary state of things and break as an interruption of continuity or
uniformity, the suffix -ing denoting the action, an instance of this, or its result.
In other words, rules here refer to behavioral standards, to established routines, to
the way things are usually done, for instance how tasks are fulfilled, how problems
are solved, and how knowledge is learned. Breaking these rules then denotes a
purposeful departure from behavioral standards in the sense of doing things differ-
ently. Under the fundamental assumption that rule-based behavior incurs the risk of
mindless application, it may lead to inertial tendencies and a possible neglect of
potential ways to achieve competitive advantage.
The term market in rule-breaking market behavior, in a broad sense, refers to the
business management and strategic marketing context of this work. In marketing, the
market is viewed either as a locus of exchange or as an aggregation of consumers
(Kotler and Keller 2014, p. 30). In the traditional, company-centric conception of
value creation, the market’s role is value exchange and extraction; it is considered
the “target” for a company’s offerings (Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004, p. 6).
Deviations from existing behavioral standards in a particular market are likely to
open up new business opportunities by going beyond conventionalities, but at the
same time challenge existing market players to reframe what they are doing in the light
of new conditions. In a figurative sense, what is termed rule-breaking market behavior
is also often referred to as changing the “rules of the game” (e.g. Tidd 2006, p. 4).
Apart from this more general introductory description, to fully capture the
distinctive dimensions of the phenomenon, existing concepts in the domain of
innovation research and a thorough analysis of real-life phenomena are drawn
on. A detailed outline of this analytical process deriving the conceptual features
will be given in Sect. 2.1. The result of what has been distilled can be summarized in
the following core operational definition:
Rule-breaking market behavior denotes a legal, non-technological innovation that radically
changes the dominant logic of a market.
1.2 Rule-Breaking Market Behavior and Related Constructs 7
This definition entails four distinct characteristics that must necessarily apply in
order for a phenomenon to qualify as rule-breaking. The first two features are related
to the input, as in the roots of the innovation, and the other two to the output, as in the
impact of the innovation. First of all, rule-breaking market behavior refers to
innovations that are of the non-technological kind, as in new ways of thinking and
behaving instead of technological progress. Put differently, rule-breaking market
behavior can also be thought of as insight innovation. Second, the new way to think
and behave must comply with formal rules: it must be legal. If the innovative attempt
were illegal (i.e. could be judicially sanctioned), it does not qualify as rule-breaking
market behavior. In other words, the new way to behave does not deviate from
exogenous regulations that govern a particular market but from endogenous behav-
ioral standards that simply exist and guide behaviors without being further reflected
on. Third, such new ways of thinking and behaving are conceptualized as typically
leading to changes that are closer to the radical (than the incremental) end of the
innovation-degree of the newness-continuum. Thus, rule-breaking market behavior
is considered to be both fundamentally different and substantially better than prior
approaches. Fourth, such new ways of thinking and behaving must be collectively
adopted in order to meet the requirements for being a pure version of rule-breaking
market behavior. Put differently, rule-breaking market behavior is not considered to
be a rather idiosyncratic style that is just embraced by a small number of agents and
not relevant to the majority of the market but thought of as eventually becoming (one
of) the dominant approaches in a market (e.g. a new product resulting from rule-
breaking behavior that holds a substantial market share). As mentioned above, all
features will be discussed more comprehensively at the beginning of Chap. 2.
The term rule-breaking market behavior has not been chosen for the sake of
introducing yet another name for an already existing construct3 but to account for the
unique specificities of the underlying phenomenon, which, in this particular combi-
nation, to the best knowledge of the author, do not find systematic consideration in
the literature. Though researchers have long been interested in the development of
breakthrough innovation in a broader sense (i.e. under several different theoretical
umbrellas and labels), it is believed that rule-breaking market behavior adds value to
existing discussions because it captures an important but systematically
understudied way to create competitive advantage. Studying rule-breaking market
behavior, with its emphasis on purposeful behavioral deviation from entrenched
standards helps understand any individual’s possibilities in the important quest for
profitable change from a novel and useful perspective.
Suddaby (2010) points out that “constructs are rarely created de novo. Rather, they
are usually the result of creative building upon pre-existing constructs, which them-
selves refer to other extant constructs, in an ongoing web of referential relationships”
(p. 350). Therefore, what is conceptualized as rule-breaking market behavior is, to
3
Larsen and How Bong (2016) give insight into how management and other fields suffer from
construct fallacies such as jingle (two constructs with identical names referring to two different
phenomena) and jangle (two labels referring to the same phenomena).
varying degrees, related to but different from a number of other scholarly discussions.
Thus, associated phenomena will be outlined and briefly compared in terms of their
similarities and differences with the conceptualization of rule-breaking market behavior.
It is nearly impossible to review all existing constructs that are broadly related to
behavioral breakthrough change. To further the understanding of this work’s focus,
those phenomena that occurred in the course of the research process but which will
not be covered in later parts of this work (i.e. areas that are directly related to
innovation research such as business model innovation and ambidexterity theory)
are briefly discussed in Table 1.1. The review comprises routines (routine dynam-
ics), habits (habit breaking), normality (positive deviance), endogenous growth
theory, technology life cycles, path dependency (path breaking), disruption research,
opportunity recognition, divergent thinking and lateral thinking. The gist of the
subsequent discussion will be summarized thereafter.
In summary, three main aspects become evident after having briefly reviewed the
various research areas above. First of all, it stands out that bottom-up empirical
approaches, even though considered desirable, are the exception rather than the
norm. Second, it can be stated that it seems that the constructs are typically more
concerned with describing problems rather than offering solutions. Many resources are
spent on construct definition and single effect studies rather than gaining a systematic
procedural understanding of the phenomena’s basic underlying mechanisms. Espe-
cially, the individual processes at the root of the phenomena seem to be poorly
understood. For instance, there is a larger focus on the study of norms or path
dependency than on the potentially positive effects when deviating from norms or
breaking existing paths. And third, regarding the content-related distance to rule-
breaking market behavior, it can be summarized that all constructs are somehow
related, but none of the concepts go along with all four features that are characteristic
of rule-breaking market behavior. The perspectives are either embedded in technolog-
ical instead of behavioral literature, focus more on evolutionary than revolutionary
changes, or are concerned with another level of analysis. Moreover, links to the
creativity and innovation literature, as part of what the underlying work classifies, are
frequently missing. All in all, some of the discussions may give helpful guidance at later
points in this work, but basically, it can be concluded that existing research does not
satisfactorily solve the underlying puzzle by answering the focal research questions.
Therefore, a contribution shall be made with the help of the following research design.
1.3 Research Design
1.3.1 Research Objectives
In phenomenon-driven exploratory research questions, it is most critical to frame the

research regarding the importance of the phenomenon and the lack of plausible
existing theory. The research questions are then typically more “broadly scoped to
give the researcher more flexibility” (Eisenhardt and Graebner 2007, p. 26). Gerring
1.3 Research Design 9
Table 1.1 Brief review of related discussions

Brief description and differentiation from rule-
Related construct breaking market behavior Exemplary literature
Routines as a Routines can be defined as a “pattern of behaviour Becker (2004),
source of change/ that is followed repeatedly, but is subject to change if Feldman and
routine dynamics conditions change” (Winter 1964, pp. 263–264). Pentland (2003),
Building on theories of structuration, works on rou- Feldman et al.
tines are primarily focusing on persistence and sta- (2016), Nelson and
bility. Winter (1982), and
In the context of routine dynamics, internal dynam- Pentland Brian et al.
ics of routines that contribute to both stability and (2012)
change in organizations are studied (Feldman et al.
2016, p. 505). This latter perspective postulates a
recursive relation between routine participants’
behavior and the rules, principles and concepts that
guide them in doing so, explaining how routines
evolve continuously as current performances are
adapted to ongoing circumstances (Bucher and
Langley 2016).
Routine dynamics are distinct from the idea of rule-
breaking market behavior because discussions about
routine dynamics are embedded in an evolutionary
change (continuous improvement) or adaptation to
exogenous shocks context rather than a revolution-
ary framework. Some more recent studies are trying
to go beyond local variations of routines: that puzzle
has not yet been solved sufficiently, however
(Bucher and Langley 2016).
Disrupting or Also referred to as the basis and individual analogue Aarts and
breaking habits of organizational routines (e.g. Hodgson 2008; Nel- Dijksterhuis (2000),
son and Winter 1982), habits can be interpreted as Aarts et al. (1998),
“. . . learned sequences of acts that have become Glăveanu (2012),
automatic responses to specific cues, and are func- Labrecque et al.
tional in obtaining certain goals or end states” (2017), Neal et al.
(Verplanken and Aarts 1999, p. 104). More specifi- (2012), Verplanken
cally, the defining quality of habit is “the automa- and Wood (2006),
ticity and efficiency of behavior occurring in stable Wendy and Neal
contexts” (Verplanken 2006, pp. 639–640). Habits (2009), Wood et al.
require no thought and in consequence people tend (2002, 2005), Wood
to repeat well-practiced actions regardless of their and Rünger (2016)
intentions or normative beliefs.
Research on habits is mostly concerned with under-
standing habits and habit formation rather than the
quest of how to break habits (e.g. Wood and Rünger
2016). Bottom-up research on how to change habits
in the context of innovations is sparse. When com-
paring habits with the underlying idea of rules, habits
are more focused on individual behaviors rather than
universally accepted behavioral standards in a mar-
ket. However, habits will be further addressed later
in this work.
(continued)
Table 1.1 (continued)

Norm(ality)/con- A social norm is a social construction reflecting Theoretical origins
structive or posi- collectively shared behavioral rules and regulations of deviance (Durk-
tive deviance that govern how people ought to behave in particular heim 1985 [1964];
situations (e.g. Bicchieri 2006). Individuals usually Merton 1938) and
conform to norms because they experience utility positive deviance
from complying with what is collectively judged to (Wilkins 1964) in
be appropriate (Krupka et al. 2017). Even for those sociology (Galperin
wanting to be different, norms serve as a guide. What 2003, 2012;
is viewed as normal can evolve, dependent on both Herington and van
timeframe and environment going along with de Fliert 2018;
changing societal standards and norms. Mertens et al. 2016;
Any violation of or departure from norms is regarded Spreitzer and
as deviance (Dodge 1985). Deviance is one of the Sonenshein 2004;
most studied topics in sociology and has traditionally Vadera et al. 2013;
focused on negative social phenomena such as mor- Warren 2003)
ally objectionable, forbidden, and disvalued behav-
iors (Spreitzer and Sonenshein 2004). It, therefore,
continues to be negatively connoted and is typically
associated with criminals, sexual predators and other
harmful behaviors at the margins of society
(Herington and van de Fliert 2018). In organizational
research, too, it has been primarily argued that
deviating from norms is harmful, e.g. fraud or theft
(Robinson and Bennett 1995). More recently it has
been acknowledged, however, that certain kinds of
deviance can also positively contribute to organiza-
tional effectiveness (Vadera et al. 2013). Termed
constructive or positive workplace deviance, these
behaviors are defined to violate organizational norms
with the intent of helping the organization (Galperin
2012). Creative performance can be considered one
of several different kinds of constructive deviance
(Vadera et al. 2013). One example would be the
violation of a managerial order to stop working on a
new idea as it was the case with Pontiac’s Fiero or
3 M’s tape slitters (Mainemelis 2010).
Despite the increasing importance of constructive
deviance in organizations the majority of research
still focuses on destructive deviant behaviors.
Knowledge about the common causes and processes
of constructive deviance is largely limited (Dahling
and Gutworth 2017; Vadera et al. 2013). As
Mainemelis (2010, p. 558) points out, “creativity and
deviance researchers have rarely exchanged findings
and insights to date”.
In a broad sense, every innovation begins as a devi-
ation from existing norms. When these norms are not
thought of as social norms in the sense of general
values to maintain societal stability such as fairness,
(continued)

cooperation, or reciprocity; however, this is not what
rule-breaking market behavior is about. It may be
that rule-breaking market offerings also affect such
values, but it is not to suggest that rule-breakers
should deviate from fundamental societal merits.
The idea is more to find different constructive ways
to operate within the framework of generally
accepted societal values by engaging in behaviors
for the greater (corporate) good.
Endogenous As rule-breaking market behavior is under-stood as Romer (1994)
growth theory deviating from endogenous rules, a brief examina-
tion of possible similarities to endogenous growth
theory seems appropriate. Discussions under the
term endogenous growth encompass a vast body of
theoretical and empirical work that emerged in the
1980s and stands in contrast to the neoclassical
growth theory that focuses on technology as the
engine of an economy’s growth (Grossman and
Helpman 1994). The endogenous growth theory
posits that economic growth “is an endogenous out-
come of an economic system, not the result of forces
that impinge from outside”, with the goal to
“uncover the private and public sector choices that
cause the rate of growth of the residual to vary across
countries” (Romer 1994, p. 3). Economic theory
models economic growth on a societal level,
e.g. with their AK-model as the simplest endogenous
model.
The theory is distinct from endogenous rules in rule-
breaking market behavior in some respects, such as
level of analysis (economy vs. firm) and fundamen-
tal goals (modelling vs. procedural understanding).
Technology life Models of technical change use a life cycle metaphor Kaplan and Tripsas
cycle literature to describe technological progress in an industry (2008), Murmann
over time, starting with a technological discontinu- and Frenken (2006),
ity. The technology life cycle literature has, for the Suarez (2004),
most part, neglected cognitive factors (Kaplan and Tushman and
Tripsas 2008) that would have been interesting for a Anderson (1986),
better understanding of rule-breaking market Tushman and
behavior. Rosenkopf (1992),
and Utterback
(1974)
Path dependency/ The concept of organizational path dependence is Current perspectives
path breaking used to explain change-inhibiting forces such as (David 2001; Garud
organizational rigidities, stickiness and structural et al. 2010; Jean-
inertia (Sydow et al. 2009). Path dependency stresses Philippe and
the imprinting effects of the past on future organi- Rodolphe 2010;
zational behavior, with decisions being conceived of Schreyögg 2014;
(continued)

as historically conditioned (“history matters”) Schreyögg and
(Sydow et al. 2009). Another core concept lies in the Sydow 2011;
dynamics of self-reinforcing social mechanisms, Sydow et al. 2009)
such as coordination, complementarity, learning, exemplary early
and adaptive expectation effects (Sydow et al. 2009). theoretical founda-
Path dependence is conceptualized to lead “into an tions (Arthur 1989,
organizational lock-in, understood as a corridor of 1994; North 1990)
limited scope of action that is strategically ineffi-
cient” (Sydow et al. 2009, p. 704).
The possibility of escaping from or breaking a path
depends on interrupting the logic and specific energy
of the self-reinforcing patterns of organizational
processes (Schreyögg 2014; Sydow et al. 2009). It is
argued on a broad level that path dissolution may
occur through unforeseen exogenous forces like
shocks, catastrophes, or crises, which, by shaking
the system, cause the organization to break away
from the path (Arthur 1994). Furthermore, the liter-
ature refers to potential coincidental unlocking of
organizational paths as a by-product of other deci-
sions (Castaldi and Dosi 2006) and an insidious path
dissolution by new organizational members because
of their incomplete socialization (Tolbert and Zucker
1996). Apart from these more general statements, it
is posited that “the conditions that are conducive to
path dependence and possible ways of unlocking
paths await further exploration” (Sydow et al. 2009,
p. 705). A theory of path-breaking that could sys-
tematically show how to break paths does not yet
exist (Schreyögg 2014).
Starting off from a historical account, as discussed in
the context of path dependence, could be one of
many possible ways to get to rule-breaking market
behavior. While both rule-breaking market behavior
and path dependence are examined from a process
perspective, the study of path dependence and path
breaking primarily draws on studies of technological
paths (fur further references, see Sydow et al. 2009).
Path dependence started out as a study of techno-
logical standardization (Schreyögg 2014) and is
anchored as a key concept in the genre of evolu-
tionary economics.
Disruption The theory of disruptive innovation has been intro- Development of the
research duced and popularized by Clayton Christensen in fields intellectual
(1995, 1997) and is considered a powerful way of core (Abernathy and
thinking about innovation-driven growth Clark 1985; Bower
(Christensen et al. 2015). The theory has been called and Christensen
“one of the most influential modern business ideas” 1995; Christensen
and is widely accepted far beyond the business world 1992, 1997, 2006;
(continued)

(King and Baatartogtokh 2015). In a nutshell, dis- Tushman and
ruption theory originally described a process in Anderson 1986)
which a smaller company with fewer resources suc- Exemplary reviews
cessfully challenges established incumbent busi- (Danneels 2004;
nesses. More specifically, while incumbent Markides 2006; Yu
companies are focusing on their most demanding and Hang 2010)
customer segment and neglect or ignore the needs of
others, these others are then targeted by new entrants
who often deliver a cheaper, unproven or inferior
alternative to mainstream products and services
(low-end of the market) and then move upmarket.
When the incumbent’s mainstream customers adopt
these offerings, disruption has occurred
(e.g. Christensen et al. 2015). Today, disruption is
seldom related to the original tenets of the theory but
rather resembles a catch-all phrase used to describe
any situation in which an industry is shaken up and
previously successful companies stumble (“too
many people who speak of ‘disruption’ have not read
a serious book or article on the subject”,
(Christensen et al. 2015, p. 4). Moreover, the formal
theory has aroused plenty of rich debate within aca-
demia, for instance about the definition and scope of
disruptive phenomena (King and Baatartogtokh
2015; Yu and Hang 2010). Christensen’s initial
research was mainly based on the hard disk drive
industry in the 1970s and 1980s (Christensen and
Bower 1996). That is, besides the existing challenges
with regard to disruptive innovation theory, that the
fundamental locus of research (technology manage-
ment) is different from the conceptualization of rule-
breaking market behavior in this work.
Entrepreneurship, According to the key references listed on the right, Baron (2006),
opportunity opportunity recognition is a key construct in entre- Eckhardt and Shane
recognition preneurship where opportunities are said to be trig- (2003),
gered by environmental changes and recognized by Sardeshmukh and
individuals. Opportunity recognition involves the act Smith-Nelson
of perceiving a possibility to create a new business or (2012), and Shane
to significantly improve existing business to gener- (2000)
ate new profit potential associated with the cognitive Recent review
processes of perception, discovery, creation, pattern (Mary George et al.
recognition, and their interaction with new, novel, or 2016)
ill-defined problems or situations requiring creativ-
ity. Opportunities involve identifying new combi-
nations, new means, new ends, or new means-ends
relationships that have the possibility of generating a
profit for a new or existing business. Six influential
factors are considered: Prior knowledge, social cap-
ital, cognition/personality traits, environmental
(continued)

conditions, alertness, and systematic search.
In addition to the fact that key questions remain
about what factors facilitate the recognition of
opportunities, the perspective taken in opportunity
recognition re-search is rather of the exogenous than
endogenous kind: an individual is considered to
potentially exploit technological, political and regu-
latory, social and demographic opportunities. More-
over, many discussions seem to revolve around the
question of why some people and not others discover
and exploit opportunities. Such a distinction across
individual differences is not made in this work,
however.
Divergent The psychologist Guilford (1950, 1957, 1968) was Baer (1993), Titus
thinking the first to coin the terms divergent and convergent (2018), and Tor-
thinking. He defined divergent thinking as the ability rance (1962)
to generate a large number (fluency) and wide
assortment (flexibility) of original ideas or solutions
(Titus 2018). Divergent thinking is considered to be
one indicator of an individual’s creative potential,
meaning that someone can perform well on a test of
divergent thinking but never actually perform in a
creative fashion (Runco and Acar 2012). Divergent
thinking tests are the major instrument for measuring
an individual’s creative potential (Zeng et al. 2011).
As divergent thinking is a cognitive approach
(a matter of cognitive style and ability; Anderson
et al. 2014) leading to original ideas, it is more
narrowly defined than the notion of rule-breaking
market behavior. Most certainly, such thinking
styles may be one mechanism of importance for the
process of rule-breaking market behavior but the
research design is more broadly oriented and not
limited to this aspect only.
Lateral thinking British psychologist Edward de Bono introduced De Bono (1970,
lateral thinking in (1970), as a technique for creative 2010)
and more effective problem solving by reformulating
the problem or viewing if from a different angle
(Colman 2015). Besides lateral thinking, de Bono
developed several further techniques for deliberative
creative thinking, such as the principle of Six
Thinking Hats (Burgh 2014).
Again, as in the previous example, it can be outlined
that cognitive techniques comprise only one aspect
of the process of rule-breaking market behavior,
which is intended to be understood more holistically.
(2006) further specifies that research, which is concerned with explaining a puzzling
phenomenon without prior preconceptions, also described as Y-centered research, is
much more open-ended. That is, a certain degree of openness regarding the study’s
outcome has been an inherent element throughout the underlying research endeavor.
Broadly defined, the overall objective of this work is to systematically better
understand the nature and process of the real-world phenomenon rule-breaking
market behavior. The realistic intention is to provide useful impulses for both
scholars and practitioners alike and less to formally develop “The Theory of Rule-
Breaking Market Behavior”. Two overarching motives have been guiding the
research process: To offer companies a new way to generate a revolutionary
competitive advantage, and to address the mismatch between theory-building and
theory-testing studies in management and marketing science.
Based on that, the following four specific research questions guide and will be
discussed throughout the subsequent analysis.
1. What are the constitutive key characteristics of rule-breaking market behavior?
First, it is essential to describe and conceptualize the underlying multifaceted
phenomenon of rule-breaking market behavior in order to subsequently identify
distinct cases for the empirical analysis. Common denominators are found within
the extant literature that may serve as a foundation to understanding the nature of
rule-breaking market behavior in a systematic and comprehensive way.
While this initial step deals with the “what” component of theoretical contri-
butions, the primary focus of the study is effectively further narrowed to the
“how” of rule-breaking market behavior (see Whetten 1989, on the What, How,
Why, Who, Where, and When as ingredients of theory).
2. What insight can be uncovered regarding the process of rule-breaking market
behavior?
From all four research questions, this question is the focal and most important
one. The question aims at resolving of what the general creative and innovative
process to rule-breaking market behavior is constitutive. Getting a better under-
standing of how to create rule-breaking market behavior is attempted. As outlined
above, research endeavors often focus on descriptions of problems rather than
solutions. By placing the emphasis on gaining a procedural understanding of a
phenomenon, this is intended to be different here. Three analytical steps are
involved that cover the following more specific enquiries.
(a) Which individual mechanisms in the process of rule-breaking behavior can be
derived from the empirical study?
To begin with, it is of interest to get rich descriptions of particular
empirical instances of rule-breaking behavior. This relates to the lessons
that can be learned from individual examples of rule-breaking behavior,
which are interesting and inspiring as such. Basically, this is a preparatory
question for the much more central part (b).
(b) Which generalizable patterns characterize the developmental process of rule-
breaking behavior?
Most importantly, it is strived to reveal and capture a set of generalizable

factors that are characteristic of the process leading to rule-breaking behavior.
Such generative mechanisms are intended to be derived from possible pat-
terns that can be observed in the empirical data.
(c) How do the empirical insights relate to existing theoretical frameworks?
Principally, step (c) is complementary to the empirical analysis. Transfer-
ring and comparing the identified databased patterns with existing research
helps to classify and make statements about the generalizability of the
empirical findings.
Corporate challenges are building the reference point for this study’s
contributions. That is why ultimately, after having gained a systematic empir-
ical understanding of the phenomenon at hand, concrete suggestions regarding
the development of rule-breaking market behavior shall be given to support
companies in the process of creating a revolutionary competitive advantage.
3. Which normative recommendations can be provided for companies who would
like to reach rule-breaking market behavior?
This is aimed at drawing managers’ attention to key challenges in the process
of rule-breaking market behavior, wishing to introduce a number of possibilities
for managers to consider when examining routes for innovation development.
Therefore, the goal is to provide a framework for thinking, debate and action,
serving as a tool for improving innovation processes, breaking inertia and jolting
conventional thinking.
4. What implications arise from the findings that could be related to other theoretical
and practical problem spaces?
Indubitably, the fundamental need for breakthrough changes achieved through
purposeful deviation from behavioral standards does not only apply to the context
of marketing science and business practice. Thus, based on the findings, compa-
rable challenges above and beyond the scope of this study have to be identified
and reflected upon.
Overall, it can be summarized in modest analogy to Davis (1971) influential
article on phenomenological research That’s Interesting!: The purposeful devia-
tion from existing behavioral standards to achieve a competitive advantage, as in
rule-breaking market behavior, is interesting, relevant and understudied. What yet
remains to be accounted for after all, is a rigorous analytical procedure to
satisfactorily meet the top objective of this work by answering these four funda-
mental research questions.
1.3.2 Method and Analytical Process
The basic methodological approach in this work is to inductively uncover charac-

teristic principles in the process of rule-breaking market behavior by analyzing
multiple historical athletic cases, which then, by analogy, are transferred back to
the managerial context.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
sacraments and scriptures of the Persian, Jewish, Christian, “post-
Classical” and Manichæan religions.
“Space”—speaking now in the Faustian idiom—is a spiritual
something, rigidly distinct from the momentary sense-present, which
could not be represented in an Apollinian language, whether Greek
or Latin. But the created expression-space of the Apollinian arts is
equally alien to ours. The tiny cella of the early-Classical temple was
a dumb dark nothingness, a structure (originally) of perishable
material, an envelope of the moment in contrast to the eternal vaults
of Magian cupolas and Gothic naves, and the closed ranks of
columns were expressly meant to convey that for the eye at any rate
this body possessed no Inward. In no other Culture is the firm
footing, the socket, so emphasized. The Doric column bores into the
ground, the vessels are always thought of from below upward
(whereas those of the Renaissance float above their footing), and
the sculpture-schools feel the stabilizing of their figures as their main
problem. Hence in archaic works the legs are disproportionately
emphasized, the foot is planted on the full sole, and if the drapery
falls straight down, a part of the hem is removed to show that the
foot is standing. The Classical relief is strictly stereometrically set on
a plane, and there is an interspace between the figures but no depth.
A landscape of Claude Lorrain, on the contrary, is nothing but space,
every detail being made to subserve its illustration. All bodies in it
possess an atmospheric and perspective meaning purely as carriers
of light and shade. The extreme of this disembodiment of the world
in the service of space is Impressionism. Given this world-feeling,
the Faustian soul in the springtime necessarily arrived at an
architectural problem which had its centre of gravity in the spatial
vaulting-over of vast, and from porch to choir dynamically deep,
cathedrals. This last expressed its depth-experience. But with it was
associated, in opposition to the cavernous Magian expression-
space,[190] the element of a soaring into the broad universe. Magian
roofing, whether it be cupola or barrel-vault or even the horizontal
baulk of a basilica, covers in. Strzygowski[191] has very aptly
described the architectural idea of Hagia Sophia as an introverted
Gothic striving under a closed outer casing. On the other hand, in the
cathedral of Florence the cupola crowns the long Gothic body of
1367, and the same tendency rose in Bramante’s scheme for St.
Peter’s to a veritable towering-up, a magnificent “Excelsior,” that
Michelangelo carried to completion with the dome that floats high
and bright over the vast vaulting. To this sense of space the
Classical opposes the symbol of the Doric peripteros, wholly
corporeal and comprehensible in one glance.
The Classical Culture begins, then, with a great renunciation. A
rich, pictorial, almost over-ripe art lay ready to its hand. But this
could not become the expression of the young soul, and so from
about 1100 B.C. the harsh, narrow, and to our eyes scanty and
barbaric, early-Doric geometrical style appears in opposition to the
Minoan.[192] For the three centuries which correspond to the flowering
of our Gothic, there is no hint of an architecture, and it is only at
about 650 B.C., “contemporarily” with Michelangelo’s transition into
the Baroque, that the Doric and Etruscan temple-type arises. All
“Early” art is religious, and this symbolic Negation is not less so than
the Egyptian and the Gothic Affirmation. The idea of burning the
dead accords with the cult-site but not with the cult-building; and the
Early Classical religion which conceals itself from us behind the
solemn names of Calchas, Tiresias, Orpheus and (probably)
Numa[193] possessed for its rites simply that which is left of an
architectural idea when one has subtracted the architecture, viz., the
sacred precinct. The original cult-plan is thus the Etruscan templum,
a sacred area merely staked off on the ground by the augurs with an
impassable boundary and a propitious entrance on the East side.[194]
A “templum” was created where a rite was to be performed or where
the representative of the state authority, senate or army, happened
to be. It existed only for the duration of its use, and the spell was
then removed. It was probably only about 700 B.C. that the Classical
soul so far mastered itself as to represent this architectural Nothing
in the sensible form of a built body. In the long run the Euclidean
feeling proved stronger than the mere antipathy to duration.
Faustian architecture, on the contrary, begins on the grand scale
simultaneously with the first stirrings of a new piety (the Cluniac
reform, c. 1000) and a new thought (the Eucharistic controversy
between Berengar of Tours and Lanfranc 1050),[195] and proceeds at
once to plans of gigantic intention; often enough, as in the case of
Speyer, the whole community did not suffice to fill the cathedral,[196]
and often again it proved impossible to complete the projected
scheme. The passionate language of this architecture is that of the
poems too.[197] Far apart as may seem the Christian hymnology of
the south and the Eddas of the still heathen north, they are alike in
the implicit space-endlessness of prosody, rhythmic syntax and
imagery. Read the Dies Iræ together with the Völuspá,[198] which is
little earlier; there is the same adamantine will to overcome and
break all resistances of the visible. No rhythm ever imagined radiates
immensities of space and distance as the old Northern does:
Zum Unheil werden—noch allzulange

Männer und Weiber—zur Welt geboren
Aber wir beide —bleiben zusammen
Ich und Sigurd.
The accents of the Homeric hexameter are the soft rustle of a leaf
in the midday sun, the rhythm of matter; but the “Stabreim” likes
“potential energy” in the world-pictures of modern physics, creates a
tense restraint in the void without limits, distant night-storms above
the highest peaks. In its swaying indefiniteness all words and things
dissolve themselves—it is the dynamics, not the statics, of language.
The same applies to the grave rhythm of Media vita in morte sumus.
Here is heralded the colour of Rembrandt and the instrumentation of
Beethoven—here infinite solitude is felt as the home of the Faustian
soul. What is Valhalla? Unknown to the Germans of the Migrations
and even to the Merovingian Age, it was conceived by the nascent
Faustian soul. It was conceived, no doubt, under Classic-pagan and
Arabian-Christian impressions, for the antique and the sacred
writings, the ruins and mosaics and miniatures, the cults and rites
and dogmas of these past Cultures reached into the new life at all
points. And yet, this Valhalla is something beyond all sensible
actualities floating in remote, dim, Faustian regions. Olympus rests
on the homely Greek soil, the Paradise of the Fathers is a magic
garden somewhere in the Universe, but Valhalla is nowhere. Lost in
the limitless, it appears with its inharmonious gods and heroes the
supreme symbol of solitude. Siegfried, Parzeval, Tristan, Hamlet,
Faust are the loneliest heroes in all the Cultures. Read the wondrous
awakening of the inner life in Wolfram’s Parzeval. The longing for the
woods, the mysterious compassion, the ineffable sense of
forsakenness—it is all Faustian and only Faustian. Every one of us
knows it. The motive returns with all its profundity in the Easter
scene of Faust I.
“A longing pure and not to be described

drove me to wander over woods and fields,
and in a mist of hot abundant tears
I felt a world arise and live for me.”
Of this world-experience neither Apollinian nor Magian man,

neither Homer nor the Gospels, knows anything whatever. The
climax of the poem of Wolfram, that wondrous Good Friday morning
scene when the hero, at odds with God and with himself, meets the
noble Gawan and resolves to go on pilgrimage to Tevrezent, takes
us to the heart of the Faustian religion. Here one can feel the
mystery of the Eucharist which binds the communicant to a mystic
company, to a Church that alone can give bliss. In the myth of the
Holy Grail and its Knights one can feel the inward necessity of the
German-Northern Catholicism. In opposition to the Classical
sacrifices offered to individual gods in separate temples, there is
here the one never-ending sacrifice repeated everywhere and every
day. This is the Faustian idea of the 9th-11th Centuries, the Edda
time, foreshadowed by Anglo-Saxon missionaries like Winfried but
only then ripened. The Cathedral, with its High Altar enclosing the
accomplished miracle, is its expression in stone.[199]
The plurality of separate bodies which represents Cosmos for the
Classical soul, requires a similar pantheon—hence the antique
polytheism. The single world-volume, be it conceived as cavern or as
space, demands the single god of Magian or Western Christianity.
Athene or Apollo might be represented by a statue, but it is and has
long been evident to our feeling that the Deity of the Reformation
and the Counter-Reformation can only be “manifested” in the storm
of an organ fugue or the solemn progress of cantata and mass. From
the rich manifold of figures in the Edda and contemporary legends of
saints to Goethe our myth develops itself in steady opposition to the
Classical—in the one case a continuous disintegration of the divine
that culminated in the early Empire in an impossible multitude of
deities, in the other a process of simplification that led to the Deism
of the 18th Century.
The Magian hierarchy of heaven—angels, saints, persons of the
Trinity—has grown paler and paler, more and more disembodied, in
the sphere of the Western pseudomorphosis,[200] supported though it
was by the whole weight of Church authority, and even the Devil—
the great adversary in the Gothic world-drama[201]—has disappeared
unnoticed from among the possibilities of the Faustian world-feeling.
Luther could still throw the inkpot at him, but he has been passed
over in silence by perplexed Protestant theologians long ago. For the
solitude of the Faustian soul agrees not at all with a duality of world
powers. God himself is the All. About the end of the 17th Century
this religiousness could no longer be limited to pictorial expression,
and instrumental music came as its last and only form-language: we
may say that the Catholic faith is to the Protestant as an altar-piece
is to an oratorio. But even the Germanic gods and heroes are
surrounded by this rebuffing immensity and enigmatic gloom. They
are steeped in music and in night, for daylight gives visual bounds
and therefore shapes bodily things. Night eliminates body, day soul.
Apollo and Athene have no souls. On Olympus rests the eternal light
of the transparent southern day, and Apollo’s hour is high noon,
when great Pan sleeps. But Valhalla is light-less, and even in the
Eddas we can trace that deep midnight of Faust’s study-broodings,
the midnight that is caught by Rembrandt’s etchings and absorbs
Beethoven’s tone colours. No Wotan or Baldur or Freya has
“Euclidean” form. Of them, as of the Vedic gods of India, it can be
said that they suffer not “any graven image or any likeness
whatsoever”; and this impossibility carries an implicit recognition that
eternal space, and not the corporeal copy—which levels them down,
desecrates them, denies them—is the supreme symbol. This is the
deep-felt motive that underlies the iconoclastic storms in Islam and
Byzantium (both, be it noted, of the 7th century), and the closely
similar movement in our Protestant North. Was not Descartes’s
creation of the anti-Euclidean analysis of space an iconoclasm? The
Classical geometry handles a number-world of day, the function-
theory is the genuine mathematic of night.
II
That which is expressed by the soul of the West in its
extraordinary wealth of media—words, tones, colours, pictorial
perspectives, philosophical systems, legends, the spaciousness of
Gothic cathedrals and the formulæ of functions—namely its world-
feeling, is expressed by the soul of Old Egypt (which was remote
from all ambitions towards theory and literariness) almost exclusively
by the immediate language of Stone. Instead of spinning word-
subtleties around its form of extension, its “space” and its “time,”
instead of forming hypotheses and number-systems and dogmas, it
set up its huge symbols in the landscape of the Nile in all silence.
Stone is the great emblem of the Timeless-Become; space and
death seem bound up in it. “Men have built for the dead,” says
Bachofen in his autobiography, “before they have built for the living,
and even as a perishable wooden structure suffices for the span of
time that is given to the living, so the housing of the dead for ever
demands the solid stone of the earth. The oldest cult is associated
with the stone that marks the place of burial, the oldest temple-
building with the tomb-structure, the origins of art and decoration
with the grave-ornament. Symbol has created itself in the graves.
That which is thought and felt and silently prayed at the grave-side
can be expressed by no word, but only hinted by the boding symbol
that stands in unchanging grave repose.” The dead strive no more.
They are no more Time, but only Space—something that stays (if
indeed it stays at all) but does not ripen towards a Future; and hence
it is stone, the abiding stone, that expresses how the dead is
mirrored in the waking consciousness of the living. The Faustian soul
looks for an immortality to follow the bodily end, a sort of marriage
with endless space, and it disembodies the stone in its Gothic thrust-
system (contemporary, we may note, with the “consecutives” in
Church music[202]) till at last nothing remained visible but the
indwelling depth- and height-energy of this self-extension. The
Apollinian soul would have its dead burned, would see them
annihilated, and so it remained averse from stone building
throughout the early period of its Culture. The Egyptian soul saw
itself as moving down a narrow and inexorably-prescribed life-path to
come at the end before the judges of the dead (“Book of the Dead,”
cap. 125). That was its Destiny-idea. The Egyptian’s existence is that
of the traveller who follows one unchanging direction, and the whole
form-language of his Culture is a translation into the sensible of this
one theme. And as we have taken endless space as the prime
symbol of the North and body as that of the Classical, so we may
take the word way as most intelligibly expressing that of the
Egyptians. Strangely, and for Western thought almost
incomprehensibly, the one element in extension that they emphasize
is that of direction in depth. The tomb-temples of the Old Kingdom
and especially the mighty pyramid-temples of the Fourth Dynasty
represent, not a purposed organization of space such as we find in
the mosque and the cathedral, but a rhythmically ordered sequence
of spaces. The sacred way leads from the gate-building on the Nile
through passages, halls, arcaded courts and pillared rooms that
grow ever narrower and narrower, to the chamber of the dead,[203]
and similarly the Sun-temples of the Fifth Dynasty are not “buildings”
but a path enclosed by mighty masonry.[204] The reliefs and the
paintings appear always as rows which with an impressive
compulsion lead the beholder in a definite direction. The ram and
sphinx avenues of the New Empire have the same object. For the
Egyptian, the depth-experience which governed his world-form was
so emphatically directional that he comprehended space more or
less as a continuous process of actualization. There is nothing rigid
about distance as expressed here. The man must move, and so
become himself a symbol of life, in order to enter into relation with
the stone part of the symbolism. “Way” signifies both Destiny and
third dimension. The grand wall-surfaces, reliefs, colonnades past
which he moves are “length and breadth”; that is, mere perceptions
of the senses, and it is the forward-driving life that extends them into
“world.” Thus the Egyptian experienced space, we may say, in and
by the processional march along its distinct elements, whereas the
Greek who sacrificed outside the temple did not feel it and the man
of our Gothic centuries praying in the cathedral let himself be
immersed in the quiet infinity of it. And consequently the art of these
Egyptians must aim at plane effects and nothing else, even when it
is making use of solid means. For the Egyptian, the pyramid over the
king’s tomb is a triangle, a huge, powerfully expressive plane that,
whatever be the direction from which one approaches, closes off the
“way” and commands the landscape. For him, the columns of the
inner passages and courts, with their dark backgrounds, their dense
array and their profusion of adornments, appear entirely as vertical
strips which rhythmically accompany the march of the priests. Relief-
work is—in utter contrast to the Classical—carefully restricted in one
plane; in the course of development dated by the Third to the Fifth
dynasties it diminishes from the thickness of a finger to that of a
sheet of paper, and finally it is sunk in the plane.[205] The dominance
of the horizontal, the vertical and the right angle, and the avoidance
of all foreshortening support the two-dimensional principle and serve
to insulate this directional depth-experience which coincides with the
way and the grave at its end. It is an art that admits of no deviation
for the relief of the tense soul.
Is not this an expression in the noblest language that it is possible
to conceive of what all our space-theories would like to put into
words? Is it not a metaphysic in stone by the side of which the
written metaphysics of Kant seems but a helpless stammering?
There is, however, another Culture that, different as it most
fundamentally is from the Egyptian, yet found a closely-related prime
symbol. This is the Chinese, with its intensely directional principle of
the Tao.[206] But whereas the Egyptian treads to the end a way that is
prescribed for him with an inexorable necessity, the Chinaman
wanders through his world; consequently, he is conducted to his god
or his ancestral tomb not by ravines of stone, between faultless
smooth walls, but by friendly Nature herself. Nowhere else has the
landscape become so genuinely the material of the architecture.
“Here, on religious foundations, there has been developed a grand
lawfulness and unity common to all building, which, combined with
the strict maintenance of a north-south general axis, always holds
together gate-buildings, side-buildings, courts and halls in the same
homogeneous plan, and has led finally to so grandiose a planning
and such a command over ground and space that one is quite
justified in saying that the artist builds and reckons with the
landscape itself.”[207] The temple is not a self-contained building but a
lay-out, in which hills, water, trees, flowers, and stones in definite
forms and dispositions are just as important as gates, walls, bridges
and houses. This Culture is the only one in which the art of
gardening is a grand religious art. There are gardens that are
reflections of particular Buddhist sects.[208] It is the architecture of the
landscape, and only that, which explains the architecture of the
buildings, with their flat extension and the emphasis laid on the roof
as the really expressive element. And just as the devious ways
through doors, over bridges, round hills and walls lead at last to the
end, so the paintings take the beholder from detail to detail whereas
Egyptian relief masterfully points him in the one set direction. “The
whole picture is not to be taken at once. Sequence in time
presupposes a sequence of space-elements through which the eye
is to wander from one to the next.”[209] Whereas the Egyptian
architecture dominates the landscape, the Chinese espouses it. But
in both cases it is direction in depth that maintains the becoming of
space as a continuously-present experience.
III
All art is expression-language.[210] Moreover, in its very earliest
essays—which extend far back into the animal world—it is that of
one active existence speaking for itself only, and it is unconscious of
witnesses even though in the absence of such the impulse to
expression would not come to utterance. Even in quite “late”
conditions we often see, instead of the combination of artist and
spectator, a crowd of art-makers who all dance or mime or sing. The
idea of the “Chorus” as sum total of persons present has never
entirely vanished from art-history. It is only the higher art that
becomes decisively an art “before witnesses” and especially (as
Nietzsche somewhere remarks) before God as the supreme witness.
[211]
This expression is either ornament or imitation. Both are higher

possibilities and their polarity to one another is hardly perceptible in
the beginnings. Of the two, imitation is definitely the earlier and the
closer to the producing race. Imitation is the outcome of a
physiognomic idea of a second person with whom (or which) the first
is involuntarily induced into resonance of vital rhythm (mitschwingen
im); whereas ornament evidences an ego conscious of its own
specific character. The former is widely spread in the animal world,
the latter almost peculiar to man.
Imitation is born of the secret rhythm of all things cosmic. For the
waking being the One appears as discrete and extended; there is a
Here and a There, a Proper and an Alien something, a Microcosm
and a Macrocosm that are polar to one another in the sense-life, and
what the rhythm of imitation does is to bridge this dichotomy. Every
religion is an effort of the waking soul to reach the powers of the
world-around. And so too is Imitation, which in its most devoted
moments is wholly religious, for it consists in an identity of inner
activity between the soul and body “here” and the world-around
“there” which, vibrating as one, become one. As a bird poises itself in
the storm or a float gives to the swaying waves, so our limbs take up
an irresistible beat at the sound of march-music. Not less contagious
is the imitation of another’s bearing and movements, wherein
children in particular excel. It reaches the superlative when we “let
ourselves go” in the common song or parade-march or dance that
creates out of many units one unit of feeling and expression, a “we.”
But a “successful” picture of a man or a landscape is also the
outcome of a felt harmony of the pictorial motion with the secret
swing and sway of the living opposite; and it is this actualizing of
physiognomic rhythm that requires the executant to be an adept who
can reveal the idea, the soul, of the alien in the play of its surface. In
certain unreserved moments we are all adepts of this sort, and in
such moments, as we follow in an imperceptible rhythm the music
and the play of facial expression, we suddenly look over the
precipice and see great secrets. The aim of all imitation is effective
simulation; this means effective assimilation of ourselves into an
alien something—such a transposition and transubstantiation that
the One lives henceforth in the Other that it describes or depicts—
and it is able to awaken an intense feeling of unison over all the
range from silent absorption and acquiescence to the most
abandoned laughter and down into the last depths of the erotic, a
unison which is inseparable from creative activity. In this wise arose
the popular circling-dances (for instance, the Bavarian Schuhplattler
was originally imitated from the courtship of the woodcocks) but this
too is what Vasari means when he praises Cimabue and Giotto as
the first who returned to the imitation of “Nature”—the Nature, that is,
of springtime men, of which Meister Eckart said: “God flows out in all
creatures, and therefore all created is God.” That which in this world-
around presents itself to our contemplation—and therefore contains
meaning for our feelings—as movement, we render by movement.
Hence all imitation is in the broadest sense dramatic; drama is
presented in the movement of the brush-stroke or the chisel, the
melodic curve of the song, the tone of the recitation, the line of
poetry, the description, the dance. But everything that we experience
with and in seeings and hearings is always an alien soul to which we
are uniting ourselves. It is only at the stage of the Megalopolis that
art, reasoned to pieces and de-spiritualized, goes over to naturalism
as that term is understood nowadays; viz., imitation of the charm of
visible appearances, of the stock of sensible characters that are
capable of being scientifically fixed.
Ornament detaches itself now from Imitation as something which
does not follow the stream of life but rigidly faces it. Instead of
physiognomic traits overheard in the alien being, we have
established motives, symbols, which are impressed upon it. The
intention is no longer to pretend but to conjure. The “I” overwhelms
the “Thou.” Imitation is only a speaking with means that are born of
the moment and unreproduceable—but Ornament employs a
language emancipated from the speaking, a stock of forms that
possesses duration and is not at the mercy of the individual.[212]
Only the living can be imitated, and it can be imitated only in
movements, for it is through these that it reveals itself to the senses
of artists and spectators. To that extent, imitation belongs to Time
and Direction. All the dancing and drawing and describing and
portraying for eye and ear is irrevocably “directional,” and hence the
highest possibilities of Imitation lie in the copying of a destiny, be it in
tones, verses, picture or stage-scene.[213] Ornament, on the contrary,
is something taken away from Time: it is pure extension, settled and
stable. Whereas an imitation expresses something by accomplishing
itself, ornament can only do so by presenting itself to the senses as
a finished thing. It is Being as such, wholly independent of origin.
Every imitation possesses beginning and end, while an ornament
possesses only duration, and therefore we can only imitate the
destiny of an individual (for instance, Antigone or Desdemona), while
by an ornament or symbol only the generalized destiny-idea itself
can be represented (as, for example, that of the Classical world by
the Doric column). And the former presupposes a talent, while the
latter calls for an acquirable knowledge as well.
All strict arts have their grammar and syntax of form-language,
with rules and laws, inward logic and tradition. This is true not merely
for the Doric cabin-temple and Gothic cottage-cathedral, for the
carving-schools of Egypt[214] and Athens and the cathedral plastic of
northern France, for the painting-schools of the Classical world and
those of Holland and the Rhine and Florence, but also for the fixed
rules of the Skalds and Minnesänger which were learned and
practised as a craft (and dealt not merely with sentence and metre
but also with gesture and the choice of imagery[215]), for the
narration-technique of the Vedic, Homeric and Celto-Germanic Epos,
for the composition and delivery of the Gothic sermon (both
vernacular and Latin), and for the orators’ prose[216] in the Classical,
and for the rules of French drama. In the ornamentation of an art-
work is reflected the inviolable causality of the macrocosm as the
man of the particular kind sees and comprehends it. Both have
system. Each is penetrated with the religious side of life—fear and
love.[217] A genuine symbol can instil fear or can set free from fear;
the “right” emancipates and the “wrong” hurts and depresses. The
imitative side of the arts, on the contrary, stands closer to the real
race-feelings of hate and love, out of which arises the opposition of
ugly and beautiful. This is in relation only with the living, of which the
inner rhythm repels us or draws us into phase with it, whether it be
that of the sunset-cloud or that of the tense breath of the machine.
An imitation is beautiful, an ornament significant, and therein lies the
difference between direction and extension, organic and inorganic
logic, life and death. That which we think beautiful is “worth copying.”
Easily it swings with us and draws us on to imitate, to join in the
singing, to repeat. Our hearts beat higher, our limbs twitch, and we
are stirred till our spirits overflow. But as it belongs to Time, it “has its
time.” A symbol endures, but everything beautiful vanishes with the
life-pulsation of the man, the class, the people or the race that feels it
as a specific beauty in the general cosmic rhythm.[218] The “beauty”
that Classical sculpture and poetry contained for Classical eyes is
something different from the beauty that they contain for ours—
something extinguished irrecoverably with the Classical soul—while
what we regard as beautiful in it is something that only exists for us.
Not only is that which is beautiful for one kind of man neutral or ugly
for another—e.g., the whole of our music for the Chinese, or
Mexican sculpture for us. For one and the same life the accustomed,
the habitual, owing to the very fact of its possessing duration, cannot
possess beauty.
And now for the first time we can see the opposition between
these two sides of every art in all its depth. Imitation spiritualizes and
quickens, ornament enchants and kills. The one becomes, the other
is. And therefore the one is allied to love and, above all—in songs
and riot and dance—to the sexual love, which turns existence to face
the future; and the other to care of the past, to recollection[219] and to
the funerary. The beautiful is longingly pursued, the significant instils
dread, and there is no deeper contrast than that between the house
of the living and the house of the dead.[220] The peasant’s cottage[221]
and its derivative the country noble’s hall, the fenced town and the
castle are mansions of life, unconscious expressions of circling
blood, that no art produced and no art can alter. The idea of the
family appears in the plan of the proto-house, the inner form of the
stock in the plan of its villages—which after many a century and
many a change of occupation still show what race it was that
founded them[222]—the life of a nation and its social ordering in the
plan (not the elevation or silhouette) of the city.[223] On the other
hand, Ornamentation of the high order develops itself on the stiff
symbols of death, the urn, the sarcophagus, the stele and the temple
of the dead,[224] and beyond these in gods’ temples and cathedrals
which are Ornament through and through, not the expressions of a
race but the language of a world-view. They are pure art through and
through—just what the castle and the cottage are not.[225]
For cottage and castle are buildings in which art, and, specifically,
imitative art, is made and done, the home of Vedic, Homeric and
Germanic epos, of the songs of heroes, the dance of boors and that
of lords and ladies, of the minstrel’s lay. The cathedral, on the other
hand, is art, and, moreover, the only art by which nothing is imitated;
it alone is pure tension of persistent forms, pure three-dimensional
logic that expresses itself in edges and surfaces and volumes. But
the art of villages and castles is derived from the inclinations of the
moment, from the laughter and high spirit of feasts and games, and
to such a degree is it dependent on Time, so much is it a thing of
occasion, that the troubadour obtains his very name from finding,
while Improvisation—as we see in the Tzigane music to-day—is
nothing but race manifesting itself to alien senses under the
influence of the hour. To this free creative power all spiritual art
opposes the strict school in which the individual—in the hymn as in
the work of building and carving—is the servant of a logic of timeless
forms, and so in all Cultures the seat of its style-history is in its early
cult architecture. In the castle it is the life and not the structure that
possesses style. In the town the plan is an image of the destinies of
a people, whereas the silhouette of emergent spires and cupolas
tells of the logic in the builders’ world-picture, of the “first and last
things” of their universe.
In the architecture of the living, stone serves a worldly purpose,
but in the architecture of the cult it is a symbol.[226] Nothing has
injured the history of the great architectures so much as the fact that
it has been regarded as the history of architectural techniques
instead of as that of architectural ideas which took their technical
expression-means as and where they found them. It has been just
the same with the history of musical instruments,[227] which also were
developed on a foundation of tone-language. Whether the groin and
the flying buttress and the squinch-cupola were imagined specially
for the great architectures or were expedients that lay more or less
ready to hand and were taken into use, is for art-history a matter of
as little importance as the question of whether, technically, stringed
instruments originated in Arabia or in Celtic Britain. It may be that the
Doric column was, as a matter of workmanship, borrowed from the
Egyptian temples of the New Empire, or the late-Roman domical
construction from the Etruscans, or the Florentine court from the
North-African Moors. Nevertheless the Doric peripteros, the
Pantheon, and the Palazzo Farnese belong to wholly different worlds
—they subserve the artistic expression of the prime-symbol in three
different Cultures.
IV
In every springtime, consequently, there are two definitely
ornamental and non-imitative arts, that of building and that of
decoration. In the longing and pregnant centuries before it, elemental
expression belongs exclusively to Ornamentation in the narrow
sense. The Carolingian period is represented only by its ornament,
as its architecture, for want of the Idea, stands between the styles.
And similarly, as a matter of art-history, it is immaterial that no
buildings of the Mycenæan age have survived.[228] But with the dawn
of the great Culture, architecture as ornament comes into being
suddenly and with such a force of expression that for a century mere
decoration-as-such shrinks away from it in awe. The spaces,
surfaces and edges of stone speak alone. The tomb of Chephren is
the culmination of mathematical simplicity—everywhere right angles,
squares and rectangular pillars, nowhere adornment, inscription or
desinence—and it is only after some generations have passed that
Relief ventures to infringe the solemn magic of those spaces and the
strain begins to be eased. And the noble Romanesque of
Westphalia-Saxony (Hildesheim, Gernrode, Paulinzella, Paderborn),
of Southern France and of the Normans (Norwich and Peterborough)
managed to render the whole sense of the world with indescribable
power and dignity in one line, one capital, one arch.
When the form-world of the springtime is at its highest, and not
before, the ordained relation is that architecture is lord and ornament
is vassal. And the word “ornament” is to be taken here in the widest
possible sense. Even conventionally, it covers the Classical unit-
motive with its quiet poised symmetry or meander supplement, the
spun surface of arabesque and the not dissimilar surface-patterning
of Mayan art, and the “Thunder-pattern”[229] and others of the early
Chóu period which prove once again the landscape basis of the old
Chinese architecture without a doubt. But the warrior figures of
Dipylon vases are also conceived in the spirit of ornament, and so, in
a far higher degree still, are the statuary groups of Gothic cathedrals.
“The figures were composed pillarwise from the spectator, the
figures of the pillar being, with reference to the spectator, ranked
upon one another like rhythmic figures in a symphony that soars
heavenward and expands its sounds in every direction.”[230] And
besides draperies, gestures, and figure-types, even the structure of
the hymn-strophe and the parallel motion of the parts in church
music are ornament in the service of the all-ruling architectural idea.
[231]
The spell of the great Ornamentation remains unbroken till in the
beginning of a “late” period architecture falls into a group of civic and
worldly special arts that unceasingly devote themselves to pleasing
and clever imitation and become ipso facto personal. To Imitation
and Ornament the same applies that has been said already of time
and space. Time gives birth to space, but space gives death to time.
[232]
In the beginning, rigid symbolism had petrified everything alive;
the Gothic statue was not permitted to be a living body, but was
simply a set of lines disposed in human form. But now Ornament
loses all its sacred rigour and becomes more and more decoration
for the architectural setting of a polite and mannered life. It was
purely as this, namely as a beautifying element, that Renaissance
taste was adopted by the courtly and patrician world of the North
(and by it alone!). Ornament meant something quite different in the
Egyptian Old Kingdom from what it meant in the Middle; in the
geometric period from what it meant in the Hellenistic; at the end of
the 12th Century from what it meant at the end of Louis XIV’s reign.
And architecture too becomes pictorial and makes music, and its
forms seem always to be trying to imitate something in the picture of
the world-around. From the Ionic capital we proceed to the
Corinthian, and from Vignola through Bernini to the Rococo.
At the last, when Civilization sets in, true ornament and, with it,
great art as a whole are extinguished. The transition consists—in
every Culture—in Classicism and Romanticism of one sort or
another, the former being a sentimental regard for an Ornamentation
(rules, laws, types) that has long been archaic and soulless, and the
latter a sentimental Imitation, not of life, but of an older Imitation. In
the place of architectural style we find architectural taste. Methods of
painting and mannerisms of writing, old forms and new, home and
foreign, come and go with the fashion. The inward necessity is no
longer there, there are no longer “schools,” for everyone selects
what and where it pleases him to select. Art becomes craft-art
(Kunstgewerbe) in all its branches—architecture and music, poetry
and drama—and in the end we have a pictorial and literary stock-in-
trade which is destitute of any deeper significance and is employed
according to taste. This final or industrial form of Ornament—no
longer historical, no longer in the condition of “becoming”—we have
before us not only in the patterns of oriental carpets, Persian and
Indian metal work,` Chinese porcelain, but also in Egyptian (and
Babylonian) art as the Greeks and Romans met it. The Minoan art of
Crete is pure craft-art, a northern outlier of Egyptian post-Hyksos
taste; and its “contemporary,” Hellenistic-Roman art from about the
time of Scipio and Hannibal, similarly subserves the habit of comfort
and the play of intellect. From the richly-decorated entablature of the
Forum of Nerva in Rome to the later provincial ceramics in the West,
we can trace the same steady formation of an unalterable craft-art
that we find in the Egyptian and the Islamic worlds, and that we have
to presume in India after Buddha and in China after Confucius.
Now, Cathedral and Pyramid-temple are different in spite of their

deep inward kinship, and it is precisely in these differences that we
seize the mighty phenomenon of the Faustian soul, whose depth-
impulse refuses to be bound in the prime symbol of a way, and from
its earliest beginnings strives to transcend every optical limitation.
Can anything be more alien to the Egyptian conception of the State
—whose tendency we may describe as a noble sobriety—than the
political ambitions of the great Saxon, Franconian and Hohenstaufen
Emperors, who came to grief because they overleapt all political
actualities and for whom the recognition of any bounds would have
been a betrayal of the idea of their rulership? Here the prime symbol
of infinite space, with all its indescribable power, entered the field of
active political existence. Beside the figures of the Ottos, Conrad II,
Henry VI and Frederick II stand the Viking-Normans, conquerors of
Russia, Greenland, England, Sicily and almost of Constantinople;
and the great popes, Gregory VII and Innocent III—all of whom alike
aimed at making their visible spheres of influence coincident with the
whole known world. This is what distinguishes the heroes of the Grail
and Arthurian and Siegfried sagas, ever roaming in the infinite, from
the heroes of Homer with their geographically modest horizon; and
the Crusades, that took men from the Elbe and the Loire to the limits
of the known world, from the historical events upon which the
Classical soul built the “Iliad” and which from the style of that soul we
may safely assume to have been local, bounded, and completely
appreciable.
The Doric soul actualized the symbol of the corporally-present
individual thing, while deliberately rejecting all big and far-reaching
creations, and it is for this very good reason that the first post-
Mycenæan period has bequeathed nothing to our archæologists.
The expression to which this soul finally attained was the Doric
temple with its purely outward effectiveness, set upon the landscape
as a massive image but denying and artistically disregarding the
space within as the μὴ ὄv, that which was held to be incapable of
existence. The ranked columns of the Egyptians carried the roof of a
hall. The Greek in borrowing the motive invested it with a meaning
proper to himself—he turned the architectural type inside out like a
glove. The outer column-sets are, in a sense, relics of a denied
interior.[233]
The Magian and the Faustian souls, on the contrary, built high.
Their dream-images became concrete as vaultings above significant
inner-spaces, structural anticipations respectively of the mathematic
of algebra and that of analysis. In the style that radiated from
Burgundy and Flanders rib-vaulting with its lunettes and flying
buttresses emancipated the contained space from the sense-
appreciable surface[234] bounding it. In the Magian interior "the
window is merely a negative component, a utility-form in no wise yet
developed into an art-form—to put it crudely, nothing but a hole in
the wall."[235] When windows were in practice indispensable, they
were for the sake of artistic impression concealed by galleries as in
the Eastern basilica.[236] The window as architecture, on the other
hand, is peculiar to the Faustian soul and the most significant symbol
of its depth-experience. In it can be felt the will to emerge from the
interior into the boundless. The same will that is immanent in

Toward A Better Understanding of Rule Breaking Market Behavior Insights From Performance Breakthroughs in Sports Ann-Kathrin Veenendaal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toward A Better Understanding of Rule Breaking Market Behavior Insights From Performance Breakthroughs in Sports Ann-Kathrin Veenendaal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toward a Better Understanding of Rule

Breaking Market Behavior Insights from

Understanding Ethics in Applied Behavior Analysis

Photovoltaics From Milliwatts To Gigawatts:

Human Factors in Air Transport: Understanding Behavior

Minorities and Small Numbers from Molecules to

Studies on Competition and Antitrust Issues in the

Sports Performance Measurement and Analytics: The

Understanding Global Higher Education: Insights from

Understanding Higher Education Internationalization:

Dissertation Steinbeis University Berlin, 2018

ISSN 1431-1941 ISSN 2197-716X (electronic)

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

This is an extraordinary dissertation.

Berlin Helmut Schneider

1 Relevance and Current Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

3 Toward a Rule-Breaking Managerial Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

3M Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company

NCAA National Collegiate Athletic Association

Fig. 1.1 Schematic conceptualization of the focal perspective, variant 1

Table 1.1 Brief review of related discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Abstract This chapter introduces the research on rule-breaking market behavior. It

1.1 A Non-technological Perspective on Breakthrough

The twenty-ﬁrst-century business landscape, especially regarding but not limited to

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 1

To more speciﬁcally depict the above-explained and explicated phenomenon that

1.2 Rule-Breaking Market Behavior and Related

In order to get a systematic understanding of the underlying phenomenon’s speciﬁcs,

1.3 Research Design

1.3.1 Research Objectives

In phenomenon-driven exploratory research questions, it is most critical to frame the

Table 1.1 Brief review of related discussions

Table 1.1 (continued)

Table 1.1 (continued)

Table 1.1 (continued)

Table 1.1 (continued)

Table 1.1 (continued)

Most importantly, it is strived to reveal and capture a set of generalizable

1.3.2 Method and Analytical Process

The basic methodological approach in this work is to inductively uncover charac-

Zum Unheil werden—noch allzulange

“A longing pure and not to be described

Of this world-experience neither Apollinian nor Magian man,

This expression is either ornament or imitation. Both are higher

Now, Cathedral and Pyramid-temple are different in spite of their

You might also like