Fundamentos del balance de materia y energía

The case of the Cleantech fund illustrates the importance of examining focal activities and capabilities of strategy implementation in MCS research. Frameworks that provide a static view of a MCS package may not sufficiently capture relevant activities for strategy implementation. Notably, poor attention to such activities may even prevent realizing aspects of existing MCS practices. The following part demonstrates this with evidence from the Cleantech fund. Additionally, the second part summarizes findings in light of dynamic capability approach.

5.3.1 Activities for strategy implementation

The strategic plan consisted of focal activities that were defined in the internal planning materials. Strategy implementation was not originally perceived as a composition of any MCS package. These processes, such as building new facilities and developing business constituted the explicit strategic roadmap. As apparent in the case and analysis part, they were often subject to multiple control systems that supported and controlled them. Furthermore, research of these activities revealed additional MCS on top those identified during examination of explicit documents, formal practices and interviews. Especially interview questions about MCS practices in terms of LOC did not sufficiently cover control of aforementioned activities. In turn, additional interview questions emerged during examination of other data sources.

Additional findings that were not of formal and explicit nature are still relevant in light of MCS. The revised framework still recognizes the possibility that beliefs and boundary systems can be practiced interactively. Two examples demonstrate this. The fund management continuously encouraged the target companies to lean forward and proceed under uncertainty, instead of hesitating and spending time for being cautious. This encouraging beliefs system was used interactively. Furthermore, beliefs system concerning PE culture of exploring opportunities for inorganic growth. It was not communicated through formal symbols, but

shared in the fund setting culturally and clarified interactively. This distinction between cultural values and symbols has been clearly conceptualized in the MCS package framework of Malmi & Brown (2008). In sum, these findings demonstrate the materialized potential of triangulation to support discovery and improve matching, an exceptional benefit identified in the systematic combining literature (e.g. Dubois & Gadde 2002).

5.3.2 Dynamic capabilities approach to strategy implementation

Dynamic capability approach provides concepts to match dynamic aspects of strategy implementation. Capabilities of dynamic nature are those that enable integrating, building and reconfiguring resources. Identifying opportunities and fostering renewal are closely related to these capabilities. (Teece 2007; 2012) Such elements were identified in the case, having been supported and controlled by the use of MCS. Initial buyouts can be seen as a major act of integrating capabilities. Entrepreneurs of the target companies were involved in resource orchestration, which was supported with interactive and encouraging beliefs systems. By inviting external industry professionals into interactive board work of the advisory team, the fund management also integrated additional human capital in a dynamic way. The fund management built acquired target company capabilities further by improving their business understanding and expanding their technical orientation to more managerial directions. This process was longer and involved more MCS. Interactive systems were used to "challenge" and share insights. The fund management assigned open-ended questions to the entrepreneurs as CEOs. Managers were granted discretion over the use of MCS in their own organizations. They were challenged to continuously improve their mindset and organizations by sparking discussions on ad hoc uncertainties. In addition to interaction, business orientation was also supported by operational implications to performance (beliefs) and diagnostic systems that integrated customer perspective into management routines.

Increased business understanding of the target company layer together with interactive MCS extended the scope of opportunity identification. Identification of opportunities for integrating and building resources was supported with such beliefs systems that encouraged to proceed under uncertainty and to explore potential acquisition targets as a PE investor. Already acquired capabilities of the target companies were involved in this exploration by using other MCS. For example, strategic boundaries defined division of labor, and interaction was used to share emerging insights. More operational asset reconfiguration was supported with diagnostic systems. If target companies identified any potentially strategic insights, they were encouraged

to share them interactively with the fund management. In summary, interactive control systems in the original sense of LOC served as the significant backbone for dynamic capabilities. However, other MCS, such as encouraging beliefs and diagnostic systems were occasionally involved as well. Discussion above shows yet another notion: there are many other potential aspects of dynamic capabilities to be applied in MCS research, on top of considerations of environmental velocity (McCarthy & Gordon 2010) introduced in the framework.

6 Conclusions and implications

Earlier research on MCS in PE investing has been scarce in general. Within the frame, there is even more notable lack of comprehensive longitudinal single case studies with sensitivity to contingent factors. This research space motivated to examine how PE investors used MCS in strategy implementation during their ownership period of buyout targets. Empirical setting of a PE fund hierarchy provided a means to expand conventional scope of MCS research that has typically focused on single organizations with their senior managers as the highest authority of implementing MCS. This research aimed to capture wider setting of PE context and relevant factors that influenced MCS beyond the boundaries of a buyout company. The examined PE fund was not isolated from the parent Asset management company and its customers as investors and limited partners. Potential to contribute to MCS research on PE was not the only opportunity that this diverse case provided. PE context demonstrates how the use of MCS can cross firm boundaries through board work. Furthermore, the research enabled to improve general understanding of relations between MCS, ownership and capabilities.

Existing body of research did not provide sufficient examples of similar cases with aforementioned approach to MCS. Sufficient research of this empirical scope required to develop theoretical framework of MCS and PE to fit with the context. Therefore, systematic combining was chosen as the research method. In order to match theory and practice of how PE investors used MCS during their ownership period, realizing capabilities, ownership and delegation of entrepreneurial judgment implied integration of additional elements into the theoretical framework. Consequently, examined empirical setting and the constructed theoretical framework formed an exceptional research on MCS and PE. The following parts will discuss limitations of the research as well as implications for theory, practice and further research.