arbiter
JournalsAccount

Micro‐Processes of Constrained Innovation: A Field Study of Constraint‐Handling Practices in Base of the Pyramid Innovation Projects

Helene Doms et al.

Journal of Management Studies2026https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.70065article
FT50AJG 4ABDC A*
Weight
0.50

Abstract

This study addresses the problem of handling constraints in innovative projects. Using a qualitative research design on base of the pyramid (BOP) innovation projects, we examine how creativity emerges from constraints. By investigating responses to experienced constraints from 60 BOP innovation projects, we identify specific micro‐processes used to deal with constraints, which we introduce as constraint‐handling practices. Moreover, we investigate the interplay between these constraint‐handling practices and the nature of the constraints in the resultant sequence of such micro‐processes, distinguishing between goal and task constraints. Drawing from theory on effectuation and causation, we explain how different constraint‐handling practices are implemented in innovation projects in response to these constraints. We demonstrate that instead of relying on an either/or mode of effectuation versus causation, actors in constrained BOP innovation projects exhibit repeated cycles of both effectuation‐ and causation‐based constraint‐handling practices.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.70065

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{helene2026,
  title        = {{Micro‐Processes of Constrained Innovation: A Field Study of Constraint‐Handling Practices in Base of the Pyramid Innovation Projects}},
  author       = {Helene Doms et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of Management Studies},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.70065},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Micro‐Processes of Constrained Innovation: A Field Study of Constraint‐Handling Practices in Base of the Pyramid Innovation Projects

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.