Search results

Virtual teams are typically made up of geographically dispersed experts, supported by computer‐based communication technologies. Though increasingly popular this is still a relatively unstudied organizational form. Virtual team membership is typically based solely on needed expertise; the teams rarely have any history of interaction and their performance potential is unknown. Research shows that teams exhibit constructive, passive, and aggressive interaction styles, which have significant effects on the decisions the teams produce as well as the teams’ satisfaction with those decisions. We present managerial tools for the assessment of conventional and virtual team interaction styles. We detail how the tools are used, and we also discuss how the styles manifest in each medium, and their effects. We give suggestions to team managers on how to use the insights the tools provide to manage their virtual teams for optimal performance.

This paper aims to describe how organizational culture is manifested in behavioral norms and expectations, focusing on 12 sets of behavioral norms associated with constructive, passive/defensive, and aggressive/defensive cultural styles.

The organizational culture inventory, a normed and validated instrument designed to measure organizational culture in terms of behavioral norms and expectations, was used to test hypotheses regarding the impact of culture. Data are summarized from 60,900 respondents affiliated with various organizations that have used the instrument to assess their cultures. Also presented is a brief overview of a practitioner‐led assessment of four state government departments.

The results of correlational analyses illustrate the positive impact of constructive cultural styles, and the negative impact of dysfunctional defensive styles, on both the individual‐ and organizational‐level performance drivers. The results clearly link the dysfunctional cultural styles to deficits in operating efficiency and effectiveness.

The concept of organizational culture is derived from research in the field of organizational behavior characterized by use of qualitative methods. Yet, one of the most powerful strategies for organizational development is knowledge‐based change, an approach that generally relies on the use of quantitative measures. Although both methods share the potential for producing cumulative bodies of information for assessment and theory testing, quantitative approaches may be more practical for purposes of knowledge‐based approaches for organizational development generally, and assessing cultural prerequisites for organizational learning and knowledge management specifically.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a theoretical model for the in‐depth study of organizations, producing a framework which makes it possible to clarify many propositions and to specifically test the theory. In order to carry out this assignment, the paper has two sub‐objectives.

The first one studies the adaptation of the internal culture‐structure variables as a way to determine the congruity of the components of the companies which form the real structure and to study the behavior that is expected from the people in the organization. The second sub‐aim is to analyze whether the partial adaptations of real structure mentioned above are orientated correctly towards the achievement of the strategic aims. Only a suitable design of the real structure which in turn enables the attainment of the aims raised by the strategy will give rise to the obtaining of a suitable level of efficiency.

The key contribution of the paper is to render operative in practical terms such a diffuse concept as is the alignment model.

Alignment theory has been combined with configuration theory to detect the ideal cultural, structural, and strategic options and making the comparison with the real forms possible in order to analyze the possible deviations and to predict the level of efficiency.

Over the last decade quality function deployment or QFD, thanks to the efforts of Akao and others, has gained widespread popularity in its applicability to business and industry. Many organizations have adopted it as a tool of continuous improvement in their quest for quality through total quality management (TQM). QFD in simple terms, has been looked on as a mechanism of translating the customers’ expectations of a particular product or service into product planning, parts development, process planning, and production planning. Explores the robustness of QFD for translating the available knowledge within a product design group into appropriate design choices, ones that consider the customer’s view of quality throughout the product’s entire life cycle. Conventional QFD analysis allows equity of participation through “consensus”, but often trades outcomes influenced by expertise for those attained with “fairness”. This process may lead to less than optimal results. Discusses the role of group support systems (GSS) to improve the qualitative discussion of the whats and the hows in the QFD process. Also introduces influence allocation processes, methods that allow differential weighting of participants and an incremental usage of knowledge within groups. Discusses their potential impact for QFD analysis.