Search results

This chapter introduces human resource practices in contemporary knowledge-based organizations of today’s fast moving sectors. Such organizations are called ‘knowledge intensive firms’ (KIFs) which are distinct from traditional organizations as their main focus is innovation. These firms employ knowledge-oriented workers named as ‘knowledge workers’ (KWs) whose main task is to find creative solutions to complex problems and create new knowledge. Knowledge workers are well-educated experts and their nature of work includes complexity, creativity and analytical thinking. Such workers are the most important resource of KIFs, as they own the means of production. In this regard, attracting, retaining and motivating KWs have become crucial for knowledge intense firms to gain competitive advantage. Having these workers in hand, human resource management practices also differ in knowledge-oriented organizations. This chapter aims to introduce such contemporary practices and inform the reader about the strategies in attracting, retaining and motivating KWs in organizations.

This paper seeks to develop a mid-range theory of how change recipient sensemaking processes affect the realization of strategic flexibility during simultaneous change in professional service firms.

The research presented is based on an exploratory embedded case study adopting a qualitative interpretive methodology, conducted at a professional service organization. A sensemaking lens was adopted in order to study organizational change processes. Data was collected through semi-structured open-ended in-depth interviews, and analyzed using first and second order analysis, inspired by the methodology used by Corley and Gioia (2004).

We identified four determinants of change recipient sensemaking: professional identification, dominant organizational discourse, equivocality of expectations, and cross-understanding between thought worlds. Case findings indicate that cognitive and affective dimensions of change recipient sensemaking are strongly interwoven in their effect on realizing strategic flexibility.

We contribute to the competence-based strategic management literature by introducing the concept of change recipient sensemaking in understanding the realization of strategic flexibility; by identifying four major determinants in a context of simultaneous change in a professional service organization; and by highlighting the interwoven and mutually reinforcing cognitive and affective dimensions of professional’s process of constructing meaning.

Our conception of the ideal organization has changed from the machine-like efficiency of Weberian bureaucracy to a post-industrial ideal (Bell, 1973) in which organizations spurn the bureaucratic form to become more adaptive, receptive and generative. Such ideal organizations, we are told, will exhibit strong employee involvement and will rely on self-organizing autonomous teams. Hierarchy will be abandoned in favor of flatter organizational structures, and authority relations will be based upon individual capability and expertise rather than position. Put simply, organizations of the future will cure all of the ills of Weber's bureaucracy while preserving the ideals of precision, speed, discretion, knowledge and, above all, efficiency.

This chapter examines the impact of adopting a global strategy upon leaders’ roles and identities in an engineering consultancy firm. Drawing upon process and social practice perspectives on leadership; our results explain leaders’ resistance to changing practices despite major process changes as due to the threats to their identity caused by the new role requirements to implement a global strategy. Our emerging process and social practice model of leadership highlights the complementary nature of process and practice change, creates a distinction between good and malign ambiguity in professional services firms and has implications for regulating the pace and timing of major changes which impact upon professional identities.

The chapter aims to conceptually explore how to govern public sector organizations in order to create public value. It focuses on the importance of knowledge-intensive processes in creating public value as well as the challenges in governing such fragile processes.

We use organizational theory and respective concepts in the field of organizational design focusing on cognitive and motivational aspects. These are explained by group theories and concepts of conditional cooperation.

We show the important role and the antecedents of self-governance in creating public value based on knowledge creation, sharing and use, whereas the classical method of hierarchical and bureaucratic procedural-based governance (via rules and direct supervision) as well as the more modern method of output-based governance (via so-called key performance indicators) fails to govern public value in this form.

The heuristic model differentiates between modes of governance. Their mutual interplay and empirical evidence are yet needed for substantiating the findings.

Self-organizing mechanisms require behavioural antecedents of the involved actors: on the one hand there is a need for a minimum of mutual understanding in the sense of ‘cognitive compatibility’ and on the other, a minimum of ‘willingness to cooperate’.

Participating public employees and citizens need to cultivate participatory and collaborative governance mechanisms in order to create public value. These can be understood as supplementing and enriching existing ones rather than replacing them.

This chapter contributes to research in public administration in that the concept of public value with a focus on knowledge-intensive collaboration is specified. A new path is taken, originating from organizational theory and motivational theory that are transferred into public administration in order to show how collaborative governance should be employed and how motivational and cognitive aspects should be considered.

The primary purpose of this chapter is to offer a conceptual/theoretical understanding of post-M&A integration rationales and/or actions which pose a challenge to acquired firm customers in acquisitions of knowledge-intensive firms, and thus trigger M&A value destruction. The approach takes the form of a literature overview and conceptual development. As a step toward developing a more elaborate understanding of a customer-centered perspective, this conceptual study identifies five key factors that may lead to value leakage/destruction for acquirers’ of knowledge-intensive firms. Specifically, it identifies acquisition motive, specific acquired firm employees other than the engineers and scientists, size of the acquired firm customer-base, M&A customer compatibility, and the acquirer’s own customers’ behavior as integration rationales and/or actions which pose a challenge to acquired firm customers. In addition, the chapter offers a theoretical framework that serves as an analytical tool, and can thus be used as a foundation for future empirical work on analyzing acquirers’ destruction of value in knowledge-intensive acquisitions through the neglect of acquired firm’s customers. This study does not claim to have provided exhaustive list of all factors regarding acquirer’s integration rationales and/or actions that influence acquired firm customers. Nonetheless, for researchers seeking to build a more comprehensive framework relating to the impact of acquirer’s integration rationales and/or actions on acquired firm’s customers, this framework may serve as a solid foundation for achieving that goal. For practitioners, this study points to the importance of knowledge held by acquired firm customers and the need to maintain such customer relationships in order to avert acquirer’s post-M&A value destruction. In addition, acquirers may also recognize that post-M&A integration changes required following M&A should not be restricted to only the firm’s internal activities and resource deployment but should extend to how the firm interacts or relates with other external value creation actors. This chapter contributes by highlighting and stimulating a discussion on the important role of acquired firm customers in acquisitions of knowledge-intensive firms in informing our understanding of the sources of M&A value leakage/destruction.

Building on the resource-based view of the firm and complex systems theory, we argue that the effective utilization of knowledge-intensive teamwork (KITwork) can be a source of sustained competitive advantage for firms that pursue a variety of strategies and compete in a variety of industries. KITwork is a multi-dimensional, multi-level social process that promotes knowledge flows within and between organizations. Through KITwork, the knowledge resources of individual employees are transformed into a capability that contributes to the effectiveness of knowledge-based organizations. After introducing and explaining the concept of KITwork, we explore the challenges that organizations must address in order to design HRM systems that support and facilitate KITwork.

Mats Alvesson is professor of business administration at the University of Lund, Sweden and at University of Queensland Business School, Australia. Research interests include critical theory, gender, power, management of knowledge intensive organizations, leadership, identity, organizational image, organizational culture and symbolism, qualitative methods and philosophy of science. Recent books include Interpreting Interviews (Sage, 2011), Metaphor We Lead By: Understanding Leadership in the Real World (Routledge, 2011, edited with Andre Spicer), Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies (Oxford University Press, edited with Todd Bridgman and Hugh Willmott), Understanding Gender and Organizations (Sage, 2009, 2nd edition edited with Yvonne Billing), Reflexive Methodology (Sage, 2009, 2nd edition edited with Kaj Skoldberg), Changing Organizational Culture (Routledge, 2008, edited with Stefan Sveningsson) and Knowledge Work and Knowledge-Intensive Firms (Oxford University Press, 2004).