Search results

Nowadays, organizations have to resist the rising competition more effectively than their competitors and take a step closer to excellence in offering the product to customer demands. To do this, organizations need agile leaders in order to implement agility principles and practices. Especially in the health sector, health managers must be agile because of the specific characteristics of health services. From this view, this chapter aims to develop a theoretical agile leadership model in healthcare organizations. First, the authors define agile leadership and its sub-dimensions based on previous literature. Then, the antecedents and outcomes of agile leadership have been analyzed. “Drivers of agile leadership,” “organizational factors affecting agile leadership” and “individual factors affecting agile leadership” are identified as the antecedents of agile leadership. “Organizational outcomes” and “individual outcomes” are determined as the outcomes of agile leadership in the health sector.

Manufacturers have experienced many stages of evolution and paradigm shift. The paradigm shifts from crafts to mass production, then to lean production, and finally to agile manufacturing (AM). Agility will reduce the time to market for appropriate products and services. Twenty-first century companies must meet a demanding customer base that will increasingly seek high quality, low-cost products adapted to their specific and continually evolving needs. It is time for companies to compete, and “push the boundaries” in response to delivery, product quality, and overall excellence in customer service and satisfaction. For addressing these challenges, a new way to manage businesses was proposed called “Agility,” AM is defined as the ability to survive in a competitive environment characterized by the continual and unpredictable changes, by responding effectively to the changing markets with products and services designed by the customer. This chapter presents a review of research related to the agility concept through an analysis of the variously proposed studies. This analysis was conducted based on a meta-model of three words (Agility, Management, and Organization).

Today humanity is facing a time period, in which the speed and rate of change in different fields are faced. The rapid and effective change in the technological, economic, military, social and cultural fields all over the world in recent years has had important results in many topics such as informatics, interactive communication, production, data production and sharing and forms of consumption and perception. Changes and developments at very high speeds and rates affect the personal life, social life and work life in a deep manner, especially after the 1980s, paving the way for many concepts such as globalization, Industry 4.0, digitalization, new economy, new world order and digital transformation age to be the leading variables in every field of social sciences.

Production, consumption and communication forms at the global level are becoming more and more in depth and predicting the future is becoming more and more difficult and valuable. Understanding, analyzing and predicting the future for national and international companies and organizations directly and indirectly affect all economic, military and political variables. At this point, competition stands out as one of the most critical concepts for survival and growth for profit-oriented companies.

Based on this, the topics and contents selected in this study were created to cover the field of management and strategy. Indeed, in this study, the concept of organizational agility is explored theoretically from a historical perspective on the concept of Industry 4.0 and especially emphasized the dimensions and components of agility used in today’s world.

Within the scope of this study, the aim is to define and present the general framework of the Industry 4.0 and agile firms, which aim to combine the conceptual and theoretical infrastructure with the implementation of the agile firms within the field. In this respect, the study defines the situation coming from the past together with the world of today in the relationship of the technological and economical dimensions of globalization with the digitalization and latest theoretical view for the agile firm’s structure and management. On the other hand; in this study, the possible effects of the recent COVID-19 pandemic crisis on the management of organizations are interpreted in the context of Industry 4.0 and agile companies. This aim will provide a foresight for the future periods, with the conclusions added with the theory of senism, which present the dominant value of the study.

Customers today expect businesses to cater to their individual needs by tailoring the products they purchase to their own preferences. The term “Industry 5.0” refers to a new wave of manufacturing that aims to meet each customer's unique demands. Even while Industry 4.0 allowed for mass customization, that wasn't good enough before, customers today demand individualized products at scale, and Industry 5.0 is driving the transition from mass customization to mass personalization to meet these demands. It caters to the individual needs of each consumer by meeting their demands. More specialized components for use in medicine are made possible by the widespread customization made possible by Industry 5.0. These individualized parts are included into the medical care of the patient to meet their specific needs and preferences. In the current medical revolution, an enabling technology of Industry 5.0 can produce medical implants, artificial organs, bodily fluids, and transplants with pinpoint accuracy. With the advent of AI-enabled sensors, we now live in a world where data can be swiftly analyzed. Machines may be programmed to make complex choices on the fly. In the medical field, these innovations allow for exact measurement and monitoring of human body variables according to the individual's needs. They aid in monitoring the body's response to training for peak performance. It allows for the digital dissemination of accurate healthcare data networks. In order to collect and exchange relevant patient data, every equipment is online.

The university is changing. Its social role is growing in diversity and complexity. In a knowledge-based society, there is a huge public expectation in the results and impacts of the university’s activities. Its traditional roles – training and qualification of individuals and production of new knowledge – are no longer valid. As a result of university–industry interactions, policy-making began to give additional significance to the role of the university in regional development, mainly motivated by shining examples of success in transferring scientific knowledge to valuable innovation, many through academic entrepreneurship. This change in the role of the university is reflected not only in the mode of knowledge production, which became more transdisciplinary and applied, but also in the active engagement of different institutional spheres, the university, the firm, the government, and end-users, creating new hybrid and overlapping areas for the governance of innovative dynamics. This chapter defines and analyses the position of the university in contemporary society as a socially legitimised institution for the production of knowledge and innovation. Three different theoretical traditions – Actor–Network Theory, Stakeholder Theory and territorial innovation models – inspire the analysis of 15 in-depth interviews with key actors in their local innovation system and knowledge networks around the University of Huelva (Andalusia, Spain). The main conclusions suggest that the university today faces a huge challenge in responding to the expectations that society places on it.