Search results

As part of the developing attention being paid to time in organization science, this chapter discusses two temporal dimensions – polychronicity and speed – and develops propositions relating these two temporal dimensions to other organization science variables. The propositions are specified according to levels of analysis, at least three of which are considered in propositions presented for each dimension. Two other temporal dimensions – punctuality and temporal depth – are also described, albeit not as extensively as polychronicity and speed. A fifth temporal phenomenon, entrainment, provides insights into organizational processes as well as the four temporal dimensions. The chapter concludes by outlining some reasons for caution for both theory and practice.

Polychronicity is the extent to which people prefer to be engaged in two or more tasks simultaneously. Relationships between polychronicity and four variables were examined in data from four samples totaling 1,173 participants. Only one statistically significant relationship occurred between polychronicity and propensity for creativity after controlling for other variables. Consistent significant relationships were found, however, between polychronicity and orientation to change (positive), tolerance for ambiguity (positive), and organizational attractiveness (positive or negative depending on whether the organization demonstrated a high or low level of polychronicity, respectively). Concatenated replications reproduced each of these three relationships in at least two samples.

Allen C. Bluedorn and Sydney Finkelstein have provided an unusually insightful set of commentaries on “Planning in organizations: Performance as a multi-level phenomenon”. In this article, I respond to these commentaries beginning with an examination of the assumptions made about planning over the years. Subsequently, I examine Bluedorn's and Finkelstein's critiques of this article with respect to three key issues: Complexity, performance, and history. With regard to history, I argue that the use of case-based reasoning in planning insures that planning performance is as much a function of the past as forecasting of the future. With regard to performance, it is argued that planning performance must be framed in a multi-level model. The issue of complexity is addressed by examining the role of cross-level and within-level interactions in shaping planning performance. The implications of these observations for theoretical integration and research needs are discussed.

The temporal imagination is the understanding of the intersection of one entity’s timescape with the larger timescapes of which that entity is a part. We examine in detail what the temporal imagination is, complemented with a discussion of the related timescape idea, and why the temporal imagination is necessary to function in any timescape. We also discuss group attributes that will likely affect the development of the temporal imagination and its use and how its use in group boundary spanning efforts affect both the groups and the larger organization.

Addressing the challenges of temporal concepts in organizations involves precise measurement and clear definitions. In this essay, we propose a number of future research ideas generated by Waller and Conte's (this volume) thought-provoking essays. Our hope in presenting these ideas is that future studies consider them in efforts to further close the definitional and measurement gaps in current research on temporal variables in organizations. In particular, we invite scholars to consider the implications of the dimensionality of polychronicity, of context on temporal variables, and of temporal variables interacting together.

New ways of managing change have run aground on the uncritical acceptance of a limited view of temporality, identified here as causal-time. Because it emphasizes identity and state-transitions, causal-time is inherently static and past-centered. An alternative view, called flow-time, emphasizes the dynamic of the always arriving future. The claim is made that a future-centered temporality gives access to the knowledge change agents need to cope with accelerating and ongoing change.

Ulf Bengtsson works for Motorola Inc. as an Organization Effectiveness consultant. In this role he works in the area of change acceleration, organization design, and other strategic OD initiatives. His undergraduate degree is in Organizational Communication from Cleveland State University and he earned a Masters in Management and Organizational Behavior (concentration in OD) from Benedictine University. He has done award-winning papers and presentations and has numerous publications on topics including organizational behavior, organization development, and appreciative inquiry. A Swedish citizen, he now resides in Chicago. Ulf can be reached at: Ulfl@motorola.com.Allen C. Bluedorn (Ph.D. in sociology, University of Iowa) is the Emma S. Hibbs Distinguished Professor and the Chair of the Department of Management at the University of Missouri-Columbia. He has taught and studied management and the organization sciences, first at the Pennsylvania State University, then for the last 23 years at the University of Missouri-Columbia. These efforts have produced seven major teaching awards, over 30 articles and chapters, and his recently published book, The Human Organization of Time (Stanford University Press, 2002). He has served as president of the Midwest Academy of Management, as a member of the Organizational Behavior Teaching Society’s board of directors, as a representative-at-large to the Academy of Management’s board of governors, as associate editor of Academy of Management Learning and Education, and as division chair of the Academy of Management’s Organizational Behavior Division.David Coghlan is a member of the School of Business Studies at the University of Dublin, Trinity College, Ireland. His research and teaching interests lie in the areas of organisation development, action research, action learning, clinical inquiry, practitioner research and doing action research in one’s own organisation. His most recent books include Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization (co-authored with Teresa Brannick, Sage, 2001), Changing Healthcare Organisations, (coauthored with Eilish Mc Auliffe, Blackhall: Dublin, 2003) and Managers Learning in Action (eds. D. Coghlan, T. Dromgoole, P. Joynt & P. Sorensen, Routledge, 2004).Paul Coughlan is Associate Professor of Operations Management at the University of Dublin, School of Business Studies, Trinity College, Ireland where, since 1993, he has researched and taught in the areas of operations management and product development. His active research interests relate to continuous improvement of practices and performance in product development and manufacturing operations. He is President of the Board of the European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management, and a member of the board of the European Operations Management Association.Fariborz Damanpour received his Ph.D. from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He joined the Graduate School of Management at the Rutgers University in 1985. Currently he is a professor at the Department of Management and Global Business of the Rutgers Business School, where he served as the chairperson of the management department from 1996 to 2002. Prior to his academic career, he worked as an engineer, an organizational development consultant, and the manager of a start-up unit in a large organization. His primary areas of research have been management of innovation and organization design and change. His papers have been published in several management and technology management journals including the Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Journal of Management Studies, Management Science, Organization Studies, and Strategic Management Journal. He serves on the editorial boards of the IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, and Journal of Management Studies.Joyce Falkenberg is Professor of Strategy and Associate Dean of the School of Management at Agder University College (HiA) in Kristiansand, Norway. She received a Ph.D. from the University of Oregon in 1984. Her dissertation focused on strategic change and adaptation as a response to changes in the environment. Her research has continued the focus on strategic change with an emphasis on implementation. Recent work has combined this emphasis with the strategy issues of congition, strategizing, and resource based perspective. Before coming to HiA in the summer of 2003, Joyce Falkenberg was a member of the faculty at the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. She taught in many international programs, including NHHs Masters of International Business; executive masters programs in Russia and Poland; and held seminars in Latvia, China, Switzerland, and Germany. Falkenberg has served on the Executive Board of the Academy of Management Business Policy Division and on the Editorial Board of the Academy of Management Review.Mary A. Ferdig Ph.D., is Director of the Sustainability Leadership Institute in Middlebury, Vermont, a research and education organization dedicated to developing leadership capacity for building a more sustainable world. Her research interests focus on leadership for sustainable organizational and social change, grounded in complexity and social constructionist perspectives. She consults with leaders in not-for-profit and business sectors as well as teaching process consultation and leadership communication in the Management and Organizational Behavior Master’s program at Benedictine University and the Public Administration and Community Services program at the University of Nebraska, Omaha. She also serves as an External Examiner in the Doctoral Program in the Complexity Management Centre, Hertfordshire University, London, U.K.Robert T. Golembiewski is Distinguished Research Professor, Emeritus at the University of Georgia, where he is part of the Public Administration program. Bob G is an internationally-active consultant in planned change, and he is the only pracademic who has won all of the major research prizes in management: the Irwin in business, Waldo Award in PA, the NASPAA Award in public policy, two McGregor awards for excellence in the application of the behavioral sciences, and the ODI Prize for global programs in planned change.

Three points are addressed concerning, “Planning in Organizations.” The first deals with what has become a fundamental image of planning; the second, with problems in conceptualizing the quality of planning; and the third, with the possibility of developing some of the propositions further by combining them with other theory.

The ten‐item Inventory of Polychronic Values (IPV), a psychometric measure of polychronicity (the extent to which people in a culture prefer to be engaged in two or more tasks or events simultaneously and believe their preference is the best way to do things), was developed using data from 11 samples (N = 2,190) collected from bank employees, undergraduate students, hospital personnel, dentists and their staffs, and state agency managers. Principal components, alpha, correlation, and confirmatory factor analyses supported the IPV in its internal consistency, test‐retest reliability, content adequacy, construct validity (both discriminant and convergent), and nomological validity.