Search results1 – 4 of 4
Accountability is ubiquitous in social systems, and its necessity is magnified in formal organizations, whose purpose has been argued to predict and control behavior. The…
Accountability is ubiquitous in social systems, and its necessity is magnified in formal organizations, whose purpose has been argued to predict and control behavior. The very notion of organizing necessitates answering to others, and this feature implies an interface of work and social enterprises, the individuals comprising them, and subunits from dyads to divisions. Because the nature of workplace accountability is multi-level as well as interactive, single-level conceptualizations of the phenomenon are incomplete and inherently misleading. In response, this chapter sets forth a meso-level conceptualization of accountability, which develops a more comprehensive understanding of this pervasive and imperative phenomenon. The meso model presented integrates contemporary theory and research, and extends our perspectives beyond individual, group, unit, or organizational perspectives toward a unitary whole. Following this is a description of challenges and opportunities facing scholars conducting accountability research (e.g., data collection and analysis and non-traditional conceptualizations of workplace phenomenon). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed, as are directions for future research.
Susan Brodt (PhD, Stanford University) is E. Marie Shantz associate professor of organizational behavior and associate professor of psychology at Queen's University. Her research examines aspects of effective work relationships and how psychological and organizational processes help or hinder their development. She is currently studying the dynamics of interpersonal trust – trust building, violation, and repair – and how factors external to a work relationship (e.g., personal blogs) can facilitate trust development and repair. Her work has been published in numerous scholarly as well as practitioner-oriented journals. Susan has served on Editorial Review Boards of several scholarly journals and has held leadership positions in both the Academy of Management (Program and Division Chair, Conflict Management Division) and the International Association for Conflict Management (Program Chair, Board of Directors). She is also an experienced executive educator and consultant on such topics as negotiation, executive leadership, interpersonal trust, and managing global teams.
Performance measures should be linked to an organization’s strategy in order to provide useful information for making effective decisions and shaping desirable employee…
Performance measures should be linked to an organization’s strategy in order to provide useful information for making effective decisions and shaping desirable employee behaviour. The pitfalls relating to the indiscriminate use of common maintenance performance indicators are discussed in this paper. It also reviews four approaches to maintenance performance measures. The value‐based performance measure evaluates the impact of maintenance activities on the future value of the organization. The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) provides a framework for translating strategy into operational measures that collectively capture the critical requirements for sustaining the organization’s success. System audits are the tool for measuring organizational culture, which in turn determines the appropriate approach to the organization of maintenance functions. The operational efficiency of an organization’s maintenance function can be benchmarked with those of its counterparts in other organizations by using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). Among these approaches, the one which builds on the BSC embraces the design principles of a good performance measurement system. To smooth the adoption of the BSC approach to managing maintenance operations, a related research agenda is proposed in the concluding section.