Search results

The purpose of this paper is to increase the knowledge and understanding of organizational and supervisory support in the context of employee deviant workplace behavior (DWB) by examining the potential associations of employees’ cultural value orientations. This paper aims to: clarify DWB; review perceived organizational support (POS) and perceived supervisory support (PSS); discuss the meaning of employees’ cultural value orientations (individualism–collectivism, power distance and paternalism); use the fuzzy logic model to analyze relationships between DWB and POS, as well as PSS and employees’ cultural value orientations.

This research applies a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis.

The results show the role of employee perceived organizational and supervisory support and cultural dimension (power distance and paternalism) configurations on employee DWB.

The main originality of this study is to further increase the understanding of organizational and supervisory support in the context of employee DWB by examining the potential associations of employees’ cultural value orientations. This study extends the previous research by providing evidence that organizational and supervisory support influences employees’ DWB.

This paper aims to show that evolutionary game theory not only provides a general and unified theory of political philosophy and strategic management theories but also a positive theory of interactive behavior.

This study suggests a way of the evolutionary game-theoretical model.

The model presented in this paper demonstrates coopetition is derived from balance points in multi-actor games. As the political–philosophical address of those strategic games will of all becomes convention in this balance point at which common knowledge occurs global optimum.

This study explores the connections between several streams in philosophy and strategic management. What does a particular philosophy contribute to strategic management with respect to game theory? When addressing this question in historical or exploratory terms, or in a combination of both, the end result is similar: particular philosophical issues, properly explained, are discussed in relation to important questions in strategic management.

What are the psychological and behavioral underpinnings of strategic decisions of this kind? What type of cognitive frames and managerial mental models, such as the game-theoretical model, might enable or hinder the integration of real-world problems in strategic decision-making?

What explains the evolution of such mental models, as well as the development of philosophical ideas, in informing the origins? How does the evolution of social and political contexts influence change in the cognitive and behavioral underpinnings of strategic decision-making?

This study highlights the overt power of strategic management ideas – competition, cooperation and coopetition – which have historically been built on the foundations of organizational theory, while also underlying the potential of philosophies, collective wisdom and Condorcet’s jury theorem and Rousseau’s (1998) correctness theory in games of evaluation. This study investigates whether the many produce better decisions than the wise few.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the contribution of company functional areas – production, marketing, and human resources – to strategic flexibility configurations. It also seeks to explore the comparative contributions of functional areas to product innovation.

The study uses the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to develop a better understanding of departmental contributions to strategic flexibility configuration and the effect of strategic flexibility on product innovation by functional areas.

The findings of this study indicate that marketing flexibility has a key role in product innovation.

A limited number of cases may be one of the possible reasons for no proven contribution of HR flexibility to product innovation, and may affect results due to poor representation.

The required flexibility level is at least the one maintaining the company’s status and certifying competitive advantage.

A pressure for flexibility leads companies to modify their organizational structure, processes, and resources.

The environmental change and uncertainty provide dynamic challenges that increase the need of company flexible reactions