Search results

This paper explores the added value of chaordic systems Thinking for organizational renewal, which is defined as transformation instead of reformation. The exploration is presented in the form of an antagonistic dialogue between two “voices,” which develop commentaries from distinct theoretical inspirations, namely chaordic systems thinking (CST) and socio‐technical systems design (STS). This paper contains part I of the conversation. In the course of the dialogue it becomes obvious that CST both includes and transcends STS, and that it is firmly based in democratic values.

This paper is a continuation of the antagonistic dialogue about the differences of chaordic systems thinking (CST) and socio‐technical systems design (STS). In this second part of the conversation a concrete example is used to illustrate the added value provided by CST. Whereas STS focuses on an organization's surface by designing processes and structures, CST aims at a developed mind and hence at the capability to reflect and understand. It is assumed that consciousness is the basis for the emergence of real organizational novelty, and thus, a prerequisite for viability.

In 1996 Hubert Saint‐Onge and Smith published an article (“The evolutionary organization: avoiding a Titanic fate”, in The Learning Organization, Vol. 3 No. 4), based on their experience at the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC). It was established at CIBC that change could be successfully facilitated through blended application of theory such as system dynamics, and the then emerging notions of “chaos and complexity”. The resulting enterprise was termed an evolutionary organization (EVO), and CIBC has continued since to re‐invent itself with great success. Although the all‐embracing nature of chaos and complexity was understood, in retrospect the impact of non‐rational people‐factors, e.g. emotion, trust, openness, spirituality were underestimated. Introduces the six papers included in this special issue, which illustrate how much more sophisticated chaos and complexity have become in the decade since Hubert Saint‐Onge and Smith first began to apply the notions at CIBC. However, although the papers in this issue present some evidence of managerial “take‐up” of chaos and complexity, whether “take‐off” will ever ensue is questionable. It is proposed that, just as in the 1990s, if there is one thing that more than any other stands in the way of exploration and adoption of these ideas, it is management mindsets.

This paper aims to document the development of cellular manufacturing at Scania-Vabis, thereby contributing to the history of an organizational idea.

The authors draw on published sources and interviews to reconstruct the development of cellular manufacturing at Scania-Vabis and its traces.

Cellular manufacturing was applied and further developed at Scania-Vabis in the 1940s and 1950s. Nevertheless, it seems to have fallen into oblivion. The key idea resurfaced in the 1970s.

The authors argue that such “proven technology” should be considered a classical insight in organization design rather than old and thus outdated.

The authors demonstrate that this form of flow-based organizing is much older than commonly assumed and point to barriers in accumulating knowledge on organizing.

A theoretical model of collective learning has been developed based on complex systems theory. The need for collective learning is illustrated by an empirical study of an “unsuccessful” organizational‐renewal project in a Swedish Telecom firm. The conclusion, using chaordic systems thinking as a diagnostic framework, is that its interior was underdeveloped. A suggestion is given for use of collective learning to develop the organizational‐mind domain of the telecom firm in order to make the desired organizational‐behavior change more likely to occur. Collective learning is drawn apart for analytical purposes into four abilities: relationics, correlation, internal model, and praxis. It was possible to operationalize the theoretical model into a questionnaire and the model functioned well when analyzing the answers in a way that could be understood and accepted by the respondents of the questionnaire, and to give a base for work on improvements.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the claim that the application of human factors (HF) knowledge can improve both human well‐being and operations system (OS) performance.

A systematic review was conducted using a general and two specialist databases to identify empirical studies addressing both human and OS effects in examining manufacturing OS design aspects.

A total of 45 empirical studies were found, addressing both the human and system effects of OS (re)design. Of those studies providing clear directional effects, 95 percent showed a convergence between human effects and system effects (+, + or −,−), 5 percent showed a divergence of human and system effects (+,− or −,+). System effects included quality, productivity, implementation performance of new technologies, and also more “intangible” effects in terms of improved communication and co‐operation. Human effects included employee health, attitudes, physical workload, and “quality of working life”.

Future research should attend to both human and system outcomes in trying to determine optimal configurations for OSs as this appears to be a complex relationship with potential long‐term impact on operational performance.

The application of HF in OS design can support improvement in both employee well‐being and system performance in a number of manufacturing domains.

The paper outlines and documents a research and practice gap between the fields of HF and operations management research that has not been previously discussed in the management literature. This gap may be inhibiting the design of OSs with superior long‐term performance.

Within the “wicked” concept of ageing, this paper aims to primarily model an integrated approach to identifying and evaluating opportunities that deliver innovative outcomes in Ageing Well Practice, Health and Economic Policy and Research Actions using a collaborative and entrepreneurial mindset. The strategic focus is on a “Boomer” (user)-driven and facilitated Network – that brings together health professionals, research specialists, technologists, ageing well providers, “encore” career specialists, life-style providers, community groups, wealth creation specialists and industry innovators to streamline the progression of identified concepts to valued users and markets and enhance the economy.

Using the unit of analysis for innovation, i.e. the “added-value” as perceived by the user and not simply a product or a technology, the identified “opportunity-outcome” will embed a new service concept or intervention, which embraces and promotes ageing well, independent living or resident-centred care in the community and delivers direct and indirect economic benefits.

The authors model a point of differentiation in facilitating existing ageing well policies in the community, through a focus on an integrated and multi-dimensional collaborative framework that can deliver user value and contributes to community and economic benefits.

Generalising results without a commercial business case from this single strategic viewpoint requires caution. The positive outcomes from this innovation collaborative concept can be used to guide further policy development and business investment in ageing well needs.

Such an integrated innovation collaborative structure provides the capacity to identify ageing well opportunities, to contract enterprises, both SMEs’ and larger companies, for development of the opportunities into user-valued outcomes, to network venture resources and deliver these outcomes to a sustainable market of ageing well citizens.

The Ageing Well Innovation collaborative framework identifies practical ways to integrate new concepts of ageing participation to be realised by the increasing number of “Boomers”. It provides a self-managing process for linking individuals, public and private parties to maximise information and ideas flow, and engagement of the skilled resources in the Boomer group.

The innovation collaborative structure proposed is not simply novel but is a targeted focus on entrepreneurship and innovation applied strategically to the needs of ageing boomers and community needs. The added-value is in the demonstrated enhancement to effective innovation outcomes in community ageing and the economy.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate a leadership program in a way that captures leadership self-efficacy, political skills (PS) and resilience in the form of indicators of health and well-being that would have relevance for leadership roles in turbulent organizations.

The design was quasi-experimental with pre- and post-measurement with unequal controls. Measurement was made through a mail survey before and after the leadership development program. n=107.

Program participants differed from the control group in the post-measurement in that they reported higher levels on leadership self-efficacy and had better health compared to a year earlier.

Concepts like leadership self-efficacy, PS and measures of health and well-being can be used to operationalize and measure broad and contextually relevant outcomes of leadership development.

Evaluation of leadership development can benefit from including these more psychologically relevant and generic outcomes.

The study illustrates how psychologically based concepts can help to elucidate key outcomes of leadership development that can be critical for meeting the challenges in the turbulent and fluid work situation managers currently meet.