Search results

The issue dealt with in this chapter is the role of management in developing and maintaining business relationships among companies. Interdependent business network structures result from interactions in dyads between single actors and interactions among all involved actors collectively. Managers as ‘architects and constructors’ of business relationships, involved directly in developing the relationships between customers and suppliers, are mostly middle-management positions rather than top management. Purchasing managers, sales managers and technical managers are fundamental for the development of business relationships as they create value in business relationships. Relationships between companies cannot be developed unilaterally; they have to be developed jointly. Since value creation requires involvement of others, motivating other actors and mediating are fundamental in developing relationships and creating value. The effective development of business relationships of value hinges on the capability and skills of management to work with and through others, to relate to others and to cope with interdependencies that arise in relationships. However, the capability of a company to interact and create value in business relationships is not simply a sum of individual managerial skills; it is an issue of organising the interfaces in relationships to other business.

Innovation originally meant ‘change’ or ‘renewal’. Over time, it became associated with creating new products, methods, materials, markets, and forms of organisation. Today, in everyday language, innovation is used as a much broader term that encompasses non-materialistic, non-economical ideas such as social, educational, philosophical, political, environmental, or spiritual innovations. What makes something innovative is subjective and depends not only on the perceived novelty of the content but also on the co-constructed meaning of what is possible or what it changes in our lives. Therefore, innovation leaders must also become experts in co-constructing meanings with their teams. In this chapter, a structured solution-focused framework will be introduced with the intent to support innovative teams in maintaining effective team dialogue, foster more innovative team collaboration, better innovations, or an improved innovation process. In fostering an interactive and dynamic team process, solution-focused leaders engage in deliberate interactions that often initiate a positive dynamic leading into an even more innovative future.

Interactivity is a dimension that describes a certain condition in business networks – a propensity to use interaction in business as a major means in development processes. Expectations formed as a collective attitude and knowledge about existing economic conditions and the importance of joint solutions formed through interactions to handle them are an expression of interactivity in the network. This collective condition is important because there are some obstacles confronting the development of substantive interaction. Businesses engage in interaction only when they acknowledge and accept that mutuality is something positive and a necessary condition to achieve some positive outcomes that cannot be achieved in isolation, and that interdependencies can be used in a constructive way. Finally, there must be managers prepared to use resources to build up relationships and to develop joint solutions that will pay in the long run. All relationships require investments. These attitude and knowledge factors, which are aspects of interactivity, are a condition for handling resources and activities to create efficiency and innovativeness.

B2B business is very much about relationships, and solution-oriented business may further underline this. But relations could look very different and the interface between buyer and seller could also vary a lot and be more or less fit for purpose.

In this chapter, we point at possibilities to be more methodical about the ways in which the interfaces are organized. In longer-term business, this seems to be a core factor in order for the two or more parties involved how to get the best value of their relation. We discuss interaction patterns and what seem to be the most important factors influencing the success or failure.

An important question facing business scholars is whether and how organizations may best adapt their investments, resource profiles, and strategies to the demands of their particular environments. While a broad literature describes organizational design principles that may assist in this regard, more recent work builds on Kauffman's (1993) NK model of biological evolution to explore how selection mechanisms and adaptive principles promote firms' exploitation and exploration efforts. This research stream has made contributions regarding the importance and efficacy of various internal adaptive factors in particular environmental settings. For instance, Levinthal (1997) shows that, despite extensive adaptation efforts, the influence of imprinting persists in complex environments with many local peaks. Rivkin (2000) demonstrates that NK complexity degrades the efficacy of search, compelling imitators to rely on search heuristics rather than adaptation via local learning. Rivkin and Siggelkow (2003) explore the tradeoffs between exploration and stability, and describe how particular organizational attributes, such as vertical hierarchy and group- or firm-level incentive systems, influence the flow of information throughout the organization. These as well as other contributions have added precision to the conceptualization of environments and sharpened understanding of organization by describing precisely how interdependencies across investment choices and/or resource profiles affect adaptation efforts.

This chapter explores the issue of an outsider entering an existing business network in an interactive, interdependent and interconnected business world. Developing the new venture appears a ‘mission impossible’ as the new venture has no relationship in the relevant network or a tenuous one at best. The critical issue and major difficulty for the new company are to make established business actors perceive that there are good reasons to admit the new venture into the existing business network. The fate of the new venture, its acceptance by at least some other business actors, will largely depend on how the incumbents perceive the new company to affect their existing relational assets which result from past investments. In attempting to become a new node of a business relationship, the ‘management’ of the new venture has to address two issues. First, it has to find some actors interested in relating to the new venture and to engage them in developing the initial business relationships. Second, the new venture has to manage the networking that is combining the initial relationships with each other. The authors identify and discuss six spaces for action for new business ventures related to these two challenges.

During team meetings, expressing negativity about other team members’ ideas and contributions – that is, negative disagreements – can derail team processes and harm team productivity. If team members want to improve their meetings and reduce negativity, which aspects are relevant starting points? This chapter discusses the complexity of this question by considering the interplay of team attributes, individual characteristics, and verbal interaction dynamics that may evoke negative disagreements in meetings. To this end, this chapter relies on existing behavioral and survey data of 259 employees nested in 43 team meetings that were analyzed using statistical discourse analysis. The results of this analysis highlight several potential starting points for reducing negativity in workplace meetings. First, we discovered that team attributes matter, as teams with a lower overall level of job satisfaction were more likely to experience negative disagreements during their meetings. Second, at the individual level, we found a significant gender effect such that women were more likely than men to start negative disagreements. Third, individual team members reporting lower organizational trust were more likely to start negative disagreements. Finally, counter to previous work on interaction dynamics during meetings, we could not identify specific verbal behaviors that triggered negative disagreements. In terms of practical implications, we discuss how managers can increase organizational trust and job satisfaction (e.g., through ensuring justice and improving job design) in order to encourage more positive meeting interactions.

This study explores interactions on internal social media (ISM) in a Danish bank in order to understand how communicative leadership is enacted in social media dialogues within an organizational context. Three months of posts, comments and likes from September to November 2018 were analyzed to identify communicative leadership roles and communicative leadership behaviours. Three types of communicative leadership arose in this study: formal communicative leadership, coconstructed communicative leadership and peer communicative leadership. Communicative leadership was further identified in communicative acts such as setting directions, making sense, solving problems and listening. The findings suggest that communicative leadership is coconstructed in interactions between managers and employees as well as in interactions among employees. In this respect, communicative leadership on ISM is not only enacted by formal managers but aslo by knowledgeable individual organizational members and it is also coconstructed by groups of employees. In this respect, the findings help us understand leadership as a complex set of interactions in organizational contexts and know that empowering communication on ISM can therefore enhance employee engagement.