Search results

Corporate venturing initiatives, which exemplify corporate entrepreneurial behavior, follow an evolutionary path of variation, selection, and retention. While their external selection is a consequence of their performance, their internal selection is subject to forces of complementarity and legitimacy, and how well competition from other initiatives is overcome. This chapter aims to unfold the dynamics of the internal selection process of initiatives, focusing on its emotional dimensions. Assuming that organizational agents have a deliberate role in guiding the internal selection process of initiatives, the chapter examines how organizational agents' emotional dynamics influence this process. The chapter draws its theoretical basis from the intraorganizational evolutionary perspective and the literature on emotions in organizations. The case of a corporate venturing initiative and the narratives of four managers involved directly and indirectly in the initiative are used to illustrate how the emotional dynamics of organizational members evoked envy toward a venturing initiative and directly impacted its degree of competition and complementarity with other interacting initiatives, ultimately hampering its selection.

Governance network managers are charged with triggering and sustaining collaborative dynamics, but often struggle to do so because they come from and interact with hierarchical and competitive organizations and systems. Thus, an important step toward effectively managing governance networks is to clarify collaborative dynamics. While the recently proposed collaborative governance regime (CGR) model provides a good start, it lacks both the conceptual clarity and parsimony needed in a useful analytical tool. This theoretical chapter uses the logic model framework to assess and reorganize the CGR model and then amends it using Follett’s theory of integrative process to provide a parsimonious understanding of collaborative dynamics, as opposed to authoritative coordination or negotiated cooperation. Uniquely, Follett draws from political and organizational theory practically grounded in the study of civic and business groups to frame the manner in which integrative process permeates collaboration. We argue that the disposition, style of relating, and mode of association in her integrative method foster collaborative dynamics while avoiding the counterproductive characteristics of hierarchy and competition. We develop an alternative logic model for studying collaborative dynamics that clarifies and defines these dynamics for future operationalization and empirical study.

This paper aims to propose and verify an improved cascade active disturbance rejection control (ADRC) scheme based on output redefinition for hypersonic vehicles (HSVs) with nonminimum phase characteristic and model uncertainties.

To handle the nonminimum phase characteristic, a tuning factor stabilizing internal dynamics is introduced to redefine the system output states; its effective range is determined by analyzing Byrnes–Isidori normalized form of the redefined system. The extended state observers (ESOs) are used to estimate the uncertainties, which include matched and mismatched items in the system. The controller compensates observations in real time and appends integral terms to improve robustness against the estimation errors of ESOs.

Theoretical and simulation results show that the stability of internal dynamics is guaranteed by the tuning factor and the tracking errors of external commands are globally asymptotically stable.

The control scheme in this paper is expected to generate a reliable way for dealing with nonminimum phase characteristic and model uncertainties of HSVs.

In the framework of ADRC, a concise form of redefined outputs is proposed, in which the tuning factor performs a decisive role in stabilizing the internal dynamics of HSVs. By introducing an integral term into the cascade ADRC scheme, the compensation accuracy of matched and mismatched disturbances is improved.

Moving beyond the question of whether large corporations are truly addressing sustainability, some scholars have explored the degree to which CSR activities are purely symbolic or substantive in nature. Most of the studies have focused on external stakeholder pressures. The aim of this chapter is to extend this line of inquiry by theorizing that the dynamics among internal stakeholders also shapes CSR conduct.

This theoretical contribution borrows from research on socially responsible indices, behavioral corporate governance theory in CSR and from recent research that has leveraged attribution theory to better understand reactions to corporate social irresponsibility (CSiR).

Our chapter proposes that firms adhering to substantive CSR practice are less likely to be punished by external stakeholders than otherwise. From an internal stakeholder viewpoint, it suggests there is a positive relationship between the number of board ties to reputable universities/nonprofit organizations and substantive CSR practices; and a negative relationship between managerial discretion and substantive CSR practices.

This chapter can have social applicability as it deals with stakeholders’ role in pressuring the modern organization to engage in substantive CSR.

As aforementioned, most studies explore the relationship between CSR compliance and external stakeholder pressures. In contrast, the relationship between internal stakeholder dynamics and CSR compliances is still not well understood. Hence, the incorporating of these dynamics provides theoretical insights for the CSR, sustainability, and corporate governance arenas.

The time is right for renewed and updated attention to the relationship between public relations (PR) and human resources (HR) departments in the context of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability. For too long, conflict between the two practice areas has obscured opportunities for collaboration which benefits organizations and stakeholders. This chapter offers theoretical underpinnings for examining an interdepartmental, cross-unit working relationship between HR and PR – and advances a vision for why it is needed now.

This study seeks to postulate a theory of psychohistory as a “think‐piece”. It develops from some earlier theoretical work on sociohistory that can model cultures that are large‐scale (e.g. societies) over the long term or small scale (e.g. corporations) over the short term. Sociohistory, as developed by Yolles and Frieden, provides a new theory to explore the possibilities of tracking and explaining social and cultural change. It offers entry to the development of a theory of psychohistory that explores the psychological basis for decision making and social action and interaction, and connects with both Jung's propositions on psychological profiling and with the popular Myers‐Briggs instruments of personality testing.

Sociohistory was developed by coupling three theoretical frameworks: the knowledge cybernetics of Maurice Yolles, the mathematical approach in extreme physical information (EPI) of Roy Frieden, and the sociocultural dynamics of Pitrin Sorokin. Knowledge cybernetics creates the vehicle for the exploration of the sociocultural dynamics that reflects the theoretical structures of Sorokin, and uses EPI as a way of fine tuning one's understanding of the qualitative and quantitative dynamics uncovered. The basic fractal nature of knowledge cybernetics is be used to extend the theory of sociohistory from sociocultural dynamics to psychosocial dynamics. Elaborating on the fractal nature of the approach, an indicative theory of psychohistory is formulated.

The theoretical basis for sociohistory is outlined and extended from sociocultural to psychosocial dynamics, and it is shown how the methodological approach can then be extended to the development of psychohistory. An agenda for further sociohistorical and psychohistorical research is also developed in this process.

Sociocultural dynamics is extended to the promise of being able to deal with social dynamics within a cultural setting. The postulated theory of psychohistory both explores social dynamics in psychological terms and is linked to the potential for developing a new personality inventory.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the under-investigated role played by different key organizational actors engaged in the practice of performance-based budgeting (PBB) (e.g. Ministry of Finance, National Audit Office, Sectoral Agencies) to explore how they influence the practice of PBB, contributing to lead the change or create resistance toward it.

The empirical evidence has been collected through a multiple case study based on semi-structured interviews and document analysis in Sweden and Finland, which have long traditions with PBB, and has been interpreted through the lens of institutional and organizational change theory.

The results show that, despite the lengthy experiences with PBB, the lack of sound dynamics across key actors makes the budgetary use of performance information limited and partial, placing the reform in a “gray area” between the complete implementation of the practice and the total resistance toward it.

The knowledge obtained from the exploratory analysis has relevant implications for understanding differences and similarities across key organizational actors and underlining their crucial role in making a change feasible. Indeed, PBB may represent a radical change even in presence of embedded performance management systems.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the drivers that induce companies to change their rules for managing product development. Most companies use a form of rule-based management approach, but surprisingly little is known about what makes companies change these rules. Furthermore, this management technology also has developed over time into different versions, but what drives firms from one version to another has only been suggested, not empirically studied.

The dynamics of the rules of five companies are analyzed over a period of more than ten years based on three rounds of interviews with 40 managers.

Previous research has assumed that the dynamics of product development rules are based on internal learning processes, and that increasingly competent management will stimulate the implementation of newer and more complex rule regimes. However, the analysis here indicates that there are different drivers, both internal and external, that cause companies to adopt new rules or modify their existing ones, such as changes in organizational structures, organizational conflicts and changes in ownership or strategy. In addition, contrary to the predictions in previous research, companies sometimes move back and forth between different generations of rules. Companies that have moved to a more flexible third generation of rules might revert to their second generation rules, or supplement their flexibility with an increased level of management control and information systems. A model is proposed to explain the relationship between the drivers of rule change and the actual dynamics of rules, incorporating two sets of moderators: organizational moderators and rule-related moderators.

The findings indicate that many factors influence the modification of rules, and that there is no simple linear progression from one generation to another. Organizational learning is one among several other factors that influences the dynamics of rules for managing product development. Further research is needed to explore the dynamic relationship between different factors, the proposed moderators and changes to rules. Lack of historical record keeping in companies puts special requirements on research concerning rules.

Companies need to consider how and why their present versions of rules have emerged, whether or not the existing rules can actually solve the challenges they face today, whether or not the rules support the intended company strategy, and what mechanisms influence their product development rules.

A great deal of research has investigated the relationship between the uses of structured rule-based approaches to manage product development, but little is known about what makes these rules change. This is the first study to uncover the multitude of drivers that stimulate change in product development rules and to suggest sets of moderators that influence the outcome.

Relative to the increasing focus on organisations’ outward communication consistency and coherency, the internal communication taking place between different organisational functions is under-explored. The study aims to address the following two research questions: What form does cross-functional communication take within organisations? How do features of the communication work climate influence the form of cross-functional communication?

The study draws on qualitative data generated from semi-structured interviews with media and marketing managers from 33 professional football organisations operating in the English Premier League.

Thematic patterns between internal communication practices and different communication climates lead to the development of a new internal organisational communications typology, comprising: Type 1: collaborative symmetrical communication (cohesive climate); Type 2: unstructured informal communication (friendly climate); and Type 3: cross-functional silos (divisive climate).

Internal organisational communication practices are deemed fundamental to organisational success, yet there remains limited empirical evidence of the form such practices take or how they interact with features of an organisation’s communication climate. The study introduces a new internal organisational communications typology to develop and extend the theory and practice of internal marketing communications.

Since the 2008 financial crisis, the financial industry is in need of innovation to increase stability and improve quality of services. The purpose of this paper is to explore internal barriers that influence the effectiveness of projects within large financial services firms focussing on potentially disruptive and radical innovations. While literature has generally focused on barriers within traditional technology and manufacturing firms, few researchers have identified barriers for these type of firms.

A framework of internal barriers was developed and validated by means of an explorative case study. Data were collected at a European bank by exploring how innovation is organized and what barriers influence effectiveness of eight innovation projects.

Six items were identified as key barrier for potentially disruptive and radical innovations (e.g. traditional risk-avoidance focus, and inertia caused by systems architecture). As such, in the sample these were more important than traditionally defined barriers such as sources of finance, and lacking exploration competences.

Based on a small number of projects within one firm, the results highlight the need for more in-depth research on the effects of barriers and how barriers can be overcome within this industry.

The results show that there is a discrepancy between the societal demand for radical change within the financial industry and the ability of large financial services firms to innovate. The study identifies which unique internal barriers hamper potentially disruptive and radical innovation in large financial services firms.