Search results

Using the backdrop of an (apparently) extended visit to the West Indies, analogies with key concerns of internal audit are drawn. An unusual and refreshing way of exploring the main themes ‐ a discussion between Bill and Jack on tour in the islands ‐ forms the debate. Explores the concepts of control, necessary procedures, fraud and corruption, supporting systems, creativity and chaos, and building a corporate control facility.

Using the backdrop of an (apparently) extended visit to the West Indies, analogies with key concerns of internal audit are drawn. An unusual and refreshing way of exploring the main themes ‐ a discussion between Bill and Jack on tour in the islands ‐ forms the debate. Explores the concepts of control, necessary procedures, fraud and corruption, supporting systems, creativity and chaos, and building a corporate control facility.

Stress damages us and our performance. It is a real part of most manager's experience and can be said to occur when significant demands exceed perceived management responsibilities and routines. Stress can be the essence of working life, and certainly need not always be damaging to us. But when it becomes excessive, it is something unwanted.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the concepts of key messages and key message integrity, and examines their viability for communication management scholars and practitioners in evaluating media relations activities. Key message integrity addresses not only what messages transfer, but also how well.

The authors analyzed 18 nonprofit organizations’ key messages and the messages’ integrity levels using content analysis on one month of their news coverage. In-depth interviews with eight of their media relations practitioners helped validate the concepts and the results.

The authors found five unique categories and functions of key messages: information concerned with dissemination, raison d’être concerned with purpose, categories concerned with positioning, resource management concerned with accounting for resources, and social relevance concerned with legitimacy. Findings also revealed varying levels of transmission and message integrity across the categories. Interviews revealed insights into challenges for communicating organizational key messages to the news media.

This study lays the foundation for additional research on key messages and key message integrity as useful metrics for communication management scholars and practitioners.

Abnormal behaviors such as rework, backlog, changes and claims generated by project organizations are unavoidable in complex projects. When abnormal behaviors emerge, the previously normal state of interactions between organizations will be altered to some extent. However, previous studies have ignored the associations and interactions between organizations in the context of abnormal organizational behaviors (AOBs), making this challenging to cope with AOBs. As a result, the objective of this paper is to explore how to reduce AOBs in complex projects at the organizational level from a network perspective.

To overcome the inherent limitations of a single case study, this research integrated two data collection methods: questionnaire survey and expert scoring method. The questionnaire survey captured the universal data on the influence possibility of AOBs between complex project organizations and the expert scoring method got the influence probability scores of AOBs between organizations in the case. Using these data, four organizational influence network models of AOBs based on a case were developed to demonstrate how to destroy AOBs networks in complex projects using network attack theory (NAT).

First, the findings show that controlling AOBs generated by key organizations preferentially and improving the ability of key organizations can weaken AOBs network, enabling more effective coping strategies. Second, the owners, government, material suppliers and designers are identified as key organizations across all four influence networks of AOBs. Third, change and claim behaviors are more manageable from the organizational level.

Project managers can target specific organizations for intervention, weaken the AOBs network by applying NAT and achieve better project outcomes through coping strategies. Additionally, by taking a network perspective, this research provides a novel approach to comprehending the associations and interactions between organizations in the context of complex projects.

This paper proposes a new approach to investigating AOBs in complex projects by simultaneously examining rework, backlog, change and claim. Leveraging NAT as a novel tool for managing the harmful effects of influence networks, this study extends the knowledge body in the field of organizational behavior (OB) management and complex project management.

The purpose of this study is to provide more insight in the ways key users act as knowledge managers and boundary spanners during the enterprise resource planning (ERP) system usage phase. Despite the recognized importance of key users during the implementation phase of an ERP system, little is known about their role in the ERP usage phase.

To provide rich insight in the boundary-spanning mechanisms utilized by key users to share knowledge, a qualitative approach was applied. In this study, “abductive” theme coding for 58 interviews with key users, end-users and managers has been used. This paper found six mechanisms and characterized them as “crossing” structural, social or cognitive boundaries.

Six boundary-spanning mechanisms have been distinguished which have been applied by key users to overcome several knowledge management issues. Subsequently, these mechanisms lead to a model which describes three different roles that key users may fulfill to efficiently share and transfer knowledge during the ERP usage phase.

Knowledge barriers during an ERP implementation and their accompanying six boundary-crossing mechanisms have been distinguished.

The recognition of the essential role that key users can fulfill during the usage phase of an ERP system is an important implication. Management has to take into account that tasks and responsibilities of key users have to be clear from the start and they may cautiously select employees who are suited to become key users.

The main contribution is the importance of the impact of key users on the effectivity of knowledge management during the ERP usage phase.

This paper aims to look at the implementation of project-funded research governance and its potential to induce organisational learning on responsible research and innovation (RRI). This paper analysed what types of organisational learning and change can take place within organisations of an Europe-funded project and to what extent. This paper examined whether and how change occurs and how it is shaped and co-produced with other orderings.

The paper is based on materials and evidence collected while working on the internal evaluation of a Horizon 2020-funded project. Analysis of the results of the mixed methods evaluation design was used to characterise occurrences of organisational learning and change.

The authors identified different forms of learning (single-loop learning, double-loop learning, reflexive and reflective learning and situational learning). The extent of learning that could lead to long-lasting organisational change was limited. This was due to the project-based and organisational design, the key-based definition of RRI and the indeterminacy of what constitutes learning and change – both at the level of funding and performing the project. For organisational change to occur, the authors argue for governance mechanisms based on reflexive learning that consider a range of structural conditions and measures.

Organisational learning plays an important role in change processes, which has so far been given too little consideration concerning the governance and implementation of RRI through project-based funding. The authors argue for a restructuring of governance and funding mechanisms to create more space for reflexivity and learning.

Key account management (KAM) programmes are a way for companies to develop existing relationships and increase sales, thus being proactive and searching for opportunities (which is often expected of KAM). It is also a way to meet changing customer demands arising from changes in purchasing strategy, buyers' mergers and acquisitions and the search for synergies in order to reduce costs. The purpose of this article is to analyse different key account management programmes on how they manage the sales process complexity and customer expectations.

The paper draws on qualitative data collected during a field study of ABB and six of their major customers, based on annual or biannual interviews with 50 individuals within ABB from 1996 to 2006 and three to ten individuals from each of the customers. Interviewees included corporate managers, key account managers and sales personnel/project managers. The customers involved in the study belonged to mining, automotive, process equipment manufacture, building technology, energy production and telecommunication sectors.

In this study three different programmes are identified and analysed: the proactive programme – which is driven by sales opportunity; the reactive programme – which is driven by customer demands; and the organisation‐based programme – which is driven by the belief in customer‐centric organisational units.

The paper identifies sales aspects (complexities) of KAM programmes that are handled in different ways by different types of programmes.

With an empirical base the paper provides a basis for understanding the reasons behind the establishment of several KAM programmes in the same corporation.

The central messages of the article are threefold. First, a summary of research testing the perception that cross‐functional organization designs provide key advantages and differentiators for firms in today's hypercompetitive business climate. Second, includes a multifaceted “body of evidence” (e.g. multiple data sources, a range of industries, and various levels of management). Third, pragmatic recommendations regarding how to advance elusive cross‐functional organization design constructs, which today's executives are increasingly seeking to implement.

The article addresses several key questions – are organizations today more like cross‐functional “symphonies” or do they still resemble the traditional, functional, manufacturing model? Are cross‐functional organizations really more effective than functional organizations? And, if cross‐functional organizations are more effective, why aren't they more prevalent? To answer these questions, information from three key sources was assembled to test a body of evidence: first, a Business Schools Programs Review: a comparison of “functional” versus “cross‐functional” business school programs, that included 61 schools offering Masters of Business Administration degrees, located across the USA; second, a scan of the business literature available from five key online sources; and third, a management survey that included 212 total respondents from 37 different industries.

The evidence presented supports five key conclusions: “Functionality” is still the prevailing organization design. Business schools are not functionally focused, but corporate training is. Functionality dominates the management literature. More managers manage functionally. Cross‐functional organizations appear to have several performance advantages over functional organizations.

The key limitation of the current research, and implication for future research, is that cross‐functional and functional organizational financial performance comparisons were not conducted. Financial performance comparisons should be addressed by future research.

The article provides a set of 12 pragmatic recommendations regarding how to implement cross‐functional organization design structures.

The content of the article is useful to executives and managers for several reasons, including: pragmatic recommendations regarding how to implement cross‐functional organization design structures, which today's executives are increasingly seeking to employ. Multifaceted evidence highlighting the differences between functional and cross‐functional structures. Research confirming the assumption that cross‐functional organization designs provide a key differentiator for firms in today's hypercompetitive business climate. Broad application to companies across multiple industries. An overview of available organization design literature and case examples.

This study deals with the results of an investigation to recognize and prioritize key and critical success factors to achieve predetermined goals in strategic plans of SAIPA Press Co., producer of Automobile parts.

In this study, Sirus and Moghaddam model, 2007, is used to identify critical success factors. also, a descriptive statistical method is used to analyze population data, and Friedman method to answer the questions

Recognition the 24 key success factors, priority of them, being as the critical success factors or core competencies are the results of this research.

Key success factors determine those performance fields that manager should notice permanently. These factors have most importance in executing this strategy

Key factors concepts for success is not a new revolution in occupation. These concepts were suggested by Ronald Daniel in 1960s. But nowadays, these concepts and approaches become more powerful. The most successful organizations in new millennium are those that from one hand have brilliant strategic views and from the other hand have guidelines and tactics to achieve success Key success goals and factors are both necessary to conduct organization to its mission. Key success factors make goals powerful directly and make mission powerful indirectly.