Search results

The purpose of this article is to show how work-teams are represented and work in non-profit organizations. From a theoretical point of view, the concepts of macro-team and micro-team, as well as their dynamics rooted in the entrepreneurial world have been discussed.

Seven socially enterprising organizations have been studied through semi-structured individual and collective interviews with managers, technicians with and without supervisory functions and workers. Data discussed here underwent an inductive analysis based on the procedures of grounded theory.

Data analysis supported the outlining of the interviewees’ representations of their belonging to the macro-team and of the working of micro-teams. There seem to be no significant differences between the way teams work in these organizations and in profit-making organizations. However, in the organizations we have analyzed, autonomous planning of activities as a mechanism of work organization and assertiveness as a fundamental communication tool between members stand out.

This research did not include the systematic observation of work teams in the field. As such, reliability may be somehow compromised due to the use of the individual and group interview as the single data collection technique.

The outline of representations that we have designed points to a set of dimensions that shows, with some reliability, how to build a sense of belonging to the macro-team among the workers of this type of organization. It also clarifies the difference between behaviors that foster effective and ineffective micro-teams. This allows action over the latter to potentiate the first and eventually eliminate the second.

Considering the scarce research about team-work in non-profit organizations, this study offers a groundbreaking reflection. Further ahead, one may establish a set of differences and similarities between effective macro and micro-teams in different economic sectors. This way, this study may contribute to more encompassing organizational theories focused on the representations about and the functioning of macro and micro-teams.

Ford and Sullivan's piece makes a unique contribution to entrepreneurship studies, with the greatest being their multi-level, “bottom-up” theorizing about the process. These authors’ focus is limited to one level during each temporal phase. To be consistent with enactment theory, this process should address the recursive nature between the micro (individual) and macro (team and venture) levels throughout the entrepreneurship process. Specifically, the individual level is relevant throughout the process. This commentary offers three mechanisms to link the micro and macro levels: situational, action formation, and transformation. The current work is not intended to diminish Ford and Sullivan's work; indeed, multi-level theorizing is messy and theirs is an ambitious first step.

In the past few years a considerable amount of research knowledge regarding organizational change and concurrent engineering (CE) has been accumulated. Suggests that organizational growth provides a framework for the emergence of CE techniques. Organizational growth demands CE and it is important to consider how changes to the organizational structure can best enhance the implementation of CE principles.

“Multi-Level Issues in Creativity and Innovation” is Volume 7 of Research in Multi-Level Issues, an annual series that provides an outlet for the discussion of multi-level problems and solutions across a variety of fields of study. Using a scientific debate format of a key scholarly essay followed by two commentaries and a rebuttal, we present, in this series, theoretical work, significant empirical studies, methodological developments, analytical techniques, and philosophical treatments to advance the field of multi-level studies, regardless of disciplinary perspective.

Explores the drivers behind successful business process re‐engineering (BPR). Examines Caterpillar Inc, located in Peoria, Illinois, USA, using data collected over a four‐year period, beginning in 1992. Reveals positive outcomes which can be directly tied to the deployment of the business process simplification and improvement (BSP/I) methodology. BPS/I provides a systematic methodology for analysis, design and implementation of re‐engineering principles. In addition, it provides the environment to help its people generate creative solutions to critical business problems. Examines the link between the steps of BPS/I and the theoretical phases of the problem‐solving process. Also explores the link between BPS/I and Couger’s variant model of creative problem solving. Notes creative opportunities available to Caterpillar as a result of the identification of this link.