Search results

Standard frameworks for project risk management (RM) are currently mostly focussed on single-firm organizations, whereas in practice, construction project RM involves multiple organizations. The purpose of this paper is to identify and systematically maps practical processes that bridge the gap between single-organizational RM standards and multi-organizational RM (MORM) needs.

This case study covers three large construction management (CM) projects in Finland. The 35 interviews with project owners, project management consultants, design groups, and contractors identify the participants’ positions on RM roles, integration within organizations, and further development requests.

Most (16 of 21) of the identified RM practices are multi-organizational; i.e. they involve two or more organizations. Compared to single-organizational standards, MORM practices involve less emphasis on detailed risk analysis processes but highlight both participant selection and managing collaborative performance.

The research results are attached to Finnish CM projects but may be applicable to other types of collaboration-based construction projects, such as alliances and public-private partnerships. The efficiency of the MORM model requires further evaluation in future research.

A model for MORM is a systematic presentation of the research results. The model provides guidance for efficiently setting up MORM processes and for refining multi-organizational research.

The multi-organizational interfaces of RM processes are mainly overlooked in the current literature, standards, and frameworks. This research provides a rare explication of parallel MORM processes.

The paper seeks to explain how competitive intelligence officers can participate more fully in strategy formulation and implementation, and how they can contribute to the strategic intelligence process.

The paper presents a review of the literature and the development of a strategic marketing intelligence and multi‐organisational resilience framework.

Competitive intelligence officers can contribute more fully to the strategic intelligence process and help establish an intelligence culture that incorporates counter‐intelligence. By adopting a broader understanding of what strategic marketing represents, marketing managers can devise new approaches to managing customer relationships and can develop international/global brand positioning strategies that when implemented counter the actions of legitimate competitors and new entrants, and disrupt the actions of counterfeiters and fraudsters.

A study can be undertaken to establish how a multi‐organisational resilience value system evolves within an organisation, and how trust and credibility among competitive intelligence professionals can be developed.

Academics and practitioners can collaborate in order to establish how an intelligence culture can be created within an organisation. Furthermore, they can also collaborate in establishing how a proactive approach to risk assessment can underpin scenario analysis and planning and aid the strategic decision‐making process.

A number of insights are provided into how competitive intelligence officers contribute to the development of a multi‐organisational resilience value system that is underpinned by an intelligence culture.

The purpose of this paper is to present a visualization method developed as a result of an observed need to capture the organizational arrangements of a complex engineering service enterprise. The focal case study is between a public sector client and private sector provider where multiple organizations contribute resource to create value. This visualization can assist client and provider stakeholders to take a holistic perspective of the purpose and management of their enterprise, highlighting the complexity of value co‐creation in service enterprises and the interdependencies between organizational units.

Development of the Enterprise Image has drawn on research within the service, organizational and individual cognition literatures. Data were obtained from an in‐depth Defence sector case study representing diverse interactions within client and provider communities. The case focused on a fast‐jet aircraft availability contract, where the public sector client outsourced through‐life support activities to a set of private sector providers. Preliminary testing of the validity and utility of the image was conducted by presentations to single and mixed communities of clients and providers involved in value co‐creation.

The paper proposes a method of pictorially representing a complex alliance, called an “Enterprise Image”. The work provides empirically based insight into the management processes of a complex, multi‐organizational service enterprise, where little or no enterprise level management had been in evidence. The Enterprise Image appeared to have the effect of raising questions and conversations about how the overall enterprise might be managed and how ongoing service improvement might be achieved.

In this research the Enterprise Image was drawn by researchers – ongoing research aims to design a method that helps clients and providers co‐create their own Enterprise Image. From current findings the implication of this research will be to encourage enterprise management of ongoing improvement in multi‐organisational service enterprises.

Models and representations for understanding the delivery of value are mostly provider and product focused, despite the recognition in a servitised environment of the complex interactions with client organizations. This paper presents a methodology for visually representing value co‐creation in complex service enterprises where the service includes significant client resource involvement.

We explore a case example of hybridity between a large worker-owned cooperative and a union through three lenses: organizational forms, multiple institutional logics, and organizational identity. We delineate three types of organizational hybridity: (1) stretching an existing organizational form; (2) creating a new organizational form; and (3) and retaining multiple discrete organizational forms in a common venture. The cooperative–union hybrid shares members from the two contributing organizations, and so can be classified as a matrix sub-form of multi-organizational hybridity. This study describes how the coop-union hybrid manages the multiple logics and identities retained from both contributing organizations. It considers the hazards of combining these logics and identities, and offers some suggestions on how to avoid potential difficulties. Finally, given the complexity and inefficiencies of the matrix form, we explore whether matrix hybridity is a transitional or permanent form in this particular instance of a cooperative–union venture.

Introduces a decision framework for making strategic competitive choices beyond the product‐brand, business unit, or corporate levels of analysis. It adds a fourth dimension: the multi‐organizational strategic competitive unit which is responsible for planning and implementing competitive strategy in the global marketplace. Long‐range competitive success can no longer be achieved by a single company, and in recent years, the relevant competitive unit has shifted from the company to the larger competitive system of companies aligned in strategic collaborations for competitive advantage. For example, no longer is competition between one auto assembler and another, but between Toyota and its Keiretsu programme of global networking and strategic alliances with suppliers and other competitors against Ford and General Motors and their relative commitment to the more narrowly focused corporate competitive unit.

Learning and knowledge management (KM) are important though complex elements of multi‐organisational collaborations. Leadership is often considered to be critical in shaping the outcomes of effective collaboration, but what particular form should this take to tackle the particular challenges faced by learning and KM? To what extent do any of the existing models and theories of leadership address learning and KM perspectives? What are the key issues that demand the attention of leaders and leadership processes? This paper draws on a substantial body of disparate and often unconnected literature to explore these complex and under‐researched questions of theoretical and practical enquiry in a public sector context. It concludes with an assessment of the main leadership challenges, the potential of different leadership approaches and some suggestions as to future areas of research.

The New Zealand Benchmarking Club (NZBC), a multi‐organisational network, aimed to improve the performance of member organisations through best practice benchmarking. The purpose of this paper is to critique the NZBC self‐assessment process, report the scores for self‐assessments from 2000‐2002, and present an analysis of the 2001 self‐assessment data.

A questionnaire measured the improvement rate of NZBC organisations through annual self‐assessments against the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence (CPE). Training was provided for facilitators in each organisation, who supported teams of four to six persons who completed the self‐assessment. Correlation coefficients of pairs of CPE categories and items were used to identify strong relationships between them.

Self‐assessment data from 2001 identified 57 strong relationships between different CPE categories and items. The strongest correlation identified (0.94) among CPE items was found between “customer focused results” and “financial and market results”. Acting on the self‐assessment results, management initiatives were implemented and scores in 2002 showed significant improvements over 2001.

Future research involves case studies and longitudinal studies of annual data to identify possible causes of the strong relationships found.

Results indicate the benefit organisations obtain from sharing best practices, resources, and self‐assessment experiences. The practices required for effective administration of self‐assessment in a network are given.

An example of self‐assessment in a multi‐organisational network, and how it was managed. Of interest to organisations that are in an existing network, or wish to create a similar network. No studies of self‐assessment in a network were found in the literature.

The purpose of this paper is to explore a manufacturer's strategy to coordinate efforts of multiple suppliers' involvement in the product development process. The paper also proposes critical factors in determining the appropriate coordination strategy.

Based on the synthesis of the literature and relevant theories, a typology of coordination strategies is developed. Propositions are developed pertaining to the performance implications of the coordination strategies and the key determinants of the effectiveness of the coordination strategies.

Four ideal types of coordination strategies are: centralized‐programming, centralized‐feedback, decentralized‐programming, and decentralized‐feedback. Prior research and recently reported industry examples indicate that a manufacturer's coordination with multiple suppliers varies in terms of the information‐processing structure and the locus of control. The effectiveness of a manufacturer's coordination strategies is influenced by the extent of component modularity, product complexity, technology uncertainty, and the technical capability of suppliers.

The four coordination strategies involve trade‐offs on certain performance dimensions. Decentralized‐programming promotes process efficiency, while centralized‐feedback facilitates problem solving. Centralized‐programming favors integrative product design, while decentralized‐feedback favors innovation from supplier's technical expertise.

While research on supplier involvement in product development has primarily focused on a single supplier's integration in the process, this paper extends understanding of multi‐organizational coordination by applying information‐processing decision‐making theories to the product development context.

This chapter seeks to address questions related to the convergence among alternative agrifood movements as well as the convergence between alternative and conventional practices with a focus on local movements. We reconstruct the common conflation of the alternative/conventional binary into a multidimensional measure that recognizes the complex interactions of economic, political, social, and cultural elements in the construction of convention, alterity, and opposition. We also consider several forms of possible convergence: multi-organizational, multi-sectoral (among elements of the agrifood system), multidimensional (among political, economic, cultural, and social practices), and multilevel or scale (hierarchy of spatially embedded governance units). These matters are empirically examined by focusing on the rapidly growing Food Policy Council (FPC) movement in North America. We address the question of this movement’s diffusion, consider its variable linkages between state and civil society, and examine the substantive practices and framings in which the movement has been engaged. While we find that most FPC practices are probably vulnerable to conventionalization, the movement’s most valuable function may be its modular form. That form functions as an incubator of multi-organizational and multi-sectoral experimental practices in a multiplicity of local environments. Further, ties between FPCs provide a networking mechanism for transmitting information about the successes and failures of those experiments among hundreds of locales and regions. Finally, the discourse among the FPC leadership amplifies values favoring the democratization of food, and articulates beliefs in the right to food as well as notions of food citizenship and sovereignty.

This chapter examines the case studies in this volume with a focus on concepts and methods used in the study of multi-organization networks and partnerships, motivations to join in multi-party collaboration, how multi-organization collaborations organized and managed, what kinds of value are created by collaborations, and the role of leadership therein.

A comparative look at four vertical networks (in health care and education); two “issue” networks/partnerships (sustainable seafood and water use); and the roles of government in collaboration in horizontal, vertical, and issue-based arrangements.

The chapter describes “lessons” learned about building both sustainability and collaborative capabilities in and across partnering organizations and about improving partnership structures, processes, and results.

The chapter sums and synthesizes the volume’s contributions.