Search results

The impact of the e-globalization combined with staggering costs for R & D across industries has resulted in the call for new approach to innovation where openness and interconnectivity is the role. This new approach is designated as “open innovation”. The new paradigm calls for the sharing of knowledge and resources in conducting innovation activities within and among organizations. As such, one needs to re-orient the structure of the organization to meet these new requirements. On the conceptual level, it becomes a significant undertake to try to grasp how our traditional understanding of the organization can be fitted within the requirements of the open innovation when the environment of the e-globalization is taken in consideration. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the question of how organization structure theories can be coupled to the open innovation paradigm. Out of that analysis the authors propose a new theoretical framework of organizational analysis that takes both the classical knowledge and the new economic context of e-globalization.

The contemporary period is recognized by the term “new economy”, as a replacement for the “old economy”. Another term of importance is “globalization”, which is coupled to the issue of economy categorization. Humanity launched the modern age of globalization some decades ago, but we are going through a new type of globalization, e-globalization. In the e-globalization, processes are induced basically by the impact of the new tools of communication and information technologies. These dynamic processes have forced a re-thinking of the traditional innovation practices. In the paper, the authors reflect on the changes in relation to the traditional knowledge about organization structure, using a deductive approach and textual analysis and relate that to the requirements of an open innovation paradigm. In the process, the authors introduce the basics of the “theory of internetisation dynamics” as a new potential organizational theoretical framework.

From the analysis, it was found that some traditional concepts about organization structure and organizing mechanism theories are responsive to the needs of the open paradigm settings while other theories are not. However, each of these is able to contribute to one of the five components of the theory of internetisation dynamics.

The authors argue that by using the correct framework for the analysis of the organizational structure, one can propose a set of strategic steps which would help the companies to re-structure. That would save time and effort for policy-makers and managers of firms, as well as researchers active in this field of organization and organizing processes, who are focused on the open innovation transformation requirements of the firms. Running this analysis would add some input into organizational re-orientation in troubled sectors such as in pharmaceutical industries.

On many occasions, organizational science research has been referred to as fragmented and disjointed, resulting in a literature that is, in the opinion of many, difficult to navigate and comprehend. One potential explanation is that scholars have failed to comprehend that organizations are complex and intricate systems. In order to move us past this morass, we recommend that researchers extend beyond traditional rational, mechanistic, and variable-centered approaches to research and integrate a more advantageous pattern-oriented approach within their research program. Pattern-oriented methods approximate real-life phenomena by adopting a holistic, integrative approach to research wherein individual- and organizational-systems are viewed as non-decomposable organized wholes. We argue that the pattern-oriented approach has the potential to overcome a number of breakdowns faced by alternate approaches, while offering a novel and more representative lens from which to view organizational- and HRM-related issues. The proposed incorporation of the pattern-oriented approach is framed within a review and evaluation of current approaches to organizational research and is supplemented with a discussion of methodological and theoretical implications as well as potential applications of the pattern-oriented approach.

The progress of women in academe is addressed, as well as their participation in the workforce generally, and management positions in particular. Women themselves may be affected by society′s stereotypes of themselves and the value of their work, and the culture in organizations and society has been working against women as much as it has been working for them.

The purpose of the paper is to contribute to further advancing of IMP as a research field by setting up and starting a theoretical conversation between system theory and the IMP.

The approach is based on a narrative literature study and conceptual research.

The authors find that system theory and cybernetics can be regarded as important sources of inspiration for early IMP research. The authors identify three specific theoretical “puzzles” in system theory that may serve as useful topics for discussion between system theorists and IMP researchers.

Only a handful of papers have touched upon the relationship between system theory and IMP before. This paper combines a narrative, historical analysis of this relationship with developing specific suggestions for using system theory as a vehicle for further advancement of IMP research.

This paper argues that the search for a theory of public budgeting has proceeded mainly on assumptions of the rationalist paradigm. This approach yielded mostly technical explanations for budgeting phenomena. These explanations fail to capture the complexities of public budgeting and yield incomplete theories. Without attempting to break new ground, the authors argue that budgeting theory should be guided by heuristic concepts borrowed from open systems theory. This offers greater potential for reconciling the rational and non-rational aspects of budgeting and permits constructive synthesis of insights from extant theories of budgeting without rejecting the rationalist paradigm. This approach views budgeting as only one of the complex functions governments perform to cope with their environment and to maintain stability.

For several decades researchers have attempted to explain the process of organization growth and development. The various models devised can be divided into roughly two categories: those which emphasize nature, and those emphasizing nurture as the cause for change. The Dynamic System Planning Model is described, which borrows from both traditions, in particular from open systems theory and from the individual learning models. Issues outlined in this model are the frequently mentioned concerns of presidents of small changing firms. Although based in open system theory, it translates readily into practical application in day‐to‐day management, as interviews with presidents attest.

This introductory chapter elaborates some of the key ideas which shaped the concept of this book. The overriding idea is that autopoiesis theory has the potential to provide a unifying framework for the study of organizational phenomena in the 21st century. Although organization studies have recently had no shortage of new paradigms and approaches — such as postmodernism, phenomenology, ethnomethodology, reflexivity, and critical theory — the field seems to be expanding in ways that make it increasingly difficult to comprehend, especially for the uninitiated.

The purpose of this paper is to argue that it is time for change in the way the paper teach, theories and practice accounting. Traditional accounting practice constructs the identity of the accountable entity as purely self-interested. Yet, there is evidence that firms do engage in broader activities. This paper aims to explain and illustrate that there are groups of firms that engage in socially responsible activities, yet their accounting systems still assume autopoietic behavior. Accounting should resonate with social expectations, but at present it does not.

Literature concerning theories of biological autopoiesis and social equivalents are reviewed. They are related to accounting practices, and to concepts of open and closed systems. The theories are related to survey results of socially responsible activities practiced by firms. National surveys undertaken in New Zealand at three-year intervals are the basis of the empirical content of the paper.

There is evidence that firms behave socially and environmentally responsibly. Yet accounting practice does not encourage such behaviour. Accounting practice has to be able to construct the identity of the accountable entity so that it pursues more than its own self-interest, and resonate with societal expectations.

The paper is unconventional. It challenges extant practice. Its theoretical content may not appeal to many traditional accountants.

The theory and empirics are original. The theory of autopoiesis is illustrated through survey evidence of business practices.

The purpose of this paper is to argue that the epistemology of the strategic literature is dominated by a Modernist (scientific) and Cybernetic system approach and that other epistemological options especially critical management studies and complex self‐adapting systems, might provide greater insight for strategic thinking.

An extensive review of the literature was undertaken.

The current dominant way of thinking about management is based on closed system notions of causality in which good enough long‐term prediction is possible. The process PLOC depends totally on this foundation. If a system's long‐term behaviour is unpredictable, then using the PLOC model is questionable. In the current turbulent business environment long‐term prediction may not be possible.

The life expectancy of a firm is only 40 years. Using closed system concepts to drive businesses to the equilibrium of a business plan may be killing the business, because a complex self‐adapting system in equilibrium is dead.

Very little work, especially in strategy has been done outside the Modernist paradigm. This paper explores the possibility of incorporating open system ideas into a strategic methodology.