Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine deliberation in the context of organizational change and introduce an organizational jury as a change facilitator.

The research is based on an empirical study of four organizational juries that were organized by a non-profit organization in Finland. The main data of the study consist of a survey that the juries’ participants filled in. The data are triangulated with observations of jury meetings and relevant documents including pre-jury information package, jury presentations and juries’ proposals. In the analysis, the paper adopts deliberative democracy criteria to assess the inclusiveness, authenticity and consequentiality of the deliberative process.

The research findings suggest that the juries increased the inclusiveness of decision making and the quality of deliberation about the changes among the employees. The results indicate that juries facilitated the change process by providing a means for information sharing and building a shared understanding among the stakeholders. The main weakness of the juries was their low consequentiality.

Deliberative jury method provides a participative way to build and preserve socially shared meanings in an organizational change context. However, the studies on the use of deliberative forums in the organizational context are still scarce. Thus, the study provides an important addition to the existing research literature.

This chapter examines the processes by which a group's racial composition affects its performance and the social-cognitive tendencies of its individual members. Drawing on published and unpublished experiments regarding group composition and interracial interaction, this review demonstrates that the information exchange perspective on diversity – in which demographic heterogeneity is expected to translate into informational heterogeneity – is more complicated than some have suggested, and is not wholly responsible for the positive performance effects of racial diversity. Indeed, many of the benefits of diversity can be attributed to the impact of heterogeneous settings on White individuals, as well as to motivational and other non-informational processes.

This paper aims to show that evolutionary game theory not only provides a general and unified theory of political philosophy and strategic management theories but also a positive theory of interactive behavior.

This study suggests a way of the evolutionary game-theoretical model.

The model presented in this paper demonstrates coopetition is derived from balance points in multi-actor games. As the political–philosophical address of those strategic games will of all becomes convention in this balance point at which common knowledge occurs global optimum.

This study explores the connections between several streams in philosophy and strategic management. What does a particular philosophy contribute to strategic management with respect to game theory? When addressing this question in historical or exploratory terms, or in a combination of both, the end result is similar: particular philosophical issues, properly explained, are discussed in relation to important questions in strategic management.

What are the psychological and behavioral underpinnings of strategic decisions of this kind? What type of cognitive frames and managerial mental models, such as the game-theoretical model, might enable or hinder the integration of real-world problems in strategic decision-making?

What explains the evolution of such mental models, as well as the development of philosophical ideas, in informing the origins? How does the evolution of social and political contexts influence change in the cognitive and behavioral underpinnings of strategic decision-making?

This study highlights the overt power of strategic management ideas – competition, cooperation and coopetition – which have historically been built on the foundations of organizational theory, while also underlying the potential of philosophies, collective wisdom and Condorcet’s jury theorem and Rousseau’s (1998) correctness theory in games of evaluation. This study investigates whether the many produce better decisions than the wise few.

Despite the emphasis on contemporary historical case studies in groupthink research, Janis believed that examining decision‐making processes recorded in antiquity was also relevant. However, neither Janis nor other groupthink researchers have adequately explored the model among decision‐making bodies described in earlier history. The current paper aims to begin to fill this gap by analyzing the judicial and legislative body of ancient Israel, known as the “Sanhedrin,” in the context of Janis's groupthink model.

The authors focus on classic Jewish rabbinic sources such as the Mishna, Talmud, and writings of Maimonides, exploring the functioning of the Sanhedrin, the authoritative body of ancient Israel, in the context of Irving Janis's groupthink model.

The authors highlight the insightful ways the Sanhedrin's members may have avoided groupthink and the symptoms of defective decision‐making that have plagued other groups.

The authors' analysis enables them to further understand the rationale behind many of the Sanhedrin's unique regulations, granting insight into an important and authoritative ancient group.

This analysis of the Sanhedrin's procedures also highlights multiple practical ways that Janis's ideas and prescriptions may be implemented by juries, modern day managers, and organizational bodies.

The authors are the first to explore the functioning of the Sanhedrin in the context of the groupthink model, highlighting the insightful ways its members may have avoided the symptoms of defective decision‐making that have plagued other groups. Their approach should be of interest to researchers and theorists in both the fields of management and history. Importantly, they include practical application relevant to the science of modern organizational behavior.

Scholars have shown that organizations active in social movements are important because they carry out a number of critical tasks such as recruitment, coordination, and sustained contention. However, these accounts do not explain how a number of recent movements using the tactic of occupation and featuring a seemingly minimal formal organizational structure nevertheless engaged in a number of critical organizational tasks. This paper draws from in-depth ethnographic research on the Occupy Wall Street movement in New York City and finds that the movement’s sustained occupation of Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan carried out four critical functions: messaging, recruitment, building commitment, and connecting participants to each other. These findings move past a general overemphasis in the literature on social movements on organizational structure, and instead point toward the utility of a perspective that accounts for the role of nonorganizational factors in the accomplishment of fundamental movement tasks.

Building on sociological research that examines the allocation of rewards in peer evaluations, we argue that the recognition of cultural producers’ work varies with their status and social distance from the audience members who evaluate them. We study the influence of these two mechanisms within the context of the Norwegian advertising industry. Specifically, we looked at how cultural producers’ status and social distance from jury members affect their chances of being honored in “The Silver Tag” – one of the main digital advertising award contests in Norway – during the period 2003–2010. While our findings provide support for status-based rewards allocation, the positive effects of status may be more circumscribed than previously thought. When accounting for the existence of previous connections between audience members and cultural producers, we find that cultural producers are more or less likely to receive an accolade depending on their degree of separation from the audience members. By exposing network-based determinants of consecrating decisions, and suggesting that the positive effects of status may be more circumscribed than previously thought, our findings shed important light on the social foundations of evaluation and, more broadly, the mechanisms of reward allocation in cultural fields.

This paper aims to argue that utilising foresight becomes a more useful tool to organisational management, if the innovative technique of “creative competition” is applied. In an empirical analysis, it seeks to show how the technique of creative competition was used in a scenario‐project. The case study shows how and why the technique of creative competition “worked”. These findings will then be used to explore the broader application of creative competition in organisational foresight.

The study first elaborates theoretically on the difference between “forecast” and “foresight” and explores how the addition of the organisational dimension to these terms changes their meanings. It then focuses on the organisation that commissioned the study – Rijkswaterstaat – and describes its history with respect to exploring the future and certain other relevant contextual elements of the case study, such as how the project was organised. After that, it conceptualises the RWS2020 project as an example of using “organisational foresight” and discusses the concept of “creative competition” as a means of bringing “organisation” and “foresight” closer together. The paper then describes what creative competition was used in the case, how it worked in the case study, and how “the game” of creative competition was played. It formulates conclusions on the basis of this case study and then reflects on the findings.

Application of creative competition adds to the integration of foresight in organizational management and organizational change. It supports a more future orientedness in strategic management. Further analysis of other cases is needed to further strengthen theory about application of the method of creative competition.

The technique of creative competition is relatively new and has not been theorized as yet. Organizational foresight has been used as a concept, but has hardly been theorized and empirically tested as well. The paper does both, in an exploratory way. It provides interesting insight into the working of organizational foresight for both academics and practitioners, and identifies strategic choices for managers conducting organizational foresight studies with or without the use of creative competition.

A sample of capital trials in North Carolina was analyzed to determine the impact on death sentencing of introducing mitigators related to diminished capacity on behalf of defendants. The results show that mitigators of this type were frequently submitted to the jury for consideration, and if accepted, the chances of a defendant being sentenced to death were diminished. However, when these mitigators were submitted but not accepted, the defendant's likelihood of receiving a death sentence was substantially escalated. These findings suggest a need for attorneys to carefully weigh the advantages and disadvantages of presenting diminished capacity mitigators in capital trials, and if choosing to do so, the absolute necessity of convincing the jury of their validity.

In a process termed “organizational centrifugalism,” this chapter describes how avant-garde artists sought new, alternative organizational spaces for innovations in the visual arts from the late nineteenth century through the early twentieth century and how new alternative marketspaces co-evolved with these new organizational spaces. Organizational centrifugalism begins with the denouement of the state-run Salon and Academy in the mid-nineteenth century; the rise of the dealer-critic system and other, non-salon alternative exhibition spaces of French Impressionism in the latter half of the nineteenth century; and through many new organizational spaces associated with Modernism such as formal artists groups, museums, great exhibitions, schools of art, and Modernist art itself. The ultimate effect of organizational centrifugalism is drawing avant-garde art closer to the public and eventually the masses. Excessive organizational centrifugalism, however, can be dangerous to the avant-garde art.