Search results

The purpose of this paper is to propose and tests a model that plant managers can use to develop cross-functional strategic consensus between purchasing, production, and logistics. The mechanisms studied are grounded in Organizational Information Processing Theory.

The model is tested using a cross-sectional survey of 120 manufacturing facilities. Path Analysis is used to determine the strength of the relationships and the model fit.

The mechanisms studied have a positive effect on the level of cross-functional strategic consensus. Some mechanisms have an effect on consensus on goals, while others have an effect on consensus on priorities. The results suggest that a plant manager must implement these mechanisms in combination to achieve the best result.

The survey respondents are all from US manufacturing facilities. Although reasonably representative of the US population of manufacturing firms, results of a similar study in other countries would further refine the knowledge concerning the effects of the mechanisms on developing strategic consensus at the operating level.

The results of this paper provide plant managers with guidance regarding the mechanisms that can enhance cross-functional strategic consensus. In a hypercompetitive and dynamic environment, these mechanisms can help the Plant Manager create a streamlined and efficient operation.

This paper presents practitioners with mechanisms that can promote consensus between key supply chain departments. The results highlight the need to implement combinations of mechanisms in order to address both dimensions of strategic consensus. For academics, it provides an empirical test of antecedents to strategic consensus at the operational level.

The paper aims to explore how managers change their strategic view so that they come with a better understanding of the strategy. It uses two proxies for such understanding: balance in beliefs (taken from performance measurement system literature) and consensus on strategic priorities (taken from strategic literature).

A longitudinal study is conducted in a financial institution during a strategic change communicated through a tailor‐made balanced scorecard (BSC). The changes are measured in the degree of understanding experienced by a set of 45 middle managers in each of the two phases in which the BSC implementation has been divided. The paper tests to what extent as the BSC implementation progresses there is a balancing in users' beliefs, an increase in consensus and alignment of managers' priorities; and finally, whether or not those proxies of managers' understanding are interchangeable.

Results show that the implementation of this BSC brought about a change in managers' beliefs by increasing the importance given to measures located in the lower BSC perspectives (called balancing effect), as well as an increase in the degree of consensus on strategic priorities. However, in the paper more balance in managers' beliefs were not necessarily associated with a higher degree of consensus and alignment. The two proxies are not interchangeable and the balancing effect was found to be ineffective and insufficient in providing an explanation for the consensus formation process.

The paper provides empirical evidence on how middle managers change their mental models and improve their understanding of the strategy. The paper helps in aligning performance measurement systems literature and strategic literature.

Strategic consensus between operators and managers is an important means to accomplish a successful manufacturing strategy (MS) process. Previous studies largely left out individual operators from this concept. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to empirically examine the level of strategic consensus on the MS within the operations function, that is, the operators’ and managers’ perceptions of MS.

Interviews were conducted with both operators and managers at three small- and medium-sized enterprises in Sweden. The MS dimensions were selected based on previous research; the data were analysed by using thematic coding.

The study shows that the levels of strategic consensus on the MS vary among companies. Even when strategic consensus exists between operators and managers, their underlying reasons often differ. Furthermore, the levels of strategic consensus vary among MS dimensions. The companies’ usage of information-sharing channels, along with their size and position in the supply chain, can be important for the level of strategic consensus.

This paper contributes to the body of knowledge in three ways. First, it expands the scope of the MS dimensions under study, thus offering a stronger, resource-based perspective on MS and strategic consensus than what earlier studies showed. Second, it goes beyond the management level by including both managers and operators as the unit of analysis. Third, compared to previous research, it focuses on a new context and is based on in-depth case studies.

How is strategic consensus formed in top management team (TMT)? Prior literature provides inadequate evidence. A few scholars explore its antecedents from some perspectives (e.g. organizational or team structure) to address this gap but yield confusing results. This study aims to clarify the mechanism to reach TMT strategic consensus and explore both the effect of collective team identification and information elaboration.

Stepwise regression analysis is applied to explore the formation process of strategic consensus by using data collected from 126 TMTs of Chinese firms.

Results show that collective team identification has a positive effect on TMT strategic consensus, whereas information elaboration has a U-shaped effect. Further, the U-shaped relationship between information elaboration and TMT strategic consensus is strengthened by collective team identification.

This study provides a nuanced explanation of the antecedents of strategic consensus in TMT by exploring the effects of collective team identification and information elaboration. Particularly, this study proposes a U-shaped relationship between information elaboration and strategic consensus, which enriches TMT decision-making literature and consensus research. Moreover, by examining the moderating effect of collective team identification, this study articulates why TMT members fail to achieve strategic consensus even when they have sufficiently discussed the task-relevant information.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate consensus formation among the top and middle managers during the strategy process. Specifically, the paper seeks to gain insight into the role of strategic consensus during the transition between strategy formulation and implementation.

Adopting a social practice perspective and a single case study approach, we undertook semi-structured interviews of twenty-seven managers working in a Kuwaiti Ministry. Data collected were analyzed using thematic analysis.

We found that social interaction among individuals with similar characteristics and shared understanding fosters consensus. Factors such as alignment of strategic priorities, managerial flux and centralized control contribute to the extent to which strategic consensus is achievable. Additionally, managerial turnover and lack of empowerment hamper the development of shared understanding. Finally, that consensus on strategy content is insufficient for effective intergroup communications.

The research contributes to the strategic consensus literature from a social practice perspective as it provides new insights into the dynamics between top managers and middle managers. Significantly, it highlights the importance and need for common understanding, as well as communications prioritization among managers for consensus development and successful implementation of organization strategy.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical analysis of studies on strategic consensus along manufacturing competitive priorities. Based on this analysis, a new methodology to measure strategic consensus on manufacturing competitive priorities that is more consistent with mainstream operations management theory is proposed. The paper also includes novel proposals for future research.

The new methodology and proposals for research are mainly based on a literature review of previous studies on strategic consensus regarding manufacturing competitive priorities and also on relevant research and works in the field of operations management.

Previous methodologies used to measure strategic consensus regarding manufacturing competitive priorities are mainly based on studies in the business strategy field. Thus, these methodologies are deemed as inadequate in the operations management field. It is also found that there are very few studies that have analysed this topic in the operations management field. Moreover, since the methodologies used in those studies are based on previous research in the field of business strategy, the results of the reviewed papers are considered as questionable.

For academics, the paper and its results imply a change in the methodologies and research used to study the issue of strategic consensus on manufacturing competitive priorities. The lack of research into this topic is also observed. More research and studies on this theme are needed. For practitioners, the methodology proposed in the paper could be utilised in order to assess the employees' knowledge of the relationships between manufacturing capabilities inside manufacturing firms.

To the best of the author's knowledge, this is the first review paper into this under‐researched theme in the operations management field. The paper also presents the first methodology that incorporates mainstream theory and research in the field of operations management into the measurement of strategic consensus on manufacturing competitive priorities.

In this study, the authors explore how sensing and seizing of market opportunities, asset reconfiguration and top management team (TMT) consensus on these elements jointly relate to a firm's international expansion. By doing this, the authors contribute to the existing literature by addressing dynamic managerial capabilities at the TMT level instead of considering them as individual executives' traits. The authors use the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) method to analyze our data from 261 TMT executives in 63 firms. The findings indicate that sensing, seizing and reconfiguration capabilities are highly relevant for internationalization but in different configurations for specific stages and elements of international business. Presence of sensing as a part of configurations is observable, especially in connection to a firm having foreign customers and explicit internationalization strategies, while configurations where seizing and reconfiguration emerge are connected to firms showing continuity in the international markets. The authors’ results also indicate that a lack of TMT consensus in connection to dynamic managerial capabilities is a driving force that allows the firm not to stagnate with regards to internationalization. Yet, lack of TMT consensus combined with low reconfiguration capabilities seems to generate negative results, which suggests that different views are not helpful if the firm is incapable of changing its approaches.

This study uses data gathered with a questionnaire where the executives select either “yes” or “no” in response to statements describing the firm situation with regard different managerial aspects and progress of international growth. The authors analyze these data from 261 TMT executives from 63 firms using the QCA method.

The findings indicate that sensing, seizing and reconfiguration capabilities are highly relevant for internationalization but to different extents for specific elements of international business; generally, while sensing is needed, in particular, for having foreign customers and internationalization strategies in the first place, seizing and reconfiguration became relevant for continuity in the international markets. Consensus or rather lack of it on these elements also plays a role. It seems that some disagreement is a driving force that allows the firm not to stagnate with regards to internationalization. However, TMT disagreement combined with low reconfiguration capabilities seems to generate negative results, which suggests that different views are not helpful if the firm is incapable of changing its approaches.

The findings contribute to existing knowledge by exploring how managerial capabilities influence firm-level dynamic capabilities from the point of view of the TMT. The authors also add to existing research that has often focused on the relationships between TMT executives' demographic traits and TMT consensus and, further, the (subsequent) firm performance by looking at different configuration rather than linear linkages. Together, these notions further mean that the authors change the point of view on diversity. The authors consider the consensus on existing managerial dynamic capabilities rather than evaluate the functional diversity or the TMT executives' agreement on strategic moves.

All capabilities are important. TMT does not need to agree on everything, as long as they acknowledge where their problem areas are, and they can capture at least some of the relevant trends and opportunities. In fact, having some lack of consensus seems to be a driving force that allows capabilities to be questioned and potentially keeps (false) under-appreciation of existing capabilities from becoming a barrier to international expansion.

Unlike previous studies that have focused on the relationship between the TMT executives' demographic characteristics and firm performance or the relationship of the demographics and TMT strategic consensus at a general level – or studies that have explained international performance with TMT consensus (or with dynamic managerial capabilities), this study brings forth how the dynamic managerial capabilities and the TMT executives' strategic consensus with regard to these capabilities influence the firm's international expansion. Here, the authors consider internationalization widely, looking at whether the firm has foreign customers or international expansion strategy in place, and whether there this activity is sustained and continuous (with repeated trading and long-term international contracts, in particular). To our knowledge, there is no research on TMT strategic consensus that explains how the unanimity among executives on dynamic managerial capabilities connects to the firm's international expansion.

The purpose of this paper is to identify factors that can help managers to overcome barriers to alignment of operations strategy at the interface with marketing.

This objective required the application of a procedure based on strategic consensus and a deeper analysis, such that the delimitation of the study in a single case was mandatory. The strategic processes of interfacing involve managerial attributes that are subject to the influence of human aspects and, therefore, the research method used a qualitative approach. The protocol design included the following data sources: interviews, document reviews and researcher observations. The categorisation was made based on the theoretical references, the frequency of observations, common responses and information from documents.

The balance between intra‐functional trade‐offs, joint research on the competitive context, reflections on the understanding of customer needs and operational performance, and understanding of inter‐functional trade‐offs were the main factors verified. They effectively support decisions associated with interface processes and promotes the integration of these processes. They can generate inputs that enable managers to achieve an appropriate balance among alternatives in light of various trade‐offs.

These factors make possible new connections between strategic processes in the context of operations and marketing functions. The formations of these strategies are aligned through a better understanding of both threats and opportunities by means of a joint analysis of the competitive context. The presented findings can be used to develop a clear definition of strategic objectives of operations and a more appropriate treatment of market needs.

The findings from the research can be considered as new elements for promoting alignment in the formation process of the operations strategy. Little research to date has examined the operations‐marketing strategic interface of companies in the context of strategic consensus.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze how the educational level and diversity of a firm's top management team (TMT), moderated by strategic consensus, influence its innovation performance.

Using Poisson regression analysis, the proposed models were tested on 97 innovative Spanish firms selected from the Dun and Bradstreet database of 2000.

Results show that a higher educational level in the TMT has a positive and direct effect on innovation performance, while functional diversity and diversity in TMT tenure have a direct and negative effect. However, in a situation of strategic consensus in the TMT, the relationship between functional diversity and innovation is positive.

The paper makes several contributions to previous research. First, few studies have considered the influence of the characteristics and composition of the TMT on the organization's innovation performance. Second, this paper responds to the calls of researchers to enrich the upper echelon theory by considering strategic consensus as a process of interaction between the members of the TMT that modifies the relationship between TMT diversity and the firm's innovation performance.

This study attempts to move beyond the “congruence assumption” surrounding top management team (TMT) demography by exploring the intervening processes that link TMT diversity and organizational performance.

Using Fiol's concept of unified diversity and employing an information processing perspective of strategic decision‐making, this article proposes a model that incorporates both moderating and mediating influences; and then tests the hypotheses using data from specific strategic decisions faced by 85 top‐level decision‐making teams within the health care industry.

Evidence was found to support the expectation that goal consensus moderates the relationship between informational diversity and decision quality within the management teams. In addition, team member collaboration was found to partially mediate this effect. Research limitations/implications – The retrospective nature of the data collection captured the essence of the decision‐making process over time, but future research using longitudinal designs that include different types of industries is needed to confirm the validity of the findings.

The practical implications of this study point towards a need for managers to set in motion both divergent and convergent thinking during the strategic decision‐making process. The findings indicate that if managers want to reap the benefits of teams with members from different functional and educational backgrounds, they must instigate some aspect of shared framing among team members, such as consensus on broad organizational goals.

This research identified relevant contingency and mediating variables that help to explain the equivocal results of previous studies attempting to link top management team demography to organizational performance.