Search results

This chapter explores a pathway towards achieving a sustainable and inclusive future through the implementation of systems innovation, systems leadership and systems change. The author highlights the importance of understanding complex systems and identifies several models that can be employed to drive systems change, including the iceberg model and multi-level perspective. The author stresses the significance of systems leadership and innovation in creating a sustainable and inclusive future. This means that leaders and managers need to shift their mindset from reductionism to systems thinking. Reductionism views complex systems as a collection of separate parts that can be studied independently. In contrast, systems thinking acknowledges the interconnectedness of all parts and how they influence each other. When they embrace systems thinking, leaders and managers can make systems innovation and drive systems change to achieve sustainable and inclusive growth. Achieving a sustainable and inclusive future requires a collective effort from individuals, organizations and governments. It demands a comprehensive understanding of the interdependencies and interactions within complex systems, as well as a willingness to adopt new ways of thinking and leading. This chapter presents a compelling case for adopting systems innovation, systems leadership and systems change as critical components in building a sustainable and inclusive future.

In this chapter, the author explores and discusses the transformation of management from the perspective of complex systems, systems change and the Taoist yin-yang theory. Modern complex organizations require innovative management practices that move beyond traditional approaches. Consequently, many organizations are experiencing a management shift towards more holistic and sustainable methods. This shift encompasses changes in organizational structures and modes of inquiry. Organizations are transitioning from rigid hierarchies to more collaborative and agile configurations while adopting a systemic approach to management that acknowledges the interconnectedness and interdependence of all organizational aspects. Simultaneously, there is a paradigm shift in management thinking, replacing the conventional focus on ego-action with eco-action, which emphasizes the integration of diverse perspectives and the cultivation of self-awareness and introspection. This shift in mindset is embodied in the yin-yang paradigm, highlighting the importance of balance and harmony between contrasting forces.

Social enterprises (SEs), part of the third sector, are hybrid organizations combining the pursuit of social scopes with commercial business solutions. In seeking for social value, they pair for-profit and non-profit features, thereby compensating for shortcomings of both the public sector and the commercial market. Therefore, the performance management of such organizations assumes a crucial relevance. Among the available tools, the balanced scorecard (BSC) aims to capture performance multidimensionality, at the same time fostering legitimacy towards stakeholders.

In general terms, the BSC has the limit to follow a linear and static logic of construction and functioning. For this reason, scholars combine it with system dynamics (SD) to create dynamic balanced scorecards (DBSCs). However, literature seems to devote scarce attention to the adoption of such analytic tools in the third sector, particularly in SEs. This chapter wants to contribute to bridging this gap by proposing a tailored application in the context of a social cooperative, active in the clothing recycle and in the re-integration of disadvantaged social categories. By referring to previous literature about DBSC, two modelling strategies are identified: the BSC-driven and the SD-driven. The latter, based on inductive reasoning, is the one privileged for the study because of its wider flexibility. The modelling outputs consider different perspectives than the ones within traditional BSCs, contain elements of circular causality and show how financial and non-financial performances interplay and co-determine each other. Insights from the proposed model can be useful to support both decision-making and stakeholder engagement.

Cryptocurrency arose, and grew in popularity, following the financial crisis of 2008 built upon a promise of decentralizing money and payments. An examination of the history of money and banking in the United States demonstrates that stable money benefits from strict controls and commitments by a centralized government through chartering restrictions and a broad safety net, rather than decentralization. In addition, financial crises happen when the government allows money creation to occur outside of official channels. The US central bank is then forced into a policy of supporting a range of money-like assets in order to maintain a grip on monetary policy and some semblance of financial stability.

In addition, this chapter argues that cryptocurrency as a form of shadow money shares many of the problematic attributes of both the privately issued bank notes that created instability during the “free banking” era and the “shadow banking” activities that contributed to the 2008 crisis. In this sense, rather than being a novel and disruptive idea, cryptocurrency replicates many of the systemically destabilizing aspects of privately issued money and money-like instruments.

This chapter proposes that, rather than allowing a new, digital “free banking” era to emerge, there are better alternatives. Specifically, it argues that the Federal Reserve (Fed) should use its tools to improve public payment systems, enact robust utility-like regulations for private digital currencies and limit the likelihood of bubbles using prudential measures.

The purpose of the chapter is to identify the fundamental characteristics of organisational resilience in management science with particular emphasis on selected approaches to the concept of resilience and organisational resilience in management, development of the definition of organisational resilience, comparison of the definitions of the concept of organisational resilience according to the adopted features, location of the defined features of organisational resilience in the planning perspective of the organisation and application of the concept of resilience to entrepreneurs, enterprises, and their strategies. Understanding resilience differs between disciplines and research contexts. In the management theory, the perception of resilience and organisational resilience is broadly diversified, which implies a niche for discussing their crucial pivot, which will be addressed in this chapter. A systematic literature review was conducted as well as a critical analysis of literature sources, as a result of which relevant significant foundation of organisational resilience area within the theory of management was determined. Analysed directions significantly indicate the importance of organisational resilience in management, enriching its heritage in accordance with current scientific discoveries. Entrepreneurs can use the selection of the theoretical foundation of organisational resilience as an indication of the management areas that may be developed to search for organisational excellence.

Despite growing interest in misconduct spillovers – where unimplicated bystanders’ stock prices, reputations, resources, and opportunities are positively or negatively affected by others’ misconduct – theory about spillovers’ antecedents has largely focused on industry or product similarity, and has used the same characteristics to argue for both positive and negative spillovers. Furthermore, limited research has considered both positive and negative spillovers together, instead focusing on one kind of spillover or the other in isolation, thereby creating a lack of theoretical integration within the literature. In this chapter, we draw on attribution theory and expectancy violations theory to explain when and how misconduct incurs positive and negative spillovers. We argue that a spillover’s valence depends on the locus of attributions made by stakeholders, where the misconduct’s causes are attributed to the perpetrator alone (i.e., an isolated attribution) – resulting in positive spillovers – or the misconduct’s causes are perceived as indicative of a systemic problem shared among a broader set of organizations (i.e., a systemic attribution), leading to negative spillovers. We further suggest that the misconduct’s nature and misconduct prevalence within a perpetrator and among other firms influences stakeholders’ attributions, and ultimately the spillover’s valence. Our theory contributes to the organizational misconduct literature by providing a unifying theoretical framework to understand both positive and negative spillovers.

In this chapter, the author delves deeper into adaptive and sustainability challenges, specifically discussing the roles of management and leadership in addressing these problems. Both responsible leadership and management are essential for tackling sustainability challenges. Leadership focuses on establishing a vision and inspiring others to attain it, while management is concerned with devising and executing strategies to realize that vision. Addressing wicked problems necessitates collaboration, engagement and innovative solutions, involving both leadership and management. To effectively conquer sustainability challenges, organizations must embrace a more holistic and sustainable approach to management and leadership. This might include collaborating with stakeholders to discover innovative solutions that prioritize sustainability and social responsibility. Resolving wicked problems calls for a distinct management and leadership approach that is cooperative, systemic, and sustainable.

This study investigates how this pandemic impacted the systemic risk in Indonesia’s Islamic commercial banks (ICBs) and conventional commercial banks (CCBs). The authors use quantitative methods, and systemic risk is measured using value at risk (VaR) and Conditional Value at Risk (CoVaR). This study provides empirical evidence regarding the estimation and determination of systemic risk. By using spillover measures, the authors find a significant increase in systemic risk among the sample banks. The novelty in this research is the measurement of the level of banking risk in the dual banking system in Indonesia. This study makes profound contributions to the literature and suggests various policy recommendations, including identifying essential institutions and testing the benefits of policy responses in containing systemic risk. These findings need to be considered by the government and financial authorities in making accurate regulations and policies.

We employ three systemic risk measures of banks, including the systemic risk index (SRISK) and marginal expected shortfall (MES) of Brownlees and Engle (2017) and the conditional Value-at-Risk (ΔCoVaR) of Adrian and Brunnermeier (2016), to analyze bank's exposure and contribution to systemic risk in the banking system when a financial crisis occurs. We find evidence that time-varying systemic risk exists, and systemic risk exposures escalate with the interconnectedness of banks. We also find revenue diversification is another significant factor that reduces a bank's exposure to systemic risk but not for banks in Taiwan and Singapore.

Organizational theorists and strategy scholars are both interested in how organizations deal with ambiguity, especially in relation to implementation. This chapter examines one source of ambiguity that organizations face, which is based on their efforts to implement moral mandates. These mandates, which are related to areas such as environmental sustainability and diversity, are inherently ambiguous, as they lack a shared understanding regarding their scope and associated practices. They are also often broad and systemic and may be unclearly aligned with an organization's strategy. Due to these challenges, in this chapter, we theorize that collective action at the field level is necessary for organizations to advance and concretize moral mandates. We examine this theorizing through the case of the implementation of sustainability in higher education. We hypothesize and find support for the idea that when an organization's members engage in collective action at the field level, those organizations have an increased likelihood of achieving sustainability implementation. To gain insight into this field-to-organization relationship, we qualitatively examine 18 years of conversations from an online forum to develop a process model of moral mandate implementation. We theorize that collective action functions as a field-configuring space, in which actors from a variety of organizations come together to (1) refine the scope of the mandate and (2) create an implementation repertoire that actors can draw on when seeking to bring sustainability to their own organizations. Overall, our study provides a model of how ambiguous moral mandates can be implemented by highlighting the important role of collective action across organizations in concretizing those mandates and providing actors with the tools for their implementation.