Search results

Purpose: The purpose of the chapter is to determine the dependence of the process of decision making in modern business systems on their organizational structure and to substantiate the necessity for considering the requirements to the process of decision making during designing the organizational structure of a business system.

Methodology: A new simplified classification of the organizational structure of business systems according to the criterion of complexity is offered, and its two main types are distinguished – organizational structure of low complexity and organizational structure of high complexity.

Conclusions: According to the offered classification, dependence of the process of decision making in modern business systems on complexity of their business structure at each stage of making of managerial decisions is determined. As a result of analysis of statistical data, it is determined that business systems with organizational structure of low complexity dominate in Russia. By the example of modern Russian business systems with the organizational structure of high complexity – Sberbank, Lukoil, Gazprom, and Rosneft – it is shown that formation of the structure of this type and supporting its functioning requires resources and thus is inaccessible for most modern business systems. Moreover, the expected advantages, related to high probability of making of optimal managerial decisions, are not always gained in practice.

Originality/value: It is substantiated that the process of decision making in modern business systems largely depends on the complexity of their organizational structure. With increase of complexity of a business system, resource intensity of decision making and duration of this process increase, but the risk of nonoptimal decisions decreases. Organizational structure of low complexity is peculiar for business systems that have deficit of financial and human resources, which does not allow using the means of optimization and fully control the process of decision making. However, in this case, managerial decisions are made much quicker. In the conditions of modern market economy, it is necessary to make quick optimal decisions, which cannot be achieved within the organizational structure of either low or high complexity. Thus, it is necessary to find a way to make quick optimal managerial decisions beyond the design of organizational structure.

Researchers continue to seek understanding of industrialization as a state managed process. How to create and implement new industries based on advanced knowledge is on the policy agenda of many advanced nations. Measures that promote these developments include national capacity building in science and technology, the formation of technology transfer systems, and the establishment of industrial clusters. What these templates often overlook is an analysis of use. This chapter aims to increase the understanding of the processes that embed new solutions in structures from an industrial network perspective. The chapter describes an empirical study of high-technology industrialization in Taiwan that the researcher conducts to this end. The study shows that the Taiwanese industrial model is oversimplified and omits several important factors in the development of new industries. This study bases its findings on the notions that resource combination occurs in different time and space, the new always builds on existing resource structures, and the users are important as active participants in development processes.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

Research has highlighted the cognitive nature of the business model intended as a cognitive representation describing a business’ value creation and value capture activities. Although the content of the business model has been extensively investigated from this perspective, less attention has been paid to the business model’s causal structure – that is the pattern of cause-effect relations that, in top managers’ or entrepreneurs’ understandings, link value creation and value capture activities. Building on the strategic cognition literature, this paper argues that conceptualizing and analysing business models as cognitive maps can shed light on four important properties of a business model’s causal structure: the levels of complexity, focus and clustering that characterize the causal structure and the mechanisms underlying the causal links featured in that structure. I use examples of business models drawn from the literature as illustrations to describe these four properties. Finally, I discuss the value of a cognitive mapping approach for augmenting extant theories and practices of business model design.

Despite agreement on the importance of adopting governance structures for developing competitive advantage, we still know little about why or how governance mechanisms are adopted in the first place. We also acknowledge that family businesses with formal governance mechanisms in place still resort to informal means to make decisions, and we lack knowledge about why certain governance mechanisms are sometimes, but not always, effective and functional. Given these research gaps, and drawing on institutional theory, we aim to explore: How are governance structures adopted and developed in family firms? Once adopted, how do family businesses perceive these governance structures?

Using Mokken Scale Analysis, a method suitable to uncover patterns/sequences of adoption/acquisition over time, we analyze a dataset of 1,488 Spanish family firms to explore if there is a specific pattern in the implementation of governance structures. We complement the analysis with descriptive data about perceived usefulness of such structures.

Our findings highlight two important issues. Family businesses follow a specific process implementing first business governance (board of directors, then executive committee), followed by family governance (family council then family constitution). We suggest they do so in response to institutional pressures, given the exposure they have to business practices, and their need to appear legitimate. Despite formal adoption of governance structures, family businesses do not necessarily consider them useful. We suggest that their perception about the usefulness of the implemented governance structures may lead to their ceremonial adoption, resulting in a gap between the implementation and functionality of such structures.

Our article contributes to the family business literature by bringing novel insights about implementation of governance structures. We take a step back to explain why these governance mechanisms were adopted in the first place. Using institutional theory we enrich governance and family business literatures, by offering a lens that explains why family businesses follow a specific process in adopting governance structures. We also offer a plausible explanation as to why governance structures are ineffective in achieving their theorized role in the context of family businesses, based on the family's perception of the unusefulness of such structures, and the concept of ceremonial adoption.

There is no single recipe that can serve the multiple needs of different family businesses. This indicates that family businesses may need diverse levels of development and order when setting up their governance structures. Accordingly, this study constitutes an important point of demarcation for practitioners interested in examining the effectiveness of governance structures in family firms. We show that an important pre-requisite for examining the effectiveness of governance structures is to start by investigating whether these structures are actually being used or are only adopted ceremonially.

Our paper expands current knowledge on governance in family firms by taking a step back hinting at why are governance structures adopted in the first place. Focusing on how governance is implemented in terms of sequence is novel and relevant for researcher and practitioners to understand how this process unfolds. Our study uses institutional theory, which is a strong theory to support the results. Our paper also uses a novel method to study governance structures in family firms.

The sharing of knowledge between partners in collaborative relationships is widely accepted to be fundamental to supporting strategic decision making, particularly in relation to innovation management and business sustainability. The purpose of this paper is to focus on how the structure of collaborative relationships in business networks may determine successful knowledge sharing and thus improve decision making and business performance.

Expert interviews were conducted with participants operating in networks and business ecosystem in four different sectors in Italy and Germany, exploring the process of knowledge sharing, organisational learning and decision making within collaborative relationships. A qualitative textual analysis was used to analyse the experts’ responses.

The research found that an organisation’s network position and the network structure, as well as the governance and richness of the business ecosystem in which it operates, influence its ability to share knowledge, to innovate and therefore to compete sustainably.

The research demonstrates that innovative strategic decision making, based on access to appropriate knowledge, occurs within the context of social and business network relations operating within a broader more diverse business ecosystem. Closer dyadic or small working group ties best facilitate trust and sharing of the most valuable knowledge. Appropriate participation in and management of such structures is therefore essential to support knowledge-based decision making, and critical to sustained competitive advantage.

The research focusses on how interfirm relationships are established and maintained, how firms establish trust and facilitate knowledge sharing forming the basis of organisational learning.

Family is a variable rarely included in organizational research (Dyer, 2003). Chua, Chrisman, and Sharma (1999) argued that one way researchers could bring clarity to the concept of family business would be to distinguish between operational and theoretical definitions. In this paper, we provide a theoretical definition for family business that is based on social capital theory (Coleman, 1988; Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998; Lesser, 2000; Portes, 1998; Putnam, 1993). A family business is one in which the social structure of the family overlaps with the social structure of the business. The result is that the social structure in the business takes on some of the characteristics of the family, especially in small businesses. In addition, and importantly, the social structure of the family takes on some characteristics of the business. In this paper, we focus on how the social structure that exists between marriage partners may influence the social structure in family firms.

While much research exists on methods and tools to support business processes, little research exists on the interrelationship with cultural and structural aspects. The purpose of this paper is to explore the chronological sequence in which culture and structure are important, as evidenced in 13 non-profit organisations that are changing towards a process-oriented way of working.

The authors use a positivist case study methodology with pattern-matching to falsify or confirm three theoretical perspectives that claim to explain the phenomena of organisational structure and culture, and their impact on business processes. The competing perspectives are: process lifecycle theories, organisational design theories and cultural and motivational theories.

The case studies cover six scenarios based on a recurrent sequence of changes and perceived outcome. The (theoretical and empirical) relationships between business processes, a process-oriented culture and a process-oriented structure are then combined in a process capability success model.

Although limited to the non-profit sector, the findings agree that the process lifecycle is insufficient. Cultural and motivational theories prevail over organisational design theories to explain and predict process success.

From the process capability success model, a roadmap for (un)successful business process management (BPM) is derived with best practices and advice on the sequence of process improvements.

While the relevance of culture and structure has been touched in research before, the aspect of chronological sequence and pattern-matching sheds new light on the topic. The case studies performed also help to evidence how important it is to believe in process-oriented developments for organisations that want to apply BPM.

The Nature of Business Policy Business policy — or general management — is concerned with the following six major functions:

The purpose of this paper is to identify both the problems and their solutions in the corporate governance systems of Korean business groups (chaebols) in the wake of the Asian financial crisis.

This is a conceptual paper and includes suggestions for improving international governance systems.

In this paper, the author focuses on how chaebols should be restructured to improve the Korean economy. In order to figure out how they should be restructured, the author explains the positives and negatives of their current structure and how these can be modified/eliminated to make stronger corporate governance.

The paper provides conceptual insights into systems and laws, which can be used to improve the corporate governance of business groups.