Search results

We argue that in order to address the contemporary challenges that organizations and societies are facing, the field of organization development (OD) requires frameworks and skills to focus on the eco-system as the level of analysis. In a world that has become economically, socially, and technologically highly connected, approaches that foster the optimization of specific actors in the eco-system, such as individual corporations, result in sub-optimization of the sustainability of the natural and social system because there is insufficient offset to the ego-centric purposes of the focal organization. We discuss the need for OD to broaden focus to deal with technological advances that enable new ways of organizing at the eco-system level, and to deal with the challenges to sustainable development. Case examples from healthcare and the agri-foods industry illustrate the kinds of development approaches that are required for the development of healthy eco-systems. We do not suggest fundamental changes in the identity of the field of organizational development. In fact, we demonstrate the need to dig deeply into the open systems and socio-technical roots of the field, and to translate the traditional values and approaches of OD to continue to be relevant in today’s dynamic interdependent world.

The large number of publications about sustainability and sustainable development that have been published during the past decade has dealt largely with the science of sustainability, the content of sustainability initiatives, and increasingly with the need to more closely link the economic, environmental, and social purposes and operating logic of the firm. Recent literature stresses the inherent social nature of the challenges to aggressively moving to more sustainable ways of operating for the well-being of our planet, society, economy, organizations, and humans. Despite rich case examples, guidance on how to organize to achieve the triple bottom line is limited. We take stock of the current state of knowledge, using an adaptive complex system perspective to articulate the challenges of organizing for sustainable effectiveness. Most of the global economy and the knowledge upon which it is predicated carry a logic of resource abundance even in the face of increasing competition for scarce resources, and a singular focus on economic outcomes. We argue that the development of new capabilities to address triple bottom line sustainability requires a change in that logic and requires new rules of interaction, new organizational and interorganizational designs, and new ways of learning. The premise is that systems can build on their inherent capabilities to learn and to act collectively in order to adapt. We argue that by working together to collaboratively explore how to organize for sustainability, academics and practitioners can accelerate knowledge generation and progress. This chapter provides the theoretical framing context for the chapters to come.

The field of Organization Development and Change (ODC) is facing the same tensions as those confronting humanity more broadly: how to build a sustainable future. There is an urgent need to preserve the viability of our species by changing our relationship to the natural environment and slowing the ravages of climate change and the degradation of the earth's resources. Simultaneously, technology advances are changing our lives, work, institutions, and culture in unpredictable ways. Social upheaval and geopolitical tensions are exposing deep fissures in values, preferences, and beliefs about what constitutes a just society and how to govern. The development needed for a sustainable future must enable us to operate in ways that are fundamentally different from the status quo – not just increase our effectiveness in the way we currently operate.

ODC will have to recontextualize its methodologies and frameworks that currently focus primarily on individual organizations to deal with the complexity and urgency of the challenges humanity is facing. In this Reflection, we consider some of the tensions and key questions that ODC faces: What does, and might, sustainable development mean in a globally intertwined world where divisions at both the macro and micro levels reflect conflicting interests, tensions, and fundamentally different aspirations for the future? How do ODC methodologies and frameworks need to change to help develop sustainable ecosystem level transformation cutting across hierarchies, institutions, geographies, and cultures? How does ODC need to design itself to operate differently with different outcomes? We suggest some possible next steps forward in addressing these tensions.

Purpose – This chapter provides a reflective synopsis of the chapters in the volume and highlights the learning from the cases about the development of new orientations, design configurations, and learning mechanisms. It charts directions for further research and possible managerial actions.

Design – The chapters in this second volume of the book series “Organizing for Sustainable Effectiveness” capture a rich set of cases in which organizing for sustainable health care was the central focus. Each chapter illuminated the development of a distinct health care system in a unique cultural and national context, and had a special focus on reporting theoretically informed and rigorously explored knowledge to guide purposeful design and learning approaches. Collectively the chapters highlighted the processes, organization and design, system regulation, and continuous learning approaches in complex organizational and multi-organizational health care systems that enable focus on and advancement of economic, social, and ecological outcomes.

Findings – Several critical themes have emerged from the cases, and from the broader literature on health care transformation: the importance of purpose; the need to overcome fragmentation; the need for alternative business models; technology as an investment in sustainable health care; the centrality of knowledge management; the importance of partnership and collaboration; the role of self-organization and leadership; and the criticality of building change capabilities.

United Arab Emirates’ (UAEs) commitment to sustainable development is well reflected in its Vision-2021, 2030 and the Green Economy Strategy for Sustainable Development, followed by several initiatives at federal and local level. However, out of seven Emirates, the governments of Abu Dhabi and Dubai are adopting and rigorously implementing green initiatives for conserving energy, minimizing resources wastage and becoming zero-carbon ecology, leaving behind the other five emirates. To promote the implementation of government’s sustainability agenda holistically (including all the emirates), it is important to adopt a systems thinking to diagnose the complex social arrangements and their interactive relations with the larger systems and the environment at each and all recursive levels.

This viewpoint proposes that Viable System Model (VSM) framework can support sustainable planning and configuration evaluation holistically, by diagnosing the region (system-in-focus) together with the present and future environment, at multiple recursive levels of city, emirates and country-wide. To demonstrate the relative strength of the VSM structural framework and its principles to replicate/implement the green initiatives country-wide, the study provides supporting evidence and multiple examples of its application in other parts of the world for managing sustainability-related issues from smallest (town/city) to largest (national) levels in the United Arab Emirates.

The VSM framework has been adopted by several scholars for fruitful utilization of its structural, connectivity, recursivity and complexity principles in the context of sustainability at the organizational, territory and national levels. The discussion has been made on the suitability of VSM framework for implementing sustainable development initiatives county-wide by viewing it in totality and at multiple levels of administration and governance.

It has implications for leaders, policy-setters and regulators of United Arab Emirates as well as Gulf region inclusive of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and Oman.

No prior work exists in Arab region where VSM has been proposed for the holistic management of sustainable initiatives. It has implications for leaders, policy-setters and regulators of United Arab Emirates as well as Gulf region inclusive of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and Oman.

This chapter compares and discusses the 10 sustainability-oriented food supply chain innovations described in the previous chapters. Our purpose is to address and reflect on the questions and challenges introduced in the first chapter.

The cases are first analyzed in terms of the extent to which the innovations were motivated and impacted the social, environmental, and economic dimensions of sustainability. The various sustainable food supply chain practices adopted are compared. The third section explores the innovation strategies used in the cases, including the type of strategy, the breadth and level of innovativeness of the strategy, the governance approach, and the extent of capability development required. The final section presents our conclusions.

The results suggest that to become truly sustainable, companies need to adopt a broad set of practices that address all three dimensions of sustainability, and develop strategies to make the sustainability-oriented innovation economically viable. The more radical and systemic the innovation, the more difficult it is to generate these outcomes.

Purpose – This chapter examines the impact of technology on sustainable effectiveness by focusing on the dynamic synchronization between the technical and the social subsystems at the Villa Beretta Rehabilitation Hospital (VBRH) and illustrates that technology can trigger and enable sustainable health care organizations.

Design/methodology/approach – The case study of VBRH relies on several data sources. They include interviews with key informants (VBRH executives, health care professionals, and technology suppliers), follow-up e-mails and phone conversations, direct observations of actors’ behavior, and notes of processes in action and archival data, such as patient pathway protocols, technical information systems documentation, performance and managerial reports, and administrative guidelines.

Findings – VBRH was capable to dynamically synchronize the social subsystem with the continuous innovation of the technical subsystem. This capability enabled sustainable effectiveness in three main areas. First, the correct alignment between technology and professionals’ practices and behaviors improved triple-bottom-line performance by promoting a more conscious use of the environmental, social, and financial resources. Second, technology-based initiatives promoted research-oriented plans of action that nurtured a culture of change and continuous improvement. Third, technology facilitated the extension of the research and operation networks that generated new ideas and initiatives for achieving sustainable effectiveness. Additionally, evidence from VBRH demonstrated that organization design, change management, and learning mechanisms are essential when institutionalizing new technology that requires the disruption of current professional practices and individuals’ behavior.

Originality/value – Previous contributions about sustainable effectiveness in health care failed to unveil and frame the complexity of dynamic synchronization between the technical and the social subsystems that is at the core of the sustainability of health care delivery. This chapter provides new insights that pave the way for a deeper-level understanding of the role that technology plays in sustainable effectiveness dynamics and outcomes in health care delivery. The chapter illustrates how different groups of technology contribute to sustainable effectiveness and the mechanisms that make them work.

The purpose of this paper is to examine design features that enable an organization to address today's complex and increasingly pressing global issues in ways that are sustainably effective. It identifies key social and environmental issues and reviews research examining how organizations can respond to them.

Research and theory on the interface between organizations and their environments are reviewed and evaluated. Proposals are offered with respect to organizing and designing to be sustainably effective.

There is a significant knowledge gap about how organizations can perform in sustainably effective ways. The globalization of business, increased stakeholder expectations, and environmental issues have created major challenges for corporations. Research that focusses on creating a sustainable future is needed.

Leaders need to help their organization envision new strategies and purposes, and companies will have to develop new capabilities and fundamentally alter their designs.

Important new points about the types of outcomes organizations need to produce and how they can be structured and managed in order to produce them.

The increasing interest in economic, social, and ecological sustainability has important implications for the traditional views on organization effectiveness, organization design, and organization development. Managers need to design organizations to achieve a “triple bottom line.” A review of the organization effectiveness literature suggests that no single model seems to provide the necessary guidance, and there is a clear need for creation, revision, and integration. Organization effectiveness criteria in the future require a clearer modeling of the multistakeholder demands so that organization designers can specify appropriate strategies, structures, systems, and processes as well as the changes necessary to develop them. We propose an integration called “responsible progress” and suggest that it represents an important new stream of organization development theory. The relationships between this new criterion of organization effectiveness and the design features necessary to pursue them must be tested.