Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide an initial test of the validity of an intertemporal stewardship theory. This theory incorporates stewardship considerations, based on a foundation of spirituality, as well as financial considerations into financial decision‐making models.

Contends that successful contemporary companies incorporate both financial and stewardship considerations into their decision making. Fortune magazine's Global Most Admired Companies list was used to define company success. Using Fortune's reputational criteria, companies were differentiated in terms of level of success. Hypotheses were developed about the articulation of and emphasis on financial considerations and stewardship considerations as evidenced by the corporate mission for highly successful vs less successful companies. The hypotheses were tested using paired t‐tests on mission statement data developed for the top‐, middle‐, and bottom‐ranked companies in each of the global industry categories in the 2002 Fortune magazine list. The intent was to determine if hypothesis‐relevant features of the mission statements significantly differed for the companies that were ranked at the top, middle, and bottom of their industries.

The results of this analysis indicate that organizational success cannot be achieved by focusing primarily on financial or stewardship considerations, but rather company success depends upon emphasizing both financial and stewardship considerations within the context of a clearly articulated mission focus.

The research should be extended to cover more than a one‐year period. This will result not only in a test of validity over time but also a larger sample size.

The practical implications are threefold – for managers and for business professors and researchers. Managers should ensure that mission statements are sufficiently well articulated and focused, and that both financial and stewardship considerations are sufficiently emphasized. Business professors and researchers should use a new paradigm – incorporating both stewardship and financial considerations – for teaching and thinking about business and for conducting meaningful and realistic research.

The preeminence of financial considerations in business decision making is challenged in this article. We find that the most successful companies incorporate stewardship considerations as well as financial considerations into their decision making, at least as it is reflected in their missions. This article provides evidence that decision making can no longer be devoid of stewardship considerations if an organization is to survive and prosper over the long term.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

A self‐help guide to achieving success in business. Directed more towards the self‐employed, it is relevant to other managers in organizations. Divided into clear sections on creativity and dealing with change; importance of clear goal setting; developing winning business and marketing strategies; negotiating skills; leadership; financial skills; and time management.

The purpose of this paper is to argue for the need to redefine a mission statement, to develop a clearer definition and show its advantages and limitations.

The paper shows the literature's lack of agreement on the definition of the mission statement and whether it should be defined as a stand‐alone statement or as a broader model. It then demonstrates the discrepancy between these definitions and the actual mission statements of exemplary organizations. This is followed by proposing a new definition of a mission, demonstrating how it is rooted in good practice, and presenting its benefits and limitations.

There are found to be widely varied definitions and models of the mission statement. These are typically complex (composed of many parts) and are not reflected in the mission statements of many exemplary organizations. The need is clear for a more focused definition.

The basic argument is mainly built on conceptual discussions and unsystematic evidence. Therefore, there is a need for more empirical studies to substantiate that argument. The paper discusses the research implications of the proposed definition.

The proposed definition of the mission statement may prove helpful both conceptually and practically. This definition focuses the attention of practitioners on purpose and commitment independent from other related concepts. The paper shows the impact of the proposed definition on the process, participants, and outcome of developing a mission statement.

The paper offers a focused definition of mission statement and shows its relevance to both theory and practice.

Spaceflight presents a unique environment in which multiteam coordination is often required for mission success. This chapter will explore the topic of multiteam systems (MTSs) and their functioning in this environment.

This chapter describes the MTS case of human spaceflight in terms of a specific subset of the system involved in current human spaceflight missions: NASA Mission Control and the NASA astronauts aboard the International Space Station. In addition to describing the system itself, this chapter describes notable advantages and disadvantages of this particular MTS, along with potential future issues in human spaceflight and research directions for use of MTSs in spaceflight.

More than 40 years of successful human spaceflight missions have demonstrated many of the benefits and drawbacks of MTSs across some of the most challenging environments faced by any teams attempting coordination. These environmental challenges include extreme distances, limited modes of communication, complex systems, novel problems, and coordination between teams from multiple countries with differing goals and priorities. The specific advantages and drawbacks of MTSs in this environment, and the impacts of the aforementioned environmental challenges, are discussed.

This chapter examines a known operational and successful MTS that operates in an environment in which many of the standard assumptions regarding teams and MTSs may not apply.

This paper aims to expose the underlying reasons behind the failure of the mission statement to have a significant impact on performance and to recommend ways forward.

A comprehensive literature review is conducted and common themes and trends are revealed. These are then discussed under four major domains of the mission statement: definitions, functions, focus, and form. The impact of the mission statement on performance is then discussed. Examples of mission statements of some prominent organizations are provided to substantiate arguments. The paper ends with conclusions and recommendations.

The paper reveals the contradictions and confusion that beset research in this area. It demonstrates how concepts such as mission, vision, values, identity are mixed up with one another, leading to a slow progress in research and underutilization of the power of mission in practice.

The paper recommends theoretical focus and practical flexibility. Theoretically, it suggests conceptual distinction between mission, vision, values, and other related concepts. Once this is done, it suggests the use of a “guiding statement” to flexibly describe any statement that integrates more than one of the above mentioned concepts in practice. The paper offers no empirical evidence of the usefulness of its recommendations.

The paper reveals the sources of ineffectiveness of the mission statement. The recommendations may help to minimize the confusion surrounding the functions, focus, and form of the mission statement. This may also help to advance the research in this area and inform the practice in the field.

The paper critically reads the literature to uncover the contradictions and confusion besetting research in this area and makes original recommendations.

Work integration social enterprises (WISEs) address the chronic unemployment of disadvantaged populations. However, WISEs face challenges, in part, because they embody both social mission and market logics which potentially contradict one another. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how the founders of WISEs perceive the relationship between logics and how they manage any resulting tensions, to help determine if they are effective vehicles for alleviating unemployment.

This study used in-depth interviews with social entrepreneurs in nationally recognized WISEs to assess how they perceived and managed logic tensions.

A total of eight out of the ten WISEs emphasized one dominant logic and did not perceive significant internal conflict. Only two cases experienced prolonged and ultimately irreconcilable tensions between their social mission and market goals, when social entrepreneurs were guided by the blended logics of providing training and services to disadvantaged populations within a for-profit legal form.

Future research is required to determine the generalizability of these findings due to small sample size, an exclusive focus on the founder’s perspective and an exclusive focus on WISEs.

Findings contribute to greater understanding of logic tensions in WISEs and the opportunities and limitations that result from aligning dominant logic(s) and organizational form.

This research suggests that the founders of WISEs perceive market and social mission logics as options to be selected, and that WISEs struggle to succeed as organizations with two dominant logics. The market appears as yet unprepared to support singlehandedly organizations with a social mission of work integration.

Alternative enterprises – organizations that operate as a business while still also being driven by a social purpose – are sometimes owned by workers or other stakeholders, rather than shareholders. What role does ownership play in enabling alternative enterprises to prioritize substantively rational organizational values, like environmental sustainability and social equity, over instrumentally rational ones, like profit maximization? We situate this question at the intersection of research on: (1) stakeholder governance and mission drift in both hybrid and collectivist-democratic organizations; and (2) varieties of ownership of enterprise. Though these literatures suggest that ownership affects the ability of alternative enterprises to maintain their social missions, the precise nature of this relationship remains under-theorized. Using the case of a global, social, and environmental values-based banking network, we suggest that alternative ownership is likely a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to combat mission drift in enterprises that have a legal owner. A supermajority of this network’s banks deploy alternative ownership structures; those operating with these structures are disproportionately associated with social movements, which imprint their values onto the banks. We show how alternative ownership acts through specific mechanisms to sustain enterprises’ missions, and we also trace how many of these mechanisms are endogenous to alternative ownership models. Finally, we find that ownership models vary in how well they enable the expression and maintenance of these social values. A ladder of mission-sustaining ownership models exists, whereby the dominance of substantive, non-instrumental values over operations and investment becomes increasingly robust as one moves up the rungs from mission-driven investor ownership to special shareholder and member-ownership models.

This study aims to reach academic consensus on key factors and boundaries used in defining the concepts of “social entrepreneurship” (SEsh), “social entrepreneur” (SE), and “social enterprise” (SEV). This study also explores the complex relationships among social/business enterprises, definitional categories and factors, missions, and impacts on effectiveness of practices and organizing for venture success.

Content analysis is conducted on articles published from 1998 to 2016 in peer-reviewed academic journals in the fields of management and organization. Furthermore, 80 articles are obtained and analyzed in terms of factors and frequently used terms for unified definitions and their intertwined linkages.

The unifying factors for the definitions of SEsh, SE, and SEV include primary mission and processes and resources. Strong linkages are observed between SEsh and actors, SE and characteristics, and SEV and organizational form. Results indicate that definitional categories and factors share numerous joint terms that can be used to propose unified definitions. This study identifies the effective interactions of variables among social mission, capabilities to manage resources and processes, entrepreneurial characteristics of actors, and forms of ventures in a process that provides potential for organizational sustainability and impact maximization.

This paper contributes to research by identifying clear and agreed-upon factors and traits as boundaries to propose definitions that can advance the legitimacy of social entrepreneurship as an academic field worthy of future exploration.

The findings emphasize social mission that achieves public benefits while preventing mission drift. Economic value and choice of organizational form can advance the fulfillment of objectives and governance practices. This study also presents the key influencing factors at various stages of an entrepreneurial process to determine how these concepts interact to increase the likelihood of organizational emergence and survival.

This work is the first to systematically review management and organizational literature on the key factors and terms that constitute the distinct definitions of SEsh, SE, and SEV and help clarify their complex relations in an entrepreneurial process.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the role a full range of activities can play to combat mission drift in a social enterprise. In doing so, it expands understanding of integrated activities to recognize the role of indirect support activities and an activity ecosystem to sustain mission. This paper also provides practical implications about the process for creating such an ecosystem.

This paper relies on an in-depth qualitative study of a for-profit company that later in life became an employee-owned benefit corporation. Data include interviews, informal and formal company documents and a site visit.

This paper expands the definition of activity integration to recognize indirect mission support, highlights the role an activity ecosystem plays to ensure the viability of these activities, and identifies a set of rules and a three-step process to create the reinforcing ecosystem.

Commonly, activities are integrated if the company earns revenues through pursuit of its social mission and differentiated if the company earns revenues not related to its social mission. By comparison, this paper argues for a more nuanced definition of activities to recognize indirect mission support and its role in reinforcing a dual mission.