Search results

Organizational sociology and organization studies have a long history together, while also sharing a proclivity to self-diagnose crises. Instead of taking these assessments at face value, this paper treats them as an object of study, asking what conditions have fueled them. In the case of organizational sociology, there are indications of a connection between rising levels of discontent and community building: self-identified organizational sociologists have progressively withdrawn from general debates in the discipline and turned their attention to organization studies, which, they suspect, has seen dramatic levels of growth at their expense. Organization studies, on the other hand, are still haunted by “a Faustian bargain”: leaning heavily on the authority of the social sciences, business school faculty were able to facilitate the emergence of a scholarly field of practice dedicated to the study of organizations, which they control. However, in doing so, they also set organization studies on a path of continued dependence on knowledge produced elsewhere: notably, by university disciplines such as sociology.

This chapter focuses on Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) as a new approach for academic institutions, such as universities and Universities of Applied Sciences (UASs) as organizations based on empirical evidence. A University of Applied Sciences in Switzerland was selected as a case. An analysis of the organization's most representative documents, extensive interviews with employees having expertise in the different RRI keys (public engagement, gender equality/diversity, science education, open access, ethics) and Anticipation, Inclusiveness, Reflexivity, Responsiveness (AIRR) dimensions, as well as a focus group produced interesting insights regarding the discourse and institutionalization of the RRI approach in the organization. Furthermore, the drivers, barriers, best practices, and monitoring of each of the RRI keys and AIRR dimensions were further described. The findings suggest that RRI could be a helpful policy framework at a time that universities are going through a systemic change.

Organizational scholars studying compensation often place an emphasis on certain employee groups (e.g., executives). Missing from this discussion is research on the compensation systems for low-wage jobs. In this review, the authors argue that workers in low-wage jobs represent a unique employment group in their understanding of rent allocation in organizations. The authors address the design of compensation strategies in organizations that lead to different outcomes for workers in low-wage jobs versus other workers. Drawing on and integrating human resource management (HRM), inequality, and worker literatures with compensation literature, the authors describe and explain compensation systems for low-wage work. The authors start by examining workers in low-wage work to identify aspects of these workers’ jobs and lives that can influence their health, performance, and other organizationally relevant outcomes. Next, the authors explore the compensation systems common for this type of work, building on the compensation literature, by identifying the low-wage work compensation designs, proposing the likely explanations for why organizations craft these designs, and describing the worker and organizational outcomes of these designs. The authors conclude with suggestions for future research in this growing field and explore how organizations may benefit by rethinking their approach to compensation for low-wage work. In sum, the authors hope that this review will be a foundational work for those interested in investigating organizational compensation issues at the intersection of inequality and worker and organizational outcomes.

The article aims to give an overview of the history and the achieved status of information science in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) with an emphasis on the organisation of information science and practice in the GDR and on the theoretical foundations of information science.

Primarily, this article is based upon critical literature studies, especially German-language books and journal articles, but the empirical basis also includes some unpublished sources (e.g. letters from information scientists from the GDR).

There are interesting results concerning the roots of information science in cybernetics, philosophy and the practical area of documentation. The naming of this knowledge field as “informatics”, “informatics of science” or “information and documentation science” is partly very distinct from Western conceptions. We found different theoretical foundations for information science including the approaches of Bonitz, Engelbert, Koblitz and Groß and Fuchs-Kittowski. In the GDR, information science and information practice were centralised, but through the information system science and technology, they were consistently accessible at all levels of professional work. With German reunification, information practice and its institutions, as well as GDR’s information science efforts, disappeared.

The article gives hints on the importance on and the survival of some GDR approaches in contemporary information science, but those developments should be analysed in much more detail.

This is the first overview article on the state and entire development of information science in the GDR.

Organizations increasingly use knowledge arbitrage to stimulate innovation and achieve competitive advantage. However, in knowledge management its use in startups is yet unexplored. This study aims to examine the utilization of knowledge arbitrage by startups, specifically during COVID-19.

This study employed an open-ended essay methodology to explore the drivers and barriers that startups face in utilizing knowledge arbitrage. We collected data from 40 participants to understand the role of knowledge arbitrage in startups’ knowledge management practices.

This study’s findings highlight the significance of knowledge arbitrage for startups. The benefits identified include organizational benefits such as building networks, innovating new products and achieving competitive advantage and financial benefits such as cost reduction and sales growth. The study also identifies several technological and organizational drivers and barriers that startups confront during knowledge arbitrage.

This study contributes to the existing literature on knowledge management by extending our understanding of knowledge arbitrage’s role in startups. Additionally, it sheds light on the importance of knowledge arbitrage for startups and the challenges they face, particularly in a disrupted environment reared by COVID-19. The study provides insights for the scholars and practitioners interested in effective knowledge management in startups.

This study aims to examine the underlying process through which learning organization culture positively influences knowledge sharing. It specifically explored the mediating role of social capital, underscoring its critical impact on enhancing both knowledge sharing and fostering learning organization culture.

To test the proposed hypotheses, structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis was conducted with a sample of 231 employees from a manufacturing firm in South Korea.

The results of this study indicate significant direct effects of learning organization culture on social capital. Also, social capital indicates a positive effect on knowledge sharing. Although learning organization culture had no direct effect on knowledge sharing, it indirectly affected learning organization culture and knowledge sharing by mediating social capital.

This study proposes that a learning organization culture will be interconnected with social capital and knowledge sharing. Organizations that can effectively harness the wealth of knowledge unlocked by social capital, and subsequently integrate this knowledge into their activities, are poised for competitive advantage.

First, this study places a special emphasis on the mediating role of social capital between learning organization culture and knowledge sharing. Despite extensive research exploring diverse knowledge-sharing factors (Wang and Noe, 2010), it is plausible that examining social capital as a mediator could offer insights for facilitating knowledge sharing through its structural, relational and cognitive dimensions. Second, while a plethora of literature examines knowledge sharing, this study also seeks to unravel the multifaceted pathways through which the learning organization culture influences knowledge sharing and how these processes could be optimized in organizations.

This research explores how firms manage the complex technologies standardization in action groups. It considers the strategic issues that technology producers face when involving lead users in architecture design. Drawing on the multi-mode standardization literature, this study addresses two dilemmas regarding value creation and appropriation by technology producers within coalitions. The first dilemma is how to create value by developing solutions in compliance with industry standards. The second one is how to appropriate value while ensuring the technology sharing with action groups. The answers to these two dilemmas contribute to filling the research gap on value creation and appropriation in multi-mode standardization.

The research focuses on technology producers participating in action groups where lead users play a crucial role. We conducted a qualitative analysis based on the standardization experience of a Japanese company specializing in smart robotics. Data are collected through semi-structured interviews with key actors. Action groups are defined operationally as a set of stakeholders including competitors of the technology producers, component suppliers, end users, services providers, research centers and academia. The case study is suitable for highlighting specific aspects of the standardization process during its manifestation. It reveals how firms create and appropriate value, providing details about its standardization strategy.

Our findings show that smart robotics standardization is drivn by collaborative models, where the two dilemmas of value creation and appropriation are evident. Firstly, the case revealed that standardization is lead users oriented. Secondly, lead users’ involvement is crucial to customize technologies. Thirdly, the firm’s position is to share a part of the value with the members. The IPR policy is a matter of interest within action groups, since the collaboration is based on open innovation models to share patents and licenses related knowledge.

This research has some limitations attributable to the limited generalizability of the results due to the qualitative analysis. In addition, this study considers the perspective of technology producers, but should also take into account the perspective of both collective actions itself and the lead users. Findings have some implications in the strategy negotiation. Participating in action groups is not enough to ensure a competitive advantage. Involving lead users is of strategic importance to acquire a competitive advantage. Lead users contribute to the producers’ technology design, helping firms to differentiate solutions from the industry standard and create value from customized technologies.

This study helps practitioners understand the competitive side of collective actions, clarifying the value capture and appropriability in standardization. The research provides insights to policymakers and standard development organizations committees when they are called to harmonize standards considering the fallouts on the sector’s competitiveness. Findings suggest appropriate property rights policies to manage the issues related to the value appropriability and technology sharing, recognizing action groups members for their contribution in value creation.

This study shows how firms deal within action groups with the two dilemmas of variety versus technology conformity and property rights versus technology sharing. It fills the research gap in collective actions, emphasizing the perspective of the individual firm in the group rather than the coalition strategy itself. This topic highlights the crucial role of lead users within action groups in managing the two dilemmas, offering a new perspective for understanding critical issues of multi-mode standardization. Reflecting on mechanisms and tools to manage the two dilemmas allows firms to protect their competitive advantage in coalitions.

Social practices of work humor among engineering workers are a lesser studied phenomenon. We examine the social practices of an engineering work team through acts of a peculiar form of humorous expression we identify as installation humor. In these cases of installation humor, an anonymous member of the team created a temporary, inappropriate, yet neutral installation of a physical object to amuse the other members of the team. We provide three mini-cases of installation humor; these installations appeared as the team subtly resisted a managerial initiative. We contribute knowledge to the practices of engineers at work and to the practices of resistive humorous expression.

Qualitative, full-participant ethnographic research with multiple data collection methods and utilizing abductive analysis. During the data collection, one of the researchers was a full member of the engineering team.

We identified anonymous, artefact-based enactments of resistive humorous expression, which we named installation humor. We identify and describe installation humor, which occurred at the intersectionality of work and self-expression and served as momentary artefacts symbolic of engineering worker resistance in a high-tech environment.

Managerial awareness of the unfolding forms of worker-led, fleeting signals of resistance, such as acts of installation humor, would provide another dimension of perception for identifying salient signals surrounding the phenomenon of resistance to managerial-led change initiatives. Further research is needed on engineering humor in the R&D workplace to better understand the complexity and dynamics of phenomena such as worker resistance through humorous acts. We suggest future studies on forms of humor in the engineering workplace, including incidences of installation humor as they exist in other professional work environments and organizations, to understand common and shared practices across professional boundaries.

We advance and extend the understanding of humor as a social practice in the context of professional engineers in their R&D workplace and we identify humorous acts serving as a response to negative emotions (Huber, 2022) toward the organization related to a newly instated form of managerial control. This paper contributes to the studies of social practices of humor and emotions (Fine and De Soucey, 2005) in the engineering workplace (Buch and Andersen, 2013; Buch, 2016; Mazzurco et al., 2021) as unsupervised activity at work (Gabriel, 1995), with the social practice of humor adopting a non-verbal form that we identified as installation humor. We named this specific form of humor that we observed as installation humor and defined its specificity and differences from more traditional methods of humor (t. ex. Fine and De Soucey, 2005; Martin and Ford, 2018), shop floor humor (t. ex. Roy 1959), workplace humor (t. ex. Rosenberg et al., 2021) and engineering student humor (Holmila et al., 2007; Bender, 2011; Berge, 2017).The results of this study also suggest that ethnography for studying humor as a social practice is useful in identifying micro-level occurrences of unfolding engineering humor, including humor as a form of resistance.

The study of humor in high-tech engineering settings enhances the literature of engineering work (t. ex. Mazzurco et al., 2021) and emerging humorous phenomena (Jarzabkowski and Lê, 2017). This case study highlights and extends the understanding of the non-technical competencies of engineers and the role of peer-to-peer humor in the engineering workplace as a form of resistance during managerial initiatives within an organization.

The study extends and contributes new knowledge to research on emotions and humor by engineers at work, including the identification of a peculiar form of humor used by the engineers. This study also contributes to nascent research on the social practices of engineers at work. The research material was gathered as a full-member ethnography, increasing methodological knowledge of researching a site from within.

This paper aims to explore the role of heuristics in the reassessment of relationship events and how it influences perceptions of commitment, fairness and relationship value. It answers the question of how heuristics interrelate with decision-makers’ evolving interpretations of commitment, fairness and relationship value in a specific buyer-supplier relationship.

This paper presents data from a longitudinal study of an evolving buyer–supplier relationship involving a multinational supplier of fast-moving consumer goods and a medium-sized and highly specialized supplier. It analyzes qualitative data about the use of heuristics in buyer–supplier relationships, and it is based on evidence collected from interviews, presentations, meetings and secondary data.

This paper shows that a buyer’s unexpected behavior can lead to a reassessment of commitment, fairness and relationship value. Heuristics can delay relationship reassessments, however. The case shows that heuristics have a preserving quality and that the effect of transformative events only slowly changes the perception of the value of the relationship. In this change process, the link between commitment, perceived fairness and heuristics is crucial.

This paper contributes to research on the relationship between buyer–supplier relationships and heuristics. In particular, the paper contributes to the understanding of how relational events in a buyer-supplier relationship change the commitment and perception of fairness, and how heuristics change accordingly. On a more overarching level, the study contributes to our understanding of business relationship dynamics.