Antecedents of sustainable management support for IT related initiatives

Having IT-related capabilities is not enough to secure value from IT resources and survive in today’s competitive environment. IT resources evolve dynamically and firms must sustain their existing capabilities to continue to leverage value from their IT resources. Firm’s human resources are an important IT-related capability, and an important source of their competitive advantage. Using a field survey, this study demonstrates that a dynamic end-user environment, a result of a coordinated change in complementary factors can help sustain firms’ IT-related management capabilities. These factors include an appropriate organizational design to decision rights and work environment and a congruent reward system. This study adds an important dimension in understanding why some firms continue to perform better with their IT resources than others. For practice, this study suggests that a comprehensive approach to what constitutes valuable organizational resources is necessary.

Green business process management: towards the sustainable enterprise

- Preface by Richard T. Watson - Discusses the emerging challenges of designing “green” business processes - Presents tools and methods that organizations can use in order to design and implement environmentally sustainable processes - Provides insights from cases where organizations successfully engaged in more sustainable business practices Green Business Process Management – Towards the Sustainable Enterprise" consolidates the global state-of-the-art knowledge about how business processes can be managed and improved in light of sustainability objectives. Business organizations, a dominant part of our society, have always been a major contributor to the degradation of our natural environment, through the resource consumption, greenhouse emissions, and wastage production associated with their business processes. In order to lessen their impact on the natural environment, organizations must design and implement environmentally sustainable business processes. Finding solutions to this organizational design problem is the key challenge of Green Business Process Management. This book discusses the emerging challenges of designing “green” business processes, presents tools and methods that organizations can use in order to design and implement environmentally sustainable processes, and provides insights from cases where organizations successfully engaged in more sustainable business practices. The book is of relevance to both practitioners and academics who are interested in understanding, designing, and implementing “green” business processes. It also constitutes a valuable resource for students and lecturers in the fields of information systems, management, and sustainable development.

Gaps in organizational leadership : linking strategic and operational activities through design-led propositions

The relationship between design process and business systems has been of interest to both practitioners and researchers exploring the numerous opportunities and challenges of this unlikely relationship. Often the relationship is presented as building design thinking capability within an organization, which can be broadly described as the union of design and strategy. Brown (2008) notes that design thinking is ‘‘a discipline that uses the designer’s sensibility and methods to match people’s needs with what is technically feasible and what business strategy can convert into customer value and market opportunities’’ (p. 1). The value that design thinking brings to an organization is a different way of framing situations and possibilities, doing things, and tackling problems: essentially a cultural transformation of the way it undertakes its business. The work of Martin (2009) has clearly shown the generalized differences between design thinking and business thinking, highlighting many instances in which these differences have been overcome, but also noting the many obstacles of trying to unify both approaches within an organization. Liedtka (2010) encourages firms to try and persist in overcoming these barriers, as she has noted that ‘‘business strategy desperately needs design ... because design is all about action and business strategy too often turns out to be only about talk ... fewer than 10 percent of new strategies are ever fully executed’’ (p. 9).

Stimulating organizational ingenuity with design methods

Organizations invest in ways to stimulate new ideas for new products and services for the benefit of the organization, engaging in tournaments and competitions to generate new ideas or to combine existing ideas in new ways for new products and services (Terweisch and Uhlrich, 2009). Specifically, some large companies have developed platforms for posting intractable problems to tap into the ideas and problem solving abilities of a broader range of people (Huston and Sakkab, 2006; Morgan and Wang, 2010), and to develop new and elegant solutions often in an open innovation approach (Chesbrough, 2003). The notion of ingenuity is often applied to individuals who create innovative solutions in situations of constraint, where ingenuity in the form of elegant solutions can be understood as one form of resourcefulness (Young, 2011). However, the notion of organizational ingenuity locates ingenuity more centrally to an organization's strategic decision making and implementation, embedding ingenuity into the company's culture. Studies of organizations displaying ingenuity indicate a range of possibilities from extreme ingenuity (Baker and Nelson, 2005) to less dramatic but substantial changes (Thomke, 2003), sometimes in an experimental phase or as part of a move towards a new and distinct identity for ongoing innovation.

Assessing organizational culture? value management to the rescue

As part of a Doctor of Business Administration degree programme jointly run by Curtin University, Perth, Australia and Lingnan University, Hong Kong, a research thesis relating organizational effectiveness to the organizational culture of Hong Kong construction firms involved in public housing is being undertaken. Organizational effectiveness is measured by the Housing Department (HD) Performance Assessment Scoring System (PASS) and organizational culture traits and strengths have been measured by using the Denison Organizational Culture Survey (OCS), developed by Daniel Denison and William S. Neale and based on 16 years of research involving over 1,000 organizations. The PASS scores of building contractors are compared with the OCS scores to determine if there is any significant correlation between highly effective companies and particular organizational strengths and traits. Profiles are then drawn using the Denison Model and can be compared against ‘norms’ for the industry sector on which the survey has been carried out. The next stage of the work is to present the results of the survey to individual companies, conduct focus group interviews to test the results, discover more detail on that company’s culture and discuss possible actions based on the results. It is in this latter stage that certain value management techniques may well prove very useful.

How environmental and organizational complexity affects opportunity recognition and exploitation in development projects

Principal Topic: Project structures are often created by entrepreneurs and large corporate organizations to develop new products. Since new product development projects (NPDP) are more often situated within a larger organization, intrapreneurship or corporate entrepreneurship plays an important role in bringing these projects to fruition. Since NPDP often involves the development of a new product using immature technology, we describe development of an immature technology. The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35 aircraft is being developed by the U.S. Department of Defense and eight allied nations. In 2001 Lockheed Martin won a $19 billion contract to develop an affordable, stealthy and supersonic all-weather strike fighter designed to replace a wide range of aging fighter aircraft. In this research we define a complex project as one that demonstrates a number of sources of uncertainty to a degree, or level of severity, that makes it extremely difficult to predict project outcomes, to control or manage project (Remington & Zolin, Forthcoming). Project complexity has been conceptualized by Remington and Pollock (2007) in terms of four major sources of complexity; temporal, directional, structural and technological complexity (See Figure 1). Temporal complexity exists when projects experience significant environmental change outside the direct influence or control of the project. The Global Economic Crisis of 2008 - 2009 is a good example of the type of environmental change that can make a project complex as, for example in the JSF project, where project managers attempt to respond to changes in interest rates, international currency exchange rates and commodity prices etc. Directional complexity exists in a project where stakeholders' goals are unclear or undefined, where progress is hindered by unknown political agendas, or where stakeholders disagree or misunderstand project goals. In the JSF project all the services and all non countries have to agree to the specifications of the three variants of the aircraft; Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL), Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) and the Carrier Variant (CV). Because the Navy requires a plane that can take off and land on an aircraft carrier, that required a special variant of the aircraft design, adding complexity to the project. Technical complexity occurs in a project using technology that is immature or where design characteristics are unknown or untried. Developing a plane that can take off on a very short runway and land vertically created may highly interdependent technological challenges to correctly locate, direct and balance the lift fans, modulate the airflow and provide equivalent amount of thrust from the downward vectored rear exhaust to lift the aircraft and at the same time control engine temperatures. These technological challenges make costing and scheduling equally challenging. Structural complexity in a project comes from the sheer numbers of elements such as the number of people, teams or organizations involved, ambiguity regarding the elements, and the massive degree of interconnectedness between them. While Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor, they are assisted in major aspects of the JSF development by Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, Pratt & Whitney and GE/Rolls-Royce Fighter Engineer Team and innumerable subcontractors. In addition to identifying opportunities to achieve project goals, complex projects also need to identify and exploit opportunities to increase agility in response to changing stakeholder demands or to reduce project risks. Complexity Leadership Theory contends that in complex environments adaptive and enabling leadership are needed (Uhl-Bien, Marion and McKelvey, 2007). Adaptive leadership facilitates creativity, learning and adaptability, while enabling leadership handles the conflicts that inevitably arise between adaptive leadership and traditional administrative leadership (Uhl-Bien and Marion, 2007). Hence, adaptive leadership involves the recognition and opportunities to adapt, while and enabling leadership involves the exploitation of these opportunities. Our research questions revolve around the type or source of complexity and its relationship to opportunity recognition and exploitation. For example, is it only external environmental complexity that creates the need for the entrepreneurial behaviours, such as opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation? Do the internal dimensions of project complexity, such as technological and structural complexity, also create the need for opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation? The Kropp, Zolin and Lindsay model (2009) describes a relationship between entrepreneurial orientation (EO), opportunity recognition (OR), and opportunity exploitation (OX) in complex projects, with environmental and organizational contextual variables as moderators. We extend their model by defining the affects of external complexity and internal complexity on OR and OX. ---------- Methodology/Key Propositions: When the environment complex EO is more likely to result in OR because project members will be actively looking for solutions to problems created by environmental change. But in projects that are technologically or structurally complex project leaders and members may try to make the minimum changes possible to reduce the risk of creating new problems due to delays or schedule changes. In projects with environmental or technological complexity project leaders who encourage the innovativeness dimension of EO will increase OR in complex projects. But projects with technical or structural complexity innovativeness will not necessarily result in the recognition and exploitation of opportunities due to the over-riding importance of maintaining stability in the highly intricate and interconnected project structure. We propose that in projects with environmental complexity creating the need for change and innovation project leaders, who are willing to accept and manage risk, are more likely to identify opportunities to increase project effectiveness and efficiency. In contrast in projects with internal complexity a much higher willingness to accept risk will be necessary to trigger opportunity recognition. In structurally complex projects we predict it will be less likely to find a relationship between risk taking and OP. When the environment is complex, and a project has autonomy, they will be motivated to execute opportunities to improve the project's performance. In contrast, when the project has high internal complexity, they will be more cautious in execution. When a project experiences high competitive aggressiveness and their environment is complex, project leaders will be motivated to execute opportunities to improve the project's performance. In contrast, when the project has high internal complexity, they will be more cautious in execution. This paper reports the first stage of a three year study into the behaviours of managers, leaders and team members of complex projects. We conduct a qualitative study involving a Group Discussion with experienced project leaders. The objective is to determine how leaders of large and potentially complex projects perceive that external and internal complexity will influence the affects of EO on OR. ---------- Results and Implications: These results will help identify and distinguish the impact of external and internal complexity on entrepreneurial behaviours in NPDP. Project managers will be better able to quickly decide how and when to respond to changes in the environment and internal project events.

Building organizational capability through a quality assurance program within a business school and encouraging organizational culture change

This study explores organizational capability and culture change through a project developing an assurance of learning program in a business school. In order to compete internationally for high quality faculty, students, strategic partnerships and research collaborations it is essential for Universities to develop and maintain an international focus and a quality produce that predicts excellence in the student experience and graduate outcomes that meet industry needs. Developing, marketing and delivering that quality product requires an organizational strategy to which all members of the organization contribute and adhere. Now, the ability to acquire, share and utilize knowledge has become a critical organizational capability in academia as well as other industries. Traditionally the functional approach to business school structures and disparate nature of the social networks and work contact limit the sharing of knowledge between academics working in different disciplines. In this project a community of practice program was established to include academics in the development of an embedded assurance of learning program affecting more than 5000 undergraduate students and 250 academics from nine different disciplines across four schools. The primary outcome from the fully developed and implemented assurance of learning program was the five year accreditation of the business schools programs by two international accrediting bodies, EQUIS and AACSB. However this study explores a different outcome, namely the change in organizational culture and individual capabilities as academics worked together in teaching and learning teams. This study uses a survey and interviews with academics involved, through a retrospective panel design which contained an experimental group and a control group. Results offer insights into communities of practice as a means of addressing organizational capability and changes in organizational culture. Knowledge management and shared learning can achieve strategic and operational benefits equally within academia as within other industrial enterprises but it comes at a cost. Traditional structures, academics that act like individual contractors and deep divides across research, teaching and service interest served a different master and required fewer resources. Collaborative structures; fewer master categories of discrete knowledge areas; specific strategic goals; greater links between academics and industry; and the means to share learned insights will require a different approach to resourcing both the individual and the team.

Boundary weaving : the social structure and processes of organizational boundaries

Boundaries are an important field of study because they mediate almost every aspect of organizational life. They are becoming increasingly more important as organizations change more frequently and yet, despite the endemic use of the boundary metaphor in common organizational parlance, they are poorly understood. Organizational boundaries are under-theorized and researchers in related fields often simply assume their existence, without defining them. The literature on organizational boundaries is fragmented with no unifying theoretical basis. As a result, when it is recognized that an organizational boundary is "dysfunctional". there is little recourse to models on which to base remediating action. This research sets out to develop just such a theoretical model and is guided by the general question: "What is the nature of organizational boundaries?" It is argued that organizational boundaries can be conceptualised through elements of both social structure and of social process. Elements of structure include objects, coupling, properties and identity. Social processes include objectification, identification, interaction and emergence. All of these elements are integrated by a core category, or basic social process, called boundary weaving. An organizational boundary is a complex system of objects and emergent properties that are woven together by people as they interact together, objectifying the world around them, identifying with these objects and creating couplings of varying strength and polarity as well as their own fragmented identity. Organizational boundaries are characterised by the multiplicity of interconnections, a particular domain of objects, varying levels of embodiment and patterns of interaction. The theory developed in this research emerged from an exploratory, qualitative research design employing grounded theory methodology. The field data was collected from the training headquarters of the New Zealand Army using semi-structured interviews and follow up observations. The unit of analysis is an organizational boundary. Only one research context was used because of the richness and multiplicity of organizational boundaries that were present. The model arose, grounded in the data collected, through a process of theoretical memoing and constant comparative analysis. Academic literature was used as a source of data to aid theory development and the saturation of some central categories. The final theory is classified as middle range, being substantive rather than formal, and is generalizable across medium to large organizations in low-context societies. The main limitation of the research arose from the breadth of the research with multiple lines of inquiry spanning several academic disciplines, with some relevant areas such as the role of identity and complexity being addressed at a necessarily high level. The organizational boundary theory developed by this research replaces the typology approaches, typical of previous theory on organizational boundaries and reconceptualises the nature of groups in organizations as well as the role of "boundary spanners". It also has implications for any theory that relies on the concept of boundaries, such as general systems theory. The main contribution of this research is the development of a holistic model of organizational boundaries including an explanation of the multiplicity of boundaries . no organization has a single definable boundary. A significant aspect of this contribution is the integration of aspects of complexity theory and identity theory to explain the emergence of higher-order properties of organizational boundaries and of organizational identity. The core category of "boundary weaving". is a powerful new metaphor that significantly reconceptualises the way organizational boundaries may be understood in organizations. It invokes secondary metaphors such as the weaving of an organization's "boundary fabric". and provides managers with other metaphorical perspectives, such as the management of boundary friction, boundary tension, boundary permeability and boundary stability. Opportunities for future research reside in formalising and testing the theory as well as developing analytical tools that would enable managers in organizations to apply the theory in practice.

Evaluation of design-builder qualifications through the analysis of Requests for Qualifications (RFQs)

The two-phrase best-value process has been widely used by public agencies for Design and Build (DB) procurement, with a key issue in the first phase of pre-qualification being the determination of evaluation criteria. This study identified a set of general qualification criteria for design-builders and compares their relative importance by a thorough content analysis of 97 Requests for Qualification (RFQ) for public DB projects advertised between 2000 and 2011 in various regions of the USA. The thirty-nine qualification criteria found are summarized and classified into eight categories comprising: experience; project understanding and approach; organizational structure and capacity; past performance record; professional qualifications; responsiveness to RFQs, office location and familiarity with local environment; and legal status in descending order of their relative importance. A comparative analysis of different types of projects shows that the relative weightings of the qualification criteria vary according to different characteristics of the DB projects involved.

How novices design business processes

Process modeling is an important design practice in organizational improvement projects. In this paper, we examine the design of business process diagrams in contexts where novice analysts only have basic design tools such as paper and pencils available, and little to no understanding of formalized modeling approaches. Based on a quasi-experimental study with 89 BPM students, we identify five distinct process design archetypes ranging from textual to hybrid and graphical representation forms. We examine the quality of the designs and identify which representation formats enable an analyst to articulate business rules, states, events, activities, temporal and geospatial information in a process model. We found that the quality of the process designs decreases with the increased use of graphics and that hybrid designs featuring appropriate text labels and abstract graphical forms appear well-suited to describe business processes. We further examine how process design preferences predict formalized process modeling ability. Our research has implications for practical process design work in industry as well as for academic curricula on process design.

Breaking organizational barriers for greening Australian

Sustainability is an issue for everyone. For instance, the higher education sector is being asked to take an active part in creating a sustainable future, due to their moral responsibility, social obligation, and their own need to adapt to the changing higher education environment. By either signing declarations or making public statements, many universities are expressing their desire to become role models for enhancing sustainability. However, too often they have not delivered as much as they had intended. This is particularly evident in the lack of physical implementation of sustainable practices in the campus environment. Real projects such as green technologies on campus have the potential to rectify the problem in addition to improving building performance. Despite being relatively recent innovations, Green Roof and Living Wall have been widely recognized because of their substantial benefits, such as runoff water reduction, noise insulation, and the promotion of biodiversity. While they can be found in commercial and residential buildings, they only appear infrequently on campuses as universities have been very slow to implement sustainability innovations. There has been very little research examining the fundamental problems from the organizational perspective. To address this deficiency, the researchers designed and carried out 24 semi-structured interviews to investigate the general organizational environment of Australian universities with the intention to identify organizational obstacles to the delivery of Green Roof and Living Wall projects. This research revealed that the organizational environment of Australian universities still has a lot of room to be improved in order to accommodate sustainability practices. Some of the main organizational barriers to the adoption of sustainable innovations were identified including lack of awareness and knowledge, the absence of strong supportive leadership, a weak sustainability-rooted culture and several management challenges. This led to the development of a set of strategies to help optimize the organizational environment for the purpose of better decision making for Green Roof and Living Wall implementation.