An exploratory study of how a Korean chaebol’s learning culture facilitates customer service

This paper explains how the organizational learning concept is used by managers in a global Korean company to promote group work, information sharing and an open communication style in order to produce a high level of customer service. Previously collected data from a set of in-depth personal interviews undertaken with three senior managers in a Korean electronics company were analyzed and interpreted using the grounded theory approach, and a number of propositions are put forward. The research findings show that managers in a chaebol deploy organizational learning to identify skilled and knowledgeable staff, and improve the organization’s capability by placing emphasis on developing harmonious, mutually oriented relationships that permeate throughout the organization. Top management demand that staff identify with government economic objectives and align the organization’s strategy accordingly so that the products produced are marketable. To achieve this, the organization fosters continual interaction among managers throughout the organization’s hierarchy. The chaebol’s organizational learning model encapsulates a “corollary” (continual communication) and “tools” (cultural influence and relationship management), and manifests in a unique strategy that allows management systems to evolve naturally.

The effects of conflict in driving forward innovation in shared leadership management consultant teams

It is argued in this study that current investigations of the role of conflict in shared leadership teams and, thus, teams in which all members have the opportunity to participate in its decision-making process are insufficient as they have focused on the downsides of these conflicts. This study demonstrates that task conflict is beneficial in that it can have positive effects on innovation in teams. It shows that particularly in shared leadership management consultant teams task conflict can stimulate innovation. Therefore, this research investigates the relationships among shared leadership, conflict and innovation. The research develops and empirically tests a conceptual model which demonstrates the relationships between these concepts and for which the inclusion of multiple research methods was essential. The sequential explanatory approach included a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, the order of which can be adapted for other domains of application. The conceptual model was first tested with a sample of 329 management consultants. This was followed by 25, in-depth, face-to-face interviews conducted with individual survey respondents. In addition, weekly meetings of a management consultant team in action were video recorded over several months. This allowed for an in-depth explanation of the findings from the survey by providing an understanding of the underlying processes. The inclusion of observational methods provided a validating role and explained how and why conflicts contributed to the development of team innovation, through the analysis of subtleties and fleeting disagreements in a real-life management consultant team. The results deliver an assessment of the theoretical model and demonstrate that task conflict can allow for additional innovation in management consultant teams operating under a shared leadership structure. A practical model and guidelines for management consultant teams wanting to enhance their innovatory capacities are provided. In addition, a novel-user methodology which includes video observations is developed, with recommendations and steps aiding researchers aiming to employ a similar combination of methods. An original contribution to knowledge is made regarding the positive effects that task conflict can have towards innovation in shared leadership teams. Collaboration and trust are identified as important mediators between shared leadership and task conflict and significant regarding the development of innovation. The effectiveness of shared leadership in reducing negative relationship conflict and the benefits of both shared leadership and task conflict in enhancing innovation are demonstrated.