Stages of organizational transformation in transition economies: A dynamic capabilities approach

How do organizations previously dominated by the state develop dynamic capabilities that would support their growth in a competitive market economy? We develop a theoretical framework of organizational transformation that explains the processes by which organizations learn and develop dynamic capabilities in transition economies. Specifically, the framework theorizes about the importance of, and inter-relationships between, leadership, organizational learning, dynamic capabilities, and performance over three stages of transformation. Propositions derived from this framework explain the pre-conditions enabling organizational learning, the linkages between types of learning and functions of dynamic capabilities, and the feedback from dynamic capabilities to organizational learning that allows firms in transition economies to regain their footing and build long-term competitive advantage. We focus on transition contexts, where these processes have been magnified and thus offer new insights into strategizing in radically altered environments.

Temperament and self-based correlates of cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning preferences

People vary in the extent to which they prefer cooperative, competitive or individualistic achievement tasks. In the present research, we conducted two studies designed to investigate correlates and possible roots of these social interdependence orientations, namely approach and avoidance temperament, general self-efficacy, implicit theories of intelligence, and contingencies of self-worth based in others’ approval, competition, and academic competence. The results indicated that approach temperament, general self-efficacy, and incremental theory were positively, and entity theory was negatively related to cooperative preferences (|r| range from .11 to .41); approach temperament, general self-efficacy, competition contingencies, and academic competence contingencies were positively related to competitive preferences (|r| range from .16 to .46); and avoidance temperament, entity theory, competitive contingencies, and academic competence contingencies were positively related, and incremental theory was negatively related to individualistic preferences (|r| range from .09 to .15). The findings are discussed with regard to the meaning of each of the three social interdependence orientations, cultural differences among the observed relations, and implications for practicioners.