Formal planning rationality in public sector professional work: between discourse and practice

Although rational models of formal planning have been seriously criticized by strategy literature, they not only remain a widely used organizational practice in private firms, but they have increasingly been entering public, professional organizations too, as part of public sector managerial reforms. This research addresses this apparent paradox, exploring the meaning of formal planning in public sector professional work. Curiously, this is an issue that remains under-investigated in the literature: the long debate on formal planning in strategy research devoted scant attention to its diffusion in the public sector, and public sector studies have scrutinized the introduction of other management tools in professional work, but very limitedly formal planning itself. In fact, little is known on the actual meaning of formal planning in public, professional services. This research is based upon a case of adoption of formal planning tools in a public hospital. Embracing a discourse analytical lens, it examines which formal planning discourse entered professional work, to what extent, and how professionals interpret it and engage with it in their practice. The analysis uncovers dynamics of social construction of meaning where, eventually, a formal planning discourse both shapes and is shaped by professional practice. In particular, it is found that formal planning rationality largely penetrated professional work, but not to the detriment of professional values. Morevover, formal planning ‘fails’ as a tool for rational decision making, but it takes up a knowledge work and a social value in professional work, as a tool for explicitation of action courses and for dialogue between otherwise more disconnected parts of the organization.

Percieved Organizational Efficacy in Internationalized Companies: Application of Competing Values Approach and Collective Efficacy

This dissertation focuses on “organizational efficacy”, in particular on employees’ beliefs of organizational capacity to be efficacious. Organizational efficacy is considered from two perspectives – competing values approach and collective efficacy, and evaluated in internationalized companies. The dissertation is composed of three studies. The data were collected in thirteen Italian companies on different stages of internationalization for a total number of respondents is 358. In the first study the factorial validity of the competing values instrument (Rohrbaugh, 1981) was investigated and confirmed. Two scales were used to measure collective efficacy: a general collective efficacy scale (Bohn, 2010), and a specific collective efficacy scale, developed following suggestions of Borgogni et al. (2001), it evaluates employees’ beliefs of efficacy of organizations in the international market. The findings suggest that competing values and collective organizational efficacy instruments may provide a multi-faceted measurement of employees’ beliefs of organizational efficacy. The second study examined the relationship between organizational efficacy and collective work engagement. To measure collective work engagement the UWES-9 (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2003) was adapted at the group level; its factor structure and reliability were similar to the standard UWES-9. The findings suggest that organizational efficacy fully predicts collective work engagement. Also we investigated whether leadership moderates the relationship between organizational efficacy and collective work engagement. We operationalized leadership style with MLQ (Bass & Avolio, 1995); the results suggest that intellectual stimulation and idealized influence (transformational leadership) and contingent reward (transactional leadership) enhance the impact of organizational efficacy on collective work engagement. In the third study we investigated organizational efficacy and collective work engagement in internationalized companies. The findings show that beliefs of organizational efficacy vary across companies in different stages of internationalization, while no significant difference was found for collective work engagement. Limitations, practical implications and future studies are discussed in the conclusion.