HRM, organizational capacity for change, and performance:a global perspective

This special issue brings together a variety of articles, each one enriching understanding about whether and how human resource management (HRM) influences organizational performance (however defined) against a backdrop of complex change. We present a preliminary framework that enables us to integrate the diverse themes explored in the special issue, proposing a mediating role for organizational change capacity (OCC). OCC represents a particular subset within the resource-based literature labeled as “dynamic capabilities.” Although not well researched, there is evidence that OCC is positively associated with firm performance and that this relationship is stronger given conditions of high uncertainty. Our framework reflects on external and internal parameters, which we suggest moderate the relationship between human resource management (HRM), OCC, and organizational performance. Our intention is to provide compelling insight for both practitioners and researchers, especially those whose remit extends beyond national boundaries, with reference to areas of the globe as disparate as Greece, Ireland, Pakistan, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

People, technology, processes and risk knowledge sharing

The present global economic crisis creates doubts about the good use of accumulated experience and knowledge in managing risk in financial services. Typically, risk management practice does not use knowledge management (KM) to improve and to develop new answers to the threats. A key reason is that it is not clear how to break down the “organizational silos” view of risk management (RM) that is commonly taken. As a result, there has been relatively little work on finding the relationships between RM and KM. We have been doing research for the last couple of years on the identification of relationships between these two disciplines. At ECKM 2007 we presented a general review of the literature(s) and some hypotheses for starting research on KM and its relationship to the perceived value of enterprise risk management. This article presents findings based on our preliminary analyses, concentrating on those factors affecting the perceived quality of risk knowledge sharing. These come from a questionnaire survey of RM employees in organisations in the financial services sector, which yielded 121 responses. We have included five explanatory variables for the perceived quality of risk knowledge sharing. These comprised two variables relating to people (organizational capacity for work coordination and perceived quality of communication among groups), one relating to process (perceived quality of risk control) and two related to technology (web channel functionality and RM information system functionality). Our findings so far are that four of these five variables have a significant positive association with the perceived quality of risk knowledge sharing: contrary to expectations, web channel functionality did not have a significant association. Indeed, in some of our exploratory regression studies its coefficient (although not significant) was negative. In stepwise regression, the variable organizational capacity for work coordination accounted for by far the largest part of the variation in the dependent variable perceived quality of risk knowledge sharing. The “people” variables thus appear to have the greatest influence on the perceived quality of risk knowledge sharing, even in a sector that relies heavily on technology and on quantitative approaches to decision making. We have also found similar results with the dependent variable perceived value of Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) implementation.

Learning and change in interorganizational networks:the case for network learning and network change

The ALBA 2002 Call for Papers asks the question ‘How do organizational learning and knowledge management contribute to organizational innovation and change?’. Intuitively, we would argue, the answer should be relatively straightforward as links between learning and change, and knowledge management and innovation, have long been commonly assumed to exist. On the basis of this assumption, theories of learning tend to focus ‘within organizations’, and assume a transfer of learning from individual to organization which in turn leads to change. However, empirically, we find these links are more difficult to articulate. Organizations exist in complex embedded economic, political, social and institutional systems, hence organizational change (or innovation) may be influenced by learning in this wider context. Based on our research in this wider interorganizational setting, we first make the case for the notion of network learning that we then explore to develop our appreciation of change in interorganizational networks, and how it may be facilitated. The paper begins with a brief review of lite rature on learning in the organizational and interorganizational context which locates our stance on organizational learning versus the learning organization, and social, distributed versus technical, centred views of organizational learning and knowledge. Developing from the view that organizational learning is “a normal, if problematic, process in every organization” (Easterby-Smith, 1997: 1109), we introduce the notion of network learning: learning by a group of organizations as a group. We argue this is also a normal, if problematic, process in organizational relationships (as distinct from interorganizational learning), which has particular implications for network change. Part two of the paper develops our analysis, drawing on empirical data from two studies of learning. The first study addresses the issue of learning to collaborate between industrial customers and suppliers, leading to the case for network learning. The second, larger scale study goes on to develop this theme, examining learning around several major change issues in a healthcare service provider network. The learning processes and outcomes around the introduction of a particularly controversial and expensive technology are described, providing a rich and contrasting case with the first study. In part three, we then discuss the implications of this work for change, and for facilitating change. Conclusions from the first study identify potential interventions designed to facilitate individual and organizational learning within the customer organization to develop individual and organizational ‘capacity to collaborate’. Translated to the network example, we observe that network change entails learning at all levels – network, organization, group and individual. However, presenting findings in terms of interventions is less meaningful in an interorganizational network setting given: the differences in authority structures; the less formalised nature of the network setting; and the importance of evaluating performance at the network rather than organizational level. Academics challenge both the idea of managing change and of managing networks. Nevertheless practitioners are faced with the issue of understanding and in fluencing change in the network setting. Thus we conclude that a network learning perspective is an important development in our understanding of organizational learning, capability and change, locating this in the wider context in which organizations are embedded. This in turn helps to develop our appreciation of facilitating change in interorganizational networks, both in terms of change issues (such as introducing a new technology), and change orientation and capability.

Organizational learning orientation profile and implications for strategic planning capacity

Theory development on the relationship between strategic planning and organizational performance has focussed on largely discrete examinations of dependent and independent variables. While the literature has examined the impact of organizational learning on strategic planning, no holistic empirical approaches have been employed in order to fully explore the inter-play between these important constructs. This paper addresses the cited limitations in both the strategic planning and organizational performance literatures by creating profiles of organizational learning and strategic planning capacity using a configuration theory-based approach. The organizational learning orientation profiles (OLOPs) created of prospector, disseminator, interpretative and memory, contribute to theory development regarding the relationship of strategic planning and organizational learning. The theory developed provides insights that have not been previously reported.

Do organizational climate and competitive strategy moderate the relationship between human resource management and productivity?

This study examined whether the effectiveness of human resource management (HRM) practices is contingent on organizational climate and competitive strategy. The concepts of internal and external fit suggest that the positive relationship between HRM and subsequent productivity will be stronger for firms with a positive organizational climate and for firms using differentiation strategies. Resource allocation theories of motivation, on the other hand, predict that the relationship between HRM and productivity will be stronger for firms with a poor climate because employees working in these firms should have the greatest amount of spare capacity. The results supported the resource allocation argument. © 2005 Southern Management Association. All rights reserved.