Search results

Organizational learning capabilities are embedded in organizational communication systems and processes related to knowledge creation and articulation. The emergence of new organizational forms (such as horizontal organizations) in rapidly‐changing environments and hyper‐competitive markets underscores the need to better understand these foundational sources of learning. In fact, the reason horizontal organizations may find success is that their structure is intended to promote communications systems and processes which enhance a knowledge‐response sequence similar to a stimulus‐response sequence associated with learning. These systems permit managers to quickly gather information, respond with agility in making decisions, and continue to make ongoing adjustments. Firms which understand the need to build their communications capabilities may be characterized as meta‐learning organizations. Resource‐based theory suggests that communications systems and processes are thus sources of competitive advantage. Future empirical research on organizational learning may progress by evaluating specific measures of communication process as proxies for learning processes.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a collection of articles representing the best papers and invited contributions from attendees at the 4th Annual Global Drucker Forum, an international conference focused on future challenges facing management.

The recent financial crisis has presented twin challenges confronting the next generation of management: a transformation toward a new environment in which market‐driven efficiency and the concern for a functioning society are better aligned, and the nature of management practice that successfully addresses this alignment. Dimensions of these challenges are discussed in five articles in this special issue. This summary of the articles and underlying themes is provided by a professor whose teaching and research focus on strategy and entrepreneurship in free markets.

The articles in this issue discuss the need in organizations for adaptive flexibility, new ways of thinking, leadership behaviour at the individual and system level, and systems thinking to overcome short termism. Themes underlying these challenges include the challenges of managing in the present for the future, the need to create a learning organization, and the complexity of managing holistically.

The paper suggests themes that might benefit from future management research.

This paper summarizes cutting‐edge issues for management that were discussed at a recent international conference, and synthesizes six authors' research contributions that address dimensions of these issues.

The purpose of the paper is to present a provocative view of what Peter Drucker would be writing about today in his self‐described role as a social ecologist.

The paper uses Drucker's qualitative framework to ask what changes that contravene conventional wisdom have already happened, whether they are relevant and meaningful and what opportunities they present.

The paper suggest that the concepts of ecological rationality and embodied cognition form the basis for a new framework to challenge the hegemony of the existing concepts of rationality based on frameworks drawn from neoclassical economics.

The primary implication is that an ecological framework of “both … and” is needed to embrace and contain the “either/or” of economics. This will sweep the liberal and fine arts back into management, render the concept and role of power in organizations discussable and place ethics, prudence and judgement at the centre of the management challenge.

The paper presents a provocative perspective that, if valid, with be extremely disruptive of the current Western management paradigm.

The purpose of this paper is to link Peter F. Drucker's seminal theoretical conceptions with empirical insights on what constitutes perception of effective knowledge worker leadership in an intercultural environment. Both a fundamental shift of mind in theorizing and much more empirical research is needed, to fully understand the underlying view of leadership as a socially distributed activity. However, in a true Druckerian spirit, to take this new lens on leadership is neither magic nor rocket science – but it constitutes a road visible but not yet seen.

The authors link key recommendations on expert leadership from the timeless 1999 Drucker paper on knowledge worker productivity to the results of qualitative in‐depth interviews with over 100 top‐level leaders and their direct reports in China, Indonesia, and Singapore. Because leadership is all about influencing other people, the authors are especially interested on what constitutes good leadership from the followers' point of view.

One of the key findings is that perceived leadership effectiveness heavily depends upon fit to followers' expectations. As a result, a leadership style, which is effective in one country can wreak havoc when unreflectively transferred into another cultural environment. Hence being able to step back and to reflect on the appropriateness of one's leadership behavior is the key element of a globally successful leader.

Too many experts are currently sent to foreign assignments without proper preparation for good adaptation of their leadership behavior. A new leadership conception informed by psychological consideration provides expert leaders with recommended action on how to best deal with the group dynamics resulting from dealing with the twenty‐first century's most valuable asset entrusted to their care. This mind‐shift will overcome leadership barriers to international business, and optimize knowledge work results.

This contribution is one of the first studies about perceived knowledge worker leadership effectiveness in Asia. Integration of the paper's findings with recent Western leadership conceptualizations focusing on sharing and distributing leadership responsibilities will help build a richer understanding.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the influence of Peter Drucker's ideas in the academy.

The author presents a profile of Peter Drucker, discussing his ideas and his relationship with the scholarly community.

Peter Drucker was not particularly fond of the academic world and served in a non‐traditional role in the academy. Yet his prolific writing and methodological rigor has impacted generations of scholars and practicing managers. His work constantly looked to the future, identified crucial emerging trends that would affect management, thought and worked in a trans‐disciplinary fashion, and focused on practical implications that would make a difference.

The paper suggests new approaches to consider, to enhance academic engagement with practice.

This paper points out the significant contributions that Peter Drucker made to management thinking and research.

The purpose of this paper is to lay the foundations for new ways of management and personality development by using the same way Peter Drucker developed his ideas. What was this “teaching philosophy”? Where else can it be found? Which learning phenomena are typical for this way of teaching? Can this “teaching philosophy” be replicated? Can it be applied to management in general?

The historical genetic method developed by Ernst Mach from the historical‐critical method. Using this approach the paper traces the origin of Drucker's central ideas for management in his early learning experiences. It then asks the question, in how far can these central ideas be generalized and used to develop the central ideas of Drucker (including the intuitive ones) further? The question is genetically left open, i.e. it is continually transformative.

Drucker was heavily influenced in his way of thinking by his education at a special school in Vienna. The school was organized by Eugenie Schwarzwald. Many of Drucker's ideas on personality development and his intuitive theories on psychology and learning can be traced back to that time. What was especially important for Drucker's later works was the “teaching philosophy” taught by Schwarzwald's teachers.

There is a direct link between the science teaching results for Finland in the OECD PISA study and Drucker's way of thinking. Drucker acquired an exponential way of learning, instead of a learning based on a linear model. This is what made his thoughts so challenging and ahead of his contemporaries. As the example of Finland shows, this is not a light‐tower method (i.e. a singular phenomenon without empirical evidence of its reproducibility). One can use these ideas in general for all of education and it has been used in over a dozen cases at different around the world times. It is especially valuable in management education of knowledge workers. In such a way, one can create a much more efficient and effective way of education, an “education 2.0”.

This is the first time that Drucker's ideas can be linked to the ideas of Ernst Mach and to similar types of education based on ideas of Mach, such as used in Finland. The empirical results of such methods can therefore not only be found in Drucker's autobiography as a single case, but they can be compared in much more general contexts, for instance in the large‐scale field study OECD PISA study or in Hattie's educational meta‐meta analysis.

Most research on new organizations drawing on resource-based theory examines firms in discrete development stages with resources that already exist. The purpose of this paper is to articulate a broader view of changing resource requirements over the life of new organizations. The authors propose four phases of resources development, arguing that new resources and capabilities must develop as new strategic challenges emerge. The paper identifies salient resources in these phases and finds that internal resource development is context dependent, interacting with the external stage of industry development.

After developing the theoretical model, the authors use an exploratory qualitative study involving extensive case studies of new ventures in the wine industry. Key personnel at a sample of firms were interviewed, supplemented with secondary data from published reports.

The paper finds that a linear stage development model for new organizational ventures is inappropriate. The various combinations of early/later new ventures in a formative/developed industry suggest that some may proceed rapidly in a linear fashion through phases of development, while others may find progress slow, difficult, stalled or occasionally regressive. A combination of resources developed simultaneously in a non-linear pattern appears to be critical to the success of new ventures. In other words, combinations must evolve as the strategic challenges evolve, thus bringing an important contextual view to the examination of dynamic resource development efforts for new organizations. Attempts to focus in a piecemeal fashion on individual aspects of resource development, without accounting for resource interactions at a systemic level or the nature of the strategic demands, is likely to leave researchers and practitioners with incomplete insights.

Existing studies have failed to grasp the dynamic and interactive process of resource development as organizations evolve in a new industry setting. The model presented in this paper provides a heuristic device for conceptualizing these changes.

The purpose of this paper is to review proposed methods to reduce corporate short‐termism – a private sector obsession with short‐term profit and a neglect of true long‐term value creation – via a systems thinking analytical framework.

This paper identifies five often cited causes of corporate short‐termism directly affecting managers, including: pressure from Wall Street; ill‐aligned executive compensation; arrested executive capabilities; weak corporate governance; and ill‐aligned regulatory policy. It then compares those issues to generic system archetypes, and evaluates proposed solutions by contrasting them with typical solutions relating to specific archetypes.

This study suggests a majority of the solutions are well proposed and identifies strong leverage points where managers may intervene. It also finds that several proposed solutions are susceptible to complications, especially those relating to executive compensation, board empowerment, and regulatory structures. It also notes several additional points of leverage not yet fully explored, especially relating to deterring shareholder pressure and executive compensation structures. Finally, it suggests too little attention is being given toward a culture supportive of short‐termism, and argues that emphasizing solutions that engage stakeholders is important for sustained success.

For managers seeking to reduce corporate short‐termism, this paper suggests several key levers that may be used to intervene within their environment.

Few works have tested system‐wide solutions to corporate short‐termism using a system thinking foundation. This original work fills that unmet need.

Entrepreneurial firms are vital to economic growth because they bring creative insights and unique capabilities to the marketplace. The content of entrepreneurial firm strategies reflect the unique opportunities that the technological breakthroughs, operational efficiencies, and/or marketing genius of entrepreneurial firms bring into existence. Entrepreneurial firms are at the forefront of creating new classes of products and services, and sometimes even new industries. With them, they often bring new methods of competing. Volume 11 identifies several strategic dilemmas and strategic choices that organizations face in their efforts to be more entrepreneurial. It concludes with a lively debate between well-known scholars regarding the best ways to advance entrepreneurship as a scholarly field.