Jelle Van Camp and Johan Braet
After more than 30 years of research, literature on performance measurement systems (PMS) is characterized by diversity and fragmentation. Due to the multidisciplinarity of…
Abstract
Purpose
After more than 30 years of research, literature on performance measurement systems (PMS) is characterized by diversity and fragmentation. Due to the multidisciplinarity of stakeholders and researchers involved the basis of literature is expanding, but not converging. The purpose of this paper is to dispersedly discuss failures of PMS in the abundance of literature written.
Design/methodology/approach
Over 250 articles related to PMS have been analyzed in order to shortlist failures of PMS. Two criteria have been used: explicitly referenced being a failure; or mentioned as being essential for a successful PMS. Next steps were clustering, cross-checking with academics and professionals and re-allocation to appropriate levels.
Findings
This paper identifies 36 failures and proposes an easy taxonomy for further referencing by attribution to three levels: metric, framework and management. Failures range from uncertainties in data gathering, lack of knowledge and dealing with complexity, toward the allocation of necessary resources.
Research limitations/implications
Limitations are attributed to the abundance of research published on PMS. Consequently, incorporated papers are a subset representing the current state of the research domain. Furthermore, the completeness of the list can be discussed as well as the level of generalization of the proposed taxonomy.
Originality/value
Both academics and professionals can benefit from this study as it creates an awareness of the risks involved when constructing, implementing and managing a PMS. Therefore, this original research ought to be seen as a catalyst for a learning curve, as it puts the research of PMS in a different perspective.
Details
Keywords
Maria Dijkstra, Bianca Beersma and Jelle van Leeuwen
The current paper aims to argue that it is important for conflict management research to start focusing on leader–follower conflict as a “special case” of conflict because the…
Abstract
Purpose
The current paper aims to argue that it is important for conflict management research to start focusing on leader–follower conflict as a “special case” of conflict because the relationship between leaders and followers is, by definition, characterized by divergence of interest and, second, because it is asymmetric in terms of power and vulnerability. Moreover, it is argued that conflict management research should start to examine the various behaviors that people engage in as a response to conflict, in a broader sense, than has been done until now. Research on conflict management increasingly recognizes the significance of interpersonal relations in the workplace.
Design/methodology/approach
As a case in point, a survey study among 97 Dutch police officers is presented. Leaders’ conflict management behaviors as assessed by followers is measured. In addition, followers’ experienced interactional justice and the extent to which they indicated that they would engage in negative and/or positive gossip about their leader was measured.
Findings
Results demonstrate that more forcing and avoiding leader conflict management behavior was related to more negative and less positive gossip about leaders. Moreover, more problem-solving and yielding leader conflict management behavior was related to less negative and more positive gossip. All relationships between leader conflict management behavior and follower gossip were mediated by followers’ experienced interactional justice.
Originality/value
It is hoped that the findings put research on the broader implications of interactional justice in leader–follower interactions, and on gossip, on the research agenda of conflict researchers.
Details
Keywords
Christoph Dörrenbächer, Mike Geppert and Ödül Bozkurt
The purpose of this study is to address the relationship between multinational corporations (MNCs) and grand challenges. Stressing the moderating impact of stakeholders and…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to address the relationship between multinational corporations (MNCs) and grand challenges. Stressing the moderating impact of stakeholders and governments, it frames and introduces the six contributions of the special issue, equally divided into those illustrating how MNCs contribute to the existence of grand challenges and those exploring how MNCs contribute to addressing grand challenges.
Design/methodology/approach
Based on a review of the existing literature on the relationship between MNCs and grand challenges and recent developments in mainstream international business, the viewpoint emphasizes the need to move beyond a one-sided focus on the positive contributions of MNCs to grand challenges.
Findings
The special issue contributions reveal that even established MNCs are actively engaged in strategic efforts to perpetuate unsustainable practices and minimize the impact of societal rules and stakeholders. The contributions also highlight the complications when MNCs aim to tackle grand challenges.
Practical implications
Displaying positive practices of how MNCs contribute to the solution of grand challenges should not be considered a functional substitute for regulatory action, contrary to the frequent assertion of MNCs and their political representatives.
Originality/value
This special issue is the first one in IB to address the relationship between MNCs and grand challenges from an empirical vantage point.