Irene M. Grubb, Norrie W. Silvestro and David F. Ward
The first of two articles, discusses the problems of seeking tointroduce organizational development interventions into a major HealthService organization. In particular, the…
Abstract
The first of two articles, discusses the problems of seeking to introduce organizational development interventions into a major Health Service organization. In particular, the paradox is that the leaders of major change issues are themselves caught up in the instability that the interventions create in their attempts to manage major environmental and political demands. Despite the planned emphasis on regular evaluation and review, senior managers often found it impossible to be objective and impartial in relation to the data being revealed about their own “patch”. Defensive and dysfunctional competitive behaviours were unintentionally created by this formal review process. Offers suggestions about how to make these types of survey process more directly useful to managers and staff.
Details
Keywords
Irene M. Grubb, Norrie W. Silvestro and David F. Ward
Describes and reviews one major initiative within the context of aten‐year organization development strategy. Outlines the key stepsinvolved in extending a performance management…
Abstract
Describes and reviews one major initiative within the context of a ten‐year organization development strategy. Outlines the key steps involved in extending a performance management and planning process to over 600 supervisory and clinical staff. Indicates that high levels of external uncertainty and change can have a disabling effect on senior managers. This effect also has implications on the ability and scope for middle managers to play a direct and active role in the change interventions. A key lesson is the need to continually support managers to work with their own staff to help the new systems to be understood and to operate them effectively. The final section reviews the main lessons and how previous work will act as a foundation for ongoing initiatives based on principles which are consistent with the original OD strategy.
Details
Keywords
Harry Boer, Matthias Holweg, Martin Kilduff, Mark Pagell, Roger Schmenner and Chris Voss
The need to make a “theoretical contribution” is a presumed mandate that permeates any researcher’s career in the Social Sciences, yet all too often this remains a source of…
Abstract
Purpose
The need to make a “theoretical contribution” is a presumed mandate that permeates any researcher’s career in the Social Sciences, yet all too often this remains a source of confusion and frustration. The purpose of this paper is to reflect on, and further develops, the principal themes discussed in the “OM Theory” workshop in Dublin in 2011 and the special sessions at the 2011 and the 2013 EurOMA Conferences in Cambridge and Dublin.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper presents six short essays that explore the role and use of theory in management research, and specifically ask what is a good or meaningful contribution to theory. The authors comment on the current state of theory in Operations Management (OM) (Harry Boer), the type of theories the authors have in OM (Chris Voss), the role of theory in increasing the general understanding of OM problems (Roger Schmenner), whether the authors can borrow theories from other fields or actually have theory “of our own” (Matthias Holweg), the different ways in which a contribution to theory can be made (Martin Kilduff), and how to construct a theoretical argument (Mark Pagell).
Findings
The authors argue that theory is fundamental to OM research, but that it is not the inevitable starting point; discovery and observation are equally important and often neglected avenues to contributing to theory. Also, there is no one right way to making a contribution, yet consistency between ontology, epistemology, and claimed contribution is what matters. The authors further argue that the choice of theory is critical, as a common mistake is trying to contribute to high-level theories borrowed from other fields. Finally, the authors recommend using theory parsimoniously, yet with confidence.
Originality/value
The paper presents a collection of viewpoints of senior scholars on the need for, and use of, theory in OM research.