Search results

Two questions broadly drove this research: Donald Trump promised to fix the economy and create jobs, and he is ending or renegotiating trade treaties. Is he creating more jobs? How can Trump create a more inclusive economy? The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper closely examines Trump’s economic policies and draws from past Democratic and Republication track records to explain how Trump’s policies will contribute to greater income inequality.

By all measures, President Trump fails on measures of equality, diversity, and inclusion.

This original paper examines the implications of the Trump administration’s policies in the areas of tax cuts (for small- and medium-sized enterprises rather than large corporations), incentives to support small business growth, entrepreneurship training, education and skills training (to retool Americans), and infrastructure spending.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how the profiles of design thinkers influence particular design-thinking solutions. It proposes to identify who (profiles), how (design-thinking methodologies) and what (outcomes as an innovation roadmap: process, product, business model, channel, brand, etc.), since the ways professional designers tackle a problem to reach an innovative solution is related to the designers’ profile.

The paper opted for an exploratory study using a focus group, composed of eight design thinkers and experts. An online survey was also sent to 123 DT leaders, with a return rate of 41 surveys, who worked on an end-to-end innovation project. The data were complemented by documentary analyses.

The paper provides empirical insights into the importance of selecting a diverse DT team. The team composition must be diverse because different profiles are required for different types of innovation and also for each DT phase to create value.

Given the exploratory research approach being used in the paper, the research results may lack generalization to different contexts. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test the proposed propositions further, using a larger sample that includes designers from different countries and testing eventual hypotheses.

The paper includes implications to increase the success rate of business innovations, and to reduce the associated costs that continue to increase for trial and error methods.

The paper fulfills an identified need to study how the DT profile and phases, empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test, require the correct skills and leadership throughout the whole process for effective outcome implementation.

El artículo busca entender cómo los perfiles de los design thinkers influencian soluciones de design thinking particulares. Propone identificar quién (perfiles), cómo (metodologías de design thinking) y qué (resultados como parte de la ruta de innovación), considerando que la manera en que los diseñadores profesionales abordan un problema para alcanzar una solución innovadora se relaciona con el perfil de los diseñadores.

El artículo presenta un estudio exploratorio utilizando un grupo de enfoque, incluyendo ocho expertos design thinkers. Un cuestionario en-línea fue enviado a 123 líderes de proyectos relacionados con DT, con una tasa de respuesta de 41 encuestas.

El artículo proporciona perspectivas empíricas sobre la importancia de seleccionar un equipo diverso de DT. La composición del equipo debe ser diversa porque diferentes perfiles son requeridos para diferentes tipos de innovación y para cada fase de DT para crear valor.

Debido a que se trata de un enfoque de investigación exploratorio, los resultados pueden estar limitados para generalizarse en distintos contextos. Por lo tanto, los investigadores que estén interesados en probar estas proposiciones son motivados a utilizar una muestra mayor, incluyendo diseñadores de distintos países para probar las hipótesis propuestas.

El articulo incluye implicaciones para incrementar la tasa de éxito de las innovaciones empresariales, y reducir los costos asociados que continúan incrementándose con métodos de prueba y error.

El artículo satisfice una necesidad identificada de estudiar cómo los perfiles de los DT y las fases de DT requieren las habilidades y liderazgo correctos a través de todo el proceso para una implementación efectiva de los resultados.

Organizational learning is depicted most frequently as an intra‐organizational information processing activity, but the role that experience plays in the development of organizational knowledge has recently become a more central focus of learning theories. The two primary perspectives on organizational learning present strikingly different depictions of the relationship between action and learning: systems‐structural models based on positivist epistemological assumptions emphasize internally‐directed information collection and distribution activities aimed at reducing uncertainty; interpretive models utilize an interpretivist epistemology that emphasizes the necessity of taking action in ambiguous circumstances as a means of creating knowledge. Proposes that neither of these alternative views of organizational learning describe how learning outcomes vary as a consequence of different types of action and that, specifically, previous models of organizational learning have not emphasized the critical role that creative actions play in the development of organizational knowledge. Delineates assumptions which serve to legitimize creative action taking within organizational contexts, and describes the learning outcomes which result from creative and routine actions. Extends previous models of organizational learning which emphasize cognition and communication processes by distinguishing the varied influences that different actions have on the production of knowledge.

The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize strategizing as a playful design practice; illustrate this view by describing a process for fostering effective strategic play; outline the benefits of the process and discuss how executives can play effectively.

The paper presents a concept development with a case illustration.

The paper finds that strategizing through playful design offers both an alternative conceptual lens as well as a novel practice of strategizing.

Strategizing through playful design is a useful complement to dry, conventional strategic planning processes and helps to open up and orient fruitful debate about an organization ' s particular strategic challenges.

This paper seeks to introduce the concept of abduction to strategists and show how abduction is an important influence on the effective design of strategies.

The paper defines what is meant by abduction, and describes why abduction is a pre-condition for intelligent designing. It reviews different characteristics of abduction, and suggests several situations in which abduction is used in strategic thinking. It describes a framework managers can use to get better at abductive thinking.

The paper finds that strategists can gain a lot from knowing how to use abduction well. Abduction is making inferences to the best explanation from information that is surprising or anomalous – both very typical in strategic decision making. Abduction is frequently integral to problem defining. Problem defining, in turn, sets the stage for possibility thinking, and choice of the best alternative. Therefore, good abductive thinking is a pre-condition for intelligent designing in strategy.

The paper shows that abduction is of practical relevance to business strategists, just as much as it is for the practice of law and medicine – two professions that have traditionally put it to effective use.

Argues that expertise based solely on rational, quantitative approaches to decision making problematic in rapidly changing business environments that arrest the tools of forecasting, analysis and planning. Where managers must take action in the face of considerable ambiguity, they must justify decisions on “gut instincts”, “best guesses” and other qualitative considerations. Unfortunately, traditional management education is primarily based on quantitative approaches to analysis and planning that may be ineffectual in ambiguous environments. Discusses an alternative approach to management education and training that seeks to blend analytic rigour with insight, intuition, creativity and learning‐by‐doing. Compares assumptions underlying traditional and action‐oriented approaches, and provides examples that suggest how management education and training can enhance their relevance by balancing quantitative and qualitative methods of decision making.

Artistry has been suggested by many authors to be a characteristic of exemplary practitioners in any discipline; however, few have defined artistry, or described how it might be employed and developed. The purpose of this paper is to explain the role of artistry in practice and how it can be developed.

This paper explains the relevance of artistry to contemporary practice. The problems faced by today ' s practitioners are often filled with features such as ambiguity, uncertainty, and complexity. The paper suggests that, in the face of these features, practitioners may not be able to rely on historical solutions however powerful these may be. Artistry is explained as an alternative capability that allows practitioners to work effectively with difficult problems.

Artistry is not an exclusive talent. Instead, it is a learned, emergent capability that allows practitioners to integrate mastery and originality as the work. This integration is made possible through the development of a sophisticated knowledge system.

By revealing what artistic practice is and how it can be achieved, this paper gives practitioners a route to a creative and effective approach to practice.

As design becomes more important for business, designers and business people need to work together more. However, they tend to find the relationship difficult, challenging and less productive than either side would wish. The purpose of this paper is to help both designers and business people work more productively with one another.

The paper identifies the underlying schism between validity, which is favored by designers, and reliability, which is favored by business people, as the source of the relationship conflict. It then uses the key attributes of validity and reliability to form recommendations for each side to deal better with their counterparts.

There are five practical and actionable things that designers can do to work better with business people and five equivalent things that business people can do to work better with designers.

Currently, neither business people nor designers have a productive or coherent theory as to why their counterparts behave in ways that appear to them to be unproductive. To fill the theory gap, they tend to think badly of their counterparts. This paper provides both sides a productive theory of the other and a prescription for utilizing the theory to promote more productive collaboration.

Organization theorists and strategy researchers have effectively leveraged archival assessments of the environment to better understand organizational actions and performance. Despite the successes, several issues continue to plague research. Vague constitutive definitions and mismatches between constitutive and operational definitions are among the most pressing of these issues. To further develop the archival tradition, we clarified existing definitions and proposed new definitions where warranted. Our work has implications not only for the selection of concepts and measures in future work but also for interpretations of past research.