Using cross-functional, cross-firm teams to co-create value: The role of financial measures

Increasingly, the involvement of representatives from all major business functions in cross-functional, crossfirmteams is being viewed as a means to develop and maintain profitable business-to-business relationships.However, if the measurements of the value co-created in these relationships with customers and suppliers donot incorporate the financial outcomes of joint cross-functional initiatives, managers can be led to makedecisions that jeopardize the long-term profitability of the two firms. In this paper, the authors explore thedifferences in value co-creation when a company is linked to key customers and key suppliers through crossfunctionalteams and when it is not. Using a case study approach, the authors measured value co-creation infinancial terms and describe how managers changed their behaviors toward customers and suppliers whenthey were able to compare the value that was being co-created in each relationship. In each pair ofrelationships, one involved cross-functional teams and the other did not. The results indicate that crossfunctional,cross-firm involvement leads to increased value co-creation. The research suggests that marketingscholars and managers should emphasize the use of cross-functional teams that involve all major functions tomanage relationships with key customers, and should incorporate financial measures in the evaluation ofrelationship performance

CAHRS hrSpectrum (November - December 2005)

HRSpec04_12.pdf: 163 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Supply chains : ago-antagonistic systems through co-opetition game theory lens

Supply chain configurations, as hybrid governance structures, allow companies to be sufficiently integrated while keeping a certain level of flexibility. This enables them, on one hand, to converge towards common interests through the development of cooperation; and on the other hand, to diverge on their own interests by remaining in competition. This dynamics generates an ago-antagonistic system where both of these two concepts, namely cooperation and competition, simultaneously drive the supply chain. In the present article, this system is analyzed by using the co-opetition game theory developed by Brandenburger and Nalebuff (1996) in order to highlight the importance of such an apprehension of the supply chain approach.Supply chain; cooperation; competition; ago-antagonistic approach; co-opetition game theory

Intellectual Capital Architectures and Bilateral Learning: A Framework For Human Resource Management

Both researchers and managers are increasingly interested in how firms can pursue bilateral learning; that is, simultaneously exploring new knowledge domains while exploiting current ones (cf., March, 1991). To address this issue, this paper introduces a framework of intellectual capital architectures that combine unique configurations of human, social, and organizational capital. These architectures support bilateral learning by helping to create supplementary alignment between human and social capital as well as complementary alignment between people-embodied knowledge (human and social capital) and organization-embodied knowledge (organizational capital). In order to establish the context for bilateral learning, the framework also identifies unique sets of HR practices that may influence the combinations of human, social, and organizational capital

Leading For The Bottom Line: A View Of Leadership In A Bottom-Line Context

This paper sets out to establish and describe a new approach to leadership called Bottom Line Leadership. The essence of Bottom Line Leadership is that a leader’s most critical responsibility is to clearly identify, communicate and gain buy-in for the ultimate bottom-line objective of the organization he/she leads, subject to constraints imposed by the market and by the organization itself. In comparison to other leadership models that focus on the general attributes or behaviors characterizing effective leaders, Bottom Line Leadership emphasizes the link between an organization’s purpose and a leader’s behavior. The philosophy that serves as the foundation for this article stipulates that employees, in any type of organization, need to be crystal clear about the purpose and bottom-line objective of the organization they work for. Having this clarity of objective enables employees to not only understand the importance of an organization’s strategy and mission; it also allows them to make sound decisions in support of the organization’s goals. We believe that it is essential that leaders in organizations instill this clarity of purpose and help create the conditions that allow people to channel their energies into the appropriate activities. What results from our leadership and management research is a “virtuous circle” model coupled with a checklist that prescribes precisely what Bottom-Line Leaders do. To arrive at our model of Bottom-Line Leadership, we review the teachings of some of the most popular leadership and management thought leaders. We conclude that effective leadership actually encompasses both traditional leadership attributes (create / inspire / influence) and traditional management capabilities (deploy / control / execute). In short, what we find is that Bottom-Line Leaders instill clarity of purpose in their organization, gain commitment to the ultimate bottom-line objective, and engage employees in these efforts. They do this by deploying methods of communication, inspiration and motivation that constantly maintain a connection to, and are aligned with, the ultimate bottom-line objective the organization is striving to achieve. They also work tirelessly to ensure that employees are in a position to make decisions and take actions in manners supporting the bottom-line objective. In our view, leaders are those who do the right things right and get their people to do likewise