The Emergence of a Multi-Organizational View on Business Processes – Experiences from a Double-loop Action Research Approach

In this paper the need for a multi-organizational perspective on business processes is outlined and a multi-grounded solution based on double-loop action research approach is proposed. Today, contemporary organizations’ capability to collaborate is an important competitive advantage and aligning in business networks is an increasingly common business model. Such development emphasizes the need for knowledge regarding how collaborative businesses could be characterized and how the constituent business interactions could be structured as several dyadic relationships in a multi-actor setting. The multiorganizational perspective proposed in this paper builds on pragmatic foundations and combines a language/action approach with a coordinative view on business processes, enabling design of complete action patterns

Structured Collaboration Across a Transformative Knowledge Network-Learning Across Disciplines, Cultures and Contexts?

Realising the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will require transformative changes at micro, meso and macro levels and across diverse geographies. Collaborative, transdisciplinary research has a role to play in documenting, understanding and contributing to such transformations. Previous work has investigated the role of this research in Europe and North America, however the dynamics of transdisciplinary research on ‘transformations to sustainability’ in other parts of the world are less well-understood. This paper reports on an international project that involved transdisciplinary research in six different hubs across the globe and was strategically designed to enable mutual learning and exchange. It draws on surveys, reports and research outputs to analyse the processes of transdisciplinary collaboration for sustainability that took place between 2015-2019. The paper illustrates how the project was structured in order to enable learning across disciplines, cultures and contexts, and describes how it also provided for the negotiation of epistemological frameworks and different normative commitments between members across the network. To this end, it discusses lessons regarding the use of theoretical and methodological anchors, multi-loop learning and evaluating emergent change (including the difficulties encountered). It offers insights for the design and implementation of future international transdisciplinary collaborations that address locally-specific sustainability challenges within the universal framework of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

What is systemic innovation?

The term ‘systemic innovation’ is increasing in use. However, there is no consensus on its meaning: four different ways of using the term can be identified in the literature. Most people simply define it as a type of innovation where value can only be derived when the innovation is synergistically integrated with other complementary innovations, going beyond the boundaries of a single organization. Therefore, the term ‘systemic’ refers to the existence of a co-ordinated innovation system. A second, less frequent use of the term makes reference to the development of policies and governance at a local, regional or national scale to create an enabling environment for the above kind of synergistic, multi-organizational innovations. Here, ‘systemic’ means recognition that innovation systems can be enabled and/or constrained by a meta-level policy system. The third use of the term, which is growing in popularity, says that an innovation is ‘systemic’ when its purpose is to change the fundamental nature of society; for instance, to deliver on major transitions concerning ecological sustainability. What makes this systemic is acknowledgement of the existence of a systems hierarchy (systems nested within each other): innovation systems are parts of economic systems, which are parts of societal systems, and all societies exist on a single planetary ecological system. Collaboration is required across organizational and national boundaries to change the societal laws and norms that govern economic systems, which will place new enablers and constraints on innovations systems in the interests of sustainability. The fourth use of the term ‘systemic innovation’ concerns how the people acting to bring about an innovation engage in a process to support systemic thinking, and it is primarily this process and the thinking it gives rise to that is seen as systemic rather than the innovation system that they exist within or are trying to create. It is this fourth understanding of ‘systemic’ that accords with most of the literature on systems thinking published between the late 1970s and the present day. The paper offers an overview of what systems thinkers mean by ‘systemic’, and this not only enables us to provide a redefinition of ‘systemic innovation’, but it also helps to show how all three previous forms of innovation that have been described as systemic can be enhanced by the practice of systems thinking

Management consulting.

Including a lengthy, comprehensive introduction, this important collection brings together some of the most influential papers that have contributed to our understanding of management consultancy work. The two-volume set encompasses the breadth of conceptual and empirical perspectives and explores those key ideas that have helped to advance our knowledge of this intriguing area. The volumes are divided into a series of thematic sections, affording the reader easy access to a great resource of information. Professors Clark and Avakian have written an original introduction which provides a comprehensive overview of the literature

The role of boundary objects in the co-evolution of design and use: the KMP project experimentation

Nowadays, it is widely recognized that an ICT tool cannot be built without knowing who will use it and what they will do with. In this perspective, Human-Computer Interaction community (Carroll, 1990; Jarke, Tung Bui and Carroll, 1998; Young and Barnard, 1987; Young and al., 1989) developed a scenario-based approach contrasting with the traditional information system design. The scenario describes an existing or envisioned system from the perspective of one or more users and includes a narration of their goals, plans and reactions (Rosson and Carroll, 2002). As a result, design is founded on the use of scenarios as a central representation for the analysis and design of use. The scenario-based design appears to be a first step in the integration of users in the design of ICT tool. However, we would like to underline in this paper a more active role of users in the design process. According to Orlikowski (2000) while a technology can be seen to have been constructed with particular materials and inscribed with developers' assumptions and knowledge about the world at a point in time, it is only when this technology is used in recurrent social practices that it can be said to structure user's action. The use of technology in recurrent social practices must be considered because how technological properties will for the moment be used or appropriate is not inherent or predetermined. Finally, this approach leads us to dissociate the designers' world from the users' world. In this perspective, the design project is the result of the co-evolution and the convergence of both worlds: on the one hand, the world of design and a first integration of users by scenarios; on the other hand, the world of users where innovation is the art of interesting an increasing number of allies who will make the world of design stronger and stronger. The objective of this paper is to understand the mechanisms of interaction between the world of design and that of users i.e. between loops of co-design and loops of uses. Indeed, according to Akrich, Callon and Latour (1988) we adopt a whirlwind model of innovation. In this perspective, “innovation continuously transforms itself according to the trials to which it is submitted i.e. of the “interessements” tried out » (Akrich and al., 2002: 7). We will demonstrate that the key success of an innovation depends on the co-evolution and convergence of design and use around boundary objects developed during this process (see Figure 1). More specifically, we will show the role of boundary objects on the integration and on the involvement of users in the design process. In order to do so, we carried out an empirical research – the Knowledge Management Platform project - located in the scientific park of Sophia Antipolis (Alpes-Maritimes, France), focusing on the Telecom Valley® (TV) association which gathers the main actors of the Sophia Antipolis Telecom cluster. Indeed, the KMP project aims to build a semantic web service of competencies in order to enhance exchange and combination dynamics of knowledge within the Telecom cluster thanks to an interactive mapping of competencies. This paper will comprise three parts: Based on the researches of Akrich, Callon and Latour (1988), Hatchuel and Mollet (1986), Orlikowski (2000), Romme and Endenburg (2006) we will identify and analyse in a first part the process of design. The combination of these approaches leads us to distinguish the design' world from the users' world. In this perspective, the success of an innovation may be explained by the co-evolution and the convergence of these two worlds. In this process, we suggest that boundary objects play a key role in the convergence of these two worlds. We will present in a second part the empirical study of the KMP project within the TV network. The KMP project involved researchers from socio-economic sciences (GREDEG Laboratory, UNSA-CNRS, Rodige and Latapses teams), cognitive sciences and artificial intelligence (INRIA, Acacia team), telecommunications (GET) and users (TV) for a total force of 187 men per month for a two-year period (2003-2005). At this present time this project is being set up in a pre-industrialization phase, supported by TV and the PACA region. Here, we will analyse the specific process of design experimented by KMP. Finally, the third part discusses the role of boundary objects in the KMP experimentation. In this part, we will show the evolution of boundary objects during the loops of design. More specifically, the focus will be on the emergence of compromises between designers and users, their materialisation in boundary objects and finally their evolution during the design' process.boundary objects, IS development, actor network theory

Evaluation, Learning and Change in Research and Development Organizations: Concepts, Experiences, and Implications for the CGIAR

learning, Evaluation, Change, ISNAR, research, CGIAR, development, Agricultural and Food Policy, Food Security and Poverty, Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies,

Complex methods of inquiry: structuring uncertainty

Organizational problem spaces can be viewed as complex, uncertain and ambiguous. They can also be understood as open problem spaces. As such, any engagement with them, and any effort to intervene in order to pursue desirable change, cannot be assumed to be just a matter of ‘complicatedness’. The issue is not just a need to cope with dynamics of system. It is also the perceptual ‘boundedness’ of multitudes of assumptions about scope of whole and limitations of organization as system. Furthermore, explicit attention to complexities of feedback loops is an extremely important aspect of any systemic discussion. How can we help teams of competent professionals to engage purposefully with such uncertain and ambiguous problem domains? The author suggests that we can only address this effectively through pragmatic efforts to incorporate a multitude of boundary-setting assumptions, explored as part of active (self-) reflection and practical engagement. This must be undertaken without resorting to an overly simplistic application of convergent thinking in our efforts to support problem solving. Instead, we need to pursue divergent thinking and ‘complexification’ in our effort to support problem resolving. The main contribution of this thesis is to present a collection of principles that taken together, provide support for this engagement ntervention. A core feature of this result is the framework for Strategic Systemic Thinking, which includes examples of pragmatically useful methods and tools

Organizational Learning Through Disruptive Digital Innovation. A Blockchain Implementation

Organizational learning and management are at a transition point because of the shift in disruptive digital innovations (DDI). Organizing axioms are challenged or fundamentally changed by the nature of innovation (Nambisan, Lyytinen, Majchrzak, & Song, 2017). There is widespread recognition that investing in organizational learning drives change and innovation (Linares, 2017). The early research examined DDI and the factors that enable or inhibit it. However, there is a limited amount of research on the relationship between DDI and organizational learning. More specifically, research that is conducted to understand the theoretical relationship between organizational learning and DDI is needed. The phenomenon has been studied in the rich context of information technology (IT) and supply chain management (SCM). In this research, a single case study approach is used to examine single- and double-loop learning. IT organizations use DDI to remain practical in a dynamic environment. In the present study, the DDI framework is used to illustrate how organizational learning is facilitated. Recommendations are offered on how IT organizations could enhance organizational learning to improve project implementation and delivery related to disruptive digital innovation

TQM Is Alive but Not as We Know It: The Use of a Novel TQM Model in a Private Healthcare Company

UK healthcare has been facing an unprecedented quality crisis in recent times. In this context, the author setout to develop and evaluate the use of a novel total quality management (TQM) model in a private healthcare firm with the aim of improving patient care. By integrating contemporary organizational theories with TQM, an innovative model called EALIM—ethical, adaptive, learning and improvement model—was devised. Using an action research study, qualitative data were gathered in three research cycles, (1) pre-implementation, (2) implementation, and (3) post-implementation. Initial results showed EALIM’s adoption generated a moral organizational perception among employees, increased organizational commitment, emergence of a learning culture, and improvements in patient self-advocacy and independence. However, other findings indicated poor leadership produced variability in service quality. Although outcomes from this study clearly indicated that EALIM generated organizational improvement, commitment from all internal stakeholders is required to achieve sustainable quality patient care