Interactions between Ideas and Behaviour in Organizations

Purpose: To develop and test a framework which can be used to facilitate the understanding of how ideas interact with behaviour in organizations, in ways that have practical relevance in organizational development and improvement. Design/methodology/approach: The framework proposed in this paper is the product of an abductive research process. This process involved testing and reflecting in action, and on action when writing. The emerging framework was also challenged by theoretical input from continual literature studies and has (at different stages of its development) been part of the theoretical framework for a PhD dissertation, research articles and master’s theses. Findings: The framework graphically highlights the relationship between explicit (i.e., spoken or documented) and tacit ideas, and that the latter is what largely controls action. It also implies that for new explicit ideas or theories to become effective, which is normally the purpose of improvement initiatives, they have to become part of the tacit guiding ideas. This is often quite difficult to achieve. The framework gives a perspective on why this is the case and how it can be counteracted. Examples of measures indicated include seeing development as iterative and contextual, and supporting sense-making and learning by doing. Another example is to address the coherence between the parts of the framework: what is said, documented, and done. Practical implications: The framework has been tested with practitioners and has rapidly assisted professionals in making explicit, and developing, the tacit knowledge they have of the specific problem/opportunity areas for their respective organizations. It has also been successfully used in analyses in several papers, including studies of sustainability and process management. Originality/value: The implications of the framework are in line with existing research, yet we believe that the graphical model adds both scientific and practical dimensions. This is partly due to the framework making it easier to differentiate between complex concepts that are often confused

Naturalizing sustainability in product development: A comparative analysis of IKEA and SCA

The aim is to analyse ways that sustainability can be successfully integrated into product development in large firms. This is done by a comparative study of two large firms, IKEA and SCA, during the time period 1990–2006. These were both among the pioneers to introduce sustainability into operations. The study is based on 24 interviews and one author’s experience as an insider researcher. The analytical framework visualizes the relationships between what is explicitly expressed, in writing or speech, and what tacitly guides behaviour, and what is actually practised in product development. Although both firms have substantial experience working with sustainability and are role models, they chose very different strategies to integrate sustainability into product development. Their approaches reflect the logic of their company cultures and management systems. This indicates that sustainability practices must be adapted to fit the logic of a firm’s existing management system

Management Systems’ Influence on Sustainable Innovation: A Comparative Analysis of Two Large MNCs

The aim of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of how sustainability is integrated into product development in large firms and how this integration is influenced by management systems. This research is based on the authors’ experiences as insider and outsider researchers at two large international firms. A conceptual framework by Marmgren et al. (2012) is used to analyse, interpret and visualise the experiences.Firm A integrated a ‘sustainability way of thinking’ into its culture in the beginning of the 1990s, both through its strategy process and compulsory training for all employees. In addition, ‘Sustainability thinking’ is continually communicated as good stories across all the firm’s activities. Culture is probably the most important component of the management system and therefore, this has been a successful approach, resulting in employees at all levels naturally feel responsible to act ‘sustainably’, since not doing so would not be in accordance with the culture.Firm B started with Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) already in the end of the 1980s. The LCA approach was developed by a specialist in the environmental department supported by the responsible manager, which is in line with the firm’s management system, reliance on specialists and specific areas of responsibility. The firm gained great status outside (and inside) the firm for having this expert knowledge and control. LCA was formally made as tollgate in the firm’s stage-gate product development model in early 1990s and documented in the ‘project handbook’. Since then, at least two LCAs have been performed in each product development project, one screening LCA in an early stage and a ‘full’ LCA at a later decision point.Firm A made an attempt to utilise the tool LCA in product development. This, however, proved difficult as the management system was not rigged to incorporate specialist tools. Furthermore, its processes are not controlled by making specific requirements supported with documentation, but rather evolve dynamically in interaction between powerful informal networks. In contrast, Firm B’s way of working with LCA means that the environmental department gains a deep knowledge of the firm’s environmental performance and that reference material for decisions is being produced in the projects. The workers in the product development team, however, do typically not see any link between the life-cycle-thinking ambitions of the firm and their daily work. Consequently, although both firms have substantial experiences working with sustainability, their approaches are very different and can be viewed as reflections of their cultures and management systems. The paper concludes with a discussion about how these different management systems influences product innovation practices and collaboration at the two firms

Understanding Management Systems: a test of a conceptual framework

Management systems can be developed in a variety of ways. General standards, such as ISO 9001 (quality) and ISO 14001 (environment), and specialized standards influence this development and have become part of the reality for many organizations. The interpretation and conceptualization of ‘management systems’ is however a challenge. In practice, the development of a management system risks ending up in a mainly normative and document oriented work, creating a type of virtual reality that does not drive actions on genuine needs. This paper presents and elaborates upon a conceptual framework designed to understand the challenges during the development of management systems. The methodology of this paper is founded on three individuals\u27 experiences from being involved in the development and observation of management systems during the past two decades. This experience and organizational, learning and change theories provide the basis for a conceptual framework. The framework is tested by analyzing three management initiatives (QS9000, ERP and BPM) within a case company. The conceptual framework was found useful for analyzing management initiatives. The dimensions of the framework, such as ‘documentation structure’, ‘explicit normative structure’ and ‘tacit guiding structure’ served as a foundation for the comparison of the initiatives and provided insights for interpreting practical outcomes in the case company. These dimensions were also useful for analyzing interactions between the different initiatives. This paper provides a conceptual framework that can be of value both for the academic community and for managers trying to understand what kind of factors impact behavior in practice; including why actions sometimes do and sometimes do not provide intended results

Understanding Management Systems: a test of a conceptual framework

Management systems can be developed in a variety of ways. General standards, such as ISO 9001 (quality) and ISO 14001 (environment), and specialized standards influence this development and have become part of the reality for many organizations. The interpretation and conceptualization of ‘management systems’ is however a challenge. In practice, the development of a management system risks ending up in a mainly normative and document oriented work, creating a type of virtual reality that does not drive actions on genuine needs. This paper presents and elaborates upon a conceptual framework designed to understand the challenges during the development of management systems. The methodology of this paper is founded on three individuals\u27 experiences from being involved in the development and observation of management systems during the past two decades. This experience and organizational, learning and change theories provide the basis for a conceptual framework. The framework is tested by analyzing three management initiatives (QS9000, ERP and BPM) within a case company. The conceptual framework was found useful for analyzing management initiatives. The dimensions of the framework, such as ‘documentation structure’, ‘explicit normative structure’ and ‘tacit guiding structure’ served as a foundation for the comparison of the initiatives and provided insights for interpreting practical outcomes in the case company. These dimensions were also useful for analyzing interactions between the different initiatives. This paper provides a conceptual framework that can be of value both for the academic community and for managers trying to understand what kind of factors impact behavior in practice; including why actions sometimes do and sometimes do not provide intended results

Successful Photopatch Testing with Ketoprofen Using One-Hour Occlusion.

The standard procedure for photopatch testing includes 24-h occlusion of the allergen, followed by irradiation at 5 J/cm2 ultraviolet A (UVA). Due to the timing, a separate visit to the clinic is needed for UV irradiation. The aim of this study was to determine whether a reduction in occlusion time from 24 h to 1 h, in order to simplify the testing procedure, influences test results when photopatch testing with ketoprofen. A total of 22 patients with a known or suspected photo-allergy to ketoprofen were simultaneously photopatch-tested with ketoprofen using both 1 h and 24 h occlusion. One side of the patient's back was irradiated with 5 J/cm2 UVA, and the other side was covered. Measurements were made after 3 days on both irradiated and non-irradiated sides. A total of 20 controls were photopatch-tested with ketoprofen using 1 h occlusion. All of the patients showed positive reactions on the irradiated side. No positive reactions were observed on the non-irradiated side. All controls were negative. In conclusion, 1 h occlusion time is sufficient to establish photo-contact allergy to ketoprofen. No adjustments in UVA or ketoprofen dose were needed. Limiting occlu-sion time to 1 h could simplify the photopatch test procedure by eliminating one visit to the clinic. These results apply only to ketoprofen; further studies are needed to determine whether a similar approach can be used with other components of photopatch test series

Contact allergy to fragrance mix I and its components in individuals with photocontact allergy to ketoprofen

BACKGROUND: Contact allergy to fragrance mix I (FM I) is over-represented in patients photoallergic to ketoprofen. The prevalence of contact allergy to two components of FM I, cinnamal and cinnamyl alcohol, in ketoprofen-photoallergic patients is higher than in dermatitis patients.OBJECTIVE: To explore the prevalence of contact allergy to FM I and its individual components in patients with photocontact allergy to ketoprofen, and to compare with a dermatitis and the general population.METHODS: Data on patch and photopatch tests performed between 2009-2018 were collected. Ketoprofen-photoallergic patients were compared with dermatitis patients and published data on the general population regarding the prevalence and the distribution of contact allergy to FM I and its components.RESULTS: A higher prevalence of contact allergy to cinnamyl alcohol compared to cinnamal (23.3% vs 10.0%), and eugenol compared to isoeugenol (23.3% vs 6.7%), was observed in ketoprofen-photoallergic patients, while the relationship was the opposite in dermatitis group (0.7% vs 1.05%; 0.4% vs 0.9%). Overall prevalence of contact allergy to several components of FM I was significantly higher in ketoprofen-photoallergic patients.CONCLUSIONS: Contact allergy to FM I and many of its components is over-represented in patients photoallergic to ketoprofen compared to dermatitis patients and the general population. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Contact Allergy to Oxidized Linalool and Oxidized Limonene is Over-represented in Individuals with Photocontact Allergy to Ketoprofen

Simultaneous contact allergies are common in individuals with photocontact allergy to ketoprofen. The rate of contact allergy to the fragrance substances oxidized linalool and oxidized limonene in ketoprofen-photo-allergic individuals were investigated in comparison with the corresponding rates in individuals without photo-contact allergy to ketoprofen, using Fisher's exact test. A total of 4,021 patients were routinely tested with oxidized linalool; of whom 190 (4.7%) tested positively. For oxidized limonene the numbers were 3,797 patients and 111 positive reactions (2.9%). A total of 19 contact allergic reactions to oxidized linalool were noted in 29 patients (65.5%) who also had photocontact allergy to ketoprofen (p < 0.0001). The corresponding figures for oxidized limonene were 10 positive reactions in 24 ketoprofen-photoallergic individuals (41.7%) (p < 0.0001). Contact allergy to oxidized linalool and/or oxidized limonene is common in routinely tested patients with dermatitis and, particularly, in those patients who are photoallergic to ketoprofen