Search results

We have not learned to manage human civilization to live well on and with the earth. Sustainability as currently narrated from the destructive myth of scarcity that underlies speculative market capitalism forces humanity out of socio-material spacetime, destroys Bakhtin’s answerability and the Rabelaisian chronotope, and therefore cannot bring about a material solution to our existential crisis. A re-created critical science of management and organization inquiry is needed to bring forth a socio-material era of sustainability. Critical scholarship in subversive and creative form to confront injustice became possible at sc’MOI because of the group’s primal alienation from the dominant discourse in management and organization. An active critical perspective offers guidance for the future of sustainability in pursuing the strategy of the avoided fate, a future that entails disentangling ourselves from a narrative-imposed destiny and of reasserting the power to choose another path to sustain all life on earth.

The purpose of this paper is to offer a reflexive commentary on the nature and validity of actionable knowledge from the authors’ experience with action research in New Mexico and beyond.

The authors have situated their localized experience in the history and theory of the broader field of action research by posing the question of whether the validity of action research depends more upon the observer's worldview than upon the quality of change in the lives of those involved in the intervention.

Three fundamental tenets of action research are identified. A pragmatic perspective underlies the need for locality grounded criticality in reflection, instrumental participation leading to trust and genuine understanding of behavior, and a shared desire to actualize untapped human potential to solve a problem.

The paper offer's reflection on the validity of actionable knowledge from the authors’ experience, supported by a brief case example to illustrate the dialogical convergence of theory and practice. Thus, this perspective may not be relevant and useful to all readers.

Reflection, regardless of when or how long it takes, is an essential catalyst in the transition of actionable knowledge into change.

The article attempts to separate a few essential elements of action research from the accumulated bits of technique, personal beliefs, ideology, and collected experiences that practitioners and theorists have attached to the question of validity and utility of knowledge produced by action research.

The evolution of capitalism has gone through four major epochs, from the first tangible exchanges of goods and resources, to the generation of wealth by entrepreneurs held personally accountable for their actions, to cost-cutting measures for increasing efficiencies and maximizing wealth for the few, and finally to a socially irresponsible form. The fourth epoch dispatched the last remaining shards of capitalist responsibility to anyone but investors, as the basis of wealth appropriation shifted to manipulating the speculative future worth of intangible or fictitious capital. This evolution through four epochs has sadly been a process of diminishing value creation (Boje et al., 2017).

We are trapped in an era of socially irresponsible capitalism with little respect for humankind. But, it was not always this way. The earliest references to entrepreneurial behavior emerged in the east during the Han Dynasty and in the west in the eighteenth century. Somewhat like the fourth epoch of the twenty-first century, these global beginnings of early capitalism were also directed by opportunistic desires to pursue wealth generation by taking advantage of people’s needs and wants. Although capitalists have consistently been the prime directors of resources and the distributors of wealth, in the early epochs of capitalism they were different. The early epoch entrepreneurs bore personal risks of business failure, consequences that might impact them for a lifetime.

The antenarrative generative mechanisms, or spirals, help us understand the interconnectivities of “real” and “actual” domains of reality (Bhaskar, 1975; Boje, 2016). Socially irresponsible capitalism is pulling global societies into a downward spiral toward an addiction of speculative destruction and dehumanization, transforming “real” into “actual” realities. We need a force to pull us back up toward a revitalized form of socially responsible capitalism. This force is called the socio-economic approach to management (SEAM), and in the responsible entrepreneurial spirit of earlier epochs, the path to recovery can be accomplished by accountably working with one organization or entity at a time.

This chapter first investigates the historical double-spiral-helix footsteps of socially irresponsible capitalism in the making. Then through a SEAM project example, we discuss how the micro-societal perspective of an organization places it at a deeper level of reality, deeper within the double-spiral-helix meta-reality of macro-societal capitalism. Finally, we demonstrate how the socioeconomic approach can help diagnose the deeper realities with an organization, beyond the evident narratives, to reveal the third spiral of deficiencies. This third spiral disenables the organization’s ability to activate the micro forces of socially responsible capitalism.

We argue that in order to address the contemporary challenges that organizations and societies are facing, the field of organization development (OD) requires frameworks and skills to focus on the eco-system as the level of analysis. In a world that has become economically, socially, and technologically highly connected, approaches that foster the optimization of specific actors in the eco-system, such as individual corporations, result in sub-optimization of the sustainability of the natural and social system because there is insufficient offset to the ego-centric purposes of the focal organization. We discuss the need for OD to broaden focus to deal with technological advances that enable new ways of organizing at the eco-system level, and to deal with the challenges to sustainable development. Case examples from healthcare and the agri-foods industry illustrate the kinds of development approaches that are required for the development of healthy eco-systems. We do not suggest fundamental changes in the identity of the field of organizational development. In fact, we demonstrate the need to dig deeply into the open systems and socio-technical roots of the field, and to translate the traditional values and approaches of OD to continue to be relevant in today’s dynamic interdependent world.

This chapter examines the case studies in this volume with a focus on concepts and methods used in the study of multi-organization networks and partnerships, motivations to join in multi-party collaboration, how multi-organization collaborations organized and managed, what kinds of value are created by collaborations, and the role of leadership therein.

A comparative look at four vertical networks (in health care and education); two “issue” networks/partnerships (sustainable seafood and water use); and the roles of government in collaboration in horizontal, vertical, and issue-based arrangements.

The chapter describes “lessons” learned about building both sustainability and collaborative capabilities in and across partnering organizations and about improving partnership structures, processes, and results.

The chapter sums and synthesizes the volume’s contributions.

This paper aims to present several tools to facilitate strategic planning and to demystify the situational analysis and the selection of strategy. These tools include situational analysis scorecards for the environmental scan, market analysis, competitive bench-marking and internal resource evaluation along with a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) fit matrix. Business student teams have tested these scorecards in capstone projects with good results; however, the concepts remain works-in-process.

This study introduces tools to assist planners in preparing the situational analysis and deriving logical strategic choices based upon the SWOT analysis. These aids include an environmental factors scorecard, a market favorability scorecard, a competitive benchmarking scorecard, a resource evaluation scorecard and a SWOT fit matrix. Planners can use these devices to produce a research-based situational analysis and as a guide to select the most appropriate strategy.

These concepts have been beta tested by business student teams in capstone projects with good results but remain works-in-process.

The introduction of these creative scorecards addresses a shortcoming in academic literature concerning the interpretation of situational analysis research data and provides tactical tools linking SWOT to the choice of grand strategy and strategy implementation.

This chapter introduces the volume’s theme by considering how the forces of globalization and complexity are leading organizations to reshape and redesign themselves, how meeting the challenges of sustainable effectiveness and shared value require multiorganization networks and partnerships, and how networks and partnerships develop, function, and can produce both private benefits and public goods.

We apply findings from social and political evolution frameworks, partnership and collaboration research, and design for sustainability concepts to induce the likely conditions required for sustainable effectiveness from a network perspective.

Successful partnerships and collaborations in service of sustainable effectiveness will require individual organizations to change their objective function and build new and varied internal and external capabilities.

The chapter sets the stage for the volume’s contributions.

In this chapter we develop sustainability implications of the Savall, Zardet, Bonett, and colleagues’ approach, known worldwide as socioeconomic approach to management (SEAM). SEAM can be used as a way of doing management and organizational inquiry into the ecological sustainability of practices with planetary boundaries. We conclude that a socially responsible approach to management needs to consider the hidden costs to an enterprise if it is not being sustainable to planetary resource limits.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the emplotment of organizational grand-narratives of a leading international organization, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The paper includes the reconstruction of the OECD’s inclusion approach as a prototype grand-narrative. Moreover, the main goal of this paper is understanding the reciprocal relationship between the organizational narratives and other organizational domains.

To study the structural process of emploting grand-narratives, which combines reciprocal dependencies across organizational domains, I have used process tracing, content analysis and interviews methodologies, for each domain. These methodologies were monitored by quantitative and qualitative analyses of the interactions among these domains. These methods allowed me to explore the interdependencies in the discursive and non-discursive ordering of institutional memory as a means for identifying the development of organizational narratives.

The findings of this paper confirm the reciprocal dynamics among and within three core organizational domains, narratives, organizational-epistemological settings and organizational products. These domains evolve constantly and concurrently in a three-phased process where a former organizational constellation is challenged, a consolidation takes place, and a new narrative is institutionalized. The context I chose to demonstrate this dynamic is the OECD evolving interactions between innerorganizational units and the organizational products (i.e. its activation policy recommendations), of the OECD post-Cold War inclusive approach (1989–2002).

The importance and complexity of the OECD as a global trendsetting organization, and the findings of this single case study are significant for their implications on trends and processes found in other complex grand-narratives. The transferability of these results would require further analysis.

The originality of this paper is using a transnational dynamic organization such as the OECD as the organizational model for understanding how organizations undergo emplotment processes. Moreover, this article’s analytical framework provides a deeper understanding of the complex interplay between the constraining structures and micro-level interactions.