The Limitations and Opportunities of Business Process Re-engineering in a Politicized Organizational Climate

This paper is concerned with the organizationalchange and project management issues raised by theimplementation of a business process re-engineering(BPR) approach in the politicized hospital context. This is a report of research in progress,focusing on the issues arising at the problem definitionand project planning stages of a BPR application in anoperating theaters department experiencing problems with scheduling and delays. The research designrelies on a case study approach, with the researcher asparticipant observer, as both an adviser to the projectteam and as field interviewer. The paper argues that an ambitious BPR agenda is compromised inat least two regards. First, the lack of precisionsurrounding the focus and methodology of BPR givespolitically motivated actors considerable influence with respect to defining terms of reference in wayswhich will shape potential outcomes in their favor.Second, the complexity and indeterminacy of the businessprocess or patient trail can also diluteredesign attempts. The principal limitations of theapproach thus concern the impracticality of embarking onrapid and radical change working from a blanksheet of paper with respect to organizational and job design. BPR, unlike other organizationdevelopment interventions, is not a contextsensitive approach. The role of project manageris critical in establishing a working balance betweenindividual, occupational, and organizational goals in a manner perceivedto be legitimate in the context. Effective BPR projectmanagement thus requires a combination of political andprocess analysis skills. The principal opportunities of BPR derive from its process orientation,which brings a fresh perspective to a traditionally andfunctionally fragmented organizational setting, andwhich presents a potentially valuable platform for anevolutionary approach to process improvement.     

我国企业学习取向的初步研究

组织学习取向的研究有助于理解和改善组织学习过程,从而提升组织学习能力。实证研究得出我国企业有五个学习取向:知识来源、学习效果、学习幅度、学习投入、传播形式。我国企业在各个学习取向上都不太极端,都采取比较折衷的学习方式;但是也存在着比较偏重于内部开发知识、渐进式的学习取向、侧重群体学习的特点。我国企业学习风格可以称之为不断改良型和实践共同体型(community of practice:即非正式的、集体学习实践)。     

Culture and Organization: The Case of Transmanche-Link

The relationship between culture and organization has often been discussed, but rarely explored directly. This paper implements a cultural values instrument taken from Hofstede together with a behavioural instrument derived from Van de Ven to matched samples of British and French managers working on the Channel Tunnel project. The results largely replicate the findings of Hofstede regarding cultural values, but do not support the predicted implications for behaviour. In essence, the British were found to be more bureaucratic and more team-oriented than their French counterparts, who tended to be more fonceur and competitive. This indicates that the relationship between culture and behaviour might be more complicated than research to date suggests.     

高校体育社团社会责任对成员组织公民行为的影响——心理契约、组织认同的序列中介作用

为考察高校体育社团社会责任对社团成员组织公民行为的影响,以及心理契约和组织认同在它们之间的多重中介作用,采用问卷法对高校体育社团成员进行调查的结果发现:高校体育社团社会责任能够正向预测组织公民行为,心理契约与组织认同在社会责任与组织公民行为中间起中介作用。高校体育社团社会责任通过4条路径影响组织公民行为:直接作用,心理契约、组织认同的中介作用,心理契约和组织认同的序列中介作用。构建的多重中介模型在一定程度上解释了高校体育社团社会责任对社团成员组织公民行为的影响机制。研究结果表明,高校体育社团重视社会责任有助于提高社团成员心理契约和组织认同,进而提高社团成员组织公民行为。     

论概率安全评价中的组织风险因素

核电站组织风险已经成为核电站安全运行重要的影响因素,在概率安全评价中考虑组织风险因素是核电安全研究的重要课题。文章在建立组织风险因素与PSA之间转换的概念框架的基础上,对组织风险因素进行分类。分类后的组织风险因素受人员行为形成因子的影响,其影响在人因可靠性分析中进行分析。计算和评估这些人员行为形成因子对于事故后操纵员的影响可以计算组织因素对核电站安全的影响。     

二元学习与创新绩效的作用机制——组织内部协作网络的调节作用

组织学习是驱动企业创新、实现技术追赶与超越追赶的关键因素,如何合理组织企业的利用式和探索式学习是企业构建研发体系的关键问题。学界对二元学习是否有利于企业的创新绩效存在截然不同的观点。同时,组织内部的情境因素是影响组织二元学习和创新绩效关系的最根本因素,组织内部研发协作网络是二元学习的重要载体。基于美国半导体行业企业十年间的专利数据,实证研究发现,不同维度的二元学习对企业创新绩效具有不同的影响,联合二元学习能够积极影响企业的创新绩效,平衡二元学习则会降低企业的创新绩效;内部研发协作网络密度在二元学习和创新绩效的关系中具有显著的调节作用,企业的内部协作网络密度越高,联合二元学习对企业创新绩效的积极影响越弱,平衡二元学习对创新绩效的负影响则加剧。     

并购情境下领导群体原型典型性与下属上向信任的关系——组织身份凸显性的调节作用

基于社会身份理论,在并购情境下,领导的群体原型典型性作为领导群体身份特征的表征,对内群体下属的上向信任存在正向预测作用,即高群体原型典型性的领导更容易获得下属的上向信任。而领导的组织身份凸显性作为领导组织身份特征的表征,负向调节领导的群体原型典型性与上向信任之间的关系。     

Who killed change management?

A story is told here of an investigation into change management's apparent death, provoked by the dubious business novel Who Killed Change [Blanchard, K., J. Britt, P. Zigarmi, and J. Hoekstra. 2009. Who Killed Change? Solving the Mystery of Leading People Through Change. London: Harper Collins Publishers]. The story is told over eight chapters inviting you to investigate competing explanations for the death of change management using the structure of the story arc: stasis, trigger, quest, surprise, critical choice, climax, reversal and resolution. An annoying voice (sometimes interior monologue and at other times dialogue) of another reader keen to inform and frame your understanding of the status of change management remains ever present. The case is solved with the story's resolution providing insights into advantages of investigating over literature reviewing, the problematic/masculine nature of murder metaphors, the academic potential of story arcs and the mystery which characterises organizational change.     

Improving Risk Management: From Lame Excuses to Principled Practice

The three classic pillars of risk analysis are risk assessment (how big is the risk and how sure can we be?), risk management (what shall we do about it?), and risk communication (what shall we say about it, to whom, when, and how?). We propose two complements as important parts of these three bases: risk attribution (who or what addressable conditions actually caused an accident or loss?) and learning from experience about risk reduction (what works, and how well?). Failures in complex systems usually evoke blame, often with insufficient attention to root causes of failure, including some aspects of the situation, design decisions, or social norms and culture. Focusing on blame, however, can inhibit effective learning, instead eliciting excuses to deflect attention and perceived culpability. Productive understanding of what went wrong, and how to do better, thus requires moving past recrimination and excuses. This article identifies common blame‐shifting “lame excuses” for poor risk management. These generally contribute little to effective improvements and may leave real risks and preventable causes unaddressed. We propose principles from risk and decision sciences and organizational design to improve results. These start with organizational leadership. More specifically, they include: deliberate testing and learning—especially from near‐misses and accident precursors; careful causal analysis of accidents; risk quantification; candid expression of uncertainties about costs and benefits of risk‐reduction options; optimization of tradeoffs between gathering additional information and immediate action; promotion of safety culture; and mindful allocation of people, responsibilities, and resources to reduce risks. We propose that these principles provide sound foundations for improving successful risk management.     

学习迁移的系统理论:PPEE理论模型的建构和意义

学习是人类社会永恒的主题。为了更好地利用过去的经验，增强学习效果，个人和组织进行学习迁移具有重要意义。学习迁移是指将在以往通过学习或解决问题所获得的经验，用于解决之后所遇到的问题。本文力图建立系统的学习迁移理论，研究人、问题、环境的因素对于学习迁移的影响。本文采用理论推导的研究方法，在前人研究的基础上，提出相应的理论模型。本文运用系统的观点，构建了学习迁移的PPEE理论模型，认为人的因素、问题的因素、人和问题的交互作用、以及环境的调节作用，会共同影响学习迁移的效果。本理论主要从五个方面论述学习迁移的机制。首先，将人的因素按照不同层面划分为后端基本能力、中端心理过程、前端知识结构，讨论了其各自对学习迁移效果的直接影响。其次，将问题的因素划分为形象相似性和抽象相似性，并根据这两个维度构建了四种问题间关系类型，并探究了其与学习迁移效果之间的关系。第三，同时考虑人的因素和问题的因素，研究了二者之间的互动对于学习迁移效果的影响。第四，将环境因素划分为时间紧迫性和空间重要性两个维度，探讨了人和环境，以及问题和环境之间的互动对学习迁移效果的影响。第五，基于系统整体的方面，研究人、问题、环境三者之间的互动对学习迁移效果的交互影响。本文还认为，该模型不仅适用于个人，也同样适用于团队、组织、地区、甚至国家和社会等各个层面，影响各个层面主体的学习迁移。本文最后总结了研究的理论和实践贡献，并提出了未来研究课题。本文对丰富学习理论、特别是学习迁移理论，以及推动教育和管理实践的发展进步具有重要的意义。