|
The question of how an organization learns, creates new knowledge, and
exploits existing knowledge becomes a cross-disciplinary quest that must
reach out to studies of politics, cultures, diplomacy, history, social
studies and other fields. This quest must also tap the experience of
institutions, networks, communities of practice, and “virtual” organizations
both public and private—from political parties to military organizations and
even nations themselves. Moreover, it must exploit practices in disciplines
that are more art than science, such as architecture and theater.
 The conference was a prime example of that cross-disciplinary quest, tapping
lines of research in diverse disciplines that are beginning to overlap.
However, integrating the insights of disparate fields has proven more of a
challenge than one might have expected.
Meanwhile, on the user end of the equation, there is a growing willingness
to consider the hard-dollar impact of “soft” issues, such as power and
emotion, as evidenced by numerous comments at the conference:
“There is a renaissance of cultural discussions in management practice,”
says Thomas Sattelberger, Executive Vice President for Products and
Services at
Lufthansa AG.
The same is true for discussions about emotionality. “Rational calculation
is the least effective way to improve outputs,” says Prof. Risto Tainio
of the Helsinki School of Economics.
“We do need to look at the intangibles and emotional
aspects,” agrees Prof. John Stopford from the London Business School.
In fact, he believes strategy formation should stop starting with the
constraints of tangible resources and instead begin with such intangibles as
dreams and beliefs. “The soft sides of strategy inform more and we need to
do much more about it.”
Prof. Keith MacMillan,
Henley Management College agrees that one difference between current
discussions and previous conversations along similar lines is a direct
connection between organizational culture and affective behavior and
bottom-line corporate performance. |
