|
with strategic resources and issues. These studies have in common a
multidisciplinary approach to the theory that helps explain and provide
a basis for improving management behavior. They share methodology
as well: all involve careful field observation in multiple settings. The
studies from the 1990s have been increasingly complemented by empirical
work that confirms both the significance of the exogenous
variables considered (such as changes in environmental turbulence, or
the existence of discontinuous technology) and the generality of the
findings.
These studies point to a clear picture of how large organizations
organize to manage their resources. Without exception, these activities
are distributed more widely across the organization than is usually
imagined. More challenging for both descriptive and normative theories
of decision making, activities whose consequences are interdependent
will typically proceed independently and simultaneously, posing
huge problems where coherence is a central requisite for efficiency and
effectiveness.
While it would seem that such complexity would defy the ability to
use the research, it has provided the basis for numerous tools. Portfolio
strategy systems were developed by consulting companies soon after
weaknesses in conventional capital budgeting systems were identified.
Incentive systems based on individual and team objectives (MBO
systems) were built to deal with the limitations of systems built on
structural symmetry. Project finance tools were developed to serve
strategies whose financial demands exceeded the capabilities of resource
allocation systems built to commit internal cash flow.
But again, with exceptions, management researchers have lagged in
recognizing and explaining the progress being made in the field. Somewhat
like medicine before modern biochemistry began to provide a
fine-grained picture of human functions, scientists raced to catch up
and explain what great clinicians could accomplish—in this case, great
managers. We feel sure that management researchers can do a better
job of catching up with great management practitioners if they take
advantage of some of the work reported here. To test that hypothesis,
we asked four distinguished discipline-based researchers to consider
the implications of the body of the book for their own fields. In their
responses, all have developed intriguing questions for future research.
Our hope is that all readers have the same experience. We present a
straightforward way of looking at an organization in terms of two
processes: one considering the substance of options brought forward,
the other involving the choice among options. That distinction is
evident in each chapter. We also consider how those choices aremade. The first chapters offer a model of the process. The second
group of chapters considers how that process breaks down. The third
section considers different approaches to fixing those breakdowns, and
the fourth section examines the role top management plays in dealing
with these issues in very demanding environments, ranging from high
technology to globalization.
If our hope is fulfilled, you will become intrigued and find ways of
probing deeper into the dilemmas reported.
J.L.B.
C.G.G.
| 
发帖
雷达卡
jg-xs1
京公网安备 11010802022788号
论坛法律顾问：王进律师
知识产权保护声明
免责及隐私声明
