Abstract
The Emergent Quality Management paradigm combine the two sides of the dichotomy imposed by the dilemmas of the production system: on the one hand side exploitation, stability, control and efficiency and, on the other hand, exploration, adaptability, creativity and effectiveness. The two sides—actors’ exploration and the structures of exploitation—are interconnected and reinforce each other. Actors and structures are always interconnected with each other in a circular causality. It is through the interactions between the actors that the structures emerge, and these structures organize the activities of the actors. The conflict in goals between exploration and exploitation at individual and team levels is thus transcended. This is a theoretical transcendence, meaning that by using the Emergent Quality Management paradigm it becomes obvious that the dichotomy is not a problem that must be managed, but a necessary feature of wholeness.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adler, P., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. (1999). Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10(1), 43–68.
Adler, P. S. (1999). Building better bureaucracies. The Academy of Management Executive, 13(4), 36–47.
Adler, P. S., & Boris, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 61–89.
Adler, P. S., & Cole, R. E. (1993, Spring). Designed for learning: A tale of two auto plants. Sloan Management Review, 34(3), 85–94.
Anderson, N., Potocnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297–1333.
Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation–exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696–717.
Archer, M. S. (1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenic approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Backström, T. (2013). Managerial rein control and the Rheo task of leadership. Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 15(4), 76–90.
Backström, T., & Döös, M. (2008). Relatonics–a key concept for networked organizations. In G. D. Putnik & M. M. Cunha (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Networked and Virtual Organizations (Vol. 3, pp. 1367–1374). Hershey, PA: Idea Group, Inc.
Backström, T., Moström Åberg, M., Köping Olsson, B., Wilhelmson, L., & Åteg, M. (2013). Manager’s task to support integrated autonomy at the workplace. Results from an intervention. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(22), 20–31. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v8n22p20.
Backström, T., & Söderberg, T. (2016). Self-organisation and group creativity. Journal of Creativity and Business Innovation, 2, 65–79.
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 27, 238–256.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Doubleday & Company.
Burgelman, R. A. (2002). Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary lock-in. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 325–357.
Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston: Harvard Business School.
Cooper, R. G. (1990, May–June). Stage-gate systems: A new tool for manageing new products. Business Horizons, 33(3), 44–54.
Cooper, R. G. (2011). Perspective: The innovation dilemma: How to innovate when market is mature. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(S1), 2–27.
Ekvall, G. (1996). Organizational climate for creativity and innovation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(1), 1005–1123.
Gell-Mann, M. (1994). The quark and the jaguar—Adventures in the simple and the complex. London: Little, Brown and Company.
Ghoshal, S., & Barlett, C. (1994). Linking organizational context and managerial action: The dimensions of quality of management. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 91–112.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gumusluoglu, L., & Ilsev, A. (2009). Transformational leadership, creativity, and orgazational innovation. Journal of Business Research, 62(4), 461–473.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693–706.
Hagström, T., Backström, T., & Göransson, S. (2009). Sustainable competence: Reproduction and innovation in a bank. The Learning Organization, 16(3), 237–250.
Haken, H. (1996). Principles of brain functioning. A synergetic approach to brain activity, behavior and cognition. Berlin: Springer.
Hazy, J. K., & Backström, T. (2013). Human interaction dynamics (HID): An emerging paradigm for management research. Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 15(4), i–ix.
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 109–155.
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 95–112.
Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 760–776.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
Martins, E. C., & Terblanche, F. (2003). Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1), 64–74.
Miron, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2004). Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality, and efficiency compete or complement each other? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 175–199.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206.
Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2014). Designing and enabling spaces for collaborative knowledge creation and innovation: From managing to enabling innovation as socio-epistemological technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 346–359.
Pot, F. D. (2011). Workplace innovation for better jobs and performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 60(4), 404–415.
Schein, E. H. (1985). Organzational culture and leadership—A dynamic view. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16(5), 522–536.
Solé, R., & Goodwin, B. (2000). Signs of life—How complexity pervades biology. New York: Basic Books.
Taylor, A., & Helfat, C. (2009). Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: Complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organization Science, 20(4), 718–739.
Teglborg-Lefevre, A.-C. (2010). Modes of approach to employee-driven innovation in France: An empirical study. Transfer, 16(2), 211–226.
Westerman, G., McFarlan, F. M., & Iansiti, M. (2006). Organization design and effectiveness over the innovation life cycle. Organization Science, 17(2), 230–238.
Xu, Q., Chen, J., Xie, Z., Liu, J., Zheng, G., & Wang, Y. (2007). Total innovation management: A novel paradigm of innovation management in the 21st century. Journal of Technology Transfer, 32, 9–25.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Backström, T. (2017). Solving the Quality Dilemma: Emergent Quality Management. In: Backström, T., Fundin, A., Johansson, P. (eds) Innovative Quality Improvements in Operations. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 255. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55985-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55985-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-55984-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-55985-8
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)