Balancemanagement als Erfolgsfaktor von Organisation und Führung

Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Organisationen und die in ihnen handelnden Akteure befinden sich in vielen Spannungsfeldern entgegengerichteter Strategien und Ziele (Lado, Boyd, Wright und Kroll, 2006). Organisationen sollen vorhandenes Wissen ausschöpfen, gleichzeitig jedoch neues Wissen suchen. Sie sollen langfristige Strategien verfolgen, aber gleichzeitig gute Quartalszahlen vorweisen und sie sollen zwar das Produktportfolio diversifizieren, sich parallel aber auf ihr Kerngeschäft konzentrieren.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literaturverzeichnis

  1. Aiken, L. S. & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Boerner, S. (1994). Die Organisation zwischen offener und geschlossener Gesellschaft – Athen oder Sparta? Berlin: Duncker und Humblot.Google Scholar
  3. Boerner, S. & Gebert, D. (1997). Unternehmen zwischen Resignation und Hoffnung – Ergebnisse einer Fallstudie in einem Moskauer Betrieb. Journal for East European Management Studies, 2(3),305–336.Google Scholar
  4. Bouchikhi, H. (1998). Living with and building on complexity: A constructivist perspective on organizations. Organization, 5(2),217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brannick, M. T. & Prince, C. (1997). An overview of team performance measurement. In M. T. Brannick, E. Salas & C. Prince, Team performance assessment and measurement (S. 1–18). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R. & Quinn, R. E. (1995). Paradox and Performance: Toward a Theory of Behavioral Complexity in Managerial Leadership. Organization Science, 6(5),524–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fleishman, E. A., Mumford, M. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Levin, K. Y., Korotkin, A. L. & Hein, M. B. (1991). Taxonomic Efforts in the description of leadership behavior: A synthesis and functional interpretation. Leadership Quarterly, 2(4),245–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gavetti, G. & Levinthal, D. (2000). Looking forward and looking backward: Cognitive and experiential search. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 113–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gebert, D. (2002). Fuhrung und Innovation. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  10. Gebert, D. & Boerner, S. (1995). Manager im Dilemma – Abschied von der geschlossenen Gesellschaft? Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
  11. Gebert, D. & Boerner, S. (1999). The Open and the Closed Corporation as conflicting Forms of Organization. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35(3),341–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gebert, D., Boerner, S. & Lanwehr, R. (2001a). Innovationsforderliche Offnungsprozesse: „Je mehr, desto besser?“ Die Betriebswirtschaft, 61(2),204–222.Google Scholar
  13. Gebert, D., Boerner, S. & Lanwehr, R. (2001b). Innovation durch Empowerment – eine Chance ohne Risiken? In H. Bohler & J. Sigloch (Hrsg.), Unternehmensfuhrung und empirische Forschung (S. 144–175). Bayreuth: R.E.A.-Verlag Managementforschung.Google Scholar
  14. Gebert, D., Boerner, S. & Lanwehr, R. (2004). The more situation control, the more innovation? Putting the linearity thesis to the test. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 4(1),98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gebert, D., Boerner, S. & Matiaske, W. (1998). Offenheit und Geschlossenheit in Organisationen – Zur Validierung eines Messinstruments. Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- u. Organisationspsychologie, 42(1),15–26.Google Scholar
  16. Gebert, D., Boerner, S., & Kearney, E. (2010).Fostering team innovation: Why combining opposing action strategies? Organization Science, 21(3) 593–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gibson, C. B. & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The Antecedents, Consequences and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2),209–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G. & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4),693–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hart, S. L. & Quinn, R. E. (1993). Roles executives play: CEOs, Behavioral complexity, and firm performance. Human Relations, 46(5),543–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Helfrich, C. D., Yu-Fang, L., Mohr, D. C., Meterko, M. & Sales, A. E. (2007). Assessing an organizational culture instrument based on the Competing Values Framework: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Implementation Science, 2(13),1–14.Google Scholar
  21. Hooijberg, R. (1996). A multidirectional approach toward leadership: an extension of the concept of behavior complexity. Human Relations, 49(7),919–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hooijberg, R. & Quinn, R. E. (1992). Behavioral complexity and the development of effective managerial leaders. In R. L. Phillips & J. G. Hunt (Eds.), Strategic management: A multiorganizational-level perspective. (S. 161–176), New York: Quorum.Google Scholar
  23. Howell, J. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control, and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidatedbusiness- unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6),891–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hunter, T.S., Bedell-Avers, K.E. & Mumford, M.D. (2007). The typical leadership study: Assumptions, implications, and potential remedies. Leadership Quarterly, 18(1),435–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Itami, H. (1987). Mobilizing Invisible Assets. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  26. James, L. R., Demaree, R. G. & Wolf, G. (1983). Estimating Within-Group Interrater Reliability with and without Response Bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1),85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jonas, H., Fry, R. & Srivasta, S. (1990). The Office of the CEO: Understanding the Executive Experience. Academy of Management Executive, 4(3),36–47.Google Scholar
  28. Jung, D. I., Chow, C. & Wu, A. (2003). The role of transformational leadership in enhancing organizational innovation: Hypotheses and some preliminary findings. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 525–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lado, A. A., Boyd, N. G., Wright, W. & Kroll, K. (2006). Paradox and theorizing within the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review, 31(1),115–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lamond, D. (2003). The value of Quinn’s competing values model in an Australian context. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(1),46–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lanwehr, R. (2008). Zum Zusammenhang von Fuhrungsverhalten und Fuhrungserfolg. Eine Diskussion aus dilemmatheoretischer Perspektive. Berlin: Technische Universitat Berlin.Google Scholar
  32. Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S. & Patil, A. (2006). Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research. Management Science, 52(12),1865–1883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Miles, R. E. & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  34. Mintzberg, H. (1975). The manager’s job: Folklore and fact. Harvard business review, 53(4),49–61.Google Scholar
  35. Morrison, E. W. & Phelps, C. C: (1999). Taking charge at work: Extrarole efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4),403–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Popper, K. R. (1980). Die offene Gesellschaft und ihre Feinde. 2 Bande. Tubingen: Francke.Google Scholar
  38. Porter, L. W. & McLaughlin (2006). Leadership and the organizational context: Like the weather? The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6),559–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Quinn, R. E. (1988). Beyond rational management: Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.Google Scholar
  40. Quinn, R. E. & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A Spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Toward a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3),363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G. & Tushman, M.L. (2009). Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance. Organization Science, 20(4),685–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schafer, J. L. & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2),147–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  44. Smith, W. K. & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16(3),522–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Smith, W.K. & Lewis, M.W. (2011). Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamix Equilibrium Model of Organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2),381–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Spector, P. E. (2006). Method Variance in Organizational Research. Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2),221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Strack, M., Boultgen, D., Kenkmann, C. & Held, M. (2004). Sozialperspektivische Imagepositionierung als Feedbackinstrument zur Unterstutzung kundenorientierten Managements. In W. Bungard, B. Koop & C. Liebig (Hrsg.), Psychologie und Wirtschaft leben. Aktuelle Themen der Wirtschaftspsychologie in Forschung und Praxis (S. 362–369). Munchen: Hampp.Google Scholar
  48. Thompson, M. D. (2000). Gender, Leadership Orientation, and Effectiveness: Testing the Theoretical Models of Bolman & Deal and Quinn. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 42(11–12),969–992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Venkatraman, N. & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 11(4),801–814.Google Scholar
  50. Wiersema, M.F. & Bowen, H.P. (2008). Corporate diversification: the impact of foreign competition, industry globalization, and product diversification. Strategic Management Journal, 29(2),115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in Organizations (4. Auflage). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Professor für WirtschaftspsychologieBiTS IserlohnIserlohnDeutschland

Personalised recommendations