Читать книгу An Introduction to Management Studies - Thomas Bieger - Страница 19

[32] The demand to overcome functional silos or, in research, subdisciplinary silos has received attention early on (e.g., Aldrich & Herker, 1977). Research, for instance, often faces critique for pursuing increasingly specialized research questions (e.g., consumer behavior in isolated laboratory settings), and for neglecting the integrative issues challenging top managers and demanding a cross-disciplinary perspective. Practice shows that top managers must ultimately “integrate” the increasingly specialized management of individual functions. This, in turn, might overwhelm managers and increase the number of staff functions.

Thus, conflicts may arise between departments: for example, between the marketing function, which demands greater production flexibility in line with customer needs, and production, which wants the greatest possible standardization for reasons of efficiency. If incentive mechanisms (e.g., profit-sharing schemes for executives) are geared toward the success of one’s own department, fighting one’s own corner might take priority. Top management then needs to integrate competing views and optimize the overall system. To do so, it needs information, which in turn must be obtained from management staff.

This isolated optimization of individual functional areas, and the elaborate overall coordination required at the highest level, also reduces the agility of organizations. Integrative management is needed more than ever in today’s “VUCA age.” VUCA stands for “Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity” (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014). Today, developments are volatile because manifold shocks, for instance, in the financial markets, politics, or health, may strike home swiftly and simultaneously across the world. This sheer prospect causes uncertainty. Ever more at least seemingly contradictory goals (e.g., simultaneously achieving low-cost production and environmental protection), or the demand for high-performance teams and achieving work-life balance at the same time, create ambiguities and thus also complexity for management. Management needs to deal with these force fields and to define integrative solutions and approaches.

[33] Various authors have identified management practices and tools for overcoming the boundaries between professional communities and disciplines (Spee & Jarzabkowski, 2009; Levina & Vaast, 2005). Certain practices and tools (e.g., guided future workshops), or working tools (e.g., business planning or management models like the SGMM), have been found to facilitate the integration of diverse views.

Other approaches to promoting a more inclusive view (e.g., in strategy theory) have highlighted the importance of asking the right questions. For example, Nickerson and Argyres (2018) emphasize that avoiding Type III problems requires careful problem formulation. In this categorization, Type III problems involve situations where solutions are developed for the wrong problem (i.e., when the actual problem could not be identified). Integrative management is enabled and stimulated by asking broad, unconventional questions.

Working in groups is also important. These should be as diverse as possible (e.g., company members should represent different functional areas, as well as different cultures, genders, etc.). Groupthink should be avoided (i.e., overly focusing on group needs, especially group harmony). Instead, group members need to exchange ideas about each other’s perspectives on the problem at hand.