Managerial economics and strategic analysis

310

PART 3: STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION

chapter 10

Creating Effective Organizational

Designs

After reading this chapter, you should have a good understanding of the following learning objectives:

LO10.1    The growth patterns of major corporations and the relationship between a firm’s strategy and its 

structure.

LO10.2    Each of the traditional types of organizational structure: simple, functional, divisional, and matrix.

LO10.3    The implications of a firm’s international operations for organizational structure.

LO10.4    The different types of boundaryless organizations—barrier-free, modular, and virtual—and their relative 

advantages and disadvantages.

LO10.5    The need for creating ambidextrous organizational designs that enable firms to explore new 

opportunities and effectively integrate existing operations.

Learning from Mistakes

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. The  Boeing  787  Dreamliner  is  a  game  changer  in  the  aircraft  market. 1  It  is  the  first  commercial  airliner  that 

doesn’t  have  an  aluminum  skin.  Instead,  Boeing  designed  it  to  have  a  composite  exterior,  which  provides  a 

weight savings that allows the plane to use 20 percent less fuel than the 767, the plane it is designed to replace. 

The  increased  fuel  efficiency  and  other  design  advancements  made  the  787  very  popular  with  airlines.  Boeing 

received orders for over 900 Dreamliners before the first 787 ever took flight.

It was also a game changer for Boeing. In 2003, when Boeing announced the development of the new plane, 

they  also  decided  to  design  and  manufacture  it  differently  than  they  ever  had  before.  In  the  past,  Boeing  had 

internally  designed  and  engineered  the  major  components  of  its  planes.  Boeing  would  then  provide  detailed 

engineering designs and specifications to their key suppliers. The suppliers would then build the components to 

Boeing’s specifications. To limit the upfront investment they would need to make with the 787, Boeing moved to 

a modular structure and outsourced much of the engineering of the

311

components to suppliers. Boeing provided them with basic specifications and left it to the suppliers to undertake 

the  detailed  design,  engineering,  and  manufacturing  of  components  and  subsystems.  Boeing’s  operations  in 

Seattle were then responsible for assembling the pieces into a completed aircraft.

Working with about 50 suppliers on four continents, Boeing found the coordination and integration of the work 

of  suppliers  to  be  very  challenging.  Some  of  the  contracted  suppliers  didn’t  have  the  engineering  expertise 

needed  to  do  the  work  and  outsourced  the  engineering  to  subcontractors.  This  made  it  especially  difficult  to 

monitor  the  engineering  work  for  the  plane.  Jim  Albaugh,  Boeing’s  commercial  aviation  chief,  identified  a  core 

issue with this change in responsibility and stated, “We gave work to people that had never really done this kind 

of technology before, and we didn’t provide the oversight that was necessary.” With the geographic stretch of the 

supplier  set,  Boeing  also  had  difficulty  monitoring  the  progress  of  the  supplying  firms.  Boeing  even  ended  up 

buying  some  of  the  suppliers  once  it  became  apparent  they  couldn’t  deliver  the  designs  and  products  on 

schedule.  For  example,  Boeing  spent  about  $1  billion  to  acquire  the  Vought  Aircraft  Industries  unit  responsible 

for  the  plane’s  fuselage.  When  the  suppliers  finally  delivered  the  parts,  Boeing  sometimes  found  they  had 

difficulty assembling or combining the components. With their first 787, they found that the nose section and the 

fuselage  didn’t  initially  fit  together,  leaving  a  sizable  gap  between  the  two  sections.  To  address  these  issues, 

they  were  forced  to  co-locate  many  of  their  major  suppliers  together  for  six  months  to  smooth  out  design  and 

integration issues.

In  the  end,  the  decision  to  outsource  cost  Boeing  dearly.  The  plane  was  three  years  behind  schedule  when 

the  first  787  was  delivered  to  a  customer.  The  entire  process  took  billions  of  dollars  more  than  originally 

projected and also more than what it would have cost Boeing to design in house. And as of early 2013, all 49 of 

the 787s that had been delivered to customers had been grounded because of concerns about onboard fires in 

the lithium ion batteries used to power the plane—parts

312

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 312

that were not designed by Boeing. As Boeing CEO Jim NcNerney concluded, “In retrospect, our 787 game plan may

have been overly ambitious, incorporating too many firsts all at once–in the application of new technologies, in

revolutionary design and build processes, and in increased global sourcing of engineering and manufacturing

content.”

Discussion Questions

1. A number of firms benefit from outsourcing design and manufacturing. What is different with Boeing that makes

it so much harder to be successful?

2. What lessons does their experience with the 787 offer Boeing for its next plane development effort?

One of the central concepts in this chapter is the importance of boundaryless organizations. Successful organizations

create permeable boundaries among the internal activities as well as between the organization and its external customers,

suppliers, and alliance partners. We introduced this idea in Chapter 3 in our discussion of the value-chain concept, which

consisted of several primary (e.g., inbound logistics, marketing and sales) and support activities (e.g., procurement,

human resource management). There are a number of possible benefits to outsourcing activities as part of becoming an

effective boundaryless organization. However, outsourcing can also create challenges. As in the case of Boeing, the firm

lost a large amount of control by using independent suppliers to design and manufacture key subsystems of the 787.

Today’s managers are faced with two ongoing and vital activities in structuring and designing their organizations. 2

First, they must decide on the most appropriate type of organizational structure. Second, they need to assess what

mechanisms, processes, and techniques are most helpful in enhancing the permeability of both internal and external

boundaries.

Traditional Forms of Organizational Structure

Organizational structure refers to the formalized patterns of interactions that link a firm’s tasks, technologies, and

people. 3 Structures help to ensure that resources are used effectively in accomplishing an organization’s mission.

Structure provides a means of balancing two conflicting forces: a need for the division of tasks into meaningful

groupings and the need to integrate such groupings in order to ensure efficiency and effectiveness. 4 Structure identifies

the executive, managerial, and administrative organization of a firm and indicates responsibilities and hierarchical

relationships. It also influences the flow of information as well as the context and nature of human interactions. 5

organizational structure

the formalized patterns of interactions that link a firm’s tasks, technologies, and people.

Most organizations begin very small and either die or remain small. Those that survive and prosper embark on

strategies designed to increase the overall scope of operations and enable them to enter new product-market domains.

Such growth places additional pressure on executives to control and coordinate the firm’s increasing size and diversity.

The most appropriate type of structure depends on the nature and magnitude of growth.

LO10.1

The growth patterns of major corporations and the relationship between a firm’s strategy and its structure.

Patterns of Growth of Large Corporations: Strategy-Structure Relationships

A firm’s strategy and structure change as it increases in size, diversifies into new product markets, and expands its

geographic scope. 6Exhibit 10.1 illustrates common growth patterns of firms.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 313

EXHIBIT 10.1 Dominant Growth Patterns of Large Corporations

Source: Adapted from J. R. Galbraith and R. K. Kazanjian. Strategy Implementation: Structure, Systems and Process , 2nd ed. Copyright © 1986.

A new firm with a simple structure typically increases its sales revenue and volume of outputs over time. It may also

engage in some vertical integration to secure sources of supply (backward integration) as well as channels of distribution

(forward integration). The simple-structure firm then implements a functional structure to concentrate efforts on both

increasing efficiency and enhancing its operations and products. This structure enables the firm to group its operations

into either functions, departments, or geographic areas. As its initial markets mature, a firm looks beyond its present

products and markets for possible expansion.

A strategy of related diversification requires a need to reorganize around product lines or geographic markets. This

leads to a divisional structure. As the business expands in terms of sales revenues, and domestic growth opportunities

become somewhat limited, a firm may seek opportunities in international markets. A firm has a wide variety of structures

to choose from. These include international division, geographic area, worldwide product division, worldwide

functional , and worldwide matrix. Deciding upon the most appropriate structure when a firm has international operations

depends on three primary factors: the extent of international expansion, type of strategy (global, multidomestic, or

transnational), and the degree of product diversity. 7

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 314

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 314

Some firms may find it advantageous to diversify into several product lines rather than focus their efforts on

strengthening distributor and supplier relationships through vertical integration. They would organize themselves

according to product lines by implementing a divisional structure. Also, some firms may choose to move into unrelated

product areas, typically by acquiring existing businesses. Frequently, their rationale is that acquiring assets and

competencies is more economical or expedient than developing them internally. Such an unrelated, or conglomerate,

strategy requires relatively little integration across businesses and sharing of resources. Thus, a holding company

structure becomes appropriate. There are many other growth patterns, but these are the most common. *

Now we will discuss some of the most common types of organizational structures—simple, functional, divisional

(including two variants: strategic business unit and holding company ), and matrix and their advantages and

disadvantages. We will close the section with a discussion of the structural implications when a firm expands its

operations into international markets. 8

LO10.2

Each of the traditional types of organizational structure: simple, functional, divisional, and matrix.

Simple Structure

The simple organizational structure is the oldest, and most common, organizational form. Most organizations are very

small and have a single or very narrow product line in which the owner-manager (or top executive) makes most of the

decisions. The owner-manager controls all activities, and the staff serves as an extension of the top executive.

simple organizational structure

an organizational form in which the owner-manager makes most of the decisions and controls activities, and the staff

serves as an extension of the top executive.

Advantages The simple structure is highly informal and the coordination of tasks is accomplished by direct supervision.

Decision making is highly centralized, there is little specialization of tasks, few rules and regulations, and an informal

evaluation and reward system. Although the owner-manager is intimately involved in almost all phases of the business, a

manager is often employed to oversee day-to-day operations.

Disadvantages A simple structure may foster creativity and individualism since there are generally few rules and

regulations. However, such “informality” may lead to problems. Employees may not clearly understand their

responsibilities, which can lead to conflict and confusion. Employees may take advantage of the lack of regulations, act

in their own self-interest, which can erode motivation and satisfaction and lead to the possible misuse of organizational

resources. Small organizations have flat structures that limit opportunities for upward mobility. Without the potential for

future advancement, recruiting and retaining talent may become very difficult.

Functional Structure

When an organization is small (15 employees or less), it is not necessary to have a variety of formal arrangements and

groupings of activities. However, as firms grow, excessive demands may be placed on the owner-manager in order to

obtain and process all of the information necessary to run the business. Chances are the owner will not be skilled in all

specialties (e.g., accounting, engineering, production, marketing). Thus, he or she will need to hire specialists in the

various functional areas. Such growth in the overall scope and complexity of the business necessitates a functional

organizational structure wherein the major functions of the firm are grouped internally. The coordination and

integration of the functional areas becomes one of the most important responsibilities of the chief executive of the firm

(see Exhibit 10.2 ).

functional organizational structure

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. an organizational form in which the major functions of the firm, such as production, marketing, R&D, and accounting, are

grouped internally.

*The lowering of transaction costs and globalization have led to some changes in the common historical patterns that we have discussed. Some firms are, in

effect, bypassing the vertical integration stage. Instead, they focus on core competencies and outsource other value-creation activities. Also, even relatively

young firms are going global early in their history because of lower communication and transportation costs. For an interesting perspective on global start-ups,

see McDougall, P. P. & Oviatt, B. M. 1996. New Venture Internationalization, Strategic Change and Performance: A Follow-Up Study. Journal of Business

Venturing , 11: 23–40; and McDougall, P. P. & Oviatt, B. M. (Eds.). 2000. The Special Research Forum on International Entrepreneurship. Academy of

Management Journal , October: 902–1003.

315

EXHIBIT 10.2 Functional Organizational Structure

Functional structures are generally found in organizations in which there is a single or closely related product or

service, high production volume, and some vertical integration. Initially, firms tend to expand the overall scope of their

operations by penetrating existing markets, introducing similar products in additional markets, or increasing the level of

vertical integration. Such expansion activities clearly increase the scope and complexity of the operations. The functional

structure provides for a high level of centralization that helps to ensure integration and control over the related product-

market activities or multiple primary activities (from inbound logistics to operations to marketing, sales, and service) in

the value chain (addressed in Chapters 3 and 4). Strategy Spotlight 10.1 provides an example of an effective functional

organization structure—Parkdale Mills.

Advantages By bringing together specialists into functional departments, a firm is able to enhance its coordination and

control within each of the functional areas. Decision making in the firm will be centralized at the top of the organization.

This enhances the organizational-level (as opposed to functional area) perspective across the various functions in the

organization. In addition, the functional structure provides for a more efficient use of managerial and technical talent

since functional area expertise is pooled in a single department (e.g., marketing) instead of being spread across a variety

of product-market areas. Finally, career paths and professional development in specialized areas are facilitated.

Disadvantages The differences in values and orientations among functional areas may impede communication and

coordination. Edgar Schein of MIT has argued that shared assumptions, often based on similar backgrounds and

experiences of members, form around functional units in an organization. This leads to what are often called “stove

pipes” or “silos,” in which departments view themselves as isolated, self-contained units with little need for interaction

and coordination with other departments. This erodes communication because functional groups may have not only

different goals but also differing meanings of words and concepts. According to Schein:

The word “marketing” will mean product development to the engineer, studying customers through market research to the

product manager, merchandising to the salesperson, and constant change in design to the manufacturing manager. When they try

to work together, they will often attribute disagreements to personalities and fail to notice the deeper, shared assumptions that

color how each function thinks. 9

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Such narrow functional orientations also may lead to short-term thinking based largely upon what is best for the

functional area, not the entire organization. In a manufacturing firm, sales may want to offer a wide range of customized

products to appeal to the firm’s

316

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 316

customers; R&D may overdesign products and components to achieve technical elegance; and manufacturing may favor

no-frills products that can be produced at low cost by means of long production runs. Functional structures may

overburden the top executives in the firm because conflicts have a tendency to be “pushed up” to the top of the

organization since there are no managers who are responsible for the specific product lines. Functional structures make it

difficult to establish uniform performance standards across the entire organization. It may be relatively easy to evaluate

production managers on the basis of production volume and cost control, but establishing performance measures for

engineering, R&D, and accounting become more problematic.

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 10.1

PARKDALE MILLS: A SUCCESSFUL FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

For more than 80 years, Parkdale Mills, with approximately $1 billion in revenues, has been the industry leader in

the production of cotton and cotton blend yarns. Their expertise comes by concentrating on a single product line,

perfecting processes, and welcoming innovation. According to CEO Andy Warlick, “I think we’ve probably spent

more than any two competitors combined on new equipment and robotics. We do this because we have to compete

in a global market where a lot of the competition has a lower wage structure and gets subsidies that we don’t

receive, so we really have to focus on consistency and cost control.” Yarn making is generally considered to be a

commodity business, and Parkdale is the industry’s low-cost producer.

Tasks are highly standardized and authority is centralized with Duke Kimbrell, founder and chairman, and CEO

Andy Warlick. The firm operates a bare-bones staff with a small staff of top executives. Kimbrell and Warlick are

considered shrewd about the cotton market, technology, customer loyalty, and incentive pay.

Sources: Stewart, C. 2003. The Perfect Yarn. The Manufacturer.com , July 31; www.parkdalemills.com ; Berman, P. 1987. The Fast Track Isn’t Always the Best

Track. Forbes, November 2: 60–64; and personal communication with Duke Kimbrell, March 11, 2005.

Divisional Structure

The divisional organizational structure (sometimes called the multidivisional structure or M-Form) is organized

around products, projects, or markets. Each of the divisions, in turn, includes its own functional specialists who are

typically organized into departments. 10 A divisional structure encompasses a set of relatively autonomous units governed

by a central corporate office. The operating divisions are relatively independent and consist of products and services that

are different from those of the other divisions. 11 Operational decision making in a large business places excessive

demands on the firm’s top management. In order to attend to broader, longer-term organizational issues, top-level

managers must delegate decision making to lower-level managers. Divisional executives play a key role: they help to

determine the product-market and financial objectives for the division as well as their division’s contribution to overall

corporate performance. 12 The rewards are based largely on measures of financial performance such as net income and

revenue. Exhibit 10.3 illustrates a divisional structure.

divisional organizational structure

an organizational form in which products, projects, or product markets are grouped internally.

General Motors was among the earliest firms to adopt the divisional organizational structure. 13 In the 1920s the

company formed five major product divisions (Cadillac, Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, and Chevrolet) as well as several

industrial divisions. Since then, many firms have discovered that as they diversified into new product-market activities,

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. functional structures—with their emphasis on single functional departments—were unable to manage the increased

complexity of the entire business.

Advantages By creating separate divisions to manage individual product markets, there is a separation of strategic and

operating control. Divisional managers can focus

317

their efforts on improving operations in the product markets for which they are responsible, and corporate officers can

devote their time to overall strategic issues for the entire corporation. The focus on a division’s products and

markets—by the divisional executives—provides the corporation with an enhanced ability to respond quickly to

important changes. Since there are functional departments within each division of the corporation, the problems

associated with sharing resources across functional departments are minimized. Because there are multiple levels of

general managers (executives responsible for integrating and coordinating all functional areas), the development of

general management talent is enhanced.

EXHIBIT 10.3 Divisional Organizational Structure

Disadvantages It can be very expensive; there can be increased costs due to the duplication of personnel, operations, and

investment since each division must staff multiple functional departments. There also can be dysfunctional competition

among divisions since each division tends to become concerned solely about its own operations. Divisional managers are

often evaluated on common measures such as return on assets and sales growth. If goals are conflicting, there can be a

sense of a “zero-sum” game that would discourage sharing ideas and resources among the divisions for the common good

of the corporation. Ghoshal and Bartlett, two leading strategy scholars, note:

As their label clearly warns, divisions divide. The divisional model fragmented companies’ resources; it created vertical

communication channels that insulated business units and prevented them from sharing their strengths with one another.

Consequently, the whole of the corporation was often less than the sum of its parts. 14

With many divisions providing different products and services, there is the chance that differences in image and

quality may occur across divisions. One division may offer no-frills products of lower quality that may erode the brand

reputation of another division that has top quality, highly differentiated offerings. Since each division is evaluated in

terms of financial measures such as return on investment and revenue growth, there is often an urge to focus on short-

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. term performance. If corporate management uses quarterly profits as the key performance indicator, divisional

management may tend to put significant emphasis

318

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 318

on “making the numbers” and minimizing activities, such as advertising, maintenance, and capital investments, which

would detract from short-term performance measures. Strategy Spotlight 10.2 discusses how ArcelorMittal works to

overcome some of the disadvantages of the divisional structure by “twinning” its plants.

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 10.2

BREAKING DOWN DIVISIONAL BOUNDARIES: LEARNING FROM YOUR TWIN

On the edge of Lake Michigan in Burns Harbor, Indiana, sits a 50-year-old steel mill that produces steel for the

automotive, appliance, and other industries with midwestern production plants. The steel mill struggled through the

1980s and 1990s and went bankrupt in 2002. It was bought out of bankruptcy and has been owned by ArcelorMittal

Steel, the world’s largest steel producer, since 2005. However, the plant faced a another crisis in 2007 when it was

threatened with closure unless it became more productive and efficient.

Today, this plant requires 1.32 man hours per ton of steel produced, which is 34 percent more efficient than the

average in U.S. steel mills. Further, in 2011, the plant was 19 percent more efficient than it was in 2007 and

produced twice the quantity of steel it produced in 2009. Its future as a productive steel plant is now secure.

How did ArcelorMittal achieve these gains and rejuvenate an old steel mill? It did it by breaking down the barriers

between organization units to facilitate knowledge transfer and learning. One of the disadvantages of a divisional

structure is that the divisions often perceive themselves as being in competition with each other and are therefore

unwilling to share information to help other divisions improve. ArcelorMittal has overcome this by “twinning” different

steel mills, one efficient and one struggling, and challenging the efficient plant to help out its twin. The Burns Harbor

mill was paired with a mill in Ghent, Belgium. Over 100 engineers and managers from Burns Harbor traveled to

Belgium to tour the Ghent plant and learn from their colleagues there how to improve operations. They copied

routines from that plant, implemented an advanced computer control system used in the Belgian mill, and employed

automated machines similar to the ones used in Belgium. ArcelorMittal also provided $150 million in capital

investments to upgrade the operations to bring the facilities up to par with the Ghent plant. These changes resulted

in dramatic improvements in the efficiency of the Burns Harbor mill. The Belgians take pride in the improvements in

Burns Harbor and now find themselves striving to improve their own operations to stay ahead of the Americans. The

Ghent plant now produces 950 tons of steel per employee each year, only 50 tons per employee more than Burns

Harbor, but the Ghent managers boast they will soon increase productivity to 1100 tons per employee. Thus, Ghent

cooperates and is willing to help Burns Harbor, but the managers and employees at Ghent have a competitive

streak as well.

The experience of ArcelorMittal demonstrates how firms can act to overcome the typical disadvantages of their

divisional structure.

Source: Miller, J. 2012. Indiana steel mill revived with lessons from abroad. WSJ.com , May 21: np; www.nishp.org/bh-history.htm ; and Markovich, S. 2012.

Morning brief: Foreign investment revives Indiana steel mill. blogs.cfr.org , May 21: np.

We’ll discuss two variations of the divisional form: the strategic business unit (SBU) and holding company structures.

Strategic Business Unit (SBU) Structure Highly diversified corporations such as ConAgra, a $13 billion food producer,

may consist of dozens of different divisions. 15 If ConAgra were to use a purely divisional structure, it would be nearly

impossible for the corporate office to plan and coordinate activities, because the span of control would be too large. To

attain synergies, ConAgra has put its diverse businesses into three primary SBUs: food service (restaurants), retail

(grocery stores), and agricultural products.

strategic business unit (SBU) structure

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. an organizational form in which products, projects, or product market divisions are grouped into homogeneous units.

With an SBU structure, divisions with similar products, markets, and/or technologies are grouped into homogeneous

units to achieve some synergies. These include those discussed in Chapter 6 for related diversification, such as leveraging

core competencies, sharing infrastructures, and market power. Generally the more related businesses are within a

corporation, the fewer SBUs will be required. Each of the SBUs in the corporation operates as a profit center.

319

Advantages The SBU structure makes the task of planning and control by the corporate office more manageable. Also,

with greater decentralization of authority, individual businesses can react more quickly to important changes in the

environment than if all divisions had to report directly to the corporate office.

Disadvantages Since the divisions are grouped into SBUs, it may become difficult to achieve synergies across SBUs. If

divisions in different SBUs have potential sources of synergy, it may become difficult for them to be realized. The

additional level of management increases the number of personnel and overhead expenses, while the additional

hierarchical level removes the corporate office further from the individual divisions. The corporate office may become

unaware of key developments that could have a major impact on the corporation.

Holding Company Structure The holding company structure (sometimes referred to as a conglomerate ) is also a

variation of the divisional structure. Whereas the SBU structure is often used when similarities exist between the

individual businesses (or divisions), the holding company structure is appropriate when the businesses in a corporation’s

portfolio do not have much in common. Thus, the potential for synergies is limited.

holding company structure

an organizational form that is a variation of the divisional organizational structure in which the divisions have a high

degree of autonomy both from other divisions and from corporate headquarters.

Holding company structures are most appropriate for firms with a strategy of unrelated diversification. Companies

such as Berkshire Hathaway and Loews use a holding company structure to implement their unrelated diversification

strategies. Since there are few similarities across the businesses, the corporate offices in these companies provide a great

deal of autonomy to operating divisions and rely on financial controls and incentive programs to obtain high levels of

performance from the individual businesses. Corporate staffs at these firms tend to be small because of their limited

involvement in the overall operation of their various businesses. 16

Advantages The holding company structure has the cost savings associated with fewer personnel and the lower overhead

resulting from a small corporate office and fewer hierarchical levels. The autonomy of the holding company structure

increases the motivational level of divisional executives and enables them to respond quickly to market opportunities and

threats.

Disadvantages There is an inherent lack of control and dependence that corporate-level executives have on divisional

executives. Major problems could arise if key divisional executives leave the firm, because the corporate office has very

little “bench strength”—additional managerial talent ready to quickly fill key positions. If problems arise in a division, it

may become very difficult to turn around individual businesses because of limited staff support in the corporate office.

Matrix Structure

One approach that tries to overcome the inadequacies inherent in the other structures is the matrix organizational

structure. It is a combination of the functional and divisional structures. Most commonly, functional departments are

combined with product groups on a project basis. For example, a product group may want to develop a new addition to

its line; for this project, it obtains personnel from functional departments such as marketing, production, and engineering.

These personnel work under the manager of the product group for the duration of the project, which can vary from a few

weeks to an open-ended period of time. The individuals who work in a matrix organization become responsible to two

managers: the project manager and the manager of their functional area. Exhibit 10.4 illustrates a matrix structure.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. matrix organizational structure

an organizational form in which there are multiple lines of authority and some individuals report to at least two managers.

Some large multinational corporations rely on a matrix structure to combine product groups and geographical units.

Product managers have global responsibility for the

320

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 320

development, manufacturing, and distribution of their own line, while managers of geographical regions have

responsibility for the profitability of the businesses in their regions. In the mid-1990s, Caterpillar, Inc., implemented this

type of structure.

EXHIBIT 10.4 Matrix Organizational Structure

Other organizations, such as Cisco, use a matrix structure to try to maintain flexibility. In these firms, individual

workers have a permanent functional home but also are assigned to and work within temporary project teams. 17

Advantages The matrix structure facilitates the use of specialized personnel, equipment, and facilities. Instead of

duplicating functions, as would be the case in a divisional structure based on products, the resources are shared.

Individuals with high expertise can divide their time among multiple projects. Such resource sharing and collaboration

enable a firm to use resources more efficiently and to respond more quickly and effectively to changes in the competitive

environment. The flexibility inherent in a matrix structure provides professionals with a broader range of responsibility.

Such experience enables them to develop their skills and competencies.

Disadvantages The dual-reporting structures can result in uncertainty and lead to intense power struggles and conflict

over the allocation of personnel and other resources. Working relationships become more complicated. This may result in

excessive reliance on group processes and teamwork, along with a diffusion of responsibility, which in turn may erode

timely decision making.

Let’s look at Procter & Gamble (P&G) to see some of the disadvantages associated with a matrix structure:

After 50 years with a divisional structure, P&G went to a matrix structure in 1987. In this structure, they had product categories,

such as soaps and detergents, on one dimension and functional managers on the other dimension. Within each product category,

country managers reported to regional managers who then reported to product managers. The structure became complex to

manage, with 13 layers of management and significant power struggles as the functional managers developed their own strategic

agendas that often were

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 321

at odds with the product managers’ agendas. After seeing their growth rate decline from 8.5 percent in the 1980s to 2.6 percent

in the late 1990s, P&G scrapped the matrix structure to go to a global product structure with three major product categories to

offer unity in direction and more responsive decision making. 18

EXHIBIT 10.5 Functional, Divisional, and Matrix Organizational Structures: Advantages and

Disadvantages

Functional Structure

Advantages Disadvantages

•   Pooling of specialists enhances coordination and control. •   Differences in functional area orientation impede 

communication and coordination.

•   Centralized decision making enhances an organizational 

perspective across functions.

•   Tendency for specialists to develop short-term 

perspective and narrow functional orientation.

•   Efficient use of managerial and technical talent. •   Functional area conflicts may overburden top-level 

decision makers.

•   Facilitates career paths and professional development in 

specialized areas.

•   Difficult to establish uniform performance standards.

Divisional Structure

Advantages Disadvantages

•   Increases strategic and operational control, permitting 

corporate-level executives to address strategic issues.

•   Increased costs incurred through duplication of 

personnel, operations, and investment.

•   Quick response to environmental changes. •   Dysfunctional competition among divisions may 

detract from overall corporate performance.

•   Increases focus on products and markets. •   Difficult to maintain uniform corporate image.

•   Minimizes problems associated with sharing resources 

across functional areas.

•   Overemphasis on short-term performance.

•   Facilitates development of general managers.

Matrix Structure

Advantages Disadvantages

•   Increases market responsiveness through collaboration and 

synergies among professional colleagues.

•   Dual-reporting relationships can result in uncertainty 

regarding accountability.

•   Allows more efficient utilization of resources. •   Intense power struggles may lead to increased levels 

of conflict.

•   Improves flexibility, coordination, and communication. •   Working relationships may be more complicated and 

human resources duplicated

•   Increases professional development through a broader range 

of responsibility.

•   Excessive reliance on group processes and 

teamwork may impede timely decision making.

Exhibit 10.5 briefly summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of the functional, divisional, and matrix

organizational structures.

LO10.3

The implications of a firm’s international operations for organizational structure.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. International Operations: Implications for Organizational Structure

Today’s managers must maintain an international outlook on their firm’s businesses and competitive strategies. In the

global marketplace, managers must ensure consistency between their strategies (at the business, corporate, and

international levels) and the structure of their organization. As firms expand into foreign markets, they generally follow

322

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 322

a pattern of change in structure that parallels the changes in their strategies. 19 Three major contingencies that influence

the chosen structure are (1) the type of strategy that is driving a firm’s foreign operations, (2) product diversity, and (3)

the extent to which a firm is dependent on foreign sales. 20

As international operations become an important part of a firm’s overall operations, managers must make changes that

are consistent with their firm’s structure. The primary types of structures used to manage a firm’s international operations

are: 21

• International division

• Geographic-area division

• Worldwide functional

• Worldwide product division

• Worldwide matrix

Multidomestic strategies are driven by political and cultural imperatives requiring managers within each country to

respond to local conditions. The structures consistent with such a strategic orientation are the international division and

geographic-area division structures . Here local managers are provided with a high level of autonomy to manage their

operations within the constraints and demands of their geographic market. As a firm’s foreign sales increase as a

percentage of its total sales, it will likely change from an international division to a geographic-area division structure.

And, as a firm’s product and/or market diversity becomes large, it is likely to benefit from a worldwide matrix

structure .

international division structure

an organizational form in which international operations are in a separate, autonomous division. Most domestic

operations are kept in other parts of the organization.

geographic-area division structure

a type of divisional organizational structure in which operations in geographical regions are grouped internally.

worldwide matrix structure

a type of matrix organizational structure that has one line of authority for geographic-area divisions and another line of

authority for worldwide product divisions.

Global strategies are driven by economic pressures that require managers to view operations in different geographic

areas to be managed for overall efficiency. The structures consistent with the efficiency perspective are the worldwide

functional and worldwide product division structures . Here, division managers view the marketplace as homogeneous

and devote relatively little attention to local market, political, and economic factors. The choice between these two types

of structures is guided largely by the extent of product diversity. Firms with relatively low levels of product diversity

may opt for a worldwide product division structure. However, if significant product–market diversity results from highly

unrelated international acquisitions, a worldwide holding company structure should be implemented. Such firms have

very little commonality among products, markets, or technologies, and have little need for integration.

worldwide functional structure

a functional structure in which all departments have worldwide reponsibilities.

worldwide product division structure

a product division structure in which all divisions have worldwide responsibilities.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Global Start-Ups: A Recent Phenomenon

International expansion occurs rather late for most corporations, typically after possibilities of domestic growth are

exhausted. Increasingly, we are seeing two interrelated phenomena. First, many firms now expand internationally

relatively early in their history. Second, some firms are “born global”—that is, from the very beginning, many start-ups

are global in their activities. For example, Logitech Inc., a leading producer of personal computer accessories, was global

from day one. Founded in 1982 by a Swiss national and two Italians, the company was headquartered both in California

and Switzerland. R&D and manufacturing were also conducted in both locations and, subsequently, in Taiwan and

Ireland. 22

The success of companies such as Logitech challenges the conventional wisdom that a company must first build up

assets, internal processes, and experience before venturing into faraway lands. It also raises a number of questions: What

exactly is a global start-up? Under what conditions should a company start out as a global start-up? What does it take to

succeed as a global start-up?

A global start-up has been defined as a business organization that, from inception, seeks to derive significant

competitive advantage from the use of resources and the sale of outputs in multiple countries. Right from the beginning,

it uses in-puts from around the world and sells its products and services to customers around the world. Geographical

boundaries of nation-states are irrelevant for a global start-up.

global start-up

a business organization that, from inception, seeks to derive significant advantage from the use of resources and the

sale of outputs in multiple countries.

323

STRATEGY

SPOTLIGHT

10.3 ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY

GLOBAL START-UP AIMING TO BRING A CHARGE TO THE WORLD

Buffalo Grid is a firm that has yet to fully roll out its service offerings, but it has already positioned itself as a truly

global firm. Buffalo Grid aims to bring inexpensive electrical charging stations to rural markets in Africa and India. In

these markets, millions of individuals have mobile phones and other portable electronic devices but live off the grid

and have no electrical service in their homes. They charge up their devices in convenience stores, restaurants, and

bars, often at very high prices. Buffalo Grid aims to address this issue with an environmentally sustainable and cost-

effective solution.

Buffalo Grid has developed zero carbon emission microgenerators for the developing world that can be used for

pennies an hour. The generators are mounted on bikes and run on pedal power. Thus, they are environmentally

friendly and can easily move through the neighborhoods they serve.

The global orientation of Buffalo Grid is evident in its management core, the geographic spread of its operations,

and the location of its partners. Looking at its management core, we see the foundation of its global mindset. The

business is the brainchild of six entrepreneurs who have diverse global backgrounds. The founders of the firm

include an individual who spent his early childhood years in Kenya and helped run a business that works with

suppliers in Africa. Another of the founders grew up in Mexico. Another has lived in Guatemala and Peru. A fourth

founder lived in a number of developing countries in his youth. A fifth of the founders grew up in Northern Ireland but

also spent time living in India. The geographic scope of the firm is also notable. Its headquarters is set in in Britain,

but the firm aims to serve customers thousands of miles away in India and Africa. The firm has also enlisted a global

partner and has signed an agreement with Infosys, the Indian IT firm. Infosys will provide a mentor to Buffalo Grid

who will support them and provide contacts and business advice to exploit opportunities in India.

Sources: Anonymous. 2013. Infosys to mentor 16 British start-ups locally in the UK. Economictimes.indiatimes.com , February 12: np; and Buffalogrid.com .

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. There is no reason for every start-up to be global. Being global necessarily involves higher communication,

coordination, and transportation costs. Therefore, it is important to identify the circumstances under which going global

from the beginning is advantageous. 23 First, if the required human resources are globally dispersed, going global may be

the best way to access those resources. For example, Italians are masters in fine leather and Europeans in ergonomics.

Second, in many cases foreign financing may be easier to obtain and more suitable. Traditionally, U.S. venture capitalists

have shown greater willingness to bear risk, but they have shorter time horizons in their expectations for return. If a U.S.

start-up is looking for patient capital, it may be better off looking overseas. Third, the target customers in many

specialized industries are located in other parts of the world. Fourth, in many industries a gradual move from domestic

markets to foreign markets is no longer possible because, if a product is successful, foreign competitors may immediately

imitate it. Therefore, preemptive entry into foreign markets may be the only option. Finally, because of high up-front

development costs, a global market is often necessary to recover the costs. This is particularly true for start-ups from

smaller nations that do not have access to large domestic markets.

Successful management of a global start-up presents many challenges. Communication and coordination across time

zones and cultures are always problematic. Since most global start-ups have far less resources than well-established

corporations, one key for success is to internalize few activities and outsource the rest. Managers of such firms must have

considerable prior international experience so that they can successfully handle the inevitable communication problems

and cultural conflicts. Another key for success is to keep the communication and coordination costs low. The only way to

achieve this is by creating less costly administrative mechanisms. The boundaryless organizational designs that we

discuss in the next section are particularly suitable for global start-ups because of their flexibility and low cost.

Strategy Spotlight 10.3 discusses a British start-up with a global vision and scope of operations.

324

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 324

How an Organization’s Structure Can Influence Strategy Formulation

Discussions of the relationship between strategy and structure usually strongly imply that structure follows strategy. The

strategy that a firm chooses (e.g., related diversification) dictates such structural elements as the division of tasks, the

need for integration of activities, and authority relationships within the organization. However, an existing structure can

influence strategy formulation. Once a firm’s structure is in place, it is very difficult and expensive to change. 24

Executives may not be able to modify their duties and responsibilities greatly, or may not welcome the disruption

associated with a transfer to a new location. There are costs associated with hiring, training, and replacing executive,

managerial, and operating personnel. Strategy cannot be formulated without considering structural elements.

An organization’s structure can also have an important influence on how it competes in the marketplace. It can also

strongly influence a firm’s strategy, day-to-day operations, and performance. 25

LO10.4

The different types of boundaryless organizations—barrier-free, modular, and virtual—and their relative advantages

and disadvantages.

Boundaryless Organizational Designs

The term boundaryless may bring to mind a chaotic organizational reality in which “anything goes.” This is not the case.

As Jack Welch, GE’s former CEO, has suggested, boundaryless does not imply that all internal and external boundaries

vanish completely, but that they become more open and permeable. 26 Strategy Spotlight 10.4 discusses four types of

boundaries.

We are not suggesting that boundaryless organizational designs replace the traditional forms of organizational

structure, but they should complement them. Sharp Corp. has implemented a functional structure to attain economies of

scale with its applied research and manufacturing skills. However, to bring about this key objective, Sharp has relied on

several integrating mechanisms and processes:

boundaryless organizational designs

organizations in which the boundaries, including vertical, horizontal, external, and geographic boundaries, are

permeable.

To prevent functional groups from becoming vertical chimneys that obstruct product development, Sharp’s product managers

have responsibility—but not authority—for coordinating the entire set of value-chain activities. And the company convenes

enormous numbers of cross-unit and corporate committees to ensure that shared activities, including the corporate R&D unit and

sales forces, are optimally configured and allocated among the different product lines. Sharp invests in such time-intensive

coordination to minimize the inevitable conflicts that arise when units share important activities. 27

We will discuss three approaches to making boundaries more permeable, that help to facilitate the widespread sharing

of knowledge and information across both the internal and external boundaries of the organization. The barrier-free type

involves making all organizational boundaries—internal and external—more permeable. Teams are a central building

block for implementing the boundaryless organization. The modular and virtual types of organizations focus on the need

to create seamless relationships with external organizations such as customers or suppliers. While the modular type

emphasizes the outsourcing of noncore activities, the virtual (or network) organization focuses on alliances among

independent entities formed to exploit specific market opportunities.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. The Barrier-Free Organization

The “boundary” mind-set is ingrained deeply into bureaucracies. It is evidenced by such clichés as “That’s not my job,”

“I’m here from corporate to help,” or endless battles over transfer pricing. In the traditional company, boundaries are

clearly delineated in the design

325

of an organization’s structure. Their basic advantage is that the roles of managers and employees are simple, clear, well-

defined, and long-lived. A major shortcoming was pointed out to the authors during an interview with a high-tech

executive: “Structure tends to be divisive; it leads to territorial fights.”

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 10.4

BOUNDARY TYPES

There are primarily four types of boundaries that place limits on organizations. In today’s dynamic business

environment, different types of boundaries are needed to foster high degrees of interaction with outside influences

and varying levels of permeability.

1. Vertical boundaries between levels in the organization’s hierarchy. SmithKline Beecham asks employees at

different hierarchical levels to brainstorm ideas for managing clinical trial data. The ideas are incorporated into

action plans that significantly cut the new product approval time of its pharmaceuticals. This would not have

been possible if the barriers between levels of individuals in the organization had been too high.

2. Horizontal boundaries between functional areas. Fidelity Investments makes the functional barriers more porous

and flexible among divisions, such as marketing, operations, and customer service, in order to offer customers a

more integrated experience when conducting business with the company. Customers can take their questions to

one person, reducing the chance that customers will “get the run-around” from employees who feel customer

service is not their responsibility. At Fidelity, customer service is everyone’s business, regardless of functional

area.

3. External boundaries between the firm and its customers, suppliers, and regulators. GE Lighting, by working

closely with retailers, functions throughout the value chain as a single operation. This allows GE to track point-of-

sale purchases, giving it better control over inventory management.

4. Geographic boundaries between locations, cultures, and markets. The global nature of today’s business

environment spurred PricewaterhouseCoopers to use a global groupware system. This allows the company to

instantly connect to its 26 worldwide offices.

Source: Ashkenas, R. 1997. The organization’s New Clothes. In Hesselbein, F., Goldsmith, M., and Beckhard, R. (Eds.). The Organization of the Future: 104

–106. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Such structures are being replaced by fluid, ambiguous, and deliberately ill-defined tasks and roles. Just because work

roles are no longer clearly defined, however, does not mean that differences in skills, authority, and talent disappear. A

barrier-free organization enables a firm to bridge real differences in culture, function, and goals to find common

ground that facilitates information sharing and other forms of cooperative behavior. Eliminating the multiple boundaries

that stifle productivity and innovation can enhance the potential of the entire organization.

barrier-free organization

an organizational design in which firms bridge real differences in culture, function, and goals to find common ground that

facilitates information sharing and other forms of cooperative behavior.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Creating Permeable Internal Boundaries For barrier-free organizations to work effectively, the level of trust and

shared interests among all parts of the organization must be raised. 28 The organization needs to develop among its

employees the skill level needed to work in a more democratic organization. Barrier-free organizations also require a

shift in the organization’s philosophy from executive to organizational development, and from investments in high-

potential individuals to investments in leveraging the talents of all individuals.

Teams can be an important aspect of barrier-free structures. 29 Jeffrey Pfeffer, author of several insightful books,

including The Human Equation , suggests that teams have three primary advantages. 30 First, teams substitute peer-based

control for hierarchical control of work activities. Employees control themselves, reducing the time and energy

management needs to devote to control. Second, teams frequently develop more creative solutions to problems because

they encourage the sharing of the tacit knowledge held by individuals. 31

326

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 326

Brainstorming, or group problem solving, involves the pooling of ideas and expertise to enhance the chances that at least

one group member will think of a way to solve the problems at hand. Third, by substituting peer control for hierarchical

control, teams permit the removal of layers of hierarchy and absorption of administrative tasks previously performed by

specialists. This avoids the costs of having people whose sole job is to watch the people who watch other people do the

work.

Effective barrier-free organizations must go beyond achieving close integration and coordination within divisions in a

corporation. Research on multidivisional organizations has stressed the importance of interdivisional coordination and

resource sharing. 32 This requires interdivisional task forces and committees, reward and incentive systems that emphasize

interdivisional cooperation, and common training programs.

Frank Carruba (former head of Hewlett-Packard’s labs) found that the difference between mediocre teams and good

teams was generally varying levels of motivation and talent. 33 But what explained the difference between good teams and

truly superior teams? The key difference—and this explained a 40 percent overall difference in performance—was the

way members treated each other: the degree to which they believed in one another and created an atmosphere of

encouragement rather than competition. Vision, talent, and motivation could carry a team only so far. What clearly stood

out in the “super” teams were higher levels of authenticity and caring, which allowed the full synergy of their individual

talents, motivation, and vision.

Developing Effective Relationships with External Constituencies In barrier-free organizations, managers must also

create flexible, porous organizational boundaries and establish communication flows and mutually beneficial

relationships with internal (e.g., employees) and external (e.g., customers) constituencies. 34 IBM has worked to develop a

long-standing cooperative relationship with the Mayo Clinic. The clinic is a customer but more importantly a research

partner. IBM has placed staff at the Mayo Clinic, and the two organizations have worked together on technology for the

early identification of aneurysms, the mining of data in electronic health records to develop customized treatment plans

for patients, and other medical issues. Having worked collaboratively for over a dozen years, the IBM and Mayo

researchers have built strong relationships. 35

Barrier-free organizations create successful relationships between both internal and external constituencies, but there

is one additional constituency—competitors—with whom some organizations have benefited as they developed

cooperative relationships. For example, after struggling on their own to develop the technology, Ford, Renault-Nissan,

and Daimler have agreed to cooperate with each other to develop zero emission, hydrogen fuel cell systems to power

automobiles. 36

By joining and actively participating in the Business Roundtable—an organization consisting of CEOs of leading U.S.

corporations—Walmart has been able to learn about cutting-edge sustainable initiatives of other major firms. This free

flow of information has enabled Walmart to undertake a number of steps that increased the energy efficiency of its

operations. These are described in Strategy Spotlight 10.5 .

Risks, Challenges, and Potential Downsides Many firms find that creating and managing a barrier-free organization

can be frustrating. 37 Puritan-Bennett Corporation, a manufacturer of respiratory equipment, found that its product

development time more than doubled after it adopted team management. Roger J. Dolida, director of R&D, attributed

this failure to a lack of top management commitment, high turnover among team members, and infrequent meetings.

Often, managers trained in rigid hierarchies find it difficult to make the transition to the more democratic, participative

style that teamwork requires.

Christopher Barnes, a consultant with PricewaterhouseCoopers, previously worked as an industrial engineer for

Challenger Electrical Distribution (a subsidiary of Westinghouse,

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 327

now part of CBS) at a plant which produced circuit-breaker boxes. His assignment was to lead a team of workers from

the plant’s troubled final-assembly operation with the mission: “Make things better.” That vague notion set the team up

for failure. After a year of futility, the team was disbanded. In retrospect, Barnes identified several reasons for the

debacle: (1) limited personal credibility—he was viewed as an “outsider”; (2) a lack of commitment to the

team—everyone involved was forced to be on the team; (3) poor communications—nobody was told why the team was

important; (4) limited autonomy—line managers refused to give up control over team members; and (5) misaligned

incentives—the culture rewarded individual performance over team performance. Barnes’s experience has implications

for all types of teams, whether they are composed of managerial, professional, clerical, or production personnel. 38 The

pros and cons of barrier-free structures are summarized in Exhibit 10.6 .

STRATEGY

SPOTLIGHT

10.5 ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY

THE BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE: A FORUM FOR SHARING BEST ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY PRACTICES

The Business Roundtable is a group of chief executive officers of major U.S. corporations that was created to

promote probusiness public policy. It was formed in 1972 through the merger of three existing organizations: The

March Group, the Construction Users Anti-Inflation Roundtable, and the Labor Law Study Committee. The group

has been called President Obama’s “closest ally in the business community.”

The Business Roundtable became the first broad-based business group to agree on the need to address climate

change through collective action, and it remains committed to limiting greenhouse gas emissions and setting the

United States on a more sustainable path. The organization considers that threats to water quality and quantity,

rising greenhouse gas emissions, and the risk of climate change—along with increasing energy prices and growing

demand—are of great concern.

Its recent report “Create, Grow, Sustain” provides best practices and metrics from Business Roundtable member

companies that represent nearly all sectors of the economy with $6 trillion in annual revenues. CEOs from Walmart,

FedEx, PepsiCo, Whirlpool, and Verizon are among the 126 executives from leading U.S. companies that shared

some of their best sustainability initiatives in this report. These companies are committed to reducing emissions,

increasing energy efficiency, and developing more sustainable business practices.

Let’s look, for example, at some of Walmart’s initiatives. The firm’s CEO, Mike Duke, says it is working with

suppliers, partners, and consumers to drive its sustainability program. It has helped establish the Sustainability

Consortium to drive metrics for measuring the environmental effects of consumer products across their life cycle.

The retailer also helped lead the creation of a Sustainable Product Index to provide product information to

consumers about the environmental impact of the products they purchase.

As part of its sustainability efforts, Walmart had either initiated or was in the process of developing over 180

renewable energy projects. Combined, these efforts resulted in more than 1 billion kilowatt hours of renewable

energy production each year, enough power to provide the electrical needs of 78,000 homes.

Walmart’s renewable energy efforts have focused on three general initiatives.

• It has invested in developing distributed electrical generation systems on its property. As part of this effort,

Walmart has installed rooftop solar panels on 127 locations in seven countries. It also has 26 fuel cell

installations, 11 micro-wind projects, and seven solar thermal projects.

• Expanding its contracts with suppliers for renewable energy has also been a focus of Walmart. Thus, Walmart

bypasses the local utility to go directly to renewable energy suppliers to sign long-term contracts for renewable

energy. With long-term contracts, Walmart has found that providers will give them more favorable terms. Walmart

also believes that the long-term contracts give suppliers the incentive to invest in their generation systems,

increasing the availability of renewable power for other users.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. • In regions where going directly to renewable energy suppliers is difficult or impossible, Walmart has engaged the

local utilities to increase their investment in renewable energy.

Sources: Anonymous. 2010. Leading CEOs Share Best Sustainability Practices. www.environmentalleader.com , April 26: np; Hopkins, M. No date. Sustainable

Growth. www.businessroundtable , np; Anonymous. 2012. Create, grow, sustain. www.businessroundtable.org , April 18: 120; and Business Roundtable.

www.en.wikipedia.org .

328

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 328

EXHIBIT 10.6 Pros and Cons of Barrier-Free Structures

Pros Cons

•   Leverages the talents of all employees. •   Difficult to overcome political and authority 

boundaries inside and outside the organization.

•   Enhances cooperation, coordination, and information sharing 

among functions, divisions, SBUs, and external constituencies.

•   Lacks strong leadership and common vision, 

which can lead to coordination problems.

•   Enables a quicker response to market changes through a single-

goal focus.

•   Time-consuming and difficult-to-manage 

democratic processes.

•   Can lead to coordinated win–win initiatives with key suppliers, 

customers, and alliance partners.

•   Lacks high levels of trust, which can impede 

performance.

The Modular Organization

As Charles Handy, author of The Age of Unreason , has noted:

While it may be convenient to have everyone around all the time, having all of your workforce’s time at your command is an

extravagant way of marshaling the necessary resources. It is cheaper to keep them outside the organization … and to buy their

services when you need them. 39

The modular organization outsources nonvital functions, tapping into the knowledge and expertise of “best in class”

suppliers, but retains strategic control. Outsiders may be used to manufacture parts, handle logistics, or perform

accounting activities. 40 The value chain can be used to identify the key primary and support activities performed by a

firm to create value: Which activities do we keep “in-house” and which activities do we outsource to suppliers? 41 The

organization becomes a central hub surrounded by networks of outside suppliers and specialists and parts can be added or

taken away. Both manufacturing and service units may be modular. 42

modular organization

an organization in which nonvital functions are outsourced, which uses the knowledge and expertise of outside suppliers 

while retaining strategic control.

Apparel is an industry in which the modular type has been widely adopted. Nike and Reebok, for example,

concentrate on their strengths: designing and marketing high-tech, fashionable footwear. Nike has few production

facilities and Reebok owns no plants. These two companies contract virtually all their footwear production to suppliers in

China, Vietnam, and other countries with low-cost labor. Avoiding large investments in fixed assets helps them derive

large profits on minor sales increases. Nike and Reebok can keep pace with changing tastes in the marketplace because

their suppliers have become expert at rapidly retooling to produce new products. 43

In a modular company, outsourcing the noncore functions offers three advantages.

1. A firm can decrease overall costs, stimulate new product development by hiring suppliers with superior talent to that of in-house

personnel, avoid idle capacity, reduce inventories, and avoid being locked into a particular technology.

2. A company can focus scarce resources on the areas where it holds a competitive advantage. These benefits can

translate into more funding for R&D hiring the best engineers, and providing continuous training for sales and

service staff.

3. An organization can tap into the knowledge and expertise of its specialized supply-chain partners, adding critical

skills and accelerating organizational learning. 44

The modular type enables a company to leverage relatively small amounts of capital and a small management team to

achieve seemingly unattainable strategic objectives. 45 Certain preconditions are necessary before the modular approach

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. can be successful. First, the company must work closely with suppliers to ensure that the interests of each party are being

fulfilled. Companies need to find loyal, reliable vendors who can be trusted with trade secrets. They also need assurances

that suppliers will dedicate their financial,

329

physical, and human resources to satisfy strategic objectives such as lowering costs or being first to market.

Second, the modular company must be sure that it selects the proper competencies to keep in-house. For Nike and

Reebok, the core competencies are design and marketing, not shoe manufacturing; for Honda, the core competence is

engine technology. An organization must avoid outsourcing components that may compromise its long-term competitive

advantages.

Strategic Risks of Outsourcing The main strategic concerns are (1) loss of critical skills or developing the wrong skills,

(2) loss of cross-functional skills, and (3) loss of control over a supplier. 46

Too much outsourcing can result in a firm “giving away” too much skill and control. 47 Outsourcing relieves

companies of the requirement to maintain skill levels needed to manufacture essential components. 48 At one time,

semiconductor chips seemed like a simple technology to outsource, but they have now become a critical component of a

wide variety of products. Companies that have outsourced the manufacture of these chips run the risk of losing the ability

to manufacture them as the technology escalates. They become more dependent upon their suppliers.

Cross-functional skills refer to the skills acquired through the interaction of individuals in various departments within

a company. 49 Such interaction assists a department in solving problems as employees interface with others across

functional units. However, if a firm outsources key functional responsibilities, such as manufacturing, communication

across departments can become more difficult. A firm and its employees must now integrate their activities with a new,

outside supplier.

The outsourced products may give suppliers too much power over the manufacturer. Suppliers that are key to a

manufacturer’s success can, in essence, hold the manufacturer “hostage.” Nike manages this potential problem by

sending full-time “product expatriates” to work at the plants of its suppliers. Also, Nike often brings top members of

supplier management and technical teams to its headquarters. This way, Nike keeps close tabs on the pulse of new

developments, builds rapport and trust with suppliers, and develops long-term relationships with suppliers to prevent

hostage situations.

Exhibit 10.7 summarizes the pros and cons of modular structures. 50

The Virtual Organization

In contrast to the “self-reliant” thinking that guided traditional organizational designs, the strategic challenge today has

become doing more with less and looking outside the firm for opportunities and solutions to problems. The virtual

organization provides a new means of leveraging resources and exploiting opportunities. 51

The virtual organization can be viewed as a continually evolving network of independent companies—suppliers,

customers, even competitors—linked together to share skills, costs, and access to one another’s markets. 52 The members

of a virtual organization, by pooling and sharing the knowledge and expertise of each of the component organizations,

simultaneously “know” more and can “do” more than any one member of the group could do alone. By working closely

together, each gains in the long run from individual and organizational learning. 53 The term virtual , meaning “being in

effect but not actually so,” is commonly used in the computer industry. A computer’s ability to appear to have more

storage capacity than it really possesses is called virtual memory. Similarly, by assembling resources from a variety of

entities, a virtual organization may seem to have more capabilities than it really possesses. 54

virtual organization

a continually evolving network of independent companies that are linked together to share skills, costs, and access to 

one another’s markets.

Virtual organizations need not be permanent and participating firms may be involved in multiple alliances. Virtual

organizations may involve different firms performing complementary value activities, or different firms involved jointly

in the same value activities,

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 330

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 330

such as production, R&D, and distribution. The percentage of activities that are jointly performed with partners may vary

significantly from alliance to alliance. 55

EXHIBIT 10.7 Pros and Cons of Modular Structures

Pros Cons

•   Directs a firm’s managerial and technical talent to 

the most critical activities.

•   Inhibits common vision through reliance on outsiders.

•   Maintains full strategic control over most critical 

activities—core competencies.

•   Diminishes future competitive advantages if critical technologies 

or other competencies are outsourced.

•   Achieves “best in class” performance at each link 

in the value chain.

•   Increases the difficulty of bringing back into the firm activities 

that now add value due to market shifts

•   Leverages core competencies by outsourcing with 

smaller capital commitment.

•   Leads to an erosion of cross-functional skills.

•   Encourages information sharing and accelerates 

organizational learning.

•   Decreases operational control and potential loss of control over 

a supplier.

How does the virtual type of structure differ from the modular type? Unlike the modular type, in which the focal firm

maintains full strategic control, the virtual organization is characterized by participating firms that give up part of their

control and accept interdependent destinies. Participating firms pursue a collective strategy that enables them to cope

with uncertainty through cooperative efforts. The benefit is that, just as virtual memory increases storage capacity, the

virtual organizations enhance the capacity or competitive advantage of participating firms.

Strategy Spotlight 10.6 discusses the collaboration between firms from apparently unrelated industries to develop a

technology that could potentially affect all products that use plastic as a component, a container, or a package.

Each company that links up with others to create a virtual organization contributes only what it considers its core

competencies. It will mix and match what it does best with the best of other firms by identifying its critical capabilities

and the necessary links to other capabilities. 56

Challenges and Risks Such alliances often fail to meet expectations: In the 1980s, several competing U.S. computing

firms set up a consortium, US Memories, to design and manufacture memory chips for computers. The purpose of the

consortium was to allow the firms to better compete with Japanese and Taiwanese competitors. But the consortium

collapsed as a result of differences in the interests and objectives of the firms involved.

The virtual organization demands that managers build relationships with other companies, negotiate win–win deals for

all parties find the right partners with compatible goals and values, and provide the right balance of freedom and control.

Information systems must be designed and integrated to facilitate communication with current and potential partners.

Managers must be clear about the strategic objectives while forming alliances. Some objectives are time bound, and

those alliances need to be dissolved once the objective is fulfilled. Some alliances may have relatively long-term

objectives and will need to be clearly monitored and nurtured to produce mutual commitment and avoid bitter fights for

control. The highly dynamic personal computer industry is characterized by multiple temporary alliances among

hardware, operating systems, and software producers. 57 But alliances in the more stable automobile industry, such as

those involving Nissan and Volkswagen have long-term objectives and tend to be relatively stable.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 331

STRATEGY

SPOTLIGHT

10.6 ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY

PLANT PLASTICS 2.0: A COLLABORATIVE INITIATIVE AMONG 5 GLOBAL FIRMS

Coca-Cola,  Ford  Motor  Company,  H.J.  Heinz,  Nike,  and  Procter  &  Gamble  are  five  firms  that  are  typically  neither 

competitors,  suppliers,  or  customers,  but  they  have  come  together  to  address  a  joint  concern.  They  are  working 

together to develop plant-based plastics. Coca-Cola has been at the forefront of this technology and has developed 

a  plastic  bottle  that  includes  30  percent  plant-based  plastic.  Heinz  had  already  licensed  this  technology,  but  these 

two firms, along with the other three partners, have created the Plant PET Technology Collaborative (PTC) to jointly 

develop  the  plant-based  plastic  technology  further,  with  the  goal  of  creating  100  percent  plant-based  plastics  that 

can  be  used  in  a  range  of  products  across  a  number  of  industries.  As  the  spokesperson  of  the  PTC  stated,  “PTC 

members  are  committed  to  supporting  and  championing  research,  expanding  knowledge  and  accelerating 

technology  development  to  enable  commercially  viable,  more  sustainably  sourced,  100  percent  plant-based  PET 

plastic while reducing the use of fossil fuels.”

This  cooperative  is  important  for  these  firms  to  achieve  the  sustainability  goals  that  they  have  laid  out.  For 

example,  P&G  has  targeted  a  25  percent  reduction  in  the  amount  of  petroleum-based  products  the  firm  uses  by 

2020, with a long-term goal of completely replacing petroleum-based materials with sustainable sources. Ed Sawiki, 

associate  director  of  global  business  development,  asserted  that  the  collaborative  R&D  effort  is  important  since  it 

allows  P&G  to  “work  with  others  to  advance  the  pace  of  technical  learning  and  commercial  availability  of  100 

percent plant-based PET faster than any one party can do alone. This enables us to deliver products and packages 

that  consumers  want  in  a  sustainable  fashion.  It  creates  a  win-win  situation  for  the  company,  consumers,  and  the 

environment.”  The  members  of  the  PTC  hope  to  have  a  marketable  100  percent  plant-based  plastic  by  2016  or 

2017.

The  collaborative  also  serves  a  second  goal  for  the  firms.  That  is  the  development  of  common  methods, 

standards,  and  terminology  for  sustainable  plastics.  The  brands  will  then  promote  these  standards  to  facilitate  both 

customer acceptance and preference and use worldwide by other corporations. These standards could also be used 

in regulatory efforts by governments to incentivize the use of sustainable packaging.

Sources: Caliendo, H. 2012. Five major brands collaborating on plant-based PET. Plasticstoday.com , June 5: np; and Siemers, E. 2012. Nike joins Coke, Ford,

Heinz, and P&G to develop plant-based plastics. Sustainablebusinessoregon.com , June 5: np.

The virtual organization is a logical culmination of joint-venture strategies of the past. Shared risks, costs, and rewards

are the facts of life in a virtual organization. 58 When virtual organizations are formed, they involve tremendous

challenges for strategic planning. As with the modular corporation, it is essential to identify core competencies. However,

for virtual structures to be successful, a strategic plan is also needed to determine the effectiveness of combining core

competencies.

The strategic plan must address the diminished operational control and overwhelming need for trust and common

vision among the partners. This new structure may be appropriate for firms whose strategies require merging

technologies (e.g., computing and communication) or for firms exploiting shrinking product life cycles that require

simultaneous entry into multiple geographical markets. It may be effective for firms that desire to be quick to the market

with a new product or service. The recent profusion of alliances among airlines was primarily motivated by the need to

provide seamless travel demanded by the full-fare paying business traveler. Exhibit 10.8 summarizes the advantages and

disadvantages.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Boundaryless Organizations: Making Them Work

Designing an organization that simultaneously supports the requirements of an organization’s strategy, is consistent with

the demands of the environment, and can be effectively implemented by the people around the manager is a tall order for

any manager. 59 The most effective solution is usually a combination of organizational types. That is, a firm may

outsource many parts of its value chain to reduce costs and increase quality, engage simultaneously in multiple alliances

to take advantage of technological developments or penetrate new markets, and break down barriers within the

organization to enhance flexibility.

332

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 332

EXHIBIT 10.8 Pros and Cons of Virtual Structures

Pros Cons

•   Enables the sharing of costs and skills. •   Harder to determine where one company ends and another 

begins, due to close interdependencies among players.

•   Enhances access to global markets. •   Leads to potential loss of operational control among 

partners.

•   Increases market responsiveness. •   Results in loss of strategic control over emerging 

technology.

•   Creates a “best of everything” organization since each 

partner brings core competencies to the alliance.

•   Requires new and difficult-to-acquire managerial skills.

•   Encourages both individual and organizational 

knowledge sharing and accelerates organizational 

learning.

Source: Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. 1986. Organizations: New Concepts for New Forms. California Management Review , Spring: 62–73; Miles & Snow. 1999.

Causes of Failure in Network Organizations. California Management Review , Summer: 53–72; and Bahrami, H. 1991. The Emerging Flexible Organization:

Perspectives from Silicon Valley. California Management Review , Summer: 33–52.

When an organization faces external pressures, resource scarcity, and declining performance, it tends to become more

internally focused, rather than directing its efforts toward managing and enhancing relationships with existing and

potential external stakeholders. This may be the most opportune time for managers to carefully analyze their value-chain

activities and evaluate the potential for adopting elements of modular, virtual, and barrier-free organizational types.

In this section, we will address two issues managers need to be aware of as they work to design an effective

boundaryless organization. First, managers need to develop mechanisms to ensure effective coordination and integration.

Second, managers need to be aware of the benefits and costs of developing strong and long-term relationships with both

internal and external stakeholders.

Facilitating Coordination and Integration Achieving the coordination and integration necessary to maximize the

potential of an organization’s human capital involves much more than just creating a new structure. Techniques and

processes to ensure the coordination and integration of an organization’s key value-chain activities are critical. Teams are

key building blocks of the new organizational forms, and teamwork requires new and flexible approaches to coordination

and integration.

Managers trained in rigid hierarchies may find it difficult to make the transition to the more democratic, participative

style that teamwork requires. As Douglas K. Smith, coauthor of The Wisdom of Teams , pointed out, “A completely

diverse group must agree on a goal, put the notion of individual accountability aside and figure out how to work with

each other. Most of all, they must learn that if the team fails, it’s everyone’s fault.” 60 Within the framework of an

appropriate organizational design, managers must select a mix and balance of tools and techniques to facilitate the

effective coordination and integration of key activities. Some of the factors that must be considered include:

• Common culture and shared values.

• Horizontal organizational structures.

• Horizontal systems and processes.

• Communications and information technologies.

• Human resource practices.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Common Culture and Shared Values Shared goals, mutual objectives, and a high degree of trust are essential to the

success of boundaryless organizations. In the fluid and flexible environments of the new organizational architectures,

common cultures, shared values, and carefully aligned incentives are often less expensive to implement and are often

333

a more effective means of strategic control than rules, boundaries, and formal procedures. Tony Hsieh, the founder of

Zappos, echoes this need for a shared culture and values when as he describes his role this way. “I think of myself less as

a leader and more of being an architect of an environment that enables employees to come up with their own ideas.” 61

Horizontal Organizational Structures These structures, which group similar or related business units under common

management control, facilitate sharing resources and infrastructures to exploit synergies among operating units and help

to create a sense of common purpose. Consistency in training and the development of similar structures across business

units facilitates job rotation and cross training and enhances understanding of common problems and opportunities.

Cross-functional teams and inter-divisional committees and task groups represent important opportunities to improve

understanding and foster cooperation among operating units.

horizontal organizational structures

organizational forms that group similar or related business units under common management control and facilitate 

sharing resources and infrastructures to exploit synergies among operating units and help to create a sense of common 

purpose.

Horizontal Systems and Processes Organizational systems, policies, and procedures are the traditional mechanisms for

achieving integration among functional units. Existing policies and procedures often do little more than institutionalize

the barriers that exist from years of managing within the framework of the traditional model. Beginning with an

understanding of basic business processes in the context of “a collection of activities that takes one or more kinds of

input and creates an output that is of value to the customer,” Michael Hammer and James Champy’s 1993 best-selling

Reengineering the Corporation outlined a methodology for redesigning internal systems and procedures that has been

embraced by many organizations. 62 Successful reengineering lowers costs, reduces inventories and cycle times, improves

quality, speeds response times, and enhances organizational flexibility. Others advocate similar benefits through the

reduction of cycle times, total quality management, and the like.

Communications and Information Technologies (IT) The effective use of IT can play an important role in bridging

gaps and breaking down barriers between organizations. Electronic mail and videoconferencing can improve lateral

communications across long distances and multiple time zones and circumvent many of the barriers of the traditional

model. IT can be a powerful ally in the redesign and streamlining of internal business processes and in improving

coordination and integration between suppliers and customers. Internet technologies have eliminated the paperwork in

many buyer–supplier relationships, enabling cooperating organizations to reduce inventories, shorten delivery cycles, and

reduce operating costs. IT must be viewed more as a prime component of an organization’s overall strategy than simply

in terms of administrative support.

Human Resource Practices Change always involves and affects the human dimension of organizations. The attraction,

development, and retention of human capital are vital to value creation. As boundaryless structures are implemented,

processes are reengineered, and organizations become increasingly dependent on sophisticated ITs, the skills of workers

and managers alike must be upgraded to realize the full benefits.

Strategy Spotlight 10.7 discusses Procter & Gamble’s successful introduction of Crest Whitestrips. This example

shows how P&G’s tools and techniques, such as communities of practice, information technology, and human resource

practices, help to achieve effective collaboration and integration across the firm’s different business units.

The Benefits and Costs of Developing Lasting Internal and External Relationships Successful boundaryless

organizations rely heavily on the relational aspects of organizations. Rather than relying on strict hierarchical and

bureaucratic systems, these firms are flexible and coordinate action by leveraging shared social norms and strong social

334

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 334

relationships between both internal and external stakeholders. 63 At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that

relying on relationships can have both positive and negative effects. To successfully move to a more boundaryless

organization, managers need to acknowledge and attend to both the costs and benefits of relying on relationships and

social norms to guide behavior.

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 10.7

CREST’S WHITESTRIPS: AN EXAMPLE OF HOW P&G CREATES AND DERIVES BENEFITS

FROM A BOUNDARYLESS ORGANIZATION

Given its breadth of products—soaps, diapers, toothpaste, potato chips, lotions, detergent—Procter & Gamble

(P&G) has an enormous pool of resources it can integrate in various ways to launch exciting new products. For

example, the company created a new category, teeth-whitening systems, with Crest Whitestrips. Teeth whitening

done at a dentist’s office can brighten one’s smile in as little as one visit, but it can cost hundreds of dollars. On the

other hand, over-the-counter home whitening kits like Crest Whitestrips cost far less and are nearly equally

effective.

Whitestrip was created through a combined effort of product developers from three different units in P&G. People

at the oral-care division provided teeth-whitening expertise; experts from the fabric and home-care division supplied

bleach expertise; and scientists at corporate research and development provided a novel film technology. Three

separate units, by collaborating and combining their technologies, succeeded in developing an affordable product to

brighten smiles and, according to the website, bring “greater success in work and love.” With $300 million in annual

retail sales, the launch of the Whitestrips product has been a big success for P&G, one that would not have been

possible without the firm’s collaborative ability.

Such collaborations are the outcome of well-established organizational mechanisms. P&G has created more than

20 communities of practice, with 8,000 participants. Each group comprises volunteers from different parts of the

company and focuses on an area of expertise (fragrance, packaging, polymer chemistry, skin science, and so on).

The groups solve specific problems that are brought to them, and they meet to share best practices. The company

also has posted an “ask me” feature on its intranet, where employees can describe a business problem, which is

directed to those people with appropriate expertise. At a more fundamental level, P&G promotes from within and

rotates people across countries and business units. As a result, its employees build powerful cross-unit networks.

Sources: Hansen, M. T. 2009. Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid the Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Results. Boston: Harvard Business Press, 24–25;

Anonymous. 2004. At P&G, It’s 360-Degree Innovation. www.businessweek.com , October 11: np; www.whitestrips.com ; Anonymous. 2009. The Price of a

Whiter, Brighter Smile. www.washingtonpost.com , July 21: np; Hansen, M. T. & Birkinshaw, J. 2007. The Innovation Value Chain. Harvard Business Review ,

June: 85(6): 121–130.

There are three primary benefits that organizations accrue when relying on relationships.

• Agency costs within the firm can be dramatically cut through the use of relational systems. Managers and

employees in relationship-oriented firms are guided by social norms and relationships they have with other

managers and employees. As a result, the firm can reduce the degree to which it relies on monitoring, rules and

regulations, and financial incentives to ensure that workers put in a strong effort and work in the firm’s interests. A

relational view leads managers and employees to act in a supportive manner and makes them more willing to step

out of their formal roles when needed to accomplish tasks for others and for the organization. They are also less

likely to shirk their responsibilities.

• There is also likely to be a reduction in the transaction costs between a firm and its suppliers and customers. If

firms have built strong relationships with partnering firms, they are more likely to work cooperatively with these

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. firms and build trust that their partners will work in the best interests of the alliance. This will reduce the need for

the firms to write detailed contracts and set up strict bureaucratic rules to outline the responsibilities and define the

behavior of each firm. Additionally, partnering firms with strong relationships are more likely to invest in assets

that specifically support the partnership. Finally, they will have much less fear that their partner will try to take

advantage of them or seize the bulk of the benefits from the partnership.

335

• Since they feel a sense of shared ownership and goals, individuals within the firm as well as partnering firms will

be more likely to search for win-win rather than win-lose solutions. When taking a relational view, individuals are

less likely to look out solely for their personal best interests. They will also be considerate of the benefits and costs

to other individuals in the firm and to the overall firm. The same is true at the organizational level. Firms with

strong relationships with their partners are going to look for solutions that not only benefit themselves but also

provide equitable benefits and limited downside for the partnering firms. Such a situation was evident with a

number of German firms during the economic crisis of 2008–2010. The German government, corporations, and

unions worked together to find the fairest way to respond to the crisis. The firms agreed not to lay off workers.

The unions agreed to reduced workweeks. The government kicked in a subsidy to make up for some of the lost

wages. In other words, they negotiated a shared sacrifice to address the challenge. This positioned the German

firms to bounce back quickly once the crisis passed.

While there are a number of benefits with using a relational view, there can also be some substantial costs.

• As the relationships between individuals and firms strengthen, they are also more likely to fall prey to suboptimal

lock-in effects. The problem here is that as decisions become driven by concerns about relationships, economic

factors become less important. As a result, firms become less likely to make decisions that could benefit the firm

since those decisions may harm employees or partnering firms. For example, firms may see the economic logic in

exiting a market, but the ties they feel with employees that work in that division and partnering firms in that

market may reduce their willingness to make the hard decision to exit the market. This can be debilitating to firms

in rapidly changing markets where successful firms add, reorganize, and sometimes exit operations and

relationships regularly.

• Since there are no formal guidelines, conflicts between individuals and units within firms as well as between

partnering firms are typically resolved through ad hoc negotiations and processes. In these circumstances, there

are no legal means or bureaucratic rules to guide decision making. Thus, when firms face a difficult decision

where there are differences of opinion about the best course of action, the ultimate choices made are often driven

by the inherent power of the individuals or firms involved. This power use may be unintentional and subconscious,

but it can result in outcomes that are deemed unfair by one or more of the parties.

• The social capital of individuals and firms can drive their opportunities. Thus, rather than identifying the best

person to put in a leadership role or the optimal supplier to contract with, these choices are more strongly driven

by the level of social connection the person or supplier has. This also increases the entry barriers for potential new

suppliers or employees with whom a firm can contract since new firms likely don’t have the social connections

needed to be chosen as a worthy partner with whom to contract. This also may limit the likelihood that new

innovative ideas will enter into the conversations at the firm.

As mentioned earlier in the chapter, the solution may be to effectively integrate elements of formal structure and

reward systems with stronger relationships. This may influence specific relationships so that a manager will want

employees to build relationships while still maintaining some managerial oversight and reward systems that motivate the

desired behavior. This may also result in different emphases with different relationships. For example, there may be some

units, such as accounting, where a stronger role for traditional structures and forms of evaluation may be optimal.

However, in new product development units, a greater emphasis on relational systems may be more appropriate.

336

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 336

LO10.5

The need for creating ambidextrous organizational designs that enable firms to explore new opportunities and

effectively integrate existing operations.

Creating Ambidextrous Organizational Designs

In Chapter 1 , we introduced the concept of “ambidexterity,” which incorporates two contradictory challenges faced by

today’s managers. 64 First, managers must explore new opportunities and adjust to volatile markets in order to avoid

complacency. They must ensure that they maintain adaptability and remain proactive in expanding and/or modifying

their product–market scope to anticipate and satisfy market conditions. Such competencies are especially challenging

when change is rapid and unpredictable.

adaptibility

managers’ exploration of new opportunities and adjustment to volatile markets in order to avoid complacency.

Second, managers must also effectively exploit the value of their existing assets and competencies. They need to have

alignment , which is a clear sense of how value is being created in the short term and how activities are integrated and

properly coordinated. Firms that achieve both adaptability and alignment are considered ambidextrous

organizations —aligned and efficient in how they manage today’s business but flexible enough to changes in the

environment so that they will prosper tomorrow.

alignment

managers’ clear sense of how value is being created in the short term and how activities are integrated and properly

coordinated.

Handling such opposing demands is difficult because there will always be some degree of conflict. Firms often suffer

when they place too strong a priority on either adaptability or alignment. If it places too much focus on adaptability, the

firm will suffer low profitability in the short term. If managers direct their efforts primarily at alignment, they will likely

miss out on promising business opportunities.

Ambidextrous Organizations: Key Design Attributes

A study by Charles O’Reilly and Michael Tushman 65 provides some insights into how some firms were able to create

successful ambidextrous organizational designs . They investigated companies that attempted to simultaneously pursue

modest, incremental innovations as well as more dramatic, breakthrough innovations. The team investigated 35 attempts

to launch breakthrough innovations undertaken by 15 business units in nine different industries. They studied the

organizational designs and the processes, systems, and cultures associated with the breakthrough projects as well as their

impact on the operations and performance of the traditional businesses.

ambidextrous organizational designs

organizational designs that attempt to simultaneously pursue modest, incremental innovations as well as more dramatic,

breakthrough innovations.

Companies structured their breakthrough projects in one of four primary ways:

• Seven were carried out within existing functional organizational structures. The projects were completely

integrated into the regular organizational and management structure.

• Nine were organized as cross-functional teams. The groups operated within the established organization but outside

of the existing management structure.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. • Four were organized as unsupported teams. Here, they became independent units set up outside the established

organization and management hierarchy.

• Fifteen were conducted within ambidextrous organizations. Here, the breakthrough efforts were organized within

structurally independent units, each having its own processes, structures, and cultures. However, they were

integrated into the existing senior management structure.

The performance results of the 35 initiatives were tracked along two dimensions:

• Their success in creating desired innovations was measured by either the actual commercial results of the new

product or the application of practical market or technical learning.

• The performance of the existing business was evaluated.

The study found that the organizational structure and management practices employed had a direct and significant

impact on the performance of both the breakthrough initiative and the traditional business. The ambidextrous

organizational designs were more effective

337

than the other three designs on both dimensions: launching breakthrough products or services (i.e., adaptation) and

improving the performance of the existing business (i.e., alignment).

Why Was the Ambidextrous Organization the Most Effective Structure?

The study found that there were many factors. A clear and compelling vision, consistently communicated by the

company’s senior management team was critical in building the ambidextrous designs. The structure enabled cross-

fertilization while avoiding cross-contamination. The tight coordination and integration at the managerial levels enabled

the newer units to share important resources from the traditional units such as cash, talent, and expertise. Such sharing

was encouraged and facilitated by effective reward systems that emphasized overall company goals. The organizational

separation ensured that the new units’ distinctive processes, structures, and cultures were not overwhelmed by the forces

of “business as usual.” The established units were shielded from the distractions of launching new businesses, and they

continued to focus all of their attention and energy on refining their operations, enhancing their products, and serving

their customers.

ISSUE FOR DEBATE

Nearly half of the hotel rooms booked in the United States are booked through online travel agents (OTAs), such as

Priceline.com and Travelocity.com . These online sites grew from handling $2 billion to $15 billion worth of reservations

from 2001 to 2011. Initially, these sites were viewed favorably by the major hotel chains. They gave easy access to

customers at a lower cost than traditional travel agents.

Over time, the hotel chains’ perspective regarding the OTAs changed. The fees they charge have grown over time and

now account for up to 30 percent of the cost of hotel rooms. This put a real squeeze on the hotel chains. The margins in the

hotel industry are fairly low to begin with, and with the OTAs taking a bigger slice, there was little left for the chains.

Additionally, they altered the dynamics between hotels and customers. Customers increasingly viewed their preferred OTA

as the firm they interacted with and saw less value in the individual brands of hotels. As a result, they became more price-

focused and less loyal to a given hotel chain.

Six major chains of hotels, including Hilton, Hyatt, and Choice Hotels, responded to this issue by deciding to cooperate

with each other in developing their own joint hotel booking website, Roomkey.com . This site was designed to offer similar

pricing as the other OTAs but do so with much lower fees, leaving more of the customers’ payments in the pockets of the

hotels. Also, the site would allow the hotels to provide more information and more up-to-date information on the individual

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. hotels than the OTAs typically offered. Finally, the hotel chains guaranteed that customers on Roomkey.com would receive

full loyalty program benefits for their stays that were booked on the site.

Whether Roomkey.com is the answer to the hotel chains problems with the OTAs is unclear at this point. There are signs

that it is off to a nice start. Launched in January 2012, the site was up to 14 million monthly visitors by September 2012.

The site also signed up additional chains, including the La Quinta, Millenium, and Vantage Hospitality chains. The system

now includes over 50,000 individual hotel locations. On the other hand, it isn’t

338

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 338

yet clear whether Roomkey.com is eating into the OTA business. While Roomkey.com has generated significant traffic, most of

the visitors started at the chains’ own websites and responded to an ad there to get to Roomkey.com . Few of the visitors, only

10 percent according to an analysis by Compete.com , went to Roomkey.com without being prompted by one of the hotel

chains’ sites.

Discussion Questions

1. Do you think Roomkey.com will be successful? Why or why not?

2. What actions can Roomkey.com take to try to pull more business away from the OTAs?

3. How can the chains use Roomkey.com to improve their position relative to OTAs even while it is unclear whether or not

Roomkey.com will take off?

Sources: Robinson-Jacobs, K. 2012. Hotels unite to take on dot-coms. Dallas Morning News , January 23: 1D, 4D; Solinsky, S. 2012. The curious identity of

Roomkey.com . compete.com , September 18: np; DeLollis, B. 2012. Roomkey.com hotel chain adds more chains. usatoday.com , September 24: np; and Bilbao,

R. 2012. Five minutes with John Davis, SEO, Roomkey.com . bizjournals.com . May 25: np.

Reflecting on Career Implications …

Boundaryless Organizational Designs: Does your firm have structural mechanisms (e.g., culture, human

resources practices) that facilitate sharing information across boundaries? Regardless of the level of

boundarylessness of your organization, a key issue for your career is the extent to which you are able to cut

across boundaries within your organization. Such boundaryless behavior on your part will enable you to

enhance and leverage your human capital. Evaluate how boundaryless you are within your organizational

context. What actions can you take to become even more boundaryless?

Horizontal Systems and Processes: One of the approaches suggested in the chapter to improve

boundarylessness within organizations is reengineering. Analyze the work you are currently doing and think

of ways in which it can be reengineered to improve quality, accelerate response time, and lower cost.

Consider presenting the results of your analysis to your immediate superiors. Do you think they will be

receptive to your suggestions?

Ambidextrous Organizations: Firms that achieve adaptability and alignment are considered

ambidextrous. As an individual, you can also strive to be ambidextrous. Evaluate your own ambidexterity by

assessing your adaptability (your ability to change in response to changes around you) and alignment (how

good you are at exploiting your existing competencies). What steps can you take to improve your

ambidexterity?

summary

Successful organizations must ensure that they have the proper type of organizational structure. Furthermore, they must

ensure that their firms incorporate the necessary integration and processes so that the internal and external boundaries of

their firms are flexible and permeable. Such a need is increasingly important as the environments of firms become more

complex, rapidly changing, and unpredictable.

In the first section of the chapter, we discussed the growth patterns of large corporations. Although most organizations

remain small or die, some firms continue to grow in terms of revenues, vertical integration, and diversity of products and

services. In addition, their geographical scope may increase to include international operations. We traced the dominant

pattern of growth, which evolves from a simple structure to a functional structure as a firm grows in terms of size and

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. increases its level of vertical integration. After a firm expands into related products and services, its structure changes

from a functional to a divisional form of organization. Finally, when the firm enters international markets, its structure

again changes to accommodate the change in strategy.

We also addressed the different types of organizational structure—simple, functional, divisional (including two

variations—strategic business unit and holding company), and matrix—as well as their relative advantages and

disadvantages. We closed the section with a discussion of the implications for structure when a firm enters international

markets. The three primary factors to take into account when determining the appropriate structure are type of

international strategy, product diversity, and the extent to which a firm is dependent on foreign sales.

The second section of the chapter introduced the concept of the boundaryless organization. We did not suggest that the

concept of the boundaryless organization

339

replaces the traditional forms of organizational structure. Rather, it should complement them. This is necessary to cope

with the increasing complexity and change in the competitive environment. We addressed three types of boundaryless

organizations. The barrier-free type focuses on the need for the internal and external boundaries of a firm to be more

flexible and permeable. The modular type emphasizes the strategic outsourcing of noncore activities. The virtual type

centers on the strategic benefits of alliances and the forming of network organizations. We discussed both the advantages

and disadvantages of each type of boundaryless organization as well as suggested some techniques and processes that are

necessary to successfully implement them. These are common culture and values, horizontal organizational structures,

horizontal systems and processes, communications and information technologies, and human resource practices.

The final section addresses the need for managers to develop ambidextrous organizations. In today’s rapidly changing

global environment, managers must be responsive and proactive in order to take advantage of new opportunities. At the

same time, they must effectively integrate and coordinate existing operations. Such requirements call for organizational

designs that establish project teams that are structurally independent units, with each having its own processes, structures,

and cultures. But, at the same time, each unit needs to be effectively integrated into the existing management hierarchy.

SUMMARY REVIEW QUESTIONS

1. Why is it important for managers to carefully consider the type of organizational structure that they use to

implement their strategies?

2. Briefly trace the dominant growth pattern of major corporations from simple structure to functional structure to

divisional structure. Discuss the relationship between a firm’s strategy and its structure.

3. What are the relative advantages and disadvantages of the types of organizational structure—simple, functional,

divisional, matrix—discussed in the chapter?

4. When a firm expands its operations into foreign markets, what are the three most important factors to take into

account in deciding what type of structure is most appropriate? What are the types of international structures

discussed in the text and what are the relationships between strategy and structure?

5. Briefly describe the three different types of boundaryless organizations: barrier-free, modular, and virtual.

6. What are some of the key attributes of effective groups? Ineffective groups?

7. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the three types of boundaryless organizations: barrier-free, modular,

and virtual?

8. When are ambidextrous organizational designs necessary? What are some of their key attributes?

key terms

organizational structure

simple organizational structure

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. functional organizational structure

divisional organizational structure

strategic business unit (SBU) structure

holding company structure

matrix organizational structure

international division structure

geographic-area division structure

worldwide matrix structure

worldwide functional structure

worldwide product division structure

global start-up

boundaryless organizational designs

barrier-free organization

modular organization

virtual organization

horizontal organizational structures

adaptability

alignment

ambidextrous organizational designs

experiential exercise

Many firms have recently moved toward a modular structure. For example, they have increasingly outsourced many of

their information technology (IT) activities. Identify three such organizations. Using secondary sources, evaluate (1) the

firm’s rationale for IT outsourcing and (2) the implications for performance.

Firm Rationale Implication(s) for Performance

1.

2.

3.

340

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 340

application questions & exercises

1.   Select an organization that competes in an industry in which you are particularly interested. Go on the Internet and 

determine what type of organizational structure this organization has. In your view, is it consistent with the strategy 

that it has chosen to implement? Why? Why not?

2.   Choose an article from  Bloomberg Businessweek, Fortune, Forbes, Fast Company , or any other well-known 

publication that deals with a corporation that has undergone a significant change in its strategic direction. What are 

the implications for the structure of this organization?

3.   Go on the Internet and look up some of the public statements or speeches of an executive in a major corporation 

about a significant initiative such as entering into a joint venture or launching a new product line. What do you feel 

are the implications for making the internal and external barriers of the firm more flexible and permeable? Does the 

executive discuss processes, procedures, integrating mechanisms, or cultural issues that should serve this purpose? 

Or are other issues discussed that enable a firm to become more boundaryless?

4.   Look up a recent article in the publications listed in question 2 above that addresses a firm’s involvement in 

outsourcing (modular organization) or in strategic alliance or network organizations (virtual organization). Was the 

firm successful or unsuccessful in this endeavor? Why? Why not?

ethics questions

1.   If a firm has a divisional structure and places extreme pressures on its divisional executives to meet short-term 

profitability goals (e.g., quarterly income), could this raise some ethical considerations? Why? Why not?

2.   If a firm enters into a strategic alliance but does not exercise appropriate behavioral control of its employees (in 

terms of culture, rewards and incentives, and boundaries—as discussed in  Chapter 9 ) that are involved in the 

alliance, what ethical issues could arise? What could be the potential long-term and short-term downside for the 

firm?

references

1.      Wilson, K. & Doz, Y. 2012. 10 rules for managing global innovation.  Harvard Business Review , 90(10): 84–92; Wallace, J. 2007. Update on 

problems joining 787 fuselage sections.  Seattlepi.com , June 7: np; Peterson, K. 2011. Special report: A wing and a prayer: Outsourcing at 

Boeing.  Reuters.com , January 20: np; Hiltzik, M. 2011. 787 Dreamliner teaches Boeing costly lesson on outsourcing.  Latimes.com , 

February 15: np; and Gates, D. 2013. Boeing 787’s problems blamed on outsourcing, lack of oversight.  Seattletimes.com , February 2: np.

2.      For a unique perspective on organization design, see: Rao, R. 2010. What 17th century pirates can teach us about job design.  Harvard

Business Review , 88(10): 44.

3.      This introductory discussion draws upon Hall, R. H. 2002.  Organizations: Structures, processes, and outcomes  (8th ed.). Upper Saddle 

River, NJ: Prentice Hall; and Duncan, R. E. 1979. What is the right organization structure? Decision-tree analysis provides the right answer. 

Organizational Dynamics , 7(3): 59–80. For an insightful discussion of strategy-structure relationships in the organization theory and 

strategic management literatures, refer to Keats, B. & O’Neill, H. M. 2001. Organization structure: Looking through a strategy lens. In Hitt, 

M. A., Freeman, R. E., & Harrison, J. S. 2001.  The Blackwell handbook of strategic management:  520–542. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

4.      Gratton, L. 2011. The end of the middle manager.  Harvard Business Review , 89(1/2): 36.

5.      An interesting discussion on the role of organizational design in strategy execution is in: Neilson, G. L., Martin, K. L., & Powers, E. 2009. 

The secrets to successful strategy execution.  Harvard Business Review,  87(2): 60–70.

6.      This discussion draws upon Chandler, A. D. 1962.  Strategy and structure.  Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; Galbraith J. R. & Kazanjian, R. K. 

1986.  Strategy implementation: The role of structure and process.  St. Paul, MN: West Publishing; and Scott, B. R. 1971. Stages of 

corporate development. Intercollegiate Case Clearing House, 9-371-294, BP 998. Harvard Business School.

7.      Our discussion of the different types of organizational structures draws on a variety of sources, including Galbraith & Kazanjian, op. cit.; 

Hrebiniak, L. G. & Joyce, W. F. 1984.  Implementing strategy.  New York: Macmillan; Distelzweig, H. 2000. Organizational structure. In 

Helms, M. M. (Ed.).  Encyclopedia of management:  692–699. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale; and Dess, G. G. & Miller, A. 1993.  Strategic

management.  New York: McGraw-Hill.

8.      A discussion of an innovative organizational design is in: Garvin, D. A. & Levesque, L. C. 2009. The multiunit enterprise. Harvard Business 

Review, 87(2): 106–117.

9.      Schein, E. H. 1996. Three cultures of management: The key to organizational learning.  Sloan Management Review , 38(1): 9–20.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 10 .    Insights on governance implications for multidivisional forms are in: Verbeke, A. & Kenworthy, T. P. 2008. Multidivisional vs. metanational 

governance.  Journal of International Business , 39(6): 940–956.

11 .    Martin, J. A. & Eisenhardt, K. 2010. Rewiring: Cross-business-unit collaborations in multibusiness organizations.  Academy of Management

Journal , 53(2): 265–301.

12 .    For a discussion of performance implications, refer to Hoskisson, R. E. 1987. Multidivisional structure and performance: The contingency of 

diversification strategy.  Academy of Management Journal , 29: 625–644.

341

13 .    For a thorough and seminal discussion of the evolution toward the divisional form of organizational structure in the United States, refer to 

Chandler, op. cit. A rigorous empirical study of the strategy and structure relationship is found in Rumelt, R. P. 1974.  Strategy, structure,

and economic performance.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

14 .    Ghoshal S. & Bartlett, C. A. 1995. Changing the role of management: Beyond structure to processes.  Harvard Business Review , 73(1): 88.

15 .    Koppel, B. 2000. Synergy in ketchup? Forbes, February 7: 68–69; and Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hoskisson, R. E. 2001.  Strategic

management: Competitiveness and globalization  (4th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Southwestern Publishing.

16 .    Pitts, R. A. 1977. Strategies and structures for diversification.  Academy of Management Journal,  20(2): 197–208.

17 .    Silvestri, L. 2012. The evolution of organizational structure.  footnote 1.com , June 6: np.

18 .    Andersen, M. M., Froholdt, M., Poulfelt, F. 2010.  Return on strategy: How to achieve it.  New York: Routledge.

19 .    Haas, M. R. 2010. The double-edged swords of autonomy and external knowledge: Analyzing team effectiveness in a multinational 

organization.  Academy of Management Journal,  53(5): 989–1008.

20 .    Daniels, J. D., Pitts, R. A., & Tretter, M. J. 1984. Strategy and structure of U.S. multinationals: An exploratory study.  Academy of

Management Journal , 27(2): 292–307.

21 .    Habib, M. M. & Victor, B. 1991. Strategy, structure, and performance of U.S. manufacturing and service MNCs: A comparative analysis. 

Strategic Management Journal,  12(8): 589–606.

22 .    Our discussion of global startups draws from Oviatt, B. M. & McDougall, P. P. 2005. The internationalization of entrepreneurship.  Journal

of International Business Studies , 36(1): 2–8; Oviatt, B. M. & McDougall, P. P. 1994. Toward a theory of international new ventures. 

Journal of International Business Studies , 25(1): 45–64; and Oviatt, B. M. & McDougall, P. P. 1995. Global start-ups: Entrepreneurs on a 

worldwide stage.  Academy of Management Executive , 9(2): 30–43.

23 .    Some useful guidelines for global start-ups are provided in Kuemmerle, W. 2005. The entrepreneur’s path for global expansion.  MIT Sloan

Management Review , 46(2): 42–50.

24 .    See, for example, Miller, D. & Friesen, P. H. 1980. Momentum and revolution in organizational structure.  Administrative Science Quarterly , 

13: 65–91.

25 .    Many authors have argued that a firm’s structure can influence its strategy and performance. These include Amburgey, T. L. & Dacin, T. 

1995. As the left foot follows the right? The dynamics of strategic and structural change.  Academy of Management Journal , 37: 1427–1452; 

Dawn, K. & Amburgey, T. L. 1991. Organizational inertia and momentum: A dynamic model of strategic change.  Academy of Management

Journal , 34: 591–612; Fredrickson, J. W. 1986. The strategic decision process and organization structure.  Academy of Management Review , 

11: 280–297; Hall, D. J. & Saias, M. A. 1980. Strategy follows structure!  Strategic Management Journal , 1: 149–164; and Burgelman, R. 

A. 1983. A model of the interaction of strategic behavior, corporate context, and the concept of strategy.  Academy of Management Review , 

8: 61–70.

26 .    An interesting discussion on how the Internet has affected the boundaries of firms can be found in Afuah, A. 2003. Redefining firm 

boundaries in the face of the Internet: Are firms really shrinking?  Academy of Management Review , 28(1): 34–53.

27 .    Collis & Montgomery, op. cit.

28 .    Govindarajan, V. G. & Trimble, C. 2010. Stop the innovation wars.  Harvard Business Review , 88(7/8): 76–83.

29 .    For a discussion of the role of coaching on developing high performance teams, refer to Kets de Vries, M. F. R. 2005. Leadership group 

coaching in action: The zen of creating high performance teams.  Academy of Management Executive,  19(1): 77–89.

30 .    Pfeffer, J. 1998.  The human equation: Building profits by putting people first.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

31 .    For a discussion on how functional area diversity affects performance, see Bunderson, J. S. & Sutcliffe, K. M. 2002.    Academy of

Management Journal , 45(5): 875–893.

32 .    See, for example, Hoskisson, R. E., Hill, C. W. L., & Kim, H. 1993. The multidivisional structure: Organizational fossil or source of value? 

Journal of Management,  19(2): 269–298.

33 .    Pottruck, D. A. 1997. Speech delivered by the co-CEO of Charles Schwab Co., Inc., to the Retail Leadership Meeting, San Francisco, CA, 

January 30; and Miller, W. 1999. Building the ultimate resource.  Management Review , January: 42–45.

34 .    Public-private partnerships are addressed in: Engardio, P. 2009. State capitalism.  BusinessWeek,  February 9: 38–43.

35 .    Aller, R., Weiner, H., & Weilart, M. 2005.   IBM and Mayo collaborating to customize patient treatment plans.  cap.org , January: np; and 

McGee, M. 2010. IBM, Mayo partner on aneurysm diagnostics.  informationweek.com , January 25: np.

36 .    Anonymous. 2013. Automakers in alliance to speed fuel-cell development.  latimes.com , January 29: np.

37 .    Dess, G. G., Rasheed, A. M. A., McLaughlin, K. J., & Priem, R. 1995. The new corporate architecture.  Academy of Management Executive,

9(3): 7–20.

38 .    Barnes, C. 1998. A fatal case.  Fast Company , February–March: 173.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 39 .    Handy, C. 1989. The age of unreason. Boston: Harvard Business School Press; Ramstead, E. 1997. APC maker’s low-tech formula: Start 

with the box.  The Wall Street Journal , December 29: B1; Mussberg, W. 1997. Thin screen PCs are looking good but still fall flat.  The Wall

Street Journal , January 2: 9; Brown, E. 1997. Monorail: Low cost PCs. Fortune, July 7: 106–108; and Young, M. 1996. Ex-Compaq 

executives start new company.  Computer Reseller News , November 11: 181.

40 .    An original discussion on how open-sourcing could help the Big 3 automobile companies is in: Jarvis, J. 2009. How the Google model could 

help Detroit.  BusinessWeek , February 9: 32–36.

41 .    For a discussion of some of the downsides of outsourcing, refer to Rossetti, C. & Choi, T. Y. 2005. On the dark side of strategic sourcing: 

Experiences from the aerospace industry.  Academy of Management Executive , 19(1): 46–60.

42 .    Tully, S. 1993. The modular corporation.  Fortune , February 8: 196.

43 .    Offshoring in manufacturing firms is addressed in: Coucke, K. & Sleuwaegen, L. 2008. Offshoring as a survival strategy: Evidence from 

manufacturing firms in Belgium.  Journal of International Business Studies , 39(8): 1261–1277.

342

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 342

44 .    Quinn, J. B. 1992.  Intelligent enterprise: A knowledge and service based paradigm for industry.  New York: Free Press.

45 .    For an insightful perspective on outsourcing and its role in developing capabilities, read Gottfredson, M., Puryear, R., & Phillips, C. 2005. 

Strategic sourcing: From periphery to the core.  Harvard Business Review , 83(4): 132–139.

46 .    This discussion draws upon Quinn, J. B. & Hilmer, F. C. 1994. Strategic outsourcing.  Sloan Management Review , 35(4): 43–55.

47 .    Reitzig, M. & Wagner, S. 2010. The hidden costs of outsourcing: Evidence from patent data.  Strategic Management Journal.  31(11): 1183

–1201.

48 .    Insights on outsourcing and private branding can be found in: Cehn, S-F. S. 2009. A transaction cost rationale for private branding and its 

implications for the choice of domestic vs. offshore outsourcing.  Journal of International Business Strategy , 40(1): 156–175.

49 .    For an insightful perspective on the use of outsourcing for decision analysis, read: Davenport, T. H. & Iyer, B. 2009. Should you outsource 

your brain?  Harvard Business Review , 87(2): 38.

50 .    See also Stuckey, J. & White, D. 1993. When and when not to vertically integrate.  Sloan Management Review , Spring: 71–81; Harrar, G. 

1993. Outsource tales.  Forbes ASAP , June 7: 37–39, 42; and Davis, E. W. 1992. Global outsourcing: Have U.S. managers thrown the baby 

out with the bath water?  Business Horizons , July–August: 58–64.

51 .    For a discussion of knowledge creation through alliances, refer to Inkpen, A. C. 1996. Creating knowledge through collaboration.  California

Management Review , 39(1): 123–140; and Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. 1996. Strategic alliances and interfirm 

knowledge transfer.  Strategic Management Journal , 17 (Special Issue, Winter): 77–92.

52 .    Doz, Y. & Hamel, G. 1998.  Alliance advantage: The art of creating value through partnering.  Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

53 .    DeSanctis, G., Glass, J. T., & Ensing, I. M. 2002. Organizational designs for R&D.  Academy of Management Executive , 16(3): 55–66.

54 .    Barringer, B. R. & Harrison, J. S. 2000. Walking a tightrope: Creating value through interorganizational alliances.  Journal of Management,

26: 367–403.

55 .    One contemporary example of virtual organizations is R&D consortia. For an insightful discussion, refer to Sakaibara, M. 2002. Formation 

of R&D consortia: Industry and company effects.  Strategic Management Journal , 23(11): 1033–1050.

56 .    Bartness, A. & Cerny, K. 1993. Building competitive advantage through a global network of capabilities.  California Management Review , 

Winter: 78–103. For an insightful historical discussion of the usefulness of alliances in the computer industry, see Moore, J. F. 1993. 

Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition.  Harvard Business Review , 71(3): 75–86.

57 .    See Lorange, P. & Roos, J. 1991. Why some strategic alliances succeed and others fail.  Journal of Business Strategy , January–February: 25

–30; and Slowinski, G. 1992. The human touch in strategic alliances.  Mergers and Acquisitions , July–August: 44–47. A compelling 

argument for strategic alliances is provided by Ohmae, K. 1989. The global logic of strategic alliances.  Harvard Business Review , 67(2): 

143–154.

58 .    Some of the downsides of alliances are discussed in Das, T. K. & Teng, B. S. 2000. Instabilities of strategic alliances: An internal tensions 

perspective.  Organization Science,  11: 77–106.

59 .    This section draws upon Dess, G. G. & Picken, J. C. 1997.  Mission critical.  Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin Professional Publishing.

60 .    Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. 1994.  The wisdom of teams: Creating the high performance organization.  New York: HarperBusiness.

61 .    Bryant, A. 2011.  The corner office.  New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 230.

62 .    Hammer, M. & Champy, J. 1993.  Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution.  New York: HarperCollins.

63 .    Gupta, A. 2011. The relational perspective and east meets west.  Academy of Management Perspectives , 25(3): 19–27.

64 .    This section draws on Birkinshaw, J. & Gibson, C. 2004. Building ambidexterity into an organization.  MIT Sloan Management Review , 45

(4): 47–55; and Gibson, C. B. & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. 

Academy of Management Journal,  47(2): 209–226. Robert Duncan is generally credited with being the first to coin the term “ambidextrous 

organizations” in his article entitled: Designing dual structures for innovation. In Kilmann, R. H., Pondy, L. R., & Slevin, D. (Eds.). 1976. 

The management of organizations , vol. 1: 167–188. For a seminal academic discussion of the concept of exploration and exploitation, 

which parallels adaptation and alignment, refer to: March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning.  Organization

Science , 2: 71–86.

65 .    This section is based on O’Reilly, C. A. & Tushman, M. L. 2004. The ambidextrous organization.  Harvard Business Review , 82(4): 74–81.

343

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 344

PART 3: STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION

chapter 11

Strategic Leadership:

Creating a Learning Organization and an Ethical Organization

After reading this chapter, you should have a good understanding of the following learning objectives:

LO11.1 The three key interdependent activities in which all successful leaders must be continually engaged.

LO11.2 Two elements of effective leadership: overcoming barriers to change and the effective use of power.

LO11.3 The crucial role of emotional intelligence (EI) in successful leadership as well as its potential

drawbacks.

LO11.4 The importance of developing competency companions and creating a learning organization.

LO11.5 The leader’s role in establishing an ethical organization.

LO11.6 The difference between integrity-based and compliance-based approaches to organizational ethics.

LO11.7 Several key elements that organizations must have to become an ethical organization.

Learning from Mistakes

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Most people have never heard of Synthes, a medical device maker headquartered in West Chester,

Pennsylvania. Yet in 2012 it made national news when four of its corporate officers were found responsible for

illegal actions taken by the company and sentenced to prison. 1

When did the problems begin? Between 2002 and 2004, Synthes conducted clinical trials of Norian bone

cement, a product used to treat vertebral compression fractures (VCFs), a type of fracture that occurs in nearly

500,000 elderly people each year. Norian, a subsidiary acquired for $50 million in 1999, was already approved

for several types of bone-repair treatments. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had explicitly

barred the use of Norian in treating VCFs because of concerns that it could get into the bloodstream and harm

patients, possibly leading to death. In spite of the FDA restriction, Synthes decided to forgo the FDA approved

clinic trial, launched right into market research, and began promoting Norian for unapproved use in VCF

operations. Unfortunately, the patients were unaware of the deadly risks they faced.

345

The results? Three patients died on the operating table after spine surgeries in 2003 and 2004! Synthes did

not report these deaths to the FDA, because they claimed that the deaths were not due to their product alone.

Such disclosures, however, are required by law. The U.S. Department of Justice is still seeking to prove that the

cement caused the deaths, a claim supported by the surgeons who used the Norian product. Synthes had to pay

$23.2 million in fines and was charged with 44 misdemeanors. Norian was charged with 52 felony counts,

including lying to the FDA with the intent to defraud. As U.S. District Court Judge Legroom Davis said, “On the

wrongful conduct scale, it’s 11 on a scale of 10. It’s over the top.”

The U.S. Department of Justice prosecuted under the Responsible Corporate Officer Doctrine, which holds

executives in certain positions of authority criminally liable for violations of food and drug laws even if they did

not have direct knowledge of the underlying conduct. The resulting sentences the four executives received were

the stiffest to date under this law.

What might be the underlying problem at Synthes that caused such disregard for the law?

In large part, it appears to have been a question of leadership. Hansjorg Wyss was the founder and CEO of

Synthes, which he sold to Johnson and Johnson for $20 billion in June 2012. Prior to the sale, Wyss played an

intimidating, hands-on role in managing the company and owned a 50 percent share of it. Wyss was known for

paying attention to even the minutia of the company, and nothing went past Wyss without his input or approval.

Even the cafeteria plates, which Wyss insisted be square, and the toilet paper brand in the corporate office had

Wyss’s input! He was referred to by former employees as “the eight-hundred pound gorilla in the room who liked

getting his way.” Even though Wyss was included on emails and reports citing the product’s risks, he held all-

hands meetings after the reports were released in order to make a strong push for Norian’s bone cement to be

used in VCF. Synthes's strategy was to

346

persuade a few doctors to do the procedure on their own and then the company would try to popularize the

Norian product.

Early on, it was estimated that it would take three years for an approved clinical study. However, Wyss

insisted, without any explanation, that no clinical study would be undertaken. The top levels of executives were

all loyal to Wyss, and he had groomed them to come up through the company’s ranks. They knew better than to

confront him!

Discussion Questions

1. Why would Synthes engage in such risky behavior for such a relatively small gain?

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 2. If you are Johnson and Johnson, what aspects of the Synthes culture would you change?

Clearly, in the end, Synthes paid a high price for their unethical and illegal actions—fines, a loss of reputation, and even 

prison  terms  for  some  top  executives.  Perhaps  the  primary  responsibility  for  the  fiasco  at  Synthes  lies  with  the  CEO, 

Hansjorg  Wyss.  He  was  imperious  and  intimidating,  tolerated  no  dissent,  and  focused  on  revenues  and  profits,  while 

minimizing  ethical  and  moral  considerations.  In  contrast,  effective  leaders  play  an  important  and  often  pivotal  role  in 

creating an organizational culture that pursues excellence while adhering to high standards of ethical behavior.

This  chapter  provides  insights  into  the  role  of  strategic  leadership  in  managing,  adapting,  and  coping  in  the  face  of 

increased  environmental  complexity  and  uncertainty.  First,  we  define  leadership  and  its  three  interdependent 

activities—setting  a  direction,  designing  the  organization,  and  nurturing  a  culture  dedicated  to  excellence  and  ethical 

behavior.  Then,  we  identify  two  elements  of  leadership  that  contribute  to  success—overcoming  barriers  to  change  and 

the effective use of power. The third section focuses on emotional intelligence, a trait that is increasingly acknowledged 

to be critical to successful leadership. Next, we emphasize the importance of leaders developing competency companions 

and  creating  a  learning  organization.  Here,  we  focus  on  empowerment  wherein  employees  and  managers  throughout  an 

organization  develop  a  sense  of  self-determination,  competence,  meaning,  and  impact  that  is  centrally  important  to 

learning.  Finally,  we  address  the  leader’s  role  in  building  an  ethical  organization  and  the  elements  of  an  ethical  culture 

that contribute to firm effectiveness.

Leadership: Three Interdependent Activities

In today’s chaotic world, few would argue against the need for leadership, but how do we go about encouraging it? Is it 

enough  to  merely  keep  an  organization  afloat,  or  is  it  essential  to  make  steady  progress  toward  some  well-defined 

objective? We believe custodial management is not leadership. Leadership is proactive, goal-oriented, and focused on the 

creation  and  implementation  of  a  creative  vision.  Leadership   is  the  process  of  transforming  organizations  from  what 

they  are  to  what  the  leader  would  have  them  become.  This  definition  implies  a  lot:  dissatisfaction   with  the  status  quo,  a 

vision  of what should be, and a  process  for bringing about change. An insurance company executive shared the following 

insight: “I lead by the Noah Principle: It’s all right to know when it’s going to rain, but, by God, you had better build the 

ark.”

leadership

the process of transforming organizations from what they are to what the leader would have them become.

Doing  the  right  thing  is  becoming  increasingly  important.  Many  industries  are  declining;  the  global  village  is 

becoming  increasingly  complex,  interconnected,  and  unpredictable;  and  product  and  market  life  cycles  are  becoming 

increasingly compressed. When asked to describe the life cycle of his company’s products, the CEO of a supplier of

347

computer  components  replied,  “Seven  months  from  cradle  to  grave—and  that  includes  three  months  to  design  the 

product  and  get  it  into  production!”  Richard  D’Aveni,  author  of  Hypercompetition ,  argued  that  in  a  world  where  all 

dimensions  of  competition  appear  to  be  compressed  in  time  and  heightened  in  complexity,  sustainable   competitive 

advantages are no longer possible.

EXHIBIT 11.1 Three Interdependent Leadership Activities

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Despite the importance of doing the “right thing,” leaders must also be concerned about “doing things right.” Charan 

and Colvin strongly believe that execution, that is, the implementation of strategy, is also essential to success.

Mastering execution turns out to be the odds-on best way for a CEO to keep his job. So what’s the right way to think about that 

sexier obsession, strategy? It’s vitally important—obviously. The problem is that our age’s fascination feeds the mistaken belief 

that  developing  exactly  the  right  strategy  will  enable  a  company  to  rocket  past  competitors.  In  reality,  that’s  less  than  half  the 

battle. 2

LO11.1

The three key interdependent activities in which all successful leaders must be continually engaged.

Thus, leaders are change agents whose success is measured by how effectively they formulate  and  implement a strategic 

vision and mission. 3

Many  authors  contend  that  successful  leaders  must  recognize  three  interdependent  activities  that  must  be  continually 

reassessed  for  organizations  to  succeed.  As  shown  in  Exhibit  11.1 ,  these  are:  (1)  setting  a  direction,  (2)  designing  the 

organization, and (3) nurturing a culture dedicated to excellence and ethical behavior. 4

The interdependent nature of these three activities is self-evident. Consider an organization with a great mission and a 

superb  organizational  structure,  but  a  culture  that  implicitly  encourages  shirking  and  unethical  behavior.  Or  one  with  a 

sound  direction  and  strong  culture,  but  counterproductive  teams  and  a  “zero-sum”  reward  system  that  leads  to  the 

dysfunctional  situation  in  which  one  party’s  gain  is  viewed  as  another  party’s  loss,  and  collaboration  and  sharing  are 

severely hampered. Clearly, such combinations would be ineffective.

Often,  failure  of  today’s  organizations  can  be  attributed  to  a  lack  of  equal  consideration  of  these  three  activities.  The 

imagery of a three-legged stool is instructive: It will collapse if one leg is missing or broken. Let’s briefly look at each of 

these activities as well as the value of an ambicultural approach to leadership.

Setting a Direction

setting a direction

a strategic leadership activity of strategy analysis and strategy formulation.

A  holistic  understanding  of  an  organization’s  stakeholders  requires  an  ability  to  scan  the  environment  to  develop  a 

knowledge  of  all  of  the  company’s  stakeholders  and  other  salient  environmental  trends  and  events.  Managers  must 

integrate this knowledge into a vision of 348

what  the  organization  could  become. 5  It  necessitates  the  capacity  to  solve  increasingly  complex  problems,  become 

proactive  in  approach,  and  develop  viable  strategic  options.  A  strategic  vision  provides  many  benefits:  a  clear  future 

direction;  a  framework  for  the  organization’s  mission  and  goals;  and  enhanced  employee  communication,  participation, 

and commitment.

STRATEGY

SPOTLIGHT

11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY

A VISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY HELPS 3M TO STAY COMPETITIVE

Vision and creative change are not solely domains of the CEO. Take former vice president of environmental

engineering and pollution control at 3M Joe Ling as an example. In 1975 Mr. Ling oversaw 3M’s efforts to comply

with new legal pollution requirements. Years ago, 3M focused on lowering its environmental impact through, for

instance, placing scrubbers on smokestacks, treating effluence before releasing wastewater, and segregating solid

waste. While this prevention strategy allowed 3M to comply with legal requirements, Mr. Ling’s vision went much

further. Instead of seeing environmental concerns as a necessary evil, he asked whether 3M could prevent pollution

altogether and profit from doing so. He thought 3M could, and he started 3M’s famous Pollution Prevention Pays (or

3P) program that survives to this day.

While it is challenging to introduce creative change into any organization, Mr. Ling did not shy away from setting

challenging goals. Any idea that would reduce pollution must also save money for 3M. Executives at 3M stick to this

ideal and reiterate that “anything not a product is considered a cost.” This sustainability strategy is firmly grounded

in the 3P philosophy that everything that increases 3M’s footprint is not just pollution or waste, but also a sign of

operational inefficiency.

3P not only encourages top executives to rethink products and processes, but also empowers lower-level

employees to generate sustainability improvements. Mr. Ling’s vision to embed 3P in 3M’s corporate culture has

grown to phenomenal success, culminating in more than 6,300 sustainability projects and 2.6 billion pounds of

pollutants saved. Consistent with 3P’s mantra that pollution prevention is instrumental to 3M’s financial success, the

company achieved over $1 billion in first-year project savings.

3P has been an integral part of 3M’s corporate strategy in an increasingly global marketplace. One could imagine

that sustainability cost savings show up in increased profitability, yet 3M’s profit margins are roughly the same as 30

years ago. Yet 3M operates in increasingly competitive industrial businesses, reducing operating margins and

making operational efficiency programs such as 3P crucial to 3M’s long-term success. Therefore, it comes as no

surprise that 3M continues to challenge its employees with high sustainability standards. Over the past two

decades, 3M has slashed toxic releases by 99 percent and greenhouse gas emissions by 72 percent. This makes

3M the only company that has won the EPA’s Energy Star Award every year since the prize has been awarded, and

they have saved costs and stayed competitive while doing so.

Sources: Esty, D.C. & Winston, A.S. 2009.  Green to Gold.  Hoboken, NJ: Wiley: 106–110; Anonymous. 2012. 2015 Sustainability goals: Sometimes our 

toughest challenges are the ones we put on ourselves.  www.3m.com , June 10: np; and Winston, A.S. 2012. 3M’s sustainability innovation machine. 

www.businessweek.com , May 15: np.

At  times  the  creative  process  involves  what  the  CEO  of  Yokogawa,  GE’s  Japanese  partner  in  the  Medical  Systems 

business,  called  “bullet  train”  thinking. 6  That  is,  if  you  want  to  increase  the  speed  by  10  miles  per  hour,  you  look  for 

incremental  advances.  However,  if  you  want  to  double  the  speed,  you’ve  got  to  think  “out  of  the  box”  (e.g.,  widen  the 

track, change the overall suspension system). Leaders need more creative solutions than just keeping the same train with 

a few minor tweaks. Instead, they must come up with more revolutionary visions.

Strategy  Spotlight  11.1   discusses  Joe  Ling’s  visionary  approach  to  3M’s  sustainability  strategy.  This  example 

illustrates that visionary leadership is not just the domain of the CEO.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Designing the Organization

designing the organization

a strategic leadership activity of building structures, teams, systems, and organizational processes that facilitate the

implementation of the leader’s vision and strategies.

At  times,  almost  all  leaders  have  difficulty  implementing  their  vision  and  strategies. 7  Such  problems  may  stem  from  a 

variety of sources:

•   Lack of understanding of responsibility and accountability among managers.

•   Reward systems that do not motivate individuals (or collectives such as groups and divisions) toward desired 

organizational goals.

349

•   Inadequate or inappropriate budgeting and control systems.

•   Insufficient mechanisms to integrate activities across the organization.

Successful  leaders  are  actively  involved  in  building  structures,  teams,  systems,  and  organizational  processes  that 

facilitate  the  implementation  of  their  vision  and  strategies.  Without  appropriately  structuring  organizational  activities,  a 

firm  would  generally  be  unable  to  attain  an  overall  low-cost  advantage  by  closely  monitoring  its  costs  through  detailed 

and  formalized  cost  and  financial  control  procedures.  With  regard  to  corporate-level  strategy,  a  related  diversification 

strategy would necessitate reward systems that emphasize behavioral measures because interdependence among business 

units tends to be very important. In contrast, reward systems associated with an unrelated diversification strategy should 

rely more on financial indicators of performance because business units are relatively autonomous.

These  examples  illustrate  the  important  role  of  leadership  in  creating  systems  and  structures  to  achieve  desired  ends. 

As  Jim  Collins  says  about  the  importance  of  designing  the  organization,  “Along  with  figuring  out  what  the  company 

stands  for  and  pushing  it  to  understand  what  it’s  really  good  at,  building  mechanisms  is  the  CEO’s  role—the  leader  as 

architect.” 8

Nurturing a Culture Committed to Excellence and Ethical Behavior

excellent and ethical organizational culture

an organizational culture focused on core competencies and high ethical standards.

Organizational  culture  can  be  an  effective  means  of  organizational  control. 9  Leaders  play  a  key  role  in  changing, 

developing,  and  sustaining  an  organization’s  culture.  Consider  a  Chinese  firm,  Huawei,  a  highly  successful  producer  of 

communication  network  solutions  and  services. 10  In  2012,  it  achieved  revenues  of  $35.4  billion  and  net  profits  of  $2.5 

billion.  Its  strong  culture  can  be  attributed  to  its  founder,  Ren  Zhengfei,  and  his  background  in  the  People’s  Liberation 

Army. It is a culture which eliminates individualism and promotes collectivism and the idea of hunting in packs. It is the 

“wolf culture” of Huawei:

The  culture  of  Huawei  is  built  on  a  sense  of  patriotism,  with  Mr.  Zhengfei  frequently  citing  Mao  Zedong’s  thoughts  in  his 

speeches  and  internal  publications  such  as  the  employee  magazine  Huawei People.   Sales  teams  are  referred  to  as  “Market 

Guerrillas,”  and  battlefield  tactics,  such  as  “occupy  rural  areas  first  to  surround  cities,”  are  used  internally.  In  addition  to  Mao 

Zedong,  Mr.  Zhengfei  has  urged  his  employees  to  look  to  the  Japanese  and  Germans  for  inspiration  on  how  to  conduct 

themselves.  This  is  exemplified  by  the  words  written  in  a  letter  to  new  hires  that  states,  “I  hope  you  abandon  the  mentality  of 

achieving  quick  results,  learn  from  the  Japanese  down-to-earth  attitude  and  the  German’s  spirit  of  being  scrupulous  to  every 

detail.”

The  notion  of  “wolf  culture”  stems  from  the  fact  that  Huawei  workers  are  encouraged  to  learn  from  the  behavior  of  wolves, 

which  have  a  keen  sense  of  smell,  are  aggressive,  and,  most  important  of  all,  hunt  in  packs.  It  is  this  collective  and  aggressive 

spirit  that  is  the  center  of  the  Huawei  culture.  Combining  the  behavior  of  wolves  with  military-style  training  has  been 

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. instrumental  in  building  the  culture  of  the  company,  which,  in  turn,  is  widely  thought  to  be  instrumental  in  the  company’s 

success.

In  sharp  contrast,  leaders  can  also  have  a  very  detrimental  effect  on  a  firm’s  culture  and  ethics.  Imagine  the  negative 

impact  that  Todd  Berman’s  illegal  activities  have  had  on  a  firm  that  he  cofounded—New  York’s  private  equity  firm 

Chartwell Investments. 11 He stole more than $3.6 million from the firm and its investors. Berman pleaded guilty to fraud 

charges  brought  by  the  Justice  Department.  For  18  months  he  misled  Chartwell’s  investors  concerning  the  financial 

condition  of  one  of  the  firm’s  portfolio  companies  by  falsely  claiming  it  needed  to  borrow  funds  to  meet  operating 

expenses.  Instead,  Berman  transferred  the  money  to  his  personal  bank  account,  along  with  fees  paid  by  portfolio 

companies.

Clearly,  a  leader’s  behavior  and  values  can  make  a  strong  impact  on  an  organization—for  good  or  for  bad.  Strategy 

Spotlight  11.2   provides  a  positive  example.  It  discusses  how  the  chairman  of  Infosys  create  an  ethical  culture  by 

“walking the talk.”

350

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 11.2 ETHICS

INSTILLING ETHICS AND A FIRM’S VALUES: WALKING THE TALK

Firms often draft elaborate value statements and codes of conduct, yet many firms do not to live up to their own

standards—or in other words, fail to “walk the talk.” Take the positive example of N. R. Narayana Murthy, chairman

and one of the founders of Infosys (a giant Indian technology company). In February 1984, shortly after the firm was

founded, Infosys decided to import a super minicomputer so that it could start developing software for overseas

clients. When the machine landed at Bangalore Airport, the local customs official refused to clear it unless the

company “took care of him”—the Indian euphemism for demanding a bribe. A delay at customs could have

threatened the project. Yet, instead of caving into the unethical customs official’s demands, Mr. Murthy kept true to

his values and took the more expensive formal route of paying a customs duty of 135 percent with dim chances of

successfully appealing the duty and receiving a refund.

Reflecting on these events, Mr. Murthy reasons, “We didn’t have enough money to pay the duty and had to

borrow it. However, because we had decided to do business ethically, we didn’t have a choice. We would not pay

bribes. We effectively paid twice for the machine and had only a slim chance of recovering our money. But a clear

conscience is the softest pillow on which you can lay your head down at night…. It took a few years for corrupt

officials to stop approaching us for favors.”

Source: Raman, A. P. 2011. “Why don’t we try to be India’s most respected company?”  Harvard Business Review , 89(11): 82.

Managers  and  top  executives  must  accept  personal  responsibility  for  developing  and  strengthening  ethical  behavior 

throughout  the  organization.  They  must  consistently  demonstrate  that  such  behavior  is  central  to  the  vision  and  mission 

of  the  organization.  Several  elements  must  be  present  and  reinforced  for  a  firm  to  become  highly  ethical,  including  role 

models,  corporate  credos  and  codes  of  conduct,  reward  and  evaluation  systems,  and  policies  and  procedures.  Given  the 

importance of these elements, we address them in detail in the last section of this chapter.

LO11.2

Two elements of effective leadership: overcoming barriers to change and the effective use of power.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Getting Things Done: Overcoming Barriers and Using Power

The demands on leaders in today’s business environment require them to perform a variety of functions. The success of 

their  organizations  often  depends  on  how  they  as  individuals  meet  challenges  and  deliver  on  promises.  What  practices 

and  skills  are  needed  to  get  the  job  done  effectively?  In  this  section,  we  focus  on  two  capabilities  that  are  marks  of 

successful  leadership—overcoming  barriers  to  change  and  the  effective  use  of  power.  Then,  in  the  next  section,  we  will 

examine an important human trait that helps leaders be more effective—emotional intelligence.

Overcoming Barriers to Change

What are the  barriers to change  that leaders often encounter, and how can they best bring about organizational change?

12  After  all,  people  generally  have  some  level  of  choice  about  how  strongly  they  support  or  resist  a  leader’s  change 

initiatives.  Why  is  there  often  so  much  resistance?  Organizations  at  all  levels  are  prone  to  inertia  and  are  slow  to  learn, 

adapt, and change because:

barriers to change

characteristics of individuals and organizations that prevent a leader from transforming an organization.

1.   Many people have  vested interests in the status quo . People tend to be risk averse and resistant to change. There 

is a broad stream of research on “escalation,” wherein certain individuals continue to throw “good money at bad 

decisions” despite negative performance feedback. 13

vested interest in the status quo

a barrier to change that stems from people’s risk aversion.

351

2.   There are  systemic barriers . The design of the organization’s structure, information processing, reporting 

relationships, and so forth impede the proper flow and evaluation of information. A bureaucratic structure with 

multiple layers, onerous requirements for documentation, and rigid rules and procedures will often “inoculate” the 

organization against change.

systemic barriers

barriers to change that stem from an organizational design that impedes the proper flow and evaluation of information.

3.    Behavioral barriers  cause managers to look at issues from a biased or limited perspective due to their education, 

training, work experiences, and so forth. Consider an incident shared by David Lieberman, marketing director at 

GVO, an innovation consulting firm:

behavioral barriers

barriers to change associated with the tendency for managers to look at issues from a biased or limited perspective

based on their prior education and experience.

A  company’s  creative  type  had  come  up  with  a  great  idea  for  a  new  product.  Nearly  everybody  loved  it.  However,  it  was  shot 

down  by  a  high-ranking  manufacturing  representative  who  exploded:  “A  new  color?  Do  you  have  any  idea  of  the  spare-parts 

problem  that  it  will  create?”  This  was  not  a  dimwit  exasperated  at  having  to  build  a  few  storage  racks  at  the  warehouse.  He’d 

been hearing for years about cost cutting, lean inventories, and “focus.” Lieberman’s comment: “Good concepts, but not always 

good for innovation.”

4.    Political barriers  refer to conflicts arising from power relationships. This can be the outcome of a myriad of 

symptoms such as vested interests, refusal to share information, conflicts over resources, conflicts between 

departments and divisions, and petty interpersonal differences.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. political barriers

barriers to change related to conflicts arising from power relationships.

5.    Personal time constraints  bring to mind the old saying about “not having enough time to drain the swamp when 

you are up to your neck in alligators.” Gresham’s law of planning states that operational decisions will drive out 

the time necessary for strategic thinking and reflection. This tendency is accentuated in organizations experiencing 

severe price competition or retrenchment wherein managers and employees are spread rather thin.

personal time constraints

a barrier to change that stems from people’s not having sufficient time for strategic thinking and reflection.

Strategy  Spotlight  11.3   discusses  how  Microsoft  and  Natura  Cosméticos  were  able  to  overcome  political  barriers  to 

change through creating a more collaborative environment.

Leaders  must  draw  on  a  range  of  personal  skills  as  well  as  organizational  mechanisms  to  move  their  organizations 

forward  in  the  face  of  such  barriers.  Two  factors  mentioned  earlier—building  a  learning  organization  and  ethical 

organization—provide the kind of climate within which a leader can advance the organization’s aims and make progress 

toward its goals.

One  of  the  most  important  tools  a  leader  has  for  overcoming  barriers  to  change  is  their  personal  and  organizational 

power.  On  the  one  hand,  good  leaders  must  be  on  guard  not  to  abuse  power.  On  the  other  hand,  successful  leadership 

requires the measured exercise of power. We turn to that topic next.

The Effective Use of Power

Successful  leadership  requires  the  effective  use  of  power  in  overcoming  barriers  to  change. 14  As  humorously  noted  by 

Mark Twain, “I’m all for progress. It’s change I object to.”  Power  refers to a leader’s ability to get things done in a way 

he or she wants them to be done. It is the ability to influence other people’s behavior, to persuade them to do things that 

they  otherwise  would  not  do,  and  to  overcome  resistance  and  opposition.  Effective  exercise  of  power  is  essential  for 

successful leadership. 15

power

a leader’s ability to get things done in a way he or she wants them to be done.

A leader derives his or her power from several sources or bases. The simplest way to understand the bases of power is 

by classifying them as organizational and personal, as shown in  Exhibit 11.2 .

Organizational bases of power  refer to the power that a person wields because of her formal management position. 16

These  include  legitimate,  reward,  coercive,  and  information  power.  Legitimate power   is  derived  from  organizationally 

conferred decision-making

organizational bases of power

a formal management position that is the basis of a leader’s power.

352

authority and is exercised by virtue of a manager’s position in the organization.  Reward power  depends on the ability of 

the  leader  or  manager  to  confer  rewards  for  positive  behaviors  or  outcomes.  Coercive power   is  the  power  a  manager 

exercises over employees using

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 11.3

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. OVERCOMING POLITICAL BARRIERS TO CHANGE

To overcome barriers to organizational change, companies today work more collaboratively than ever before, inside

their own organizations and with outsiders. While virtual team meetings and other technology gadgets such as

Facebook and Twitter facilitate discussions and employee empowerment, it is not enough for leaders to rely on

technology. Instead, top management must lead by example and be good collaborators themselves. One obstacle

to effective collaboration is higher-level political battles. Take Microsoft as an example. Before Apple released its

tablet smash hit iPad, Microsoft had developed a viable tablet more than a decade earlier. However, entrenched

interests and turf fights between competing Microsoft divisions eventually killed the project. Microsoft since then

appears to be focusing on closer managerial collaboration, as the recent acquisition of Skype illustrates. The voice

and video conferencing provider will become a Microsoft business unit that is required to collaborate closely with

other Microsoft divisions in an effort to realize the anticipated synergies of the acquisition.

Brazil’s Natura Cosméticos provides another example of overcoming barriers to change by addressing political

barriers. Alessandro Carlucci, CEO of the large manufacturer and marketer of beauty products, has implemented a

comprehensive “engagement process” that promotes a collaborative mindset at all levels of the organization. As

part of this process, Mr. Carlucci made it a priority to unify his top executives behind common goals and stop

internal power struggles that became increasingly evident after Natura became a public company in 2004. He asked

top managers to invest in self-development as part of their stewardship of the company. So each executive

embarked on a “personal journey” with a dedicated coach, who met with everyone individually and with the team as

a whole. Carlucci explains that “it is a different type of coaching. It’s not just talking to your boss or subordinates but

talking about a person’s life history, with their families; it is more holistic, broader, integrating all the different roles of

a human being.” Different from other developmental processes, this coaching approach emphasizes the human side

of top team members, with all their distinct strengths but also their weaknesses. This coaching experience

effectively illustrates that no top manager at Natura alone has all the answers and that collaboration is not only

possible but also essential for long-term success. Carlucci’s efforts to create a collaborative mindset have started to

get recognized by outsiders and have helped the firm win a top spot on Fortune’s list of best companies for leaders.

Source: Ibarra, H. and Hansen, M.T. 2011. Are you a collaborative leader?  Harvard Business Review , 89(7/8): 68–75; Anonymous. 2011. Analysis: What does 

Microsoft’s Skype acquisition mean for businesses?  www.computerweekly.com , May 13: np; Hansen, M.T. and Ibarra, H. 2011. Getting collaboration right. 

blogs.hbr.org , May 16: np.

EXHIBIT 11.2 A Leader’s Bases of Power 353

fear of punishment for errors of omission or commission.  Information power  arises from a manager’s access, control, and 

distribution of information that is not freely available to everyone in an organization.

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 11.4

THE USE OF “SOFT” POWER AT SIEMENS

Until 1999, paying bribes in international markets was not only legally allowed in Germany, German corporations

could also deduct bribes from taxable income. However, once those laws changed, German industrial powerhouse

Siemens found it hard to break its bribing habit in its sprawling global operations. Eventually a major scandal forced

many top executives out of the firm, including CEO Klaus Kleinfeld. As the successor to Mr. Kleinfeld, Peter Löscher

became the first outside CEO in the more than 160-year history of Siemens in 2007. As an outsider Mr. Löscher

found it challenging to establish himself as a strong leader inside the bureaucratic Siemens organization. However,

he eventually found a way to successfully transition into his new position.

Naturally, in the early stage of his tenure, he lacked internal connections and the bases of power associated with

inside knowledge of people and processes. Yet Siemens faced tremendous challenges, such as a lack of customer

orientation, and required a strong leader with the ability to change the status quo. Absent a more formal power

base, he turned to more informal means to accomplish his mandate of organizational change and increasing

customer orientation.

Once a year, all 700 of Siemens top managers come together for a leadership conference in Berlin. Given the

historical lack of customer focus, Löscher used peer pressure as an informal (or soft) form of power in order to

challenge and eventually change the lack of customer orientation. As he recalls from his first leadership conference

as CEO, “I collected the Outlook calendars for the previous year from all my division CEOs and board members.

Then I mapped how much time they had spent with customers and I ranked them. There was a big debate in my

inner circle over whether I should use names. Some felt we would embarrass people, but I decided to put the names

on the screen anyway.”

The results of this exercise were quite remarkable: Mr. Löscher spent around 50 percent of his time with

customers, more than any other top executive. Clearly, the people who were running the business divisions should

rank higher on customer interaction than the CEO. This confirmed the lack of customer orientation in the

organization. This ranking has been repeated at every Siemens leadership conference since Löscher took office.

Over time, customer orientation has improved because nobody wants to fall short on this metric and endure

potential ridicule. Löscher’s leadership style and use of soft power during his early time in office seemed to have

paid off, as the Siemens board extended his contract as CEO of the German industry icon a year early.

Source: Löscher, P. 2012. The CEO of Siemens on using a scandal to drive change.  Harvard Business Review , 90(11): 42; and Anonymous. 2011. Löscher soll 

Vorstandschef bleiben.  www.manager-magazin.de , July 25: np.

A  leader  might  also  be  able  to  influence  subordinates  because  of  his  or  her  personality  characteristics  and  behavior. 

These  would  be  considered  the  personal bases of power ,  including  referent  power  and  expert  power.  The  source  of 

referent power  is a subordinate’s identification with the leader. A leader’s personal attributes or charisma might influence 

subordinates and make them devoted to that leader. The source of  expert power  is the leader’s expertise and knowledge. 

The leader is the expert on whom subordinates depend for information that they need to do their jobs successfully.

personal bases of power

a leader’s personality characteristics and behavior that are the basis of the leader’s power.

Successful  leaders  use  the  different  bases  of  power,  and  often  a  combination  of  them,  as  appropriate  to  meet  the 

demands of a situation, such as the nature of the task, the personality characteristics of the subordinates, and the urgency 

of  the  issue. 17  Persuasion  and  developing  consensus  are  often  essential,  but  so  is  pressing  for  action.  At  some  point 

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. stragglers  must  be  prodded  into  line. 18  Peter  Georgescu,  who  recently  retired  as  CEO  of  Young  &  Rubicam  (an 

advertising  and  media  subsidiary  of  the  UK-based  WPP  Group),  summarized  a  leader’s  dilemma  brilliantly  (and 

humorously), “I have knee pads and a .45. I get down and beg a lot, but I shoot people too.” 19

Strategy  Spotlight  11.4   addresses  some  of  the  subtleties  of  power.  Here,  the  CEO  of  Siemens  successfully  brought 

about organizational change by the effective use of peer pressure.

354

LO11.3

The crucial role of emotional intelligence (EI) in successful leadership as well as its potential drawbacks.

Emotional Intelligence: A Key Leadership Trait

In the previous sections, we discussed skills and activities of strategic leadership. The focus was on “what leaders do and 

how  they  do  it.”  Now,  the  issue  becomes  “who  leaders  are ,”  that  is,  what  leadership  traits  are  the  most  important. 

Clearly,  these  two  issues  are  related,  because  successful  leaders  possess  the  valuable  traits  that  enable  them  to  perform 

effectively in order to create value for their organization. 20

There has been a vast amount of literature on the successful traits of leaders. 21 These traits include integrity, maturity, 

energy,  judgment,  motivation,  intelligence,  expertise,  and  so  on.  For  simplicity,  these  traits  may  be  grouped  into  three 

broad sets of capabilities:

•   Purely technical skills (like accounting or operations research).

•   Cognitive abilities (like analytical reasoning or quantitative analysis).

•   Emotional intelligence (like self-management and managing relationships).

“Emotional  intelligence  (EI)”  has  become  popular  in  both  the  literature  and  management  practice  in  recent  years. 22

Harvard Business Review   articles  published  in  1998  and  2000  by  psychologist/journalist  Daniel  Goleman,  who  is  most 

closely  associated  with  the  concept,  have  become  HBR ’s  most  highly  requested  reprint  articles.  And  two  of  Goleman’s 

recent books,  Emotional Intelligence  and  Working with Emotional Intelligence , were both on the  New York Times ’s best-

seller  lists.  Goleman  defines  emotional intelligence   as  the  capacity  for  recognizing  one’s  own  emotions  and  those  of 

others. 23

emotional intelligence (EI)

an individual’s capacity for recognizing his or her own emotions and those of others, including the five components of

self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills.

Recent  studies  of  successful  managers  have  found  that  effective  leaders  consistently  have  a  high  level  of  EI. 24

Findings  indicate  that  EI  is  a  better  predictor  of  life  success  (economic  well-being,  satisfaction  with  life,  friendship, 

family  life),  including  occupational  attainments,  than  IQ.  Evidence  is  consistent  with  the  catchy  phrase:  “IQ  gets  you 

hired,  but  EQ  (Emotional  Quotient)  gets  you  promoted.”  Human  resource  managers  believe  this  statement  to  be  true, 

even for highly technical jobs such as those of scientists and engineers.

This  is  not  to  say  that  IQ  and  technical  skills  are  irrelevant,  but  they  become  “threshold  capabilities.”  They  are  the 

necessary  requirements  for  attaining  higher-level  managerial  positions.  EI,  on  the  other  hand,  is  essential  for  leadership 

success. Without it, Goleman claims, a manager can have excellent training, an incisive analytical mind, and many smart 

ideas but will still not be a great leader.

Exhibit  11.3   identifies  the  five  components  of  EI:  self-awareness,  self-regulation,  motivation,  empathy,  and  social 

skill.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Self-Awareness

Self-awareness  is  the  first  component  of  EI  and  brings  to  mind  that  Delphic  oracle  who  gave  the  advice  “know  thyself” 

thousands of years ago. Self-awareness involves a person having a deep understanding of his or her emotions, strengths, 

weaknesses,  and  drives.  People  with  strong  self-awareness  are  neither  overly  critical  nor  unrealistically  optimistic. 

Instead, they are honest with themselves and others.

People  generally  admire  and  respect  candor.  Leaders  are  constantly  required  to  make  judgment  calls  that  require  a 

candid assessment of capabilities—their own and those of others. People who assess themselves honestly (i.e., self-aware 

people) are well suited to do the same for the organizations they run. 25

Self-Regulation

Biological  impulses  drive  our  emotions.  Although  we  cannot  do  away  with  them,  we  can  strive  to  manage  them.  Self-

regulation,  which  is  akin  to  an  ongoing  inner  conversation,  frees  us  from  being  prisoners  of  our  feelings. 26  People 

engaged  in  such  conversation  feel  bad  moods  and  emotional  impulses  just  as  everyone  else  does.  However,  they  find 

ways to control them and even channel them in useful ways.

355

EXHIBIT 11.3 The Five Components of Emotional Intelligence at Work

Definition Hallmarks

Self-management skills:

Self-

awareness

• The ability to recognize and understand your moods, emotions,

and drives, as well as their effect on others.

• Self-confidence

• Realistic self-assessment

• Self-deprecating sense of

humor

Self-

regulation

• The ability to control or redirect disruptive impulses and moods. • Trustworthiness and integrity

• Comfort with ambiguity

• The propensity to suspend judgment—to think before acting. • Openness to change

Motivation • A passion to work for reasons that go beyond money or status. • Strong drive to achieve

• Optimism, even in the face of

failure

• A propensity to pursue goals with energy and persistence. • Organizational commitment

Managing relationships:

Empathy • The ability to understand the emotional makeup of other people. • Expertise in building and

retaining talent

• Cross-cultural sensitivity

• Skill in treating people according to their emotional reactions. • Service to clients and

customers

Social skill • Proficiency in managing relationships and building networks. • Effectiveness in leading

change

• Persuasiveness

• An ability to find common ground and build rapport. • Expertise in building and

leading teams

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Source: Reprinted by permission of  Harvard Business Review.  Exhibit from “What Makes a Leader,” by D. Goleman, January 2004. Copyright © 2004 by the 

Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation; all rights reserved.

Self-regulated  people  are  able  to  create  an  environment  of  trust  and  fairness  where  political  behavior  and  infighting 

are  sharply  reduced  and  productivity  tends  to  be  high.  People  who  have  mastered  their  emotions  are  better  able  to  bring 

about  and  implement  change  in  an  organization.  When  a  new  initiative  is  announced,  they  are  less  likely  to  panic;  they 

are able to suspend judgment, seek out information, and listen to executives explain the new program.

Motivation

Successful executives are driven to achieve beyond expectations—their own and everyone else’s. Although many people 

are  driven  by  external  factors,  such  as  money  and  prestige,  those  with  leadership  potential  are  driven  by  a  deeply 

embedded desire to achieve for the sake of achievement.

Motivated  people  show  a  passion  for  the  work  itself,  such  as  seeking  out  creative  challenges,  a  love  of  learning,  and 

taking pride in a job well done. They also have a high level of energy to do things better as well as a restlessness with the 

status quo. They are eager to explore new approaches to their work.

Empathy

Empathy  is  probably  the  most  easily  recognized  component  of  EI.  Empathy  means  thoughtfully  considering  an 

employee’s  feelings,  along  with  other  factors,  in  the  process  of  making  intelligent  decisions.  Empathy  is  particularly 

important in today’s business

356

environment for at least three reasons: the increasing use of teams, the rapid pace of globalization, and the growing need 

to retain talent. 27

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 11.5

EMPATHY IN A PEDIATRIC DENTAL PRACTICE

A key strength of effective leaders is to see situations from another person’s perspective—or in other words, to

show empathy. Empathy is especially important when dealing with customers who may not always be able to

articulate their preferences. Take dental practices for children. Children’s dental offices often look, smell, and sound

remarkably similar to regular dental practices for the simple reason that the owners design their offices in terms of

what they produce (i.e., dental services) instead of what would be best for their customers.

While even many parents have negative feelings toward dental offices, it is naturally quite challenging to create

some excitement or at least lower the anxieties children experience. That’s where a healthy portion of empathy

enters the picture. Let’s try to view your dental practice from a child’s point of view. How to best accomplish this?

Forget conventional wisdom, and experience your dental practice from your knees! Several interesting insights may

emerge just by emulating a child’s experience. First, what is the first thing that you see when you enter the practice?

Chances are, not much, as the reception area is conveniently set at eye level— adult eye level. Even the most

wonderful receptionist remains invisible for children coming into the practice. Second, what do you hear? Again,

chances are that you will hear the all-too-familiar sound of dental equipment, something that may sound to children

like torturing mice in the next room. Third, what do you smell? Frankly, doctor’s offices have a distinct smell that

equals panic for children and even many adults.

So what is the major takeaway from putting yourself into a kid’s shoes? Seeing the world from your customer’s

point of view may lead you to lower the reception desk so children can see the sweet receptionist. You may also

play some one-beat-per-second music to evoke the sense of a heartbeat. Finally, you could sound-proof the

examination rooms so that dental drilling noise is reduced. Overall, this example demonstrates that empathy—or the

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. ability to see situations from another person’s perspective—may allow business owners to tailor their service and

product offerings to specific customer segments.

Source: Burrus, D. 2011.  Flash foresight.  New York: Harper Business: xxii–xxiv.

When  leading  a  team,  a  manager  is  often  charged  with  arriving  at  a  consensus—often  in  the  face  of  a  high  level  of 

emotions. Empathy enables a manager to sense and understand the viewpoints of everyone around the table.

Globalization typically involves cross-cultural dialogue that can easily lead to miscues. Empathetic people are attuned 

to  the  subtleties  of  body  language;  they  can  hear  the  message  beneath  the  words  being  spoken.  They  have  a  deep 

understanding of the existence and importance of cultural and ethnic differences.

Empathy  also  plays  a  key  role  in  retaining  talent.  Human  capital  is  particularly  important  to  a  firm  in  the  knowledge 

economy  when  it  comes  to  creating  advantages  that  are  sustainable.  Leaders  need  empathy  to  develop  and  keep  top 

talent, because when high performers leave, they take their tacit knowledge with them.

Strategy  Spotlight  11.5   shows  that  empathy  can  pay  off  in  a  wide  variety  of  settings.  Here  it  helps  a  pediatric  dental 

practice to view its business through the eyes of a child.

Social Skill

While the first three components of EI are all self-management skills, the last two—empathy and social skill—concern a 

person’s  ability  to  manage  relationships  with  others.  Social  skill  may  be  viewed  as  friendliness  with  a  purpose:  moving 

people  in  the  direction  you  desire,  whether  that’s  agreement  on  a  new  marketing  strategy  or  enthusiasm  about  a  new 

product.

Socially skilled people tend to have a wide circle of acquaintances as well as a knack for finding common ground and 

building rapport. They recognize that nothing gets done alone, and they have a network in place when the time for action 

comes.

357

Social  skill  can  be  viewed  as  the  culmination  of  the  other  dimensions  of  EI.  People  will  be  effective  at  managing 

relationships when they can understand and control their own emotions and empathize with others’ feelings. Motivation 

also  contributes  to  social  skill.  People  who  are  driven  to  achieve  tend  to  be  optimistic,  even  when  confronted  with 

setbacks.  And  when  people  are  upbeat,  their  “glow”  is  cast  upon  conversations  and  other  social  encounters.  They  are 

popular, and for good reason.

A  key  to  developing  social  skill  is  to  become  a  good  listener—a  skill  that  many  executives  find  to  be  quite 

challenging. Teresa Taylor, chief operating officer at Quest Communications, says: 28

“Over the years, something I really try to focus on is truly listening. When I say that, I mean sometimes people act like they’re 

listening  but  they’re  really  formulating  their  own  thoughts  in  their  heads.  I’m  trying  to  put  myself  into  someone  else’s  shoes, 

trying to figure out what’s motivating them, and why they are in the spot they are in.”

Emotional Intelligence: Some Potential Drawbacks and Cautionary Notes

Many  great  leaders  have  great  reserves  of  empathy,  interpersonal  astuteness,  awareness  of  their  own  feelings,  and  an 

awareness  of  their  impact  on  others. 29  More  importantly,  they  know  how  to  apply  these  capabilities  judiciously  as  best 

benefits  the  situation.  Having  some  minimum  level  of  EI  will  help  a  person  be  effective  as  a  leader  as  long  as  it  is 

channeled appropriately. However, if a person has a high level of these capabilities it may become “too much of a good 

thing” if he or she is allowed to drive inappropriate behaviors. Some additional potential drawbacks of EI can be gleaned 

by considering the flip side of its benefits.

Effective Leaders Have Empathy for Others  However, they also must be able to make the “tough decisions.” Leaders 

must be able to appeal to logic and reason and acknowledge others’ feelings so that people feel the decisions are correct. 

However,  it  is  easy  to  overidentify  with  others  or  confuse  empathy  with  sympathy.  This  can  make  it  more  difficult  to 

make the tough decisions.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Effective Leaders Are Astute Judges of People   A  danger  is  that  leaders  may  become  judgmental  and  overly  critical 

about  the  shortcomings  they  perceive  in  others.  They  are  likely  to  dismiss  other  people’s  insights,  making  them  feel 

undervalued.

Effective Leaders Are Passionate about What They Do, and They Show It   This  doesn’t  mean  that  they  are  always 

cheerleaders.  Rather,  they  may  express  their  passion  as  persistence  in  pursuing  an  objective  or  a  relentless  focus  on  a 

valued principle. However, there is a fine line between being excited about something and letting your passion close your 

mind to other possibilities or cause you to ignore realities that others may see.

Effective Leaders Create Personal Connections with Their People   Most  effective  leaders  take  time  to  engage 

employees  individually  and  in  groups,  listening  to  their  ideas,  suggestions  and  concerns,  and  responding  in  ways  that 

make  people  feel  that  their  ideas  are  respected  and  appreciated.  However,  if  the  leader  makes  too  many  unannounced 

visits, it may create a culture of fear and micromanagement. Clearly, striking a correct balance is essential.

From  a  moral  standpoint,  emotional  leadership  is  neither  good  nor  bad.  On  the  one  hand,  emotional  leaders  can  be 

altruistic,  focused  on  the  general  welfare  of  the  company  and  its  employees,  and  highly  principled.  On  the  other  hand, 

they can be manipulative, selfish, and dishonest. For example, if a person is using leadership solely to gain power, that is 

not  leadership  at  all. 30  Rather,  they  are  using  their  EI  to  grasp  what  people  want  and  pander  to  those  desires  in  order  to 

gain authority and influence. After all, easy answers sell.

358

LO11.4

The importance of developing competency companions and creating a learning organization.

Developing Competency Companions and Creating a Learning

Organization

Leaders  at  all  levels  of  the  organization  need  to  reflect  on  the  skills  that  they  have  and  how  they  can  build  and  extend 

their skill set. 31 Too often leaders get stuck extending the competencies they already have. However, the most promising 

path  for  an  individual  to  learn  and  grow  may  be  to  develop  new  competencies  that  complement  the  skills  and  abilities 

they already have. For example, a leader who has great competency in developing innovative ideas can extend the value 

of that competency by developing strong communication skills. Such a leader would benefit from an interaction effect, a 

situation  where  the  combination  of  two  skills  can  generate  an  outcome  that  is  significantly  greater  than  either  skill  can 

produce  on  its  own.  By  enhancing  communication  skills,  this  highly  innovative  leader  is  more  likely  to  be  able  to 

communicate the value of both innovative ideas she has developed and also the necessity to push innovative learning and 

development throughout the organization.

Strategy Spotlight 11.6  provides useful insights on the benefits of developing competency companions and how to go 

about it.

Once  leaders  have  reflected  on  and  enhanced  their  own  competencies,  they  can  turn  their  attention  to  building  a 

learning  organization.  Such  an  organization  is  capable  of  adapting  to  change,  fostering  creativity,  and  succeeding  in 

highly competitive markets.

To  introduce  the  concept  of  a  learning  organization,  we’ll  draw  on  Charles  Handy,  one  of  today’s  most  respected 

business  visionaries.  He  is  author  of  The Age of Unreason   and  The Age of Paradox   and  he  shared  an  amusing  story 

several years ago:

The other day, a courier could not find my family’s remote cottage. He called his base on his radio, and the base called us to ask 

directions.  He  was  just  around  the  corner,  but  his  base  managed  to  omit  a  vital  part  of  the  directions.  So  he  called  them  again, 

and  they  called  us  again.  Then  the  courier  repeated  the  cycle  a  third  time  to  ask  whether  we  had  a  dangerous  dog.  When  he 

eventually  arrived,  we  asked  whether  it  would  not  have  been  simpler  and  less  aggravating  to  everyone  if  he  had  called  us 

directly from the roadside telephone booth where he had been parked. “I can’t do that,” he said, “because they won’t refund any 

money I spend.” “But it’s only pennies!” I exclaimed. “I know,” he said, “but that only shows how little they trust us!” 32

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. At  first  glance,  it  would  appear  that  the  story  epitomizes  the  lack  of  empowerment  and  trust  granted  to  the  hapless 

courier:  Don’t  ask  questions!  Do  as  you’re  told! 33  However,  implicit  in  this  scenario  is  also  the  message  that  learning, 

information  sharing,  adaptation,  decision  making,  and  so  on  are  not   shared  throughout  the  organization.  In  contrast, 

leading-edge organizations recognize the importance of having everyone involved in the process of actively learning and 

adapting.  As  noted  by  today’s  leading  expert  on  learning  organizations,  MIT’s  Peter  Senge,  the  days  when  Henry  Ford, 

Alfred Sloan, and Tom Watson “ learned for the organization ” are gone.

In an increasingly dynamic, interdependent, and unpredictable world, it is simply no longer possible for anyone to “figure it all 

out  at  the  top.”  The  old  model,  “the  top  thinks  and  the  local  acts,”  must  now  give  way  to  integrating  thinking  and  acting  at  all 

levels. While the challenge is great, so is the potential payoff. “The person who figures out how to harness the collective genius 

of the people in his or her organization,” according to former Citibank CEO Walter Wriston, “is going to blow the competition 

away.” 34

Learning  and  change  typically  involve  the  ongoing  questioning  of  an  organization’s  status  quo  or  method  of 

procedure.  This  means  that  all  individuals  throughout  the  organization  must  be  reflective. 35  Many  organizations  get  so 

caught up in carrying out their

359

day-to-day work that they rarely, if ever, stop to think objectively about themselves and their businesses. They often fail 

to ask the probing questions that might lead them to call into question their basic assumptions, to refresh their strategies, 

or  to  reengineer  their  work  processes.  According  to  Michael  Hammer  and  Steven  Stanton,  the  pioneer  consultants  who 

touched off the reengineering movement:

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 11.6

COMPETENCY COMPANIONS: LEVERAGING A LEADER’S STRENGTHS

Leaders who want to take the next step in their career can follow a straightforward four-step cross-training process.

The basic idea behind this cross-training approach is simple yet effective. While the most effective leaders have at

least one competency that makes them great and eventually indispensable, it makes little sense to continually work

on already great qualities. Instead, leaders can benefit from identifying and developing complementary strengths.

Building complementary strengths—or competency companions—may lead to substantially greater leadership

effectiveness than finding increasingly rare opportunities to improve an already outstanding competency.

First, leaders must identify their strengths in areas that usually fall into five categories: character, personal

capability, getting results, interpersonal skills, and leading change. While this task can be done in multiple ways, it is

important to realize that your own view is less important than how others see you, making a 360-degree evaluation

the method of choice.

Second, choose a strength to focus on. Most people find it easy to identity weaknesses and focus their attention

on improving them. Unless a competence is extremely underdeveloped (i.e., in the 10th percentile), however, it may

pay to focus on an already strong yet not outstanding competency. Developing a competency from strong to

outstanding often can raise the perceived leadership effectiveness dramatically. However, choosing between

multiple strong competencies is easier said than done, because most people lack clear selection criteria. To engage

effectively in this process, leaders should focus on a strong competency that is important to the organization.

Moreover, leaders should choose a competency they feel passionate about.

Third, select a companion behavior. While developing a great or outstanding competency is an important step on

the journey to becoming an indispensable leader, it may increasingly pay to also focus on a mediocre competency

that can be developed in an interacting (or complementary) fashion. As before, this companion competency should

be valued by the organization and also be something the leader feels passionate about.

Lastly, develop your companion behavior. Once you have settled on an organizationally valued and personally

engaging competency, you should now work on improving the basic skills in this area. Practically speaking, you

could look for as many opportunities as possible to develop this competency, both inside and outside of work. For

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. instance, you could take courses or practice informally with friends and coworkers. Volunteer to engage in activities

that allow you to practice this skill, and ask for continuous feedback.

Extensive research by Zenger Folkman, a leadership development consultancy, provides solid evidence of the

benefits of pairing leader attributes. Such findings were based on an analysis of their database of more than a

quarter million 360-degree surveys of some 30,000 developing leaders. Take, for example, the competencies

“focuses on results” and “builds relationships.” Only 14 percent of leaders who were reasonably strong (that is,

scored in the 75th percentile) in focusing on results but less so in building relationships reached the extraordinary

leadership level: the 90th percentile in overall leadership effectiveness. Similarly, only 12 percent of those who were

reasonably strong in building relationships but less so in focusing on results reached that level. However, when an

individual performed well in both categories, something dramatic happened: Fully 72 percent of those in the 75th

percentile in both categories reached the 90th percentile on overall leadership effectiveness.

Source: Zenger, J. H., Folkman, J. R., & Edinger, S. K. 2011. Making yourself indispensable.  Harvard Business Review , 89(10): 84–92.

Reflection entails awareness of self, of competitors, of customers. It means thinking without preconception. It means questioning 

cherished assumptions and replacing them with new approaches. It is the only way in which a winning company can maintain its 

leadership position, by which a company with great assets can ensure that they continue to be well deployed. 36

To adapt to change, foster creativity, and remain competitive, leaders must build learning organizations.  Exhibit 11.4

lists the five elements of a learning organization.

360

EXHIBIT 11.4 Key Elements of a Learning Organization

These are the five key elements of a learning organization. Each of these items should be viewed as necessary, but not

sufficient. That is, successful learning organizations need all five elements.

1. Inspiring and motivating people with a mission or purpose.

2. Empowering employees at all levels.

3. Accumulating and sharing internal knowledge.

4. Gathering and integrating external information.

5. Challenging the status quo and enabling creativity.

Inspiring and Motivating People with a Mission or Purpose

Successful  learning organizations  create a proactive, creative approach to the unknown, actively solicit the involvement 

of  employees  at  all  levels,  and  enable  all  employees  to  use  their  intelligence  and  apply  their  imagination.  Higher-level 

skills  are  required  of  everyone,  not  just  those  at  the  top. 37  A  learning  environment  involves  organizationwide 

commitment  to  change,  an  action  orientation,  and  applicable  tools  and  methods. 38  It  must  be  viewed  by  everyone  as  a 

guiding philosophy and not simply as another change program.

learning organizations

organizations that create a proactive, creative approach to the unknown, characterized by (1) inspiring and motivating

people with a mission and purpose, (2) empowering employees at all levels, (3) accumulating and sharing internal

knowledge, (4) gathering and integrating external information, and (5) challenging the status quo and enabling creativity.

A  critical  requirement  of  all  learning  organizations  is  that  everyone  feels  and  supports  a  compelling  purpose.  In  the 

words of William O’Brien, CEO of Hanover Insurance, “Before there can be meaningful participation, people must share 

certain  values  and  pictures  about  where  we  are  trying  to  go.  We  discovered  that  people  have  a  real  need  to  feel  that 

they’re  part  of  an  enabling  mission.” 39  Such  a  perspective  is  consistent  with  an  intensive  study  by  Kouzes  and  Posner, 

authors  of  The Leadership Challenge .40  They  recently  analyzed  data  from  nearly  one  million  respondents  who  were 

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. leaders at various levels in many organizations throughout the world. A major finding was that what leaders struggle with 

most  is  communicating  an  image  of  the  future  that  draws  others  in,  that  is,  it  speaks  to  what  others  see  and  feel.  To 

illustrate:

Buddy Blanton, a principal program manager at Rockwell Collins, learned this lesson firsthand. He asked his team for feedback 

on  his  leadership,  and  the  vast  majority  of  it  was  positive.  However,  he  got  some  strong  advice  from  his  team  about  how  he 

could be more effective in inspiring a shared vision. “You would benefit by helping us, as a team, to understand how you go to 

your vision. We want to walk with you while you create the goals and vision, so we all get to the end of the vision together.” 41

Inspiring  and  motivating  people  with  a  mission  or  purpose  is  a  necessary  but  not  sufficient  condition  for  developing 

an organization that can learn and adapt to a rapidly changing, complex, and interconnected environment.

Empowering Employees at All Levels

“The  great  leader  is  a  great  servant,”  asserted  Ken  Melrose,  CEO  of  Toro  Company  and  author  of  Making the Grass

Greener on Your Side .42  A  manager’s  role  becomes  one  of  creating  an  environment  where  employees  can  achieve  their 

potential  as  they  help  move  the  organization  toward  its  goals.  Instead  of  viewing  themselves  as  resource controllers and 

power  brokers,  leaders  must  envision  themselves  as  flexible  resources  willing  to  assume  numerous  roles  as  coaches, 

information  providers,  teachers,  decision  makers,  facilitators,  supporters,  or  listeners,  depending  on  the  needs  of  their 

employees. 43

The  central  key  to  empowerment  is  effective  leadership.  Empowerment  can’t  occur  in  a  leadership  vacuum. 

According to Melrose, “You best lead by serving the needs of your people. You don’t do their jobs for them; you enable 

them to learn and progress on the job.”

Leading-edge  organizations  recognize  the  need  for  trust,  cultural  control,  and  expertise  at  all  levels  instead  of  the 

extensive and cumbersome rules and regulations inherent

361

in  hierarchical  control. 44  Some  have  argued  that  too  often  organizations  fall  prey  to  the  “heroes-and-drones  syndrome,” 

wherein  the  value  of  those  in  powerful  positions  is  exalted  and  the  value  of  those  who  fail  to  achieve  top  rank  is 

diminished. Such an attitude is implicit in phrases such as “Lead, follow, or get out of the way” or, even less appealing, 

“Unless  you’re  the  lead  horse,  the  view  never  changes.”  Few  will  ever  reach  the  top  hierarchical  positions  in 

organizations, but in the information economy, the strongest organizations are those that effectively use the talents of all 

the players on the team.

STRATEGY

SPOTLIGHT

11.7

CROWDSOURCING

USING THE WISDOM OF YOUR EMPLOYEES TO MAKE BETTER DECISIONS

CEOs are often surrounded by an aura of unfailing business acumen. Yet few CEOs live up to these high

expectations over the long run, suggesting that even the most able CEOs have limited abilities. Ironically, shattering

the image of the almighty CEO by realizing and identifying cognitive limitations may help us to improve

organizational decision making. Consider WBG Construction, a small home builder west of Boston. When important

decisions need to be made, Greg Burrill, the president, asks all employees with relevant knowledge or a stake in the

outcome for their thoughts. This collaborative approach recently led to a decision that not only sold a house but also

inspired a new floor plan that appealed to a whole new segment of buyers.

As another example, EMC, the data storage giant, enables participation by a social media platform called EMC |

One. When the recession hit and cost cutting became imperative, EMC used this social media platform to do

something most companies would leave to top management: decide where to cut costs. Several thousand

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. employees participated and identified cost savings that were largely unknown to top management. The resulting

cuts were less painful because employees had a say in the cost reduction. Empowering employees in this manner

utilizes the day-to-day insights of lower-level employees and benefits both the firm and the workforce.

In some other cases, bad decisions not only cost money but also can lead to heartbreaking accidents. NASA can

look back at some 50 years of pioneering success, but also tragic accidents caused by bad judgment. In February

2009, the flight of space shuttle Discovery was overshadowed by uncertainties about whether an issue with the fuel

system should delay the launch. Prior space shuttle launch decisions were made by a small group of individuals

supported by a culture of complacency born of many prior successes and communication breakdowns. But NASA

finally implemented a much needed change of culture that now values input from all group members. As Mike

Ryschkewitsch, NASA’s chief engineer observed, “One of the things that NASA strongly emphasizes now is that any

individual who works here, if they see something that doesn’t look right, they have a responsibility to raise it, and

they can raise it.” By utilizing the insights of individuals in their organizations, leaders hope to improve organizational

decision making and secure the long-term success of their businesses.

Source: Davenport, T. H. 2012. The wisdom of your in-house crowd.  Harvard Business Review , 90(10): 40; and Davenport, T. H., & Manville, B. 2012. 

Judgment calls: Twelve stories of big decisions and the teams that got them right.  Boston: Harvard Business Review Press: 25–38.

Empowering individuals by soliciting their input helps an organization to enjoy better employee morale. It also helps 

create  a  culture  in  which  middle-  and  lower-level  employees  feel  that  their  ideas  and  initiatives  will  be  valued,  and 

enhance firm performance as explained in  Strategy Spotlight 11.7 .

Accumulating and Sharing Internal Knowledge

Effective organizations must also  redistribute information, knowledge  (skills to act on the information), and  rewards .45 A 

company  might  give  frontline  employees  the  power  to  act  as  “customer  advocates,”  doing  whatever  is  necessary  to 

satisfy customers. The company needs to disseminate information by sharing customer expectations and feedback as well 

as  financial  information.  The  employees  must  know  about  the  goals  of  the  business  as  well  as  how  key  value-creating 

activities  in  the  organization  are  related  to  each  other.  Finally,  organizations  should  allocate  rewards  on  how  effectively 

employees  use  information,  knowledge,  and  power  to  improve  customer  service  quality  and  the  company’s  overall 

performance. 46

362

Let’s  take  a  look  at  Whole  Foods  Market,  Inc.,  the  largest  natural  foods  grocer  in  the  United  States. 47  An  important 

benefit  of  the  sharing  of  internal  information  at  Whole  Foods  becomes  the  active  process  of  internal benchmarking.

Competition is intense at Whole Foods. Teams compete against their own goals for sales, growth, and productivity; they 

compete  against  different  teams  in  their  stores;  and  they  compete  against  similar  teams  at  different  stores  and  regions. 

There  is  an  elaborate  system  of  peer  reviews  through  which  teams  benchmark  each  other.  The  “Store  Tour”  is  the  most 

intense.  On  a  periodic  schedule,  each  Whole  Foods  store  is  toured  by  a  group  of  as  many  as  40  visitors  from  another 

region.  Lateral  learning—discovering  what  your  colleagues  are  doing  right  and  carrying  those  practices  into  your 

organization—has become a driving force at Whole Foods.

In  addition  to  enhancing  the  sharing  of  company  information  both  up  and  down  as  well  as  across  the  organization, 

leaders  also  have  to  develop  means  to  tap  into  some  of  the  more  informal  sources  of  internal  information.  In  a  recent 

survey of presidents, CEOs, board members, and top executives in a variety of nonprofit organizations, respondents were 

asked  what  differentiated  the  successful  candidates  for  promotion.  The  consensus:  The  executive  was  seen  as  a  person 

who  listens.  According  to  Peter  Meyer,  the  author  of  the  study,  “The  value  of  listening  is  clear:  You  cannot  succeed  in 

running  a  company  if  you  do  not  hear  what  your  people,  customers,  and  suppliers  are  telling  you….  Listening  and 

understanding well are key to making good decisions.” 48

Gathering and Integrating External Information

Recognizing  opportunities,  as  well  as  threats,  in  the  external  environment  is  vital  to  a  firm’s  success.  As  organizations 

and   environments  become  more  complex  and  evolve  rapidly,  it  is  far  more  critical  for  employees  and  managers  to 

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. become  more  aware  of  environmental  trends  and  events—both  general  and  industry-specific—and  more  knowledgeable 

about their firm’s competitors and customers. Next, we will discuss some ideas on how to do it.

First, the Internet has dramatically accelerated the speed with which anyone can track down useful information or

locate people who might have useful information.   Prior  to  the  Net,  locating  someone  who  used  to  work  at  a 

company—always  a  good  source  of  information—was  quite  a  challenge.  However,  today  people  post  their  résumés  on 

the web; they participate in discussion groups and talk openly about where they work.

Marc  Friedman,  manager  of  market  research  at  $1  billion  Andrew  Corporation,  a  fast-growing  manufacturer  of 

wireless  communications  products  provides  an  example  of  effective  Internet  use. 49  One  of  Friedman’s  preferred  sites  to 

visit  is  Corptech’s  website,  which  provides  information  on  45,000  high-tech  companies  and  more  than  170,000 

executives.  One  of  his  firm’s  product  lines  consisted  of  antennae  for  air-traffic  control  systems.  He  got  a  request  to 

provide a country-by-country breakdown of upgrade plans for various airports. He knew nothing about air-traffic control 

at the time. However, he found a site on the Internet for the International Civil Aviation Organization. Fortunately, it had 

a great deal of useful data, including several research companies working in his area of interest.

benchmarking

managers seeking out best examples of a particular practice as part of an ongoing effort to improve the corresponding

practice in their own organization.

Second, company employees at all levels can use “garden variety” traditional sources to acquire external

information.   Much  can  be  gleaned  by  reading  trade  and  professional  journals,  books,  and  popular  business  magazines. 

Other venues for gathering external information include membership in professional or trade organizations, attendance at 

meetings  and  conventions,  and  networking  among  colleagues  inside  and  outside  of  your  industry.  Intel’s  Andy  Grove 

gathered  information  from  people  like  DreamWorks  SKG’s  Steven  Spielberg  and  Tele-Communications  Inc.’s  John 

Malone. 50 He believed that such interaction provides insights into how to make personal computers more entertaining and 

better  at  communicating.  Internally,  Grove  spent  time  with  the  young  engineers  who  run  Intel  Architecture  labs,  an 

Oregon-based facility that Grove hoped to become the de facto R&D lab for the entire PC industry.

363

Third, benchmarking can be a useful means of employing external information.   Here  managers  seek  out  the  best 

examples  of  a  particular  practice  as  part  of  an  ongoing  effort  to  improve  the  corresponding  practice  in  their  own 

organization. 51  There  are  two  primary  types  of  benchmarking.  Competitive benchmarking   restricts  the  search  for  best 

practices  to  competitors,  while  functional benchmarking   endeavors  to  determine  best  practices  regardless  of  industry. 

Industry-specific  standards  (e.g.,  response  times  required  to  repair  power  outages  in  the  electric  utility  industry)  are 

typically  best  handled  through  competitive  benchmarking,  whereas  more  generic  processes  (e.g.,  answering  1-800  calls) 

lend themselves to functional benchmarking because the function is essentially the same in any industry.

competitive benchmarking

benchmarking where the examples are drawn from competitors in the industry.

functional benchmarking

benchmarking where the examples are drawn from any organization, even those outside the industry.

Ford  Motor  Company  used  benchmarking  to  study  Mazda’s  accounts  payable  operations. 52  Its  initial  goal  of  a  20 

percent  cut  in  its  500-employee  accounts  payable  staff  was  ratcheted  up  to  75  percent—and  met.  Ford  found  that  staff 

spent  most  of  their  time  trying  to  match  conflicting  data  in  a  mass  of  paper,  including  purchase  orders,  invoices,  and 

receipts.  Following  Mazda’s  example,  Ford  created  an  “invoiceless  system”  in  which  invoices  no  longer  trigger 

payments to suppliers. The receipt does the job.

Fourth, focus directly on customers for information.   For  example,  William  McKnight,  head  of  3M’s  Chicago  sales 

office, required that salesmen of abrasives products talk directly to the workers in the shop to find out what they needed, 

instead of calling on only front-office executives. 53 This was very innovative at the time—1909! But it illustrates the need 

to  get  to  the  end  user  of  a  product  or  service.  (McKnight  went  on  to  become  3M’s  president  from  1929  to  1949  and 

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. chairman from 1949 to 1969.) More recently, James Taylor, senior vice president for global marketing at Gateway 2000, 

discussed the value of customer input in reducing response time, a critical success factor in the PC industry.

We  talk  to  100,000  people  a  day—people  calling  to  order  a  computer,  shopping  around,  looking  for  tech  support.  Our  website 

gets 1.1 million hits per day. The time it takes for an idea to enter this organization, get processed, and then go to customers for 

feedback is down to minutes. We’ve designed the company around speed and feedback. 54

Challenging the Status Quo and Enabling Creativity

Earlier  in  this  chapter  we  discussed  some  of  the  barriers  that  leaders  face  when  trying  to  bring  about  change  in  an 

organization: vested interests in the status quo, systemic barriers, behavioral barriers, political barriers, and personal time 

constraints. For a firm to become a learning organization, it must overcome such barriers in order to foster creativity and 

enable it to permeate the firm. This becomes quite a challenge if the firm is entrenched in a status quo mentality.

Perhaps the best way to challenge the status quo is for the leader to forcefully create a sense of urgency. For example, 

when Tom Kasten was vice president of Levi Strauss, he had a direct approach to initiating change.

You  create  a  compelling  picture  of  the  risks  of  not   changing.  We  let  our  people  hear  directly  from  customers.  We  videotaped 

interviews  with  customers  and  played  excerpts.  One  big  customer  said,  “We  trust  many  of  your  competitors  implicitly.  We 

sample  their  deliveries.  We  open  all   Levi’s  deliveries.”  Another  said,  “Your  lead  times  are  the  worst.  If  you  weren’t  Levi’s, 

you’d be gone.” It was powerful. I wish we had done more of it. 55

Such  initiative,  if  sincere  and  credible,  establishes  a  shared  mission  and  the  need  for  major  transformations.  It  can 

channel energies to bring about both change and creative endeavors.

Establishing a “culture of dissent” can be another effective means of questioning the status quo and serving as a spur 

toward  creativity.  Here  norms  are  established  whereby  dissenters  can  openly  question  a  superior’s  perspective  without 

fear of retaliation or

364

retribution. Consider the perspective of Steven Balmer, Microsoft’s CEO, in discussing the firm’s former chairman, Bill 

Gates.

Bill  [Gates]  brings  to  the  company  the  idea  that  conflict  can  be  a  good  thing….  Bill  knows  it’s  important  to  avoid  that  gentle 

civility that keeps you from getting to the heart of an issue quickly. He likes it when anyone, even a junior employee, challenges 

him, and you know he respects you when he starts shouting back. 56

Closely related to the culture of dissent is the fostering of a culture that encourages risk taking. “If you’re not making 

mistakes, you’re not taking risks, and that means you’re not going anywhere,” claimed John Holt, coauthor of  Celebrate

Your Mistakes .57 “The key is to make errors faster than the competition, so you have more chances to learn and win.”

Companies  that  cultivate  cultures  of  experimentation  and  curiosity  make  sure  that  failure   is  not,  in  essence,  an 

obscene word. They encourage mistakes as a key part of their competitive advantage. It has been said that innovation has 

a  great  paradox:  Success—that  is,  true  breakthroughs—usually  come  through  failure.  Below  are  some  approaches  to 

encourage risk taking and learning from mistakes in an organization: 58

•    Formalize Forums for Failure  To keep failures and the important lessons that they offer from getting swept under 

the rug, carve out time for reflection. GE recently began sharing lessons from failure by bringing together 

managers whose “Imagination Breakthrough” efforts were put on the shelf.

•    Move the Goalposts  Innovation requires flexibility in meeting goals, since early predictions are often little more 

than educated guesses. Intuit’s Scott Cook even goes so far as to suggest that teams developing new products 

ignore forecasts in the early days. “For every one of our failures, we had spreadsheets that looked awesome,” he 

claims.

•    Bring in Outsiders  Outsiders can help neutralize the emotions and biases that prop up a flop. Customers can be the 

most valuable. After its DNA chip failed, Corning brought pharmaceutical companies in early to test its new drug-

discovery technology, Epic.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. •    Prove Yourself Wrong, Not Right  Development teams tend to look for supporting, rather than countervailing, 

evidence. “You have to reframe what you’re seeking in the early days,” says Innosight’s Scott Anthony. “You’re 

not really seeking proof that you have the right answer. It’s more about testing to prove yourself wrong.”

Finally,  failure  can  play  an  important  and  positive  role  in  one’s  professional  development.  John  Donahue,  eBay’s 

CEO, draws on the sport of baseball in recalling the insight (and inspiration!) one of his former bosses shared with him: 59

“The best hitters in Major League Baseball, world class, they can strike out six times out of ten and still be the greatest hitters of 

all  time.  That’s  my  philosophy—the  key  is  to  get  up  in  that  batter’s  box  and  take  a  swing.  And  all  you  have  to  do  is  hit  one 

single, a couple of doubles, and an occasional home run out of every ten at-bats, and you’re going to be the best hitter or the best 

business leader around. You can’t play in the major leagues without having a lot of failures.”

LO11.5

The leader’s role in establishing an ethical organization.

Creating an Ethical Organization

Ethics   may  be  defined  as  a  system  of  right  and  wrong. 60  Ethics  assists  individuals  in  deciding  when  an  act  is  moral  or 

immoral,  socially  desirable  or  not.  The  sources  for  an  individual’s  ethics  include  religious  beliefs,  national  and  ethnic 

heritage,  family  practices,  community  standards,  educational  experiences,  and  friends  and  neighbors.  Business  ethics  is 

the application of ethical standards to commercial enterprise.

ethics

a system of right and wrong that assists individuals in deciding when an act is moral or immoral and/or socially desirable

or not.

365

Individual Ethics versus Organizational Ethics

organizational ethics

the values, attitudes, and behavioral patterns that define an organization’s operating culture and that determine what an

organization holds as acceptable behavior.

Many  leaders  think  of  ethics  as  a  question  of  personal  scruples,  a  confidential  matter  between  employees  and  their 

consciences.  Such  leaders  are  quick  to  describe  any  wrongdoing  as  an  isolated  incident,  the  work  of  a  rogue  employee. 

They assume the company should not bear any responsibility for individual misdeeds. In their view, ethics has nothing to 

do with leadership.

Ethics  has  everything  to  do  with  leadership.  Seldom  does  the  character  flaw  of  a  lone  actor  completely  explain 

corporate  misconduct.  Instead,  unethical  business  practices  typically  involve  the  tacit,  if  not  explicit,  cooperation  of 

others and reflect the values, attitudes, and behavior patterns that define an organization’s operating culture. Ethics is as 

much an organizational as a personal issue. Leaders who fail to provide proper leadership to institute proper systems and 

controls that facilitate ethical conduct share responsibility with those who conceive, execute, and knowingly benefit from 

corporate misdeeds. 61

The  ethical orientation   of  a  leader  is  a  key  factor  in  promoting  ethical  behavior.  Ethical  leaders  must  take  personal, 

ethical  responsibility  for  their  actions  and  decision  making.  Leaders  who  exhibit  high  ethical  standards  become  role 

models for others and raise an organization’s overall level of ethical behavior. Ethical behavior must start with the leader 

before the employees can be expected to perform accordingly.

ethical orientation

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. the practices that firms use to promote an ethical business culture, including ethical role models, corporate credos and

codes of conduct, ethically-based reward and evaluation systems, and consistently enforced ethical policies and

procedures.

There has been a growing interest in corporate ethical performance. Some reasons for this trend may be the increasing 

lack  of  confidence  regarding  corporate  activities,  the  growing  emphasis  on  quality  of  life  issues,  and  a  spate  of  recent 

corporate scandals. Without a strong ethical culture, the chance of ethical crises occurring is enhanced. Ethical crises can 

be  very  expensive—both  in  terms  of  financial  costs  and  in  the  erosion  of  human  capital  and  overall  firm  reputation. 

Merely  adhering  to  the  minimum  regulatory  standards  may  not  be  enough  to  remain  competitive  in  a  world  that  is 

becoming more socially conscious.  Strategy Spotlight 11.8  highlights potential ethical problems at utility companies that 

are trying to capitalize on consumers’ desire to participate in efforts to curb global warming.

The past several years have been characterized by numerous examples of unethical and illegal behavior by many top-

level  corporate  executives.  These  include  executives  of  firms  such  as  Enron,  Tyco,  WorldCom,  Inc.,  Adelphia,  and 

Healthsouth Corp., who were all forced to resign and are facing (or have been convicted of) criminal charges. Perhaps the 

most  glaring  example  is  Bernie  Madoff,  whose  Ponzi  scheme,  which  unraveled  in  2008,  defrauded  investors  of  $50 

billion in assets they had set aside for retirement and charitable donations.

The  ethical  organization  is  characterized  by  a  conception  of  ethical  values  and  integrity  as  a  driving  force  of  the 

enterprise. 62  Ethical  values  shape  the  search  for  opportunities,  the  design  of  organizational  systems,  and  the  decision-

making  process  used  by  individuals  and  groups.  They  provide  a  common  frame  of  reference  that  serves  as  a  unifying 

force  across  different  functions,  lines  of  business,  and  employee  groups.  Organizational  ethics  helps  to  define  what  a 

company is and what it stands for.

There are many potential benefits of an ethical organization, but they are often indirect. Research has found somewhat 

inconsistent  results  concerning  the  overall  relationship  between  ethical  performance  and  measures  of  financial 

performance. 63  However,  positive  relationships  have  generally  been  found  between  ethical  performance  and  strong 

organizational  culture,  increased  employee  efforts,  lower  turnover,  higher  organizational  commitment,  and  enhanced 

social responsibility.

The  advantages  of  a  strong  ethical  orientation  can  have  a positive effect on employee commitment and motivation to 

excel.  This  is  particularly  important  in  today’s  knowledge-intensive  organizations,  where  human  capital  is  critical  in 

creating value and competitive advantages. Positive, constructive relationships among individuals (i.e., social capital) are 

vital in leveraging human capital and other resources in an organization. Drawing on the

366

concept  of  stakeholder  management,  an  ethically  sound  organization  can  also  strengthen  its  bonds  among  its  suppliers, 

customers, and governmental agencies.

STRATEGY

SPOTLIGHT

11.8 ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY

ETHICS

GREEN ENERGY: REAL OR JUST A MARKETING PLOY?

Many consumers want to “go green” and are looking for opportunities to do so. Utility companies that provide heat

and electricity are one of the most obvious places to turn, because they often use fossil fuels that could be saved

through energy conservation or replaced by using alternative energy sources. In fact, some consumers are willing to

pay a premium to contribute to environmental sustainability efforts if paying a little more will help curb global

warming. Knowing this, many power companies in the United States have developed alternative energy programs

and appealed to customers to help pay for them.

Unfortunately, many of the power companies that are offering eco-friendly options are falling short on delivering

on them. Some utilities have simply gotten off to a slow start or found it difficult to profitably offer alternative power.

Others, however, are suspected of committing a new type of fraud—“greenwashing.” This refers to companies that

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. make unsubstantiated claims about how environmentally friendly their products or services really are. In the case of

many power companies, their claims of “green power” are empty promises. Instead of actually generating additional

renewable energy, most of the premiums are going for marketing costs. “They are preying on people’s goodwill,”

says Stephen Smith, executive director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, an advocacy group in Knoxville,

Tennessee.

Consider what two power companies offered and how the money was actually spent:

• Duke Power of Indiana created a program called “GoGreen Power.” Customers were told that they could pay a

green-energy premium and a specific amount of electricity would be obtained from renewable sources. What

actually happened? Less than 18 percent of voluntary customer contributions in a recent year went to renewable

energy development.

• Alliant Energy of Iowa established a program dubbed “Second Nature.” Customers were told that they would

“support the growth of earth-friendly ‘green power’ created by wind and biomass.” What actually happened? More

than 56 percent of expenditures went to marketing and administrative costs, not green-energy development.

Sources: Elgin, B. & Holden, D. 2008. Green Power: Buyers Beware.  BusinessWeek , September 29: 68–70;  www.cleanenergy.org ; duke-energy.com ; and 

alliantenergy.com .

LO11.6

The difference between integrity-based and compliance-based approaches to organizational ethics.

Integrity-Based versus Compliance-Based Approaches to Organizational Ethics

Before  discussing  the  key  elements  of  an  ethical  organization,  one  must  understand  the  links  between  organizational 

integrity and the personal integrity of an organization’s members. 64 There cannot be high-integrity organizations without 

high-integrity  individuals.  However,  individual  integrity  is  rarely  self-sustaining.  Even  good  people  can  lose  their 

bearings  when  faced  with  pressures,  temptations,  and  heightened  performance  expectations  in  the  absence  of 

organizational  support  systems  and  ethical  boundaries.  Organizational  integrity  rests  on  a  concept  of  purpose, 

responsibility, and ideals for an organization as a whole. An important responsibility of leadership is to create this ethical 

framework and develop the organizational capabilities to make it operational. 65

Lynn Paine, an ethics scholar at Harvard, identifies two approaches: the compliance-based approach and the integrity-

based  approach.  (See  Exhibit  11.5   for  a  comparison  of  compliance-based  and  integrity-based  strategies.)  Faced  with  the 

prospect  of  litigation,  several  organizations  reactively  implement  compliance-based ethics programs .  Such  programs 

are  typically  designed  by  a  corporate  counsel  with  the  goal  of  preventing,  detecting,  and  punishing  legal  violations.  But 

being  ethical  is  much  more  than  being  legal,  and  an  integrity-based  approach  addresses  the  issue  of  ethics  in  a  more 

comprehensive manner.

compliance-based ethics programs

programs for building ethical organizations that have the goal of preventing, detecting, and punishing legal violations.

Integrity-based ethics programs   combine  a  concern  for  law  with  an  emphasis  on  managerial  responsibility  for 

ethical behavior. It is broader, deeper, and more demanding

integrity-based ethics programs

programs for building ethical organizations that combine a concern for law with an emphasis on managerial responsibility

for ethical behavior, including (1) enabling ethical conduct; (2) examining the organization’s and members’ core guiding

values, thoughts, and actions; and (3) defining the responsibilities and aspirations that constitute an organization’s

ethical compass.

367

than a legal compliance initiative. It is broader in that it seeks to enable responsible conduct. It is deeper in that it cuts to 

the ethos and operating systems of an organization and its members, their core guiding values, thoughts, and actions. It is 

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. more demanding because it requires an active effort to define the responsibilities that constitute an organization’s ethical 

compass. Most importantly, organizational ethics is seen as the responsibility of management.

EXHIBIT 11.5 Approaches to Ethics Management

Characteristics Compliance-Based Approach Integrity-Based Approach

Ethos Conformity with externally imposed

standards

Self-governance according to chosen standards

Objective Prevent criminal misconduct Enable responsible conduct

Leadership Lawyer-driven Management-driven with aid of lawyers, HR, and others

Methods Education, reduced discretion,

auditing and controls, penalties

Education, leadership, accountability, organizational systems

and decision processes, auditing and controls, penalties

Behavioral

Assumptions

Autonomous beings guided by

material self-interest

Social beings guided by material self-interest, values, ideals,

peers

Source: Reprinted by permission of  Harvard Business Review.  Exhibit from “Managing Organizational Integrity,” by L. S. Paine. Copyright © 1994 by the 

Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation; all rights reserved.

A corporate counsel may play a role in designing and implementing integrity strategies, but it is managers at all levels 

and  across  all  functions  that  are  involved  in  the  process.  Once  integrated  into  the  day-to-day  operations,  such  strategies 

can  prevent  damaging  ethical  lapses,  while  tapping  into  powerful  human  impulses  for  moral  thought  and  action.  Ethics 

becomes  the  governing  ethos  of  an  organization  and  not  burdensome  constraints.  Here  is  an  example  of  an  organization 

that goes beyond mere compliance to laws in building an ethical organization:

In  teaching  ethics  to  its  employees,  Texas  Instruments,  the  $13  billion  chip  and  electronics  manufacturer,  asks  them  to  run  an 

issue through the following steps: Is it legal? Is it consistent with the company’s stated values? Will the employee feel bad doing 

it? What will the public think if the action is reported in the press? Does the employee think it is wrong? If the employees are not 

sure of the ethicality of the issue, they are encouraged to ask someone until they are clear about it. In the process, employees can 

approach  high-level  personnel  and  even  the  company’s  lawyers.  At  TI,  the  question  of  ethics  goes  much  beyond  merely  being 

legal. It is no surprise, that this company is a benchmark for corporate ethics and has been a recipient of three ethics awards: the 

David  C.  Lincoln  Award  for  Ethics  and  Excellence  in  Business,  American  Business  Ethics  Award,  and  Bentley  College  Center 

for Business Ethics Award. 66

LO11.7

Several key elements that organizations must have to become an ethical organization.

Compliance-based approaches are externally motivated—that is, based on the fear of punishment for doing something 

unlawful.  On  the  other  hand,  integrity-based  approaches  are  driven  by  a  personal  and  organizational  commitment  to 

ethical behavior.

A firm must have several key elements to become a highly ethical organization:

•   Role models.

•   Corporate credos and codes of conduct.

•   Reward and evaluation systems.

•   Policies and procedures.

These  elements  are  highly  interrelated.  Reward  structures  and  policies  will  be  useless  if  leaders  are  not  sound  role 

models. That is, leaders who implicitly say, “Do as I say, not as 368

I  do,”  will  quickly  have  their  credibility  eroded  and  such  actions  will  sabotage  other  elements  that  are  essential  to 

building an ethical organization.

Role Models

For  good  or  for  bad,  leaders  are  role  models  in  their  organizations.  Perhaps  few  executives  can  share  an  experience  that 

better  illustrates  this  than  Linda  Hudson,  president  of  General  Dynamics. 67  Right  after  she  was  promoted  to  become  her 

firm’s  first  female  president,  she  went  to  Nordstrom  and  bought  some  new  suits  to  wear  to  work.  A  lady  at  the  store 

showed her how to tie a scarf in a very unique way. The day after she wore it to work, guess what: no fewer than a dozen 

women in the organization were wearing scarves tied exactly the same way! She reflects:

“And  that’s  when  I  realized  that  life  was  never  going  to  be  the  way  it  had  been  before,  that  people  were  watching  everything  I 

did.  And  it  wasn’t  just  going  to  be  about  how  I  dressed.  It  was  about  my  behavior,  the  example  I  set,  the  tone  I  set,  the  way  I 

carried  myself,  and  how  confident  I  was—all  those  kinds  of  things….  As  the  leader,  people  are  looking  at  you  in  a  way  you 

could not have imagined in other roles.”

Clearly,  leaders  must  “walk  the  talk”;  they  must  be  consistent  in  their  words  and  deeds.  The  values  as  well  as  the 

character  of  leaders  become  transparent  to  an  organization’s  employees  through  their  behaviors.  When  leaders  do  not 

believe  in  the  ethical  standards  that  they  are  trying  to  inspire,  they  will  not  be  effective  as  good  role  models.  Being  an 

effective  leader  often  includes  taking  responsibility  for  ethical  lapses  within  the  organization—even  though  the 

executives themselves are not directly involved. Consider the perspective of Dennis Bakke, CEO of AES, the $18 billion 

global electricity company based in Arlington, Virginia.

There was a major breach (in 1992) of the AES values. Nine members of the water treatment team in Oklahoma lied to the EPA 

about water quality at the plant. There was no environmental damage, but they lied about the test results. A new, young chemist 

at  the  plant  discovered  it,  told  a  team  leader,  and  we  then  were  notified.  Now,  you  could  argue  that  the  people  who  lied  were 

responsible  and  were  accountable,  but  the  senior  management  team  also  took  responsibility  by  taking  pay  cuts.  My  reduction 

was about 30 percent. 68

Such  action  enhances  the  loyalty  and  commitment  of  employees  throughout  the  organization.  Many  would  believe 

that it would have been much easier (and personally less expensive!) for Bakke and his management team to merely take 

strong  punitive  action  against  the  nine  individuals  who  were  acting  contrary  to  the  behavior  expected  in  AES’s  ethical 

culture.  However,  by  sharing  responsibility  for  the  misdeeds,  the  top  executives—through  their  highly  visible 

action—made  it  clear  that  responsibility  and  penalties  for  ethical  lapses  go  well  beyond  the  “guilty”  parties.  Such 

courageous behavior by leaders helps to strengthen an organization’s ethical environment.

Corporate Credos and Codes of Conduct

corporate credo

a statement of the beliefs typically held by managers in a corporation.

Corporate credos and codes of conduct are mechanisms that provide statements of norms and beliefs as well as guidelines 

for  decision  making.  They  provide  employees  with  a  clear  understanding  of  the  organization’s  policies  and  ethical 

position. Such guidelines also provide the basis for employees to refuse to commit unethical acts and help to make them 

aware of issues before they are faced with the situation. For such codes to be truly effective, organization members must 

be aware of them and what behavioral guidelines they contain. 69 Strategy Spotlight 11.9  identifies four key reasons why 

codes of conduct support organizational efforts to maintain a safe and ethical workplace.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 369

STRATEGY SPOTLIGHT 11.9 ETHICS

ELEMENTS OF A CORPORATE CODE

Corporate codes are not simply useful for conveying organizational norms and policies, but they also serve to

legitimize an organization in the eyes of others. In the United States, federal guidelines advise judges, when

determining how to sentence a company convicted of a crime, to consider whether it had a written code and was out

of compliance with its own ethical guidelines. The United Nations and countries around the world have endorsed

codes as a way to promote corporate social responsibility. As such, a code provides an increasingly important

corporate social contract that signals a company’s willingness to act ethically.

For employees, codes of conduct serve four key purposes:

1. Help employees from diverse backgrounds work more effectively across cultural backgrounds.

2. Provide a reference point for decision making.

3. Help attract individuals who want to work for a business that embraces high standards.

4. Help a company to manage risk by reducing the likelihood of damaging misconduct.

With recent scandals on Wall Street, many corporations are trying to put more teeth into their codes of conduct.

Nasdaq now requires that listed companies distribute a code to all employees. German software giant SAP’s code

informs employees that violations of the code “can result in consequences that affect employment, and could

possibly lead to external investigation, civil law proceedings, or criminal charges.” Clearly, codes of conduct are an

important part of maintaining an ethical organization.

Sources: Paine, L., Deshpande, R., Margolis, J. D., & Bettcher, K. E. 2005. Up to Code: Does Your Company’s Conduct Meet World Class Standards?  Harvard

Business Review , 82(12): 122–126; and Stone, A. 2004. Putting Teeth in Corporate Ethics Codes.  www.businessweek.com , February 19.

Large  corporations  are  not  the  only  ones  to  develop  and  use  codes  of  conduct.  Consider  the  example  of  Wetherill 

Associates (WAI), a small, privately held supplier of electrical parts to the automotive market.

Rather than a conventional code of conduct, WAI has a Quality Assurance Manual—a combination of philosophy text, conduct 

guide,  technical  manual,  and  company  profile—that  describes  the  company’s  commitment  to  honesty,  ethical  action,  and 

integrity.  WAI  doesn’t  have  a  corporate  ethics  officer,  because  the  company’s  corporate  ethics  officer  is  Marie  Bothe,  WAI’s 

CEO.  She  sees  her  main  function  as  keeping  the  350-employee  company  on  the  path  of  ethical  behavior  and  looking  for 

opportunities  to  help  the  community.  She  delegates  the  “technical”  aspects  of  the  business—marketing,  finance,  personnel,  and 

operations—to other members of the organization. 70

Reward and Evaluation Systems

It is entirely possible for a highly ethical leader to preside over an organization that commits several unethical acts. How? 

A  flaw  in  the  organization’s  reward  structure  may  inadvertently  cause  individuals  to  act  in  an  inappropriate  manner  if 

rewards  are  seen  as  being  distributed  on  the  basis  of  outcomes  rather  than  the  means  by  which  goals  and  objectives  are 

achieved. 71

Generally  speaking,  unethical  (or  illegal)  behaviors  are  also  more  likely  to  take  place  when  competition  is  intense. 

Some have called this the “dark side of competition.” Consider a couple of examples: 72

•   Competition among educational institutions for the best student is becoming stiffer. A senior admissions officer at 

Claremont McKenna College resigned after admitting to inflating SAT scores of the incoming classes for six 

years. The motive, of course, was to boost the school’s rankings in the  U.S. News and World Report’s  annual 

listing of top colleges and universities in the United States. Carmen Nobel, who reported the incident in  Working

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Knowledge  (a Harvard Business School publication), suggested that the scandal “questions the value of 

competitive rankings.”

370

•   A study of 11,000 New York vehicle emission test facilities found that companies with a greater number of local 

competitors passed cars with considerably high emission rates, and lost customers when they failed to pass the 

tests. The authors of the study concluded, “In contexts when pricing is restricted, firms use illicit quality as a 

business strategy.”

Many  companies  have  developed  reward  and  evaluation  systems  that  evaluate  whether  a  manager  is  acting  in  an 

ethical  manner.  For  example,  Raytheon,  a  $24  billion  defense  contractor,  incorporates  the  following  items  in  its 

“Leadership Assessment Instrument”: 73

•   Maintains unequivocal commitment to honesty, truth, and ethics in every facet of behavior.

•   Conforms with the letter and intent of company policies while working to affect any necessary policy changes.

•   Actions are consistent with words; follows through on commitments; readily admits mistakes.

•   Is trusted and inspires others to be trusted.

As  noted  by  Dan  Burnham,  Raytheon’s  former  CEO:  “What  do  we  look  for  in  a  leadership  candidate  with  respect  to 

integrity?  What  we’re  really  looking  for  are  people  who  have  developed  an  inner  gyroscope  of  ethical  principles.  We 

look  for  people  for  whom  ethical  thinking  is  part  of  what  they  do—no  different  from  ‘strategic  thinking’  or  ‘tactical 

thinking.’ ”

Policies and Procedures

Many situations that a firm faces have regular, identifiable patterns. Leaders tend to handle such routine by establishing a 

policy  or  procedure  to  be  followed  that  can  be  applied  uniformly  to  each  occurrence.  Such  guidelines  can  be  useful  in 

specifying  the  proper  relationships  with  a  firm’s  customers  and  suppliers.  For  example,  Levi  Strauss  has  developed 

stringent global sourcing guidelines and Chemical Bank (part of J. P. Morgan Chase Bank) has a policy of forbidding any 

review that would determine if suppliers are Chemical customers when the bank awards contracts.

Carefully developed policies and procedures guide behavior so that all employees will be encouraged to behave in an 

ethical  manner.  However,  they  must  be  reinforced  with  effective  communication,  enforcement,  and  monitoring,  as  well 

as  sound  corporate  governance  practices.  In  addition,  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002  provides  considerable  legal 

protection  to  employees  of  publicly  traded  companies  who  report  unethical  or  illegal  practices.  Provisions  in  the  Act 

coauthored by Senator Grassley include: 74

•   Make it unlawful to “discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or in any manner discriminate against ‘a 

whistleblower.’ ”

•   Establish criminal penalties of up to 10 years in jail for executives who retaliate against whistleblowers.

•   Require board audit committees to establish procedures for hearing whistleblower complaints.

•   Allow the Secretary of Labor to order a company to rehire a terminated whistleblower with no court hearings 

whatsoever.

•   Give a whistleblower the right to a jury trial, bypassing months or years of cumbersome administrative hearings.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 371

ISSUE FOR DEBATE

Pacific Investment Management Company, LLC (commonly called PIMCO), is an investment firm headquartered in 

Newport Beach, California. PIMCO oversees investments on behalf of a wide range of clients, including millions of 

retirement savers, public and private pension plans, educational institutions, central banks, foundations and endowments, 

among others. With $290 billion in assets, PIMCO Total Return Fund is managed by co-founder and Co-Chief Investment 

Officer Bill Gross.

Several years ago, Gross noted a problem brewing that could really affect his investment strategy:

“In 2006, there were signs that this had become a highly leveraged Ponzi economy and that housing was at the pinnacle of 

this leverage. The temperature of the U.S. housing market was always the best read here in Orange County (California). But 

one  day  that  August,  as  I  was  going  across  the  street  for  my  daily  yoga  exercise,  it  occurred  to  me  that  we  needed  to  get  a 

feel for the rest of the country.”

Gross’s radical idea was to take 10 of PIMCO’s 40 credit analysts and turn them into “fake” home buyers to see what 

was actually happening in the housing market! While they didn’t have a bankroll and had no intention of buying a house, 

they each were given a territory that they would visit multiple times a month. These analysts would pretend to be a serious 

buyer in order to get information on mortgage lending practices. Over a two-year period, they found that many houses could 

be bought with no money down, or without any documentation to prove income. This was occurring all across the country!

Gross admitted that he was “not necessarily proud of the obvious deception.” However, “this little bit of trickery alerted 

[PIMCO] to what was really going on—liar loans and extravagant lending practices.” The information these analysts found 

was shocking and led PIMCO to stay out of the subprime mortgage market. Although not readily apparent at the time to all, 

the housing bubble and subprime mortgage market would later play a key role in the economy’s meltdown.

Discussion Questions

1.   What do you think about the ethics of pretending to buy homes?

2.   Do the means justify the ends?

3.   Was this effective leadership?

Sources: Brady, D. 2011. Etc. Hard choices—Interview with Bill Gross.  Bloomberg Businessweek , June 13:88; and Vaishampayan, S. & Collins, M. 2012. 

Bill Miller looks to housing for redemption.  Bloomberg Businessweek , October 22: 53–54.

Reflecting on Career Implications …

Strategic Leadership: The chapter identifies three interdependent activities that are central to strategic

leadership; namely, setting direction, designing the organization, and nurturing a culture dedicated to

excellence and ethical behavior. Both during your life as a student and in organizations you work, you have

often assumed leadership positions. To what extent have you consciously and successfully engaged in

each of these activities? Observe the leaders in your organizations and assess to what extent you can learn

from them the qualities of strategic leadership that you can use to advance your own careers.

Power: Identify the sources of power used by your superior at work. How do his or her primary source of

power and the way he/she uses it affect your own creativity, morale, and willingness to stay with the

organization? In addition, identify approaches you will use to enhance your power as

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 372

you move up your career ladder. Explain why you chose these approaches.

Emotional Intelligence: The chapter identifies the five components of Emotional Intelligence (self-

awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills). How do you rate yourself on each of

these components? What steps can you take to improve your Emotional Intelligence and achieve greater

career success?

Creating an Ethical Organization: Identify an ethical dilemma that you personally faced in the course of

your work. How did you respond to it? Was your response compliance-based, integrity-based, or even

unethical? If your behavior was compliance-based, speculate on how it would have been different if it were

integrity-based. What have you learned from your experience that would make you a more ethical leader in

the future?

summary

Strategic  leadership  is  vital  in  ensuring  that  strategies  are  formulated  and  implemented  in  an  effective  manner.  Leaders 

must  play  a  central  role  in  performing  three  critical  and  interdependent  activities:  setting  the  direction,  designing  the 

organization, and nurturing a culture committed to excellence and ethical behavior. If leaders ignore or are ineffective at 

performing  any  one  of  the  three,  the  organization  will  not  be  very  successful.  We  also  identified  two  elements  of 

leadership that contribute to success—overcoming barriers to change and the effective use of power.

For  leaders  to  effectively  fulfill  their  activities,  emotional  intelligence  (EI)  is  very  important.  Five  elements  that 

contribute to EI are self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill. The first three elements pertain 

to self-management skills, whereas the last two are associated with a person’s ability to manage relationships with others. 

We also addressed some of the potential drawbacks from the ineffective use of EI. These include the dysfunctional use of 

power  as  well  as  a  tendency  to  become  overly  empathetic,  which  may  result  in  unreasonably  lowered  performance 

expectations.

Leaders need to develop competency companions and play a central role in creating a learning organization. Gone are 

the  days  when  the  top-level  managers  “think”  and  everyone  else  in  the  organization  “does.”  With  rapidly  changing, 

unpredictable, and complex competitive environments, leaders must engage everyone in the ideas and energies of people 

throughout  the  organization.  Great  ideas  can  come  from  anywhere  in  the  organization—from  the  executive  suite  to  the 

factory  floor.  The  five  elements  that  we  discussed  as  central  to  a  learning  organization  are  inspiring  and  motivating 

people with a mission or purpose, empowering people at all levels throughout the organization, accumulating and sharing 

internal knowledge, gathering external information, and challenging the status quo to stimulate creativity.

In the final section of the chapter, we addressed a leader’s central role in instilling ethical behavior in the organization. 

We  discussed  the  enormous  costs  that  firms  face  when  ethical  crises  arise—costs  in  terms  of  financial  and  reputational 

loss  as  well  as  the  erosion  of  human  capital  and  relationships  with  suppliers,  customers,  society  at  large,  and 

governmental agencies. And, as we would expect, the benefits of having a strong ethical organization are also numerous. 

We  contrasted  compliance-based  and  integrity-based  approaches  to  organizational  ethics.  Compliance-based  approaches 

are  largely  externally  motivated;  that  is,  they  are  motivated  by  the  fear  of  punishment  for  doing  something  that  is 

unlawful.  Integrity-based  approaches,  on  the  other  hand,  are  driven  by  a  personal  and  organizational  commitment  to 

ethical  behavior.  We  also  addressed  the  four  key  elements  of  an  ethical  organization:  role  models,  corporate  credos  and 

codes of conduct, reward and evaluation systems, and policies and procedures.

SUMMARY REVIEW QUESTIONS

1.   Three key activities—setting a direction, designing the organization, and nurturing a culture and ethics—are all part 

of what effective leaders do on a regular basis. Explain how these three activities are interrelated.

2.   Define emotional intelligence (EI). What are the key elements of EI? Why is EI so important to successful strategic 

leadership? Address potential “downsides.”

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 3.   The knowledge a firm possesses can be a source of competitive advantage. Describe ways that a firm can 

continuously learn to maintain its competitive position.

4.   How can the five central elements of “learning organizations” be incorporated into global companies?

5.   What are the benefits to firms and their shareholders of conducting business in an ethical manner?

6.   Firms that fail to behave in an ethical manner can incur high costs. What are these costs and what is their source?

7.   What are the most important differences between an “integrity organization” and a “compliance organization” in a 

firm’s approach to organizational ethics?

8.   What are some of the important mechanisms for promoting ethics in a firm?

373

key terms

leadership

setting a direction

designing the organization

excellent and ethical organizational culture

barriers to change

vested interest in the status quo

systemic barriers

behavioral barriers

political barriers

personal time constraints

power

organizational bases of power

personal bases of power

emotional intelligence (EI)

learning organizations

benchmarking

competitive benchmarking

functional benchmarking

ethics

organizational ethics

ethical orientation

compliance-based ethics programs

integrity-based ethics programs

corporate credo

experiential exercise

Select  two  well-known  business  leaders—one  you  admire  and  one  you  do  not.  Evaluate  each  of  them  on  the  five 

characteristics of emotional intelligence.

Emotional Intelligence Characteristics Admired Leader Leader Not Admired

Self-awareness

Self-regulation

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. Motivation

Empathy

Social skills

application questions & exercises

1.   Identify two CEOs whose leadership you admire. What is it about their skills, attributes, and effective use of power 

that causes you to admire them?

2.   Founders have an important role in developing their organization’s culture and values. At times, their influence 

persists for many years. Identify and describe two organizations in which the cultures and values established by the 

founder(s) continue to flourish. You may find research on the Internet helpful in answering these questions.

3.   Some leaders place a great emphasis on developing superior human capital. In what ways does this help a firm to 

develop and sustain competitive advantages?

4.   In this chapter we discussed the five elements of a “learning organization.” Select a firm with which you are 

familiar and discuss whether or not it epitomizes some (or all) of these elements.

ethics questions

1.   Sometimes organizations must go outside the firm to hire talent, thus bypassing employees already working for the 

firm. Are there conditions under which this might raise ethical considerations?

2.   Ethical crises can occur in virtually any organization. Describe some of the systems, procedures, and processes that 

can help to prevent such crises.

references

1.      Kimes, M. 2012. Bad to the bone.  Forbes , October 12:140-154; Loftus, P. 2011. 4 former Synthes executives sentenced to prison time for 

unapproved bone cement study.  www.orthostreams.com , December 13: np; Lotus, P. 2011. Corporate News: Former Synthes officers 

receive prison sentences.  Wall Street Journal , November 22: B4; and Synthes Annual Report, 2011.

2.      Charan, R. & Colvin, G. 1999. Why CEOs fail.  Fortune , June 21: 68–78.

3.      Yukl, G. 2008. How leaders influence organizational effectiveness.  Leadership Quarterly,  19(6): 708–722.

4.      These three activities and our discussion draw from Kotter, J. P. 1990. What leaders really do.  Harvard Business Review , 68(3): 103–111; 

Pearson, A. E. 1990. Six basics for general managers.  Harvard Business Review , 67(4): 94–101; and Covey, S. R. 1996. Three roles of the 

leader in the new paradigm. In  The leader of the future:  149–160. Hesselbein, F., Goldsmith, M., & Beckhard, R. (Eds.). San Francisco: 

Jossey-Bass. Some of the discussion of each of the three leadership activity concepts draws on Dess, G. G. & Miller, A. 1993.  Strategic

management:  320–325. New York: McGraw-Hill.

5.      García-Morales, V. J., Lloréns-Montes, F. J., & Verdú-Jover, A. J. 2008. The effects of transformational leadership on organizational

374

performance through knowledge and innovation.  British Journal of Management , 19(4): 299–319.

6.      Day, C., Jr. & LaBarre, P. 1994. GE: Just your average everyday $60 billion family grocery store.  Industry Week , May 2: 13–18.

7.      Martin, R. 2010. The execution trap.  Harvard Business Review , 88(7/8): 64–71.

8.      Collins, J. 1997. What comes next?  Inc. Magazine.  October: 34–45.

9.      Hsieh, T. 2010. Zappos’s CEO on going to extremes for customers.  Harvard Business Review , 88(7/8): 41–44.

10 .    Andersen, M. M., Froholdt, M. & Poulfelt, F. 2010.  Return on strategy.  New York: Routledge; and 2009 Huawei Annual Report.

11 .    Anonymous. 2006. Looking out for number one.  BusinessWeek , October 30: 66.

12 .    Schaffer, R. H. 2010. Mistakes leaders keep making.  Harvard Business Review , 88(9): 86–91.

13 .    For insightful perspectives on escalation, refer to Brockner, J. 1992. The escalation of commitment to a failing course of action.  Academy of

Management Review , 17(1): 39–61; and Staw, B. M. 1976. Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of commitment to a chosen course of 

action.  Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 16: 27–44. The discussion of systemic, behavioral, and political barriers 

draws on Lorange, P. & Murphy, D. 1984. Considerations in implementing strategic control.  Journal of Business Strategy , 5: 27–35. In a 

similar vein, Noel M. Tichy has addressed three types of resistance to change in the context of General Electric: technical resistance, 

political resistance, and cultural resistance. See Tichy, N. M. 1993. Revolutionalize your company.  Fortune , December 13: 114–118. 

Examples draw from O’Reilly, B. 1997. The secrets of America’s most admired corporations: New ideas and new products.  Fortune , 

March 3: 60–64.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 14 .    This section draws on Champoux, J. E. 2000.  Organizational behavior: Essential tenets for a new millennium.  London: South-Western; and 

The mature use of power in organizations. 2003.  RHR International-Executive Insights , May 29,  12.19.168.197/execinsights/8-3.htm .

15 .    An insightful perspective on the role of power and politics in organizations is provided in Ciampa, K. 2005. Almost ready: How leaders 

move up.  Harvard Business Review , 83(1): 46–53.

16 .    Pfeffer, J. 2010. Power play.  Harvard Business Review , 88(7/8): 84–92.

17 .    Westphal, J. D., & Graebner, M. E. 2010. A matter of appearances: How corporate leaders manage the impressions of financial analysts 

about the conduct of their boards.  Academy of Management Journal , 53(4): 15–44.

18 .    A discussion of the importance of persuasion in bringing about change can be found in Garvin, D. A. & Roberto, M. A. 2005. Change 

through persuasion.  Harvard Business Review , 83(4): 104–113.

19 .    Lorsch, J. W. & Tierney, T. J. 2002.  Aligning the stars: How to succeed when professionals drive results.  Boston: Harvard Business School 

Press.

20 .    Some consider EI to be a “trait,” that is, an attribute that is stable over time. However, many authors, including Daniel Goleman, have argued 

that it can be developed through motivation, extended practice, and feedback. For example, in D. Goleman, 1998, What makes a leader? 

Harvard Business Review , 76(5): 97, Goleman addresses this issue in a sidebar: “Can emotional intelligence be learned?”

21 .    For a review of this literature, see Daft, R. 1999.  Leadership: Theory and practice.  Fort Worth, TX: Dryden Press.

22 .    This section draws on Luthans, F. 2002. Positive organizational behavior: Developing and managing psychological strengths.  Academy of

Management Executive , 16(1): 57–72; and Goleman, D. 1998. What makes a leader?  Harvard Business Review , 76(6): 92–105.

23 .    EI has its roots in the concept of “social intelligence” that was first identified by E. L. Thorndike in 1920 (Intelligence and its uses.  Harper’s

Magazine , 140: 227–235). Psychologists have been uncovering other intelligences for some time now and have grouped them into such 

clusters as abstract intelligence (the ability to understand and manipulate verbal and mathematical symbols), concrete intelligence (the 

ability to understand and manipulate objects), and social intelligence (the ability to understand and relate to people). See Ruisel, I. 1992. 

Social intelligence: Conception and methodological problems.  Studia Psychologica , 34(4–5): 281–296. Refer to 

trochim.human.cornell.edu/gallery .

24 .    See, for example, Luthans, op. cit.; Mayer, J. D., Salvoney, P., & Caruso, D. 2000. Models of emotional intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. 

(Ed.).  Handbook of intelligence.  Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; and Cameron, K. 1999. Developing emotional intelligence 

at the Weatherhead School of Management.  Strategy: The Magazine of the Weatherhead School of Management , Winter: 2–3.

25 .    Tate, B. 2008. A longitudinal study of the relationships among self-monitoring, authentic leadership, and perceptions of leadership.  Journal

of Leadership & Organizational Studies , 15(1): 16–29.

26 .    Moss, S. A., Dowling, N., & Callanan, J. 2009. Towards an integrated model of leadership and self-regulation.  Leadership Quarterly , 20(2): 

162–176.

27 .    An insightful perspective on leadership, which involves discovering, developing and celebrating what is unique about each individual, is 

found in Buckingham, M. 2005. What great managers do.  Harvard Business Review , 83(3): 70–79.

28 .    Bryant, A. 2011.  The corner office.  New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 197.

29 .    This section draws upon Klemp. G. 2005.  Emotional intelligence and leadership: What really matters.  Cambria Consulting, Inc., 

www.cambriaconsulting.com .

30 .    Heifetz, R. 2004. Question authority.  Harvard Business Review , 82(1): 37.

31 .    Our discussion of competency companions draws on: Zenger, J. H., Folkman, J. R., & Edinger, S. K. 2011. Making yourself indispensable. 

Harvard Business Review , 89(10): 84–92.

32 .    Handy, C. 1995. Trust and the virtual organization.  Harvard Business Review , 73(3): 40–50.

33 .    This section draws upon Dess, G. G. & Picken, J. C. 1999.  Beyond productivity.  New York: AMACOM. The elements of the learning 

organization in this section are consistent with the work of Dorothy Leonard-Barton. See, for example, Leonard-Barton, D. 1992. The 

factory as a learning laboratory.  Sloan Management Review , 11: 23–38.

34 .    Senge, P. M. 1990. The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations.  Sloan Management Review , 32(1): 7–23.

375

35 .    Bernoff, J. & Schandler, T. 2010. Empowered.  Harvard Business Review , 88(7/8): 94–101.

36 .    Hammer, M. & Stanton, S. A. 1997. The power of reflection.  Fortune , November 24: 291–296.

37 .    Hannah, S. T. & Lester, P. B. 2009. A multilevel approach to building and leading learning organizations.  Leadership Quarterly , 20(1): 34

–48.

38 .    For some guidance on how to effectively bring about change in organizations, refer to Wall, S. J. 2005. The protean organization: Learning 

to love change.  Organizational Dynamics , 34(1): 37–46.

39 .    Covey, S. R. 1989.  The seven habits of highly effective people: Powerful lessons in personal change.  New York: Simon & Schuster.

40 .    Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. 2009. To lead, create a shared vision.  Harvard Business Review , 87(1): 20–21.

41 .    Kouzes and Posner, op. cit.

42 .    Melrose, K. 1995.  Making the grass greener on your side: A CEO’s journey to leading by servicing.  San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler.

43 .    Tekleab, A. G., Sims Jr., H. P., Yun, S., Tesluk, P. E., & Cox, J. 2008. Are we on the same page? Effects of self-awareness of empowering 

and transformational leadership.  Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies , 14(3): 185–201.

44 .    Helgesen, S. 1996. Leading from the grass roots. In  Leader of the future:  19–24 Hesselbein et al.

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be 

reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. 45 .    Bowen, D. E. & Lawler, E. E., III. 1995. Empowering service employees.  Sloan Management Review , 37: 73–84.

46 .    Easterby-Smith, M. & Prieto, I. M. 2008. Dynamic capabilities and knowledge management: An integrative role for learning?  British

Journal of Management , 19(3): 235–249.

47 .    Schafer, S. 1997. Battling a labor shortage? It’s all in your imagination.  Inc. , August: 24.

48 .    Meyer, P. 1998. So you want the president’s job …  Business Horizons , January–February: 2–8.

49 .    Imperato, G. 1998. Competitive intelligence: Get smart!  Fast Company , May: 268–279.

50 .    Novicki, C. 1998. The best brains in business.  Fast Company , April: 125.

51 .    The introductory discussion of benchmarking draws on Miller, A. 1998.  Strategic management:  142–143. New York: McGraw-Hill.

52 .    Port, O. & Smith, G. 1992. Beg, borrow—and benchmark.  BusinessWeek , November 30: 74–75.

53 .    Main, J. 1992. How to steal the best ideas around.  Fortune , October 19: 102–106.

54 .    Taylor, J. T. 1997. What happens after what comes next?  Fast Company , December–January: 84–85.

55 .    Sheff, D. 1996. Levi’s changes everything.  Fast Company , June–July: 65–74.

56 .    Isaacson, W. 1997. In search of the real Bill Gates.  Time , January 13: 44–57.

57 .    Holt, J. W. 1996.  Celebrate your mistakes.  New York: McGraw-Hill.

58 .    McGregor, J. 2006. How failure breeds success.  Bloomberg Businessweek , July 10: 42–52.

59 .    Bryant, A. 2011.  The Corner Office.  New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 34.

60 .    This opening discussion draws upon Conley, J. H. 2000. Ethics in business. In Helms, M. M. (Ed.).  Encyclopedia of management  (4th ed.): 

281–285; Farmington Hills, MI: Gale Group; Paine, L. S. 1994. Managing for organizational integrity.  Harvard Business Review , 72(2): 

106–117; and Carlson, D. S. & Perrewe, P. L. 1995. Institutionalization of organizational ethics through transformational leadership. 

Journal of Business Ethics , 14: 829–838.

61 .    Pinto, J., Leana, C. R., & Pil, F. K. 2008. Corrupt organizations or organizations of corrupt individuals? Two types of organization-level 

corruption.  Academy of Management Review , 33(3): 685–709.

62 .    Soule, E. 2002. Managerial moral strategies—in search of a few good principles.  Academy of Management Review , 27(1): 114–124.

63 .    Carlson & Perrewe, op. cit.

64 .    This discussion is based upon Paine. Managing for organizational integrity; Paine, L. S. 1997.  Cases in leadership, ethics, and

organizational integrity: A Strategic approach.  Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin; and Fontrodona, J. 2002. Business ethics across the Atlantic. 

Business Ethics Direct,  www.ethicsa.org/BED_art_fontrodone.html .

65 .    For more on operationalizing capabilities to sustain an ethical framework, see Largay III, J. A. & Zhang, R. 2008. Do CEOs worry about 

being fired when making investment decisions.  Academy of Management Perspectives , 22(1): 60–61.

66 .    See  www.ti.com/corp/docs/company/citizen/ethics/benchmark.shtml ; and  www.ti.com/corp/docs/company/citizen/ethics/quicktest.shtml .

67 .    Bryant, A. 2011.  The corner office.  New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 91.

68 .    Wetlaufer, S. 1999. Organizing for empowerment: An interview with AES’s Roger Sant and Dennis Bakke.  Harvard Business Review , 77

(1): 110–126.

69 .    For an insightful, academic perspective on the impact of ethics codes on executive decision making, refer to Stevens, J. M., Steensma, H. K., 

Harrison, D. A., & Cochran, P. S. 2005. Symbolic or substantive document? The influence of ethics code on financial executives’ 

decisions.  Strategic Management Journal , 26(2): 181–195.

70 .    Paine. Managing for organizational integrity.

71 .    For a recent study on the effects of goal setting on unethical behavior, read Schweitzer, M. E., Ordonez, L., & Douma, B. 2004. Goal setting 

as a motivator of unethical behavior.  Academy of Management Journal,  47(3): 422–432.

72 .    Williams, R. 2012. How competition can encourage unethical business practices.  business.financialpost.com , July 31: np.

73 .    Fulmer, R. M. 2004. The challenge of ethical leadership.  Organizational Dynamics , 33 (3): 307–317.

74 .     www.sarbanes-oxley.com .