Organizational Dynamics最新文献

We believe that no level of competence or commitment will matter without the foundational leadership element of strong, well-developed character. Our conversations with global leaders reinforced our conviction that character development must be included in leadership conversations and development if we are going to help create leaders who are willing and able to tackle the grand challenges of our time and work towards a more prosperous, just, and inclusive society. The ultimate objective our paper is to encourage the reader to consider how each of us can raise the bar in our respective selves, teams, organizations, and communities by recognizing, measuring, fostering, and being leaders with good character. In short, we hope the reader comes to appreciate that character is not a niche topic or a nice-to-have. Simply put, character is utterly essential to good leadership and to individual and societal well-being.

Leaders experience high levels of ambiguity when successive waves of rapid change transform their markets. Meetings provide leaders with the most pervasive opportunity to address the implications of ambiguity. Sensemaking conversations generate a shared understanding that helps leaders and their team pierce through this ambiguity. The sharper perspectives and renewed mindsets developed through a disciplined and sustained sensemaking dialogue bring greater strategic clarity to a leadership team. Applying the tenets of sensemaking to a dynamic strategy making framework enables leadership teams to generate and test insights and assumptions, the prerequisite to generating the marketplace understanding that will lead to effective strategies. Through a thoughtful integration of sensemaking and strategy making, leaders are better able to focus on the critical change issues, ask questions that lead to insightful conversations, and manage inquiry and advocacy so that all members of the leadership team productively contribute to the dialogue. With the thoughtful combination of these two approaches, business teams can autonomously accelerate the development of winning strategies at times of ambiguity.

Over the past years, hybrid teams have emerged as a prevalent phenomenon in the new work arrangements. Effective inclusive leadership strategies are essential for leveraging the full potential of hybrid teams, fostering collaboration, achieving high performance, and improving team members’ well-being. Hybrid teams have members who frequently shift between co-located and remote working. This makes them face unique challenges with technology-mediated communication (e.g., trust development) and the leaders' need to balance the preferences and needs of co-located and remote team members. Leaders must ensure that all team members feel valued and included, regardless of location or schedule, in order to achieve team objectives and enhance well-being. This paper explores hybrid team leaders’ challenges in managing diversity, equity, and inclusion, offering evidence-based strategies and practical recommendations. Specifically, we emphasize strategies for building trust and psychological safety, leveraging diversity as a strength, promoting cross-cultural understanding, establishing clear communication channels, and encouraging collaboration. By empowering hybrid team leaders with these insights, the aim is to foster a culture of inclusion and create an environment where all team members feel valued, ultimately leading to enhanced individual and team performance and team member well-being.

Responsible integration of conversational agents (CAs) like chatbots is crucial for service firms to mitigate risks and foster positive outcomes. This article provides managerial guidelines through a Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR) lens, focusing on CDR Culture, Management Structure, and Digital Governance across the service firm, software provider, and customers/society. It examines how organizational sensemaking processes of creation, interpretation, and enactment are triggered by CA-related issues and events. The research highlights the role of generative AI (GenAI) in implementing CDR factors and responsible CA software development lifecycle phases during development and integration. Guidelines are provided for leveraging GenAI to enhance CDR Culture, incorporate ethical considerations into CDR Management Structure, and enable robust Digital Governance mechanisms to prioritize customer/societal well-being. A multilevel framework illustrates reinforcing the guidelines through organizational sensemaking processes, and fostering responsible CA integration aligned with ethical principles and societal values.

Service research and business ethics literature intersect concerning the question of artificial intelligence (AI) service robot accountability. In financial services, there is a broad spectrum of potential ethical issues, from data usage to customer vulnerabilities. This article scrutinizes the impact of morality and where accountability resides in the use of AI service robots in financial services. To address this challenge, we discuss the role of Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR) for firms and illustrate how to implement a conceptual framework on the ethical implications of AI service robot applications, drawing on normative ethical theory. The framework elaborates on how the locus of morality (from human to AI agency) and moral intensity combine within context-specific AI service robot applications, and how this might influence associated accountability. We provide examples of AI robots’ use for different purposes, differentiating between four 'accountability clusters': (1) professional norms, (2) business responsibility, (3) inter-institutional normativity, and (4) supra-territorial regulations cluster. We also discuss the CDR implications in different clusters. Ethical implications of using AI service robots and associated accountability challenges are relevant for a network of actors—from customers and designers to firms and the government. Implementation of the framework incorporates a range of internal and external stakeholders that firms need to consider. We also provide a CDR roadmap to incorporate a time perspective and to inform implementation efforts.

This paper delves into the concept of Societal Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR), expanding the traditional focus of CDR from direct stakeholders to a broader societal perspective. Societal CDR is defined is defined as the responsibility of companies to develop their digital business strategies considering the impacts on societal stakeholders and institutions. This novel approach emphasizes the indirect, yet significant effects of digital technologies on various societal domains such as economic, social, and political spheres. It underscores the importance of addressing passive stakeholder groups and societal institutions that do not have a direct relationship with businesses but are nevertheless impacted by digitalization. The paper discusses challenges in managing Societal CDR, such as measuring societal impact and influencing indirect stakeholders. It also explores the roles and responsibilities of businesses in fostering a thriving digital society by examining the vitality factors across economic, social, and political domains. The paper concludes with practical recommendations for businesses to integrate Societal CDR into their strategies, highlighting the importance of inclusivity, ethical practices, and transparency in the digital era

In this digital age, organizations are increasingly reliant on technology to drive business growth and innovation. With this reliance, comes an impetus for firms to responsibly and ethically manage their digital assets and data. In response, Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR) has been espoused as a means by which firms can address the competing demands of digital innovation and transformation and ethical responsibility. Ultimately, good CDR practices have the potential to safeguard not only firms, but the various stakeholders they interact with across their digital ecosystems. However, it is recognized that the resource investment required to do so, can come at a significant cost. The CDR Calculus has been developed to assist organizations in evaluating the risks and benefits associated with digital and data practices and to determine whether they align with the organization’s CDR objectives. This paper provides a roadmap of how firms can take steps to establish a culture of CDR practice in light of these tensions. We also recognize that external regulation is required, if not needed, to enforce and cement positive CDR practices as firms respond to growing digital demands.