Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Innate immune system wikipedia , lookup
Immune system wikipedia , lookup
Adaptive immune system wikipedia , lookup
Vaccination wikipedia , lookup
Immunosuppressive drug wikipedia , lookup
Psychoneuroimmunology wikipedia , lookup
Immunocontraception wikipedia , lookup
Concepts of Organizational Immunity Yihua Wang School of Economics and Management Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 10084 [email protected] Hongjun Cao School of Economics and Management Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 10084 [email protected] Chunlai Wu School of Economics and Management Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 10084 [email protected] Guangrui Guo School of Economics and Management Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 10084 [email protected] Ping Lv Chinese Academy of Science [email protected] Abstract Based on the organizational immunity research findings, the paper redefines the preliminary constructs of organizational immunity such as organizational immunity, organizational non-selves, organizational immune system, organizational immune capabilities and behaviors and organizational immune response modes. In this paper, we also put forward five basic propositions of organizational immunity: necessity, 1 moderation, limitation, lethality and dualism. Furthermore, we propose theoretical framework of research on organizational immunity. This framework underlines the evolution relationships among organizational non-selves, organizational diseases and organizational health under specific organizational background, strategic guidelines and ecological environments centering on organizational immune design and improvements. Introduction In the 2008 AOM annual meeting,James G. March reviewed the development of management post-war. At the end of his speech, March said “This is an impressive success story, a delicate combination of disciplinary rigidity and interdisciplinary tenacity”. He encouraged young scholars to break the deadlock of the discipline, and promote integration of disciplines; he advocated making use of individual psychology organizations to promote the development of theory, and researching the problem about identity, preference, routines, coherence, coordination, ambiguity and conflict and so on. In line with March, we have already started organizational immunity, an interdisciplinary. 1. Literature Review of organization immunity Through Searching academic journals , Such as the Strategic Management Journal, Academy of Management, Academy of Management Review, Administrative Science Quarterly, Organization Science, Organization Studies, Journal of Management, Journal of Management Studies, Journal of Business Research, 2 International Business Review, International Journal of Management Reviews, Journal of International Business Studies, etc., we find that "immunity" and "immune" in terms of strategic management and the management of all areas involved, such as internationalization (e.g.,, Delios & Henisz, 2003, (p.231)), M & A Theory (e.g., Davis & Stout, 1992 (p 606,609); Thornton, 2001 (p.302)), competition strategy (for example, Heil & Robertson, 1991 (p.414); Chen & MacMillan, 1992 (p.544)), organizational learning (e.g., Morris & Moore, 2000 (p.744); Orlikowski, 2002 (p.202)), organizational change (e.g., Ginsberg & Buchholtz, 1990 (p.447); Delacroix & Swaminathan, 1991 (p.643)) , innovations (e.g., Dougherty & Hardy, 1996 (p.1147)), corporate governance (e.g., Gomez-Mejia et al, 2001 (p.63); Porac et al, 1999 (p.127)), strategic alliances (e.g., Robertson & Gatignon, 1998 (p.517)), and so on. At the top Chinese journals, "immune" mainly exist in the banking, insurance and other financial areas (e.g., Wen zhongqiao, 2005, p.94). To sum up, immunity refers "keep... from ..." and "prevent ... ..." and "resist ... ....”. searching result showed that the majority of scholars with "immunity", "immune" and "immune" to make an metaphor to express themselves (Lv Ping, 2008, PhD thesis). Only a small number of scholars have put forward the concept of immune organizations, but no one systematically study its mechanism (Figure 1). Figure 1 authors thesis Basic content on immunity De Geus (1997) “The living company” How to deal with the invaders after the merger and acquisition • "Invasion" can be divided into good ones and bad ones. A company should learn from good ones and resist the bad ones. • build the response mechanism on the "invasion" . • "invaders" often be seen as a threat. the immune system to resist foreign culture, and result in 3 "inflammatory." Birkinshaw & Analysis on the of Ridderstrale(1999) phenomena the subsidiary of transnational corporations resisting the innovations ·The concept of the immune system: the system, structure, and tendency to resist innovations. • the nature of the immune system: the nature of the conservative, be afraid of strangers, unknown and risk threats. Subba arasimha (2001) Dynamic capabilities adaptation • immune analogy with dynamic capabilities, that is, the ability to produce the diversity of knowledge. • pointed out that the biological diversity of antigen recognition with immunization, and have a diversity of the antibodies ability to adapt to the environment. Li zhanxiang (2000) “contradictions Management Science” The nature management and of Immunity refers the physiological function of a body identify the “selves” and “non-selves” components and eliminate foreign bodies. immune abnormalities may have their own organizations injury. Immunity has three functions: defense, maintain and balance internal body, and supervise. • Corporation immunity refers to the competence of the body's physical ability. Since 2005, we have started to take metaphor research, case studies, and empirical research methods to have the following content (Figure 2). Figure 2 authors thesis Basic content on immunity Xu bo(2005) Strategic management and organizational adaptation. • Corporation immunity: the capabilities of a company to identify the inside and outside “non-self”, to eliminate the harmful factors and have a memory, so as to safeguard the health of company. • The functions of Corporation immunity: scanning, defense, self-stability. • The structure of Corporation immunity: Central Immunity, peripheral Immunity, special Immunity. • The responses of Corporation immunity: adaptive/specific Immunity, native/non specific Immunity. Strategic management and organizational adaptation. ·Four concepts about organizational immunity were proposed: Organizational non-self, organizational immunity, organizational health. ·A framework about organizational immunity were proposed: The inter-relation and evolvement of “An Exploring Study of organizational immunity.” Wang yihua & Lv ping(2006) “The Study on organizational immunity”. 4 Organizational immunity, Organizational Organizational disease, Organizational health. non-self, Song zhicheng ( 2006 ) “The evolvement of organizational immunity”. Strategic management and organizational adaptation. From perspectives of complex systematic theory and evolutionary theory, he studied two response modes and the organizational evolutionary interaction process. In the practical situation, there are four types of match between the enterprise system and its immunity system, right match, pro-match, lagging match and irrelative match. Su xiaoyang(2007) “An Exploring Study of Enterprise Immune Effectiveness” Strategic management and organizational adaptation. Almost every enterprise has the issue of how make the Actual State (AS) of Enterprise’s immune System (EIS) fit the Ideal State (IS) of EIS well in order to keep Enterprise being a “healthy” state. The degree of matching between the AS of EIS and the IS of EIS was named the Enterprise Immune Effectiveness (EIE). ·Offer a new perspective through new dimensions of quality state and quantity state to the Organizational adaptability Study. Lv ping (2008) “Research on the Behavior and Mechanism of Organizational Immunology” Strategic management and organizational adaptation. ·Proposed the concept of organizational immune behavior: non-specific immunology and specific immunology. She decomposed the non-specific immunology construct into organizational structure, rules and culture, and decomposed specific immunology construct into organizational scanning, defense and memory. ·Proposed the concept of immune recognition, defense and memory. ·Proposed the concept of organizational immune mechanism and organizational immune performance. 2. Basic concepts of organizational immunity and reconstruction of the theory We are convinced that the natural laws revealed by the medical immunity are of very important Enlightenment to mankind on how to design and improve organization's defense system. Based on our preliminary studies, we set forth the basic concepts of organizational immunity further. 2.1 What is organizational immunity? Organizational immunity is the self-organizing system, the ability and the act to, 5 dynamically, identify and remove harmful non-selves both inside and outside of the organization and remembers them, through which a corporate maintains healthy in an environment of great risk. The following aspects are involved to understand this construct: 2.2 What are organizational non-selves? Organizational non-selves are the targets of the organizational immunity function. They are various harmful factors that result in the shift of organizational goals, the disorder of the mechanisms and the abnormality of the organizational behaviors. They prevent organizations from adapting to the dynamic environment. Organizational non-selves are mainly classified into three categories: external non-self (external harmful factors), internal non-self (internal harmful factors) and the internal aging factors. In nature, organizational non-selves can also be divided into natural factors (ice disaster, earthquake, tsunami, etc.) and man-made factors (such as blending harmful substances in the milk powder, stock market speculation and the transfer of risks); or material factors (pollution, prices, poor quality, etc.) and spiritual factors (Poor sense of responsibility, rigid thinking, lose morale, and so on); or known and unknown factors; or common factors and lethal factors (leading to serious crisis, even organization death). Organization immunity ought to monitor various non-selves systematically, bear the corresponding immunity ability, take appropriate immunity acts, and pay special attention to identify and defense the attacks of the strange or deadly non-selves before it is too late. 2.3 Structure design of the organizational immunity system 6 The organizational immunity system is a complex self-organizing system with the capacity of evolution. In organization it consists of a lot of departments, posts, systems, culture, techniques, human resource etc. It can be divided into three parts: (1) central immunity system, which consists of the leaders of the immunity system (such as the Board of Directors, senior managers, etc.). The central immunity system affects the design, investment, emphasis and redirection of the immunity system. It also decides the status and the authenticity of the immunity system. (2) Full-time immunity system, which is specialized to identify, remove all types of hazards, and remember them. It is a subsystem of the immunity system, consisting of the board of supervisors, financial auditing department, quality control department, strategic warning department, technical information department, market research department, public relations department, performance appraisal department, and trade unions, etc. The range of its distribution, the effects of its capacity, the strength of its driving force and the direction of its effect have direct impact on the immunity of the organization. (3) Peripheral immunity system, which consists of all the other business sectors and supporting sectors (such as product development, procurement, marketing services, information systems, human resources, etc.). It realizes self-control, mutual supervision and positive feedback through the rules developed by the full-time immunity System in line with the direction designated by the central immunity system. Similar to the management idea of "the full people, the total factor, and the whole process" advocated by the TQC management theory, they form a powerful defense system consisting of all factors. The three sub-systems of the organizational immunity 7 system evolve in the process of division and cooperation. They promote each other in the process of mutual restraint. The central immunity system is the key subsystem that decides the ability level of the whole immunity system and the vitality of the systematical conduct. 2.4 Basic functions of organizational immunity In the organizational immunity system, the ability of immunity forms and immunity act bring about the functions of organizational immunity. The process of organizational immunity includes three reiterative conducts (recognize - defense memory). Recognition is the first step of immunity behavior, and its timeliness and accuracy directly impact the effectiveness of the clearance function and memory function; defense is the second act of immunity, its pertinence and validity directly impact the effectiveness of the immunity effect; memory is the third immunity act, its accuracy and its continuity directly impact the effectiveness and efficiency of future organizational immunity conduct. Immunity acts are based on the immunity ability, and, in turn, they promote the upgrading of immunity ability. 2.4.1 Organizational immunity recognition Organizational immunity recorganization is the function of systematically and dynamically identifying adverse external factors, harmful internal factors or internal aging factors. It’s a process of "monitor - find - judge - Transfer". In terms of time, it focus on not only the real non-selves, but also on the future non-selves; In nature, it focus on not only the known non-selves(such as illegal acts led by greed), but also on strange non-selves (such as the shortage of cash led by the crisis of second-grade 8 loan in the financial System) specially; in terms of scope, the immunity system not only aims at the non-selves "outside" of itself, but also at the non-selves in the immunity system itself. Immunity recognition is also a process of repeating cycle; deviation or invalid of immunity recognition will happen when the ability of any link is poor or the chain is broken. 2.4.2 Organizational immunity defense Organizational immunity defense is the function of organizations to resist or eliminate the harmful external factors, the harmful internal factors or the internal aging factors. It’s a coordination-elimination" process of "clone - variation - selection – on the premise of organizational immunity recognition. So-called cloning refers to capacity of rapid replication, training, learning, concentration amongst the factors’ (such as people, rules and system, culture, technology, etc.) related to the Organizational immunity system. So-called variation refers to the appropriate transformation and innovation(for example, the improvement of personal capacity, the adjustment of rules and regulations and the human resources restructuring, etc.) acting against the organizational non-selves during the cloning process of the factors related to immunity system in the central, full-time, and peripheral immunity system . The transformation and innovation occur in the interaction between individuals, teams and systems, and they help form new and effective organizational immunity behavior and capability. So-called selection refers to the capability to quickly and accurately select the best one from many elements of the immunity system and responding programs. So-called co-ordination refers to the 9 capability to coordinate the work steps, acts’ rhythm and the strength of the conduct, in order to avoid bottlenecks and imbalances. By the nature of the immunity defense, it aim at not only known non-selves, but at unknown non-selves; by the area it resists, it aims at not only the non-selves outside of the system, but also the non-selves inside of the immunity system itself. If there are some wrongs or disorders in the immunity system itself, the organizational immunity system will do great damage to the organizational health. 2.4.3 Organizational immunity memory Organizational immunity memory is the function to "record - sum - preserve disseminate" the acts and effects of the organizational immunity surveillance and immunity defense. By the nature, it remembers not only the success experience, but also the failure experience; by the scope, it remember the acts and effects not only inside the immunity system, but also outside the immunity system; by the means, it remember not only in the open way (such as to revise and improve the organizational structure, rules and regulations and the technical means), but also in hidden way (such as the raising awareness to the risk of the people, the improvement of mature degree in values, ways of thinking, emotion , and so on). Of course, the error or loss of organizational immunity memory will affect the future efficiency of immunity. 2.5 The innate and acquired immunity response of organizational immunity system 10 The mechanism of organizational immunity response – there are two types of immunity response mechanisms in organizational immunity system. One is the innate general immunity response, and the other is the acquired specific immunity response. (1) The innate general immunity response refers to the function to deal with any non-self to the organization that is designed and arranged at the beginning of the organization by the team of Entrepreneurs. Its maturation degree is affected by the entrepreneur's experience in the past, and by the environment in which an organization lives. It is natural that in good economic situation, most of the entrepreneurs are so busy in making money, paying very little attention to designing and building the immunity system (for example, only set up financial monitoring system), that the function of innate general immunity system to " recognize - defense remember " is not complete, and its effect is limited; and those who have experienced setbacks or are familiar with international norms of business management, will pay more attention to the design and construction of the business innate immunity system in the first place. (2)The acquired immunity response mechanism is formed step by step in the process of growth, after encountering some types of non-selves. The organization has a potential to deal with all types of non-selves, and to maintain their health through learning. Therefore, the function of acquired immunity to" recognize defense - remember" has the features of pertinence, diversity, optimization and of from passive to active. The acquired immunity response mechanism for those known non-selves in the organization will form routines that lead to much better efficiency and effectiveness 11 (For example, the general quality testing in Eron). The innate Immunity response mechanism for unknown non-selves is facing greater challenges. Human beings have not been able to identify and overcome HIV or SARS virus, and many people have lost their lives. This has promoted greater investment in medical research, and has led to medical development in-depth. The enterprises are facing the same problems now. The more risks in the environment, the more unknown organizational non-selves there are; the greater costs the organization waste; the more an organization spends in acquired immunity, the more powerful, flexible, fast, accurate ability to "surveillance - find - judge - transfer" of immunity recognition is needed. It is the same to the ability to "clone - vary - select – coordinate-eliminate " of the immunity defense and the ability to " record - sum - preserve - disseminate" of the immunity memory. Otherwise, the organization can not be sustained survival. Those enterprises without the strength to bear against unknown non-selves, or those enterprises without enough resources to build acquired immunity capacity will be in trouble. Inferred from the Classification Model of Environmental Risk ( Burgelman, 2003) , the more turbulent in the risk environment, i.e. the general environment and the players in industry changing at the same time, the more intensive the change of organization's business model will be. Thus, the acquired immunity response mechanism of the organizational defense systems is of particular importance. 12 surveillance record clone vary find sum select judge preserve coordinate transfer eliminate disseminate 2.6 organizational immunity's basic proposition immune: Proposition 1: Organizational immunity is a "self-organizing" organization. It is a complex system and open to organization and environments, interaction and evolution with the organization and environment. Proposition 2: Organizational immunity is of an "absolute necessity” organization. Immune system is necessary to all lives; without efficient immune system, human body may die. Particularly, in the risk environment, specific immune functions of the organization difficult to shake off a weak disease or death fate. 13 Proposition 3: Being appropriate and moderate is necessary for organizational immunity to function well. Either hypersensitive or immunodeficiency can make an organization sick even dead. Only when it functions appropriately and moderately, can organizational immunity keep the organization healthy for good. Proposition 4: Organizational immunity function comes with limitation. Immunity system just cannot rescue an organization in any condition, especially, when it is atrocious. Organization immunity system can only function normally when the environment bears the least conditions for an organization to survive. Proposition 5: Autoimmune damage can be fatal. Immunity system should be the guard of an organization, but when it cannot indentify and resist fatal non-selves, serious disease of itself can make the organization dead. 3. A working framework for organizational immunity research Organizational immunity involves four constructs. They are (1) organization non-self, (2) organization health, (3) organization disease, and (4) organization therapy, which are to be defined. Organizational immunity functions under an ecological circumstance of organizations and strategy. Thus we propose a working framework for future organizational immunity research (Figure 3). Figure 3 14 Organizational health Organizational non-self Organizational therapy Organizational immunity Organization Strategy Organizational disease Environment 4. Foundations and research methodology of organizational immunity. The organizational immunity is based on the theories of strategic management and organization theory, biology and medical immunology, and complexity systems theory. As study of cross-disciplinary, we will explore the organizational immunity’s contribution to the theory of organizational adaptation. Our research will be guided by the basic method (case study, empirical analysis, deductive reasoning, biological metophor), and absorption of research methods of biology and systems science (Figure 4). 15 Figure 4 Biological Immunology Business Management Organizational Immunology Complex System Theories Acknowledgement Organizational Immunity Research has just begun; there are a lot of areas to explore. Sincerely thanks to the following persons who had given us understanding, encouragement, criticism and direction in our studying. Without their helpness, our research can not come today. They are: 1. Chinese scholars: Tsinghua University: (Chen Guoquan, Yang Baiying, Weijie, Jin Zhanming, Ning Xiangdong); Peking University :(Zhou Changhui, Wu Yajun); Xian jiaotong University (Li Yuan); Nanjing University: (Liu Hong), Zhejiang University ( Weijiang), Renmin University of China (Li zhanxiang, Wang Fengbin, Qin Zhihua). 2. Foreign scholars: Mintzberg, Mingfang Li, Burgelman, Justin Tan, Lewin, Eisenhaldt, Child, Galaskwikwicz, Donald D. Davis. References Birkinshaw J, Ridderstrale J. Fighting the corporate immune system: A process study of subsidiary initiatives in multinational corporations. International Business 16 Review, 1999, 8(2):149-180. Burgelman R. A., Christensen C.M. & Wheelwright S. C.. Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation. 2003. McGraw-Hill/Irwin press. Chen M J, MacMillan I C. Nonresponse and Delayed response to competitive moves: The roles of competitor dependence and action irreversibility. Academy of Management Journal, 1992, 35(3):539-570. Davis G F, Stout S K. Organization theory and the market for corporate control: A dynamic analysis of the characteristics of large takeover targets, 1980-1990. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1992, 37(4):605-633. De Geus A. The living company: Habits for survival in a turbulent business environment. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 1997. Delacroix J, Swaminathan A. Cosmetic, speculative, and adaptive organizational change in the wine industry: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1991, 36(4):631-661. Delios A, Henisz W J. Policy uncertainty and the sequence of entry by Japanese frims, 1980-1998. Journal of International Business Studies, 2003, 34(3):227-241. Dougherty D, Hardy C. Sustained product innovation in large, mature organizations: Overcoming innovation-to-organization problems. Academy of Management Journal, 1996, 39(5):1120-1153. Ginsberg A, Buchholtz A. Converting to for-profit status: Corporate responsiveness to radical change. Academy of Management Journal, 1990, 33(3):445-477. Gomez-Mejia L R, Nunez-Nickel M, and Gutierrez I. The role of family ties in 17 agency contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 2001, 44(1):81-95. Heil O, Robertson T S. Toward a theory of competitive market signaling: A research agenda. Strategic Management Journal, 1991, 12(6):403-418. Li zhanxiang. Contradictions Management Science. Economics and management press.2000. Lv ping. Research on the Behavior and Mechanism of Organizational Immunology. 2008. Dissertation for the degree of PhD.. Morris M W, Moore P C. The lessons we (don’t) learn: Counterfactual thinking and organizational accountability after a close call. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2000, 45(4):737-765. Orlikowski W J. Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 2002, 13(3):249-273. Porac J F, Wade J B, Pollock T G. Industry categories and the politics of the comparable firm in CEO compensation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999, 44(1):112-144. Robertson T S, Gatignon H. Technology development mode: A transaction cost conceptualization. Strategic Management Journal, 1998, 19(6):515-531. Song zhicheng. The evolvement of organizational immunity. 2006. Dissertation for the degree of M.A. SubbaNarasimha P N. Strategy in turbulent environments: The role of dynamic competence. Managerial and Decision Economics, 2001, 22(4/5):201-212. Su xiaoyang. An Exploring Study of Enterprise Immune Effectiveness”. 18 2007.Dissertation for the degree of M.A.. Thornton P H. Personal versus market logics of control: A historically contingent theory of the risk of acquisition. Organization Science, 2001, 12(3):294-311. Wen zhongqiao.Study on the Immunization of Interest Risk of the Investment in Government Bonds. The Journal of Quantitative & Technical Economics ,2005(8):93-101. Wang yihua et. al.. The study on organizational immunity. Science of Science and Management of S.& T. 2006(6):133-139. Xu bo. An Exploring Study of organizational immunity. 2005. Dissertation for the degree of M.A. 19