sábado, 28 de agosto de 2010

Personality, perception and attribution + attitudes and values

Summary of the reading: "Organizational capital as competitive advantage of the firm"
Gregorio Martín-de-Castro, José Emilio Navas-López, Pedro López-Sáenz and Elsa Alama

The aim of the document, was for the authors to describe the characteristics of strategic resources and capabilities and why they are important within the organisation's frame, then according to some field work that they did in the Spanish knowledge Society Research Center they discuss the importance and the nature of intellectual capital. They also explain the concept of organizational capital.

To begin with resources and capabilities, the authors state that resources are basic units of production that are ready for the company, on the other hand, capabilities are organizational routines which happen from the combination and coordination of different resources. There is a key difference between both of them, mentioned in the document which is "resources are independent, simple and static, as opposed to capabilities that are collective, complex and dynamic." There are some relevant characteristics that they must complete:
  • Inimitability: They must be hard to copy for the competitors.
  • Value: The effectiveness of the resource in order to compete in a certain industry.
  • Apropiability: When the company owns the rents derived from both capabilities and resources.
  • Durability: Life expectancy of both.
  • Insubstitutability: There is no resource or capability that can replace them.
  • Non-transferability: Is not easy to buy or sell them in the market.
There is an author named Barney (1991) who states that "the resources that are simultaneously rare and valuable can generate competitive advantage, and if these resources are also hard to imitate, irreplaceable and hard to transfer, they will sustain the advantage".

Nowadays is known that almost all the economic wealth is derived from knowledge, but managing such valuable asset for the company is not an easy task because of its measuremet and identification. This knowledge can be clasified as "intellectual property assets that are focused on technological knowledge and infrastructure assets that are focused on organizational knowledge" according to Brooking (1996).

According to the study and workfield realized by the authors of this document at the Spanish Knowledge Society Research Center in Madrid, they could identify in the inellectual capital assets five components:
  • Human capital
  • Technological capital
  • Organizational capital
  • Business capital
  • Social capital
The authors focused their study in order to "justify the strategic analysis of the main components of organizational capital: culture, structure and organizational learning" .

Regarding culture as a sustainble competitive advantage for the organization the authors state that "organizational culture adds financial value for the company and relates it with the competitive environment". It is not easy to imitate because is not easy to describe, it implies history and certain conditions of the company itself, is difficult to transfer because it can't be bought or sold in a market and has a long life expectancy.
Secondly, the structure as a sustainable competitive advantage is difficult to imitate and transfer to competitors because it represents several ways of communication, cooperation and integration among the different members of the company.The last of all is the organizational learning as a sustainable competitive advantage we can say is the best of all because is hard to imitate, to transfer and to replace because it is related to every organization in particular, it is developed gradually in the company to all the people working there and it has a long life expectancy even if some members leave the company.

The Pygmalion effect

This concept was first introduced to explain the relation and the result of the power of expectations. All supervisor has at some extent expectations of its subordinates and at the same time they communicate this expectations in a conscious or unconscious way, in that way, people understand and read what they're communicating in also a consciuos or unconscious way and their performance strongly depends on the expectations they have understood and received from their supervisors.

For instance, if the supervisor has positive expectations and express it to a group of employees it is more feasible for the employees to reach their goal and keep motivated because what the supervisor thinks is very important and affects their performance in a positive way, in this case. But the opposite can happen too, the supervisor might not have much expectations on its team or perhaps in one employee in particular, so in this way, the performance of the team might not be very successful. The supervisor doesn't have necesarily to tell them in words what his expectations are but he can express it in an unsconscious way and the group might pick it up. For instance, he might talk and interact with the group more frequently than with one person in particular, so this person can feel forgotte, useless and pushed away by the supervisor, so in consequence, its performance might be lower that the rest of the group because is thinking that the supervisor doesn't have much hope or expectations on its role in the company.

There are challenges arising from the internationalization of the company because one has to deal with different cultures. For instance, if there is a person from a country where the hierarchical structure is very vertical and there is none or very little interaction between managers or supervisors and employees, and this person goes to a country where the hierarchical structure is horizontal and there is a lot of communication between managers and employees, meaning that has a low PDI (Power Distribution Index) is more feasible that in this situation the Pygmeon effect takes place more deeply than in the other country, not meaning that in countries with a high PDI cannot be seen but for instance the expectations from managers to employees can be communicated in a more unconsciuos manner. Going back to the person going to the country with low PDI, can be a critical change for its performance, because for instance he or she could feel more appreciated in the company just because for the fact that the manager is talking to him or her and might think that has very positive expectations about his or her work in this company.

The relation between national culture and organisational culture can be explained utilising the concept of the pygmalion effect, in the way that depending on the culture, there are forms of communication within a country and an organisation. For instance both cultures can coincide in the same and perhaps in this culture the expectations that the manager has over the employees will not be that strong for them in order to affect their performance, but on the other hand, the opposite case could happen as well.








1 comentario: