BCom_Principles of Management_M5_v1

channels and figuring out which ones work best for which team members are crucial steps. Providing a safe space for interaction and conversation away from the manager is one of the most frequently overlooked aspects of team building. A staff room is necessary for teams. Members frequently generate ideas that they are hesitant to share in public. Teams require them, and ignoring this requirement eliminates the possibility of a more open exchange of ideas. When possible and appropriate, accomplishments should be acknowledged and celebrated as a group. Organizations use a variety of methods to accomplish this, including sending greeting cards or gift certificates from websites dedicated to these purposes, creating a periodic newsletter and email with a section for accolades, establishing a peer-to-peer award system, and sending greeting cards or gift certificates from websites dedicated to these purposes. The principles of good team management are similar to the concepts of good management of anyone or anything. 9.2.4 Characteristics of High Performing Teams’ Members • Share a common purpose / goals • Build relationships for trust and respect • Balance task and process • Plan thoroughly before acting. • Involve members in clear problem-solving and decision making procedures • Respect and understand each others’ “diversity” • Value synergism and interdependence • Emphasize and support team goals • Reward individual performance that supports the team. • Communicate effectively • Practice effective dialogue instead of debate Identify and resolve group conflicts • Vary levels and intensity of work • Provide a balance between work and home. • Critique the way they work as a team, regularly and consistently • Practice continuous improvement • Creating a team environment 9.2.5 Practices to Facilitate Development of Teams in Organisations Organisation Development facilitators should help organisations to hire team players by putting all job seekers through severe office-wide inspection. Teamwork should be a criterion in performance appraisals and performance incentives should be created in such a way that they are group-based. Conflicts within a team should be settled as soon as possible. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 151

Employees’ mutual bickering can lead to unresolved issues, which can undermine office morale and productivity. Organizations are using paid ombudsmen to assist employees in getting along and resolving workplace issues. Because disagreements in work groups are common, prompt actions to reduce tensions and build interpersonal commitment should be implemented. A strong leader must nurture a positive team relationship. Leaders may adhere to the belief that success is centred on individuals, but the importance of a strong group should not be overlooked. Team members would communicate more effectively if they had more effective interpersonal engagement. The OD process should result in the creation of a comprehensive and long-term in-house leadership training programme that promotes collaboration. Employees should be able to learn how to deal with a variety of personalities through the training programmes. Team members should be capable of avoiding reciprocal rudeness and maintaining unconditional politeness as the intervention progresses, escaping the trap of cliques, preventing polarisation of members into opposing factions, propagating the value of teams, overcoming the phenomenon of groupthink, which occurs as a result of an excessive demand for unanimity and the illusion of group invulnerability, and understanding the power of group synergy as the intervention progresses. 9.3 Organisational Innovation 9.3.1 Definition of Innovation Innovation is the process of obtaining and implementing new ideas in order to meet the needs of an organization’s stakeholders. It’s the process of turning new information into new products and services. It’s all about adding value and enhancing efficiency, and so expanding your firm. It’s a spark that keeps businesses and individuals pushing forward and higher. “Without innovation, new goods, services, and ways of doing business would never emerge, and most businesses would be trapped doing the same old things in the same old way for the rest of their lives.” Hard versus Soft Innovation Hard Innovation is a type of organised R&D that involves strategic investment in innovation, whether it’s high-risk, high-return radical innovation or low-risk, low-return gradual innovation. Soft Innovation refers to intelligent, insightful, and beneficial ideas that can come from anyone in the organisation. Competitive advantage, growth, and profitability are all dependent on innovation. Strategy innovation, new product development, creative approaches to problem Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 152

resolution, idea management, recommendation systems, and so on are all aspects of the discipline of innovation. Innovation is not a one-off or a linear process, but rather a system. It is the result of intricate interactions between a large number of people, organisations, and the environment in which they operate. Companies that are successful in achieving the full value of their technologies and innovations can supplement their technological advancements with complementary skills in other areas of their organisation, such as production, distribution, human resources, marketing, and customer service. Innovation necessitates a shift in perspective, as well as risk and disruption. Innovation isn’t carried out only for the sake of it. There must be a driving force that pushes the organisation to create the processes, resources, and culture that will promote innovation. That driver in today’s climate is survival in a world of fast change. Customers are at the centre of innovation, as well as the bottom line. The goal of innovation is to create new and better ways to satisfy customers while also meeting the needs of all other stakeholders and ensuring that the company remains financially sustainable. Innovation necessitates an ethical foundation because it can only thrive in an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect, not only within the organisation but also in the surrounding community and global environment. Only such businesses are capable of developing really innovative solutions to issues and opportunities. Innovation necessitates innovative thinking, which is a quality that every employee must possess. It’s the ability to constantly seek out new opportunities, produce ideas, work collaboratively to solve problems, make informed judgments, and achieve the commitment required for speedy and efficient implementation. Prior preconceptions and the way things have traditionally been done are left aside in order to look at possibilities with a fresh viewpoint, and innovation begins with a clean slate. Innovation considers the entire system. It’s not innovation when you create solutions in one area that produce issues in another. It’s anarchy. A diversified, information- and interaction-rich environment is required for innovation. A diversified, information- and interaction-rich environment is required for innovation. The sole source of innovation is people with various perspectives working together toward a shared goal with accurate, up-to-date information and the right tools. A risk-tolerant atmosphere is required for innovation. The act of creating something new is fraught with danger and the prospect of failure. Nice tries that don’t work are valued as learning experiences and part of the innovation process in an innovative atmosphere. Every person of the organisation is involved in and rewarded for innovation. “Thinkers” and “doers,” “owners” and “workers” no longer exist. Innovation necessitates everyone’s best thinking and acting, and it regards everyone as a “owner,” sharing the benefits earned by their best efforts fairly. The process of innovation is never-ending. It will never be a static condition that can be put on a shelf and forgotten about once accomplished. It necessitates Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 153

continual regeneration, reinvention, and commitment. Only by cultivating an environment in which every person of the organisation is constantly learning more about its goods, services, processes, customers, technology, industry, and environment can an organisation successfully innovate year after year. 9.3.2 Blocks to Innovation Managers have a proclivity to foster self-defeating behaviours. Beliefs that daydreaming and thought are pointless and that playfulness is reserved for children stifle invention. Reason, logic, numbers, and practicality are all wonderful, but feelings and intuition are far better. Similarly, believing that issue solving is a serious industry in which no comedy or fun is permitted would stifle innovation. Other roadblocks include a preference for tradition over change and the perception of being less innovative. Fear of failure, inability to tolerate ambiguity and hang out till the best answer can be found, difficulty to relax or incubate, or an extreme desire to succeed quickly are all examples of self-imposed or emotional blocks that can stifle innovation. Innovations may be hampered by a lack of tenacity, stress, or sadness. Lack of cooperation and trust among coworkers, dictatorial management, too many distractions and easy intrusions, and a lack of acknowledgement or support for ideas and their implementation are all examples of work obstacles. Lack of or erroneous information, insufficient talent to express or record ideas verbally, visually, or quantitatively, and a lack of intellectual challenge can all cause intellectual or expressive blocks. Threats to innovation include societal pressures, information overload, and the urge to stay up, as well as the acceleration of life and time. If at least 25% of a company’s revenue comes from products and services produced in the last five years, it can be considered innovative. Outperform the competition in areas such as customer service, quality, time to market, return on investment, and profitability; routinely solicit, listen to, and act on suggestions from people at all levels and functions of the organisation; encourage and stimulate interaction between departments and promote cross-functional projects and improvement processes such as Total Quality Management, reengineering, excellence, and others; and regularly train people at all levels and in all aspects of the organisation. It is critical that people in organisations have time to think through situations, look at the big picture, improvise ideas, and experiment with possibilities on a regular basis; information should be freely and readily available to everyone in the organisation rather than being restricted to those who have a need to know. Organizations should examine and update their assumptions, mission, and goals on a regular basis, and everyone in the organisation should be encouraged to do so. Through equity ownership plans or profit sharing schemes, ownership, incentives, and risks will be dispersed widely within the organisation. To be more Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 154

creative, people can be educated, encouraged, coached, or counselled. Employees can readily be encouraged to develop four core creative strengths: flexibility, fluency, elaboration, and originality. 9.3.3 The Seven Levels of Change Model Change can be categorised into seven categories of complexity, ranging from simple to very impossible. Each successive level is more radical, intricate, and difficult than the one before it. This Levels of Change methodology may be applied to any department, division, or organization’s aspirations and then embedded in its goals, culture, and day-to-day operations. The model soon becomes an intrinsic component of organisational behaviour as a group advances from learning to doing. Level 1: Efficiency—Doing Things Right The theme for Level 1 is Efficiency. Learning to do things correctly is the simplest adjustment to make. This is frequently done with the assistance of an expert who is familiar with the operation and can explain conventional practises in order to increase efficiency. Level 1 changes are mostly personal adjustments to new norms and processes; they are low-risk and low-effort. Level 2: Effectiveness—Doing The Right Things Effectiveness is the theme at Level 2. An organisation creates a big picture by first learning everything there is to know about a particular activity, then focusing on the activities that will make the biggest difference. According to the Pareto Principle, 20 percent of all actions produce 80 percent of the payoff. To maximise efficiency, focus your efforts on the 20% (the proper things) and apply Level 1 thinking to Level 2 priorities to get the job done correctly. Continuous improvement is frequently defined as doing the right things and doing them correctly at the same time. A competent person has made enough Level 1 and Level 2 modifications to feel at ease in a new setting. As a result, progressing through Levels 1 and 2—efficiency and effectiveness—requires essentially personal transformation. Level 3: Cutting—Doing Away With Things The theme for Level 3 is cutting. The Pareto Principle is used by experts to eliminate the 80 percent of actions that provide only 20% of the value and divert those resources to higher degrees of change. In its most basic form, Level 3 change focuses on waste elimination. Major effects can be gained if this is done in a systemic manner, keeping all organisational Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 155

links, processes, and subsystems in mind. Practitioners at this level must take the initiative to correct procedures quickly, readily, and inexpensively, without seeking clearance from top management. Level 3 modifications are low-risk and low-effort, yet they can increase an organization’s efficiency and visibility both internally and externally. Level 4: Enhancing—Doing Things Better The theme for Level 4 is “Better.” Experts examine an organization’s core activities (the fruitful 20% left after Level 3) to see how they might be improved. There are methods for speeding up testing, moving up deadlines, increasing functionality, and reducing downtime. Large-scale initiatives to bring about Level 4 improvements in conjunction with Level 3 are known as work process redesigns. Level 4 adjustments improve the effectiveness, efficiency, productivity, or value of anything. Level 5: Copying—Doing Things Other People are Doing At Level 5, the theme is Copying. We see here the first clear transition from incremental thinking to fundamental change. Copying, learning from others, and “reverse engineering” can dramatically boost innovation, quickly and more cheaply than starting from scratch. Benchmarking how other laboratories operate (regardless of their industry) and then enhancing their discoveries and achievements (using Level 4 change) is the hallmark of the adaptable innovator. Many managers are still uncomfortable at this level, partly because they are inwardly focused and therefore remain unaware that others are doing things worth copying. In many organisations, a “Not Invented Here” mentality resists imitation, forcing continual reinvention of the wheel. Level 6: Different—Doing Things No One Else is Doing The topic for Level 6 is “Different.” By doing something really different or very differently, we take a fork in the road. Such foresight and risk-taking can result in truly innovative products, typically by combining seemingly unrelated concepts, technology, or components—or by completely changing one’s perspective on a product’s potential uses. In process-oriented operations, Level 6 combines Levels 3, 4, and 5—cutting, augmenting, copying, and adapting—into reengineering: revolutionising processes and procedures to the point that they are no longer identifiable. Level 7: Impossible—Doing What Can’t be Done Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 156

Too often, technology, market constraints, budget constraints, or corporate culture appear to be insurmountable obstacles. At this level, breakthroughs are typically based on paradigm shifts or bold visions. They create expeditions into the unknown that are daring, bright, meaningful, and long-term. Change at this level represents the most creative thought and is nearly often perceived as a revolutionary or stunning break from tradition by others. Few such improvements are executed as intended; instead, they are bombarded with Level 4 comments aimed at removing their flaws. Those who survive are more likely to develop bursts of inventive thinking, performance, or technology. Level 7 modifications have the potential to modify or create a new industry. For example, Lockheed Corporation’s renowned Skunk Works has consistently achieved quantum leaps in aircraft and space technologies. Lower levels of change imply gradual progress, whilst larger levels result in revolutionary breakthroughs. 9.3.4 Learning Organisation A learning organisation is one that is always learning and evolving. All businesses evolve, although not always in a positive way. An individual can learn but not share what they’ve learned with the organisation. Organizations, on the other hand, can learn and not share that information with lower-level employees. A learning organisation is one that is more capable of learning, adapting, and changing. It’s a company where learning processes are studied, developed, monitored, and linked with the company’s innovative goals. Cummings and Worley (Cummings and Worley, 1993). Maintaining an organization’s position in a continuously changing environment is crucial in today’s global competitive marketplace. A learning organisation can absorb and apply knowledge faster than its competitors, giving it a competitive advantage. Organizational learning has become the fastest increasing intervention in organisational development as a result of the requirement to survive in a changing market. New strategies are surfacing that promise businesses the ability to become learning organisations. According to Locke and Jain, those who claim that the rate at which individuals and organisations learn may become the sole sustainable competitive advantage, especially in knowledge-intensive industries, provide the best case yet for organisational learning (1995). A learning organisation is one whose key competency is the rapid transformation of new technologies into goods. A continuous improvement mindset, customer focus, team relationships, flat and adaptable organisational structures, empowerment, and vision- and value-driven leadership are all characteristics of a successful organisation. Many organisations prioritise meeting static objectives, supervisor emphasis, highly hierarchical connections, vertical and inflexible organisational structures, rule compliance, and control- oriented leadership. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 157

An OD practitioner may stress an open systems framework, construct models for defining shared organisational visions, and create approaches to mental models when examining the impact of OD on organisation learning. The concept of a learning organisation is congruent with OD theories, however there is a significant disparity between the number of descriptive publications and the number of experiments on the issue. OD hasn’t always been about establishing learning organisations. The definition of a learning organisation has a variety of consequences for organisational development. To begin, there must be a dramatic shift in OD’s focus from change theories to theories that promote change and learning. A new way of thinking about organisational action and improvement must be learned. Creating systems to collect information and enable knowledge generation, as well as promoting continual transformation, are all part of organisational learning. Organisations Learn Individual learning is the only type of learning that exists, and there is no such thing as organisational learning save in the abstract. All learning takes place inside people’s heads, and an organisation can only learn from its members or by swallowing new members with fresh knowledge that the organisation didn’t have before. 1995 (Locke and Jain) With this in mind, it’s also a good idea to categorise learning into three categories: individual, group, and organisational. Learning organisations focus on organisational learning at the system level. It is more than just the total of an employee’s mental capacity and learning abilities. It happens when companies merge and then institutionalise their employees’ intellectual capital and learning, as well as their key skills. Organizations also serve as safe havens for learning, which is preserved in people’s memories and ideals, as well as in the collective memory of the organisation in the form of policies, procedures, and written documents. Learning organisations develop procedures that facilitate the collection and sharing of information across the organisation, ensuring that all employees have access to the same information. They instil new structures and behaviours in people, allowing for more effective learning. Over time, organisations sustain habits, conventions, beliefs, and “mental maps.” An organization’s culture evolves as it addresses and resolves survival challenges. It also builds core competencies that reflect all of its employees’ aggregate learning, both past and present. Because they are part of the culture, knowledge and competencies are transferred as new members of the organisation enter and old members leave. Most conceptualizations of organisational learning are founded on the premise that there is a higher order of learning involved than the type of technical, skill-based learning associated with training departments. Individuals benefit from a deeper level of cognitive and transformative learning. It is not a Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 158

rote talent to learn to modify or change one’s ideas, structures, or habits. Learning is a continuous transformation of the mind, not a one-time makeover of an organisation. Some suggest that this will need a shift in OD practise from OD as an exclusive practise of experienced professionals to OD as a tool that must be provided to a large number of people inside the organisation. Effects of Organisational Learning Experiences Organizations can learn the wrong thing, such as how to make something that no one wants, or come to incorrect conclusions. Learning does not always assist the organization’s goals, and scholars must shift their focus from viewing organisational learning as an “efficient” tool to recognising its “inefficiencies.” There are some unfavourable performance consequences discussed. When an organisation views certain findings as learning outcomes when there is little or no link between actions and outcomes, this is known as superstitious learning. In most cases, a variety of elements work together to achieve an organisational outcome. Success learning entails determining that what worked in the past will continue to work in the future. When the business environment changes dramatically, this can be terrible. When an organisation chooses an inferior technology based on its initial experimentation and continues to use it despite the availability of superior technologies, it falls into a competency trap. 1995 (Locke and Jain) Process through which Organisations Learn Organisational learning consists of four interrelated processes: discovery, intervention, production, and generalization. The learning process begins with the discovery of errors or rifts between actual and desired conditions. Diagnosing includes finding the cause of the gap and inventing appropriate solutions to close it. Production processes involve implementing solutions and generalization includes drawing conclusions about the effect of the solutions and applying that knowledge to other relevant situations. These four learning processes help the organisation’s members to generate knowledge necessary to change and improve the organisation. (Cummings and Worley, 1993) Most organisational learning models emphasise leadership and management, culture, and communication, information, and knowledge systems. Leaders and managers in learning organisations provide important support for team and individual learning. Leaders and managers have the power to shape a positive learning environment. They have the ability to provide learning-supporting systems. Personal development programmes, job rotations, and Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 159

assignments across multiple divisions can all benefit in the growth of individuals’ knowledge, skills, and capacities. Managers in a learning environment encourage employees to share ideas, even going so far as to ask their input and provide feedback on their ideas. People’s commitment to learning is strengthened when information is provided on a regular basis across the organisation. Organisations learn from direct experience and from the experience of others. Learning from direct experience generally involves working through incremental refinement procedures. The rational for learning from direct experience comes from the common observation that practice improves performance. It involves a systematic “organisational search” whereby the organisation “draws from a pool of alternative routines, adopting better ones when they are discovered” and/or trial and error experimentation. Learning from the experience of others may involve a number of approaches, ranging from merely observing others to actively seeking knowledge from outside the organisation, then using it to improve its own processes and performance. (Locke and Jain, 1995) The normative, developmental, and capacity perspectives on learning and change are the three viewpoints on learning and change. Companies’ paths to becoming learning organisations are shaped by these various approaches. Organizations learn only when specific circumstances are met, according to normative and developmental approaches. Normative-based approaches are the most prevalent, and firms that use them start by deciding to use learning to achieve a specific business goal. Leaders are crucial because they set the tone, establish the vision, and construct the supporting structures and systems. Internal task forces assess individual commitment, assist in identifying current and future situations, measure and prioritise shortcomings, and decide where and how to intervene. Normative techniques encourage people to try new things. The outcomes of these new efforts are regularly monitored and used to alter interventions, launch new project phases, and evaluate the learning organisation strategy on a regular basis. Companies become learning organisations through stages, according to developmental methodologies. These techniques promote organisational-wide development efforts and seek fundamental changes in an entire system. The awareness that the organisation is not reaching its objectives is the starting point for developmental initiatives. A consultant will often work with the company’s leaders to conduct an evaluation utilising diagnostic tools to track progress through each stage. Various elements of the organisation may advance at different periods, thus the transition from one stage to the next does not have to be smooth. Capability-based approaches presume that, regardless of the circumstances, organisations learn naturally as they respond to change. It is based on the premise that no single method Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 160

of learning is superior to another. An organization’s current learning patterns must be discovered, confirmed, and enhanced in order to improve learning. Leaders must recognise these trends in order to make educated decisions about what should be learned, who should learn it, and when and where learning should take place. These strategies are reactive rather than proactive, and they “unfold as journeys of discovery” in which consultants and leaders encourage the firm to unearth insights about the greatest types of learning. The three perspectives are reflected in a range of effective diagnostic instruments. The focus of all of the tools is on organisational learning. Some of these instruments are solely for individual and team development, and the majority of them assess learning on two or three levels. The majority place a premium on systems and processes that facilitate the flow of information between people, manage knowledge, and reward learning in performance reviews. Most also emphasise a culture that prioritises learning while also caring for employees. Factors that can Undermine Organisational Learning Organizations are frequently confronted with a variety of learning hurdles, the most significant of which is a lack of learning orientation. It will be useful to identify probable barriers to avoid in order to determine the tools and approaches of organisational learning. Individual and group-level, organisational, and environmental barriers to organisational learning can all be divided into three groups. Because an organisation can only learn through its members, any learning constraints that the members have will impede organisational learning. 1995 (Locke and Jain) According to Argyris, the majority of people, including highly skilled and successful professionals, lack the ability to learn. An active mind is a basic necessity for learning. Lack of learning is mostly caused by a failure to think, either via inactivity or a willful reluctance to think in general or about a specific subject. Some people are unable to learn from their mistakes because they are unable to comprehend the significance and implications of what occurred previously. The most effective learners are said to be the most cognitively engaged, able to grasp what happened in the past and predict what will happen in the future Argyris (Argyris, 1993). At the organisational level, learning barriers include corporate culture, managerial practises (for example, protective routines), reward mechanisms, and a focus on organisational consensus, all of which can lead to groupthink and organisational stagnation, limiting learning and future growth. Others include a concentration on exploitation of existing capabilities and opportunities rather than exploitation and experimentation, as well as a failure of the organisation to transform newly obtained knowledge into organisational rules, processes, and routines. There are many more obstacles to overcome, and they often act invisibly to sabotage learning (Locke and Jain, 1995). Markets, industries, technology, public policy, and external stakeholder concerns are all examples of environmental barriers. Environmental Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 161

elements are commonly assumed to be beyond an organization’s control, however an organisation is a component of the environment and thus has the ability to alter it. In order to succeed in the current environment, an organisation must be aware of its environment and modify it as never before. Impact of OD on Learning Organisation To determine the direction in which this application is heading in the future, it is necessary to analyse what the practise of OD now gives to the process of organisational learning. The literature identifies three ways in which OD can help learning organisations focus: supporting interaction networks, guiding ideals, and a sense of structural alternatives. Supportive systems interaction: OD is based on the use of technology to create useful “interaction systems” between people. To show the variety of interaction patterns, researchers use Argyris’ Model I (closed or degenerative) and Model II (open or regenerative) concepts. In practise, a large number of managers like the degenerative model, but they do not prefer it personally. They point the finger at their workplaces and declare that there is nothing they can do about it. They are astounded to realise in training sessions that their own behaviour, as well as the work environment, is degenerative. Learning organisations, both in their early stages and in the long run, require regenerative contact. In this case, OD can help with both theory and practise. When practitioners are focused on dialogue or modifying mental models, they are confronted with deeply established norms, which is one of the most difficult components of developing a learning organisation. Problem of institutionalisation of goods and related processes is addressed by the learning organisation method. The learning organization’s power to shape the future is constantly growing. This entails a fundamental shift in mindset from “focused on parts to dealing with wholes, from considering people as helpless responders to empowering them as observant participants, and from reacting to the past and present to evolving a shared future.” (Watkins and Golembiewski, 1995) These principles seem quite similar to the OD values discussed previously, and OD techniques at the structural level include job enrichment at operating levels, flow-of-work or divisional models at executive levels, and structural and policy empowerment throughout organisations. OD has created the tools and methods that allow for the creation of learning organisations. These tools provide a sense of alternate techniques and the diversity of approaches to forming learning organisations. Changes in OD is Implied by the Learning Organisation According to the literature, learning organisations may be sculpted by removing anything that hinders learning and replacing it with new procedures and capacities that would improve Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 162

learning. It is argued that there is no design or set of standard tools for developing learning organisations, but rather that the concept serves as a vision of what the organisation could be in comparison to what it is now. Everyone in the organisation, not only the OD practitioner or the top executives, must work together to realise that objective. The development of a learning organisation has not resulted in any specific modifications in OD practise. The utilisation of expanded discussion at the micro and macro levels is an underlying process in developing learning organisations. Action science, which uses dialogue as a process of producing shared meaning by changing the mental models of individuals who are the beneficiaries of the organization’s shared values and acquired theories of action, is one of the new approaches utilised by designers of organisational learning. Governing values can be transformed from those dominated by control or self-protection to those that promote learning and growth in organisations and individuals. They achieve this goal by combining advocacy and inquiry, digging deeper into actual discussion to identify the data from which conclusions are drawn, and recognising the constructive norms that govern both inferences and action. Basic Tenets of Learning Organisation A learning organisation, according to Peter M. Senge, is one “where people are constantly expanding their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are constantly learning how to learn together” (Senge 1990). Five learning environment disciplines are at the heart of a learning organisation. Senge emphasises the need of discipline. These disciplines are impossible to learn and master without a lot of practise. The following five disciplines are intertwined: • Personal Mastery: Learning to extend our own capacity in order to achieve the outcomes we wish, as well as creating an organisational atmosphere that supports all employees to grow toward the goals they select. • Mental Models: We can see how our mental views of the world impact our actions and decisions by reflecting on, clarifying, and refining them. The assumptions and tales we have about others and ourselves are known as mental models. Mental models assist us in functioning, yet they do not necessarily correspond to reality. • Shared Vision: Developing common images of the future we want to create, as well as the values and guiding practises we plan to use to get there, can help a group feel more committed. Everyone contributes to a common goal. Developing a vision is an iterative process. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 163

• Team Learning: Changing conversational and communal thinking skills such that groups of individuals can consistently grow intelligence and ability higher than the sum of their individual talents This is our collective ability to make a difference. There is less authority in team learning and a greater emphasis on collaboration and facilitation. Members have a high level of trust in one another. • Systems Thinking: It’s a style of thinking about the forces and interrelationships that determine the behaviour of systems, as well as a language for describing and comprehending them. This discipline aids us in better understanding how to transform systems and act in accordance with bigger ecological and economic processes. The other disciplines are built on the foundation of systems thinking (Senge 1994). Systems’ thinking incorporates eleven ideas called ‘laws’ which could be listed as follows: 1. Yesterday’s remedies have resulted in today’s difficulties. Procrastination or improper delegation, for example, could increase workload. 2. The remedy may be worse than the disease: Organizations’ efforts to address issues of indiscipline or misuse of office resources may result in new issues, such as lower employee morale. 3. Faster isn’t always better: haste is a waste of time. 4. Taking the easy way out usually leads back in: escaping reality would just exacerbate the problems. 5. The system pushes back the harder one tries to push it: It may be preferable to work around the system rather than immediately confront it at times. 6. Cause and effect are not closely associated in time and space: It takes time for an effort to produce a result, and the outcome may be observed elsewhere than where the effort was made. 7. Only a few causes are responsible for the majority of the changes: The Pareto principle, sometimes known as the 80:20 rule, is reflected in this concept. 8. Behavior improves before deteriorating: The true motivations underlying people’s overt actions are usually revealed sooner or later. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 164

9. An elephant cannot be divided into two half-elephants: It could be an expensive mistake to restructure organisations and shuffle teams. 10. You can have your cake and eat it, but not at the same time: Each employee in an organisation must first determine what their intended end-results (cakes) are and then construct the path accordingly so that work is intrinsically gratifying. 11. There is no one to blame: At the end of the day, each action would have its own reason. Staff will have a better understanding of themselves and the organisation by learning about the five disciplines. Furthermore, the fundamental guiding principles described below focus on the environment that progressive learning organisations want to create: • Focus on the customer • Commitment to quality • Teamwork and partnerships • Incorporation of best practices and continuous improvement • Continuous learning and education • Continuous change when it leads to improvement The concept of constant learning and education is an overriding part of these guiding concepts. The companies try to create an environment in which the focus is on both the persons who make up the company and the company itself. To begin, businesses must cultivate a learning culture. All employees must be active participants in this initiative. To make the learning endeavour a success, each employee must take personal responsibility for personal growth and learning that contributes to the organization’s shape. There is a link between who we are as individuals and the effectiveness and success of our organisations (Shaughnessy 1995). Becoming a learning organisation necessitates everyone’s dedication to a continuous process of learning, growth, and development. The Learning Organization, according to Senge (1990), is one in which one cannot ‘not-learn’ because learning is so ingrained in the fabric of life. He also defines a Learning Organization as “a group of people who are always improving their ability to generate what they wish to accomplish.” An “Organisation with an engrained philosophy for predicting, reacting, and responding to change, complexity, and uncertainty” is a Learning Organization. Given the increasing complexity and ambiguity of the organisational environment, the concept of a Learning Organization is becoming more relevant. “The rate at which organisations learn may become the only sustainable source of competitive advantage,” writes Senge (1990). McGill (1992) defines the Learning Organisation as “a company that can respond to Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 165

new information by altering the very “programming” by which information is processed and evaluated.” Organisational Learning vs. Learning Organisation In terms of process versus structure, Ang and Joseph (1996) compare and contrast Organizational Learning and Learning Organization. McGill, on the other hand, makes no distinction between Learning Organization and Organizational Learning (1992). They define organisational learning as an organization’s ability to learn from its experiences through experimentation, observation, analysis, and a willingness to look at both successes and mistakes. Changes in OD practise phases must be considered, as well as a system- diagnosis centred on learning. While the learning organization’s design is comparable to the open systems advocated by OD, systematic and habitual routines are frozen to ensure ongoing progress. The emphasis is on long-term enablers and barriers rather than short- term symptoms. Examining the current amount of involvement in learning as exploration and identifying the threshold of true skill development that has resulted from earlier change attempts is one component of organisational diagnostics. Organizations have a history of capitalising on new ideas and technologies while neglecting the more time-consuming process of creative discovery. Quick fix solutions have become the norm in organisations, resulting in poor superficial learning while ignoring the establishment of a suitable adaptation threshold. Nuala Beck, a Canadian economist, devised the knowledge ratio, which is a measure of a company’s investment in knowledge employees and knowledge development. Organizations that will prosper in the new information economy are predicted by indicators. These measures constitute one reliable index of macro system learning in the learning organisation. (Beck, 1992) Intervention Focused on Long Term Empowerment Despite the numerous tools and tactics available, there are no unique interventions used by organisation developers trying to establish learning organisations. Long-term tactics that empower have been emphasised by organisation developers at General Electric and Johnsonville Foods. Some consultants characterise organisations as a collective group capable of collecting its own data and sharing it with the entire organisation, rather than the consultant collecting the data and presenting it to a small number of top executives. The current trend appears to be OD practitioners giving up their technology and teaching OD to everyone. Individuals at all levels of the organisation are being asked to become process consultants in order to develop mechanisms for this type of system-wide discourse Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 166

and transformation: to encourage dialogue, collect diagnostic data, and communicate it up the organisation. Organizations will be better equipped to use OD successfully if it is made more accessible. At companies like General Electric, everyone in the company takes part in Work Out sessions designed to teach people from all levels and functions how to reach a consensus, negotiate, and make decisions. These personnel are expected to be able to accomplish what organisation developers may have formerly supported, such as inter-group dispute resolution or work redesign, on a continuing basis over time. The utilisation of action technologies is one of the most powerful instruments for establishing a learning organisation. Participatory action research, action learning, and action science are only a few of the many innovative varieties of action research. Action research is a highly adaptable technique for learning across groups and organisations since it is grounded in the context but data-driven. Groups and organisations use these action technologies to diagnose and implement their own improvements. In addition, introspection is an important skill in action research. Individuals learn how to work more successfully in teams, how to learn from actual work activities through reflection, and how to manage a change effort through the process of making change. Research on the Effectiveness of Organisational Learning Organizational learning’s main goal is to make businesses more adaptable and capable of changing functions and departments in reaction to poor performance or changes in the workplace. The factors that link organisational learning to actions and actions to intended outcomes determine whether the goal is achieved. According to research, organisational learning has a favourable impact on a company’s perceived and real financial success. Organizational learning has had a major impact on employee performance indicators such as continuous improvement, customer focus, employee dedication, and overall work performance for individual employees. Experimentation boosts innovation but not competitiveness, according to research; constant improvement and knowledge acquisition boost competitiveness but not innovation. The future organisation is the client of the OD intervention. The purpose of the OD endeavour to establish a learning organisation is to put processes in place that will help the organisation face the issues it will face in 20 years. The learning organisation is a persuasive justification for stepping up efforts to move beyond short-term projects directed solely at senior executives. Learning should be a priority for organisations, not just for survival, but also for generative growth. The learning organisation is a shaky map for a never-ending adventure. Adaptive Learning vs. Generative Learning Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 167

Coping is at the heart of adaptive learning. According to Senge (1990), improving adaptable quality is simply the first step; organisations must also focus on Generative Learning, sometimes known as “double-loop learning” (Argyris 1977). Continuous experimentation and feedback are emphasised in generative learning as part of an ongoing evaluation of how organisations define and solve challenges. Generative Learning, according to Senge (1990), is about creation; it necessitates “systemic thinking,” “shared vision,” “personal mastery,” “team learning,” and “creative tension” between the vision and existing reality. Generative learning necessitates new perspectives on the world. Adaptive Learning, also known as single-loop learning, focuses on solving issues in the present without considering whether current learning patterns are suitable. Adaptive organisations prioritise gradual improvements, which are frequently based on a proven track record of success. Essentially, they don’t examine the fundamental assumptions that underpin current work practises. The key distinction is between being adaptable and being adaptive. Organizations must act as experimenting or self-designing organisations to preserve adaptability, i.e., they must maintain a state of frequent, nearly-continuous change in structures, processes, domains, goals, and so on, even when adaption appears to be ideal. In rapidly changing and unexpected circumstances, operating in this manner is effective, if not necessary. The rationale for this is that a continual state of experimentation is likely to result in organisations learning about a variety of design aspects while remaining adaptable. The leader’s function in the Learning Organization, according to Senge (1990), is that of a designer, teacher, and steward who can create common vision and question prevalent mental models. He is in charge of creating organisations where people are constantly developing their abilities in order to create their future. Leaders, in other words, are in charge of learning. Relationship Between Strategy and Learning Organisations The objective is to develop strategic thinking rather than just having the appropriate approach. Shell, a multinational organisation, adopted the Learning Organization concept in its credo, “planning as learning.” Shell’s planners acknowledged a shift in their core duty when faced with rapid shifts and uncertainty in the world oil markets: “We no longer saw our task as creating a documented perspective of the future business climate five or ten years ahead.” The microcosm (‘mental model’) of decision-makers was the main aim.” They reframed their primary goal as facilitating learning rather than making plans, and they enlisted the help of the managers to figure out the ramifications of various scenarios. As a result, the managers were mentally prepared for the job environment’s uncertainty. How organisations process their managerial experiences is a major component of the Learning Organization. Managers in Learning Organizations learn from their experiences rather than being limited by them. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 168

In generative learning organisations, a manager’s ability is judged not by what he knows (the output of learning), but by how he learns - the learning process. Openness, systemic thinking, creativity, efficacy, and empathy are all encouraged, recognised, and rewarded in management techniques. Role of Information Systems in the Learning Organisation Huber (1991) defines IS’s role in the Learning Organization as largely supporting Organizational Memory, although it can also assist with the other three phases of Knowledge Acquisition, Information Distribution, and Information Interpretation. Scenario planning tools can be used to generate possible futures at the planning level. Intranets, e-mail, and bulletin boards, for example, can help in the distribution and interpretation of information. The elements of organisational memory can be found in communications archives. Organizational Memory must be updated and renewed on a regular basis. Huber (1991) proposes that the IT basis of OM is at the root of organisational rigidity when it becomes “hi-tech hide bound” (Kakola 1995) and unable to adjust its “theory of the company” on a continual basis (Drucker). Assessment of a Learning Organisation It’s just as vital to know when a company becomes a learning organisation as it is to create the conditions for it to happen. Both processes necessitate a continuous effort to grow and change. Belasen discusses qualities that constitute a learning organisation in his leadership of the Learning Organization. Organizations that seek to be learning organisations should possess the following characteristics: • Learning collaboratively, openly, and across boundaries • Valuing how we learn as well as what is learnt • Investing in staying ahead of the learning curve in a particular industry • Gaining a competitive edge by learning faster and smarter than competitors • Turning data into useful knowledge quickly and at the right time and place • Enabling every employee to feel that every experience provides him or her with a chance to learn something potentially useful, even if only for leveraging future learning • Exhibiting little fear and defensiveness, and learning from what goes wrong (“failure” learning) and what goes right (“success” learning) • Taking risks while simultaneously avoiding jeopardizing the basic security of the organisation • Investing in experimental and seemingly tangential learning • Supporting people and teams who want to pursue action-learning projects Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 169

● Depoliticizing learning by not penalizing individuals or groups for sharing information and conclusions Furthermore, as a learning organisation, an organisation will begin to operate in a new way, including: • Use learning to reach its goals • Help people value the effects of their learning on their organisation • Avoid repeating the same mistakes • Share information in ways that prompt appropriate action • Link individual performance with organisational performance • Tie rewards to key measures of performance • Take in a lot of environmental information at all times • Create structures and procedures that support the learning process • Foster ongoing and orderly dialogues • Make it safer for people to share openly and take risks (Belasen 2000) Inter-Group OD Interventions Inter-Group The goal of a team building intervention is to improve communication and interactions between work-related groups in order to reduce dysfunctional competition and replace a parochial independent point of view with an understanding of the importance of interdependence of action that draws on both groups’ best efforts. Inter-group interventions are incorporated into OD programmes to promote cooperation and efficiency among various groups within a company. In larger organisations, for example, departmental cooperation often deteriorates as separate divisions compete for limited resources or become disconnected from the requirements of other departments. One popular inter-group intervention is conflict resolution meetings. First, various group leaders are called together to ensure that they are committed to the intervention. The teams then split off to make a list of how they feel about the other groups. The groups then get together and share their lists. Finally, the teams get together to talk about the issues and try to come up with solutions that will benefit both parties. This sort of intervention aids in the gradual dissipation of tension between groups produced by misunderstanding and lack of communication. Rotating Membership OD change agents use such interventions to reduce the negative consequences of inter- Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 170

group rivalry caused by employee allegiances to groups or divisions. Essentially, the intervention comprises briefly reuniting members of rival groups. As more people connect in various groups, a deeper level of understanding emerges. The essential function of OD joint activity interventions is the same as the rotating membership strategy, but it entails bringing members of diverse groups together to work toward a similar goal. Similarly, common enemy interventions achieve the same outcomes by identifying a common adversary shared by two or more organisations and then enlisting the help of the groups to fight the threat. Competitors, government regulation, and economic conditions are all examples of shared foes. Characteristics of Inter-Group Conflict Intergroup disputes are marked by stereotyping, blocked, distorted, and erroneous communication, and the cessation of feedback and data input. Each group begins to exalt itself and its products, believing that it can do no wrong while the other can do no right. There may also be acts of sabotage directed at the opposing organisation. Using the concept of a shared adversary outside the group that both groups despise to bring them closer together, enhancing engagement and communication in favourable circumstances, and identifying a superordinate aim that both groups seek. Inter-group conflict has been addressed through the employment of measures such as rotating members of the group, training, and so on. Intervention for inter-group team building: This form of intervention aims to improve communication and engagement while also reducing harmful competition. Blake, Shepard, and Mouton devised a way for resolving conflicts between tense and hostile groups. The goal of the process is to get each group’s leaders to commit to finding processes that will strengthen intergroup interactions. Various rooms are assigned to different groups. Each group is responsible for creating two lists. They should write down their feelings, thoughts, attitudes, and impressions regarding the other group, as well as forecast what the other group will say about them. The groups assemble and share their to-do lists. There are no comments or debates, only clarity. The groups meet again to discuss their reactions to what they’ve learned about themselves from what the other group has stated, as well as any remaining conflicts between the two groups. The two groups meet and exchange their to-do lists, as well as define priorities, create action plans, and allocate tasks. To ensure that the action steps have been taken, a follow-up meeting is called. The strategy can be utilised with more than two groups if there is no extreme or severe antagonism between them. Each group creates two types of lists in this method: a positive feedback list, a bug list, and an empathy list. The two groups meet and share their lists; there is no discussion other than to clarify things. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 171

The entire group compiles a list of important difficulties and unresolved issues that exist between the two parties. The importance of these topics is ranked. Members of each group create subgroups, which then discuss and go through each issue. The bigger group receives reports from the sub-groups. The group proceeds to: establish action steps for resolving the disagreement, assign responsibilities for each step, and record a date by which the actions should have been completed based on the report back and all other information acquired. This strategy allows the two groups to collaborate effectively. Walton’s approach to third-party peace-making interventions is similar to group interventions, but it is focused on interpersonal conflict. Third-party interventions entail confrontation, which Walton explains in detail. The ability to precisely diagnose the problem is a key characteristic of these techniques. The diagnostic model is built on four elements: conflict issues, triggering circumstances, conflict-related acts, and conflict outcomes. It’s also crucial to understand the origins of the disagreement. Substantive concerns, such as dispute over procedures, limited resources, and various perceptions of roles and responsibilities, could be contributors. Emotional concerns, which involve feelings between the parties, such as anger, hurt, fear, resentment, and so on, can also be sources of conflict. The former necessitates negotiating and problem- solving. The latter necessitates reorganising one’s perceptions and dealing through negative emotions. The following are elements of a fruitful confrontation. Mutual positive motivation refers to both parties’ willingness to overcome the problem; There are no power differentials between the persons participating in a confrontation, hence there is a balance of power. Synchronization of confrontation attempts, in which both parties deal with the problem at the same time; and Differentiation and integration of different phases of the intervention must be done at the appropriate times. Working through unpleasant feelings and ambivalent happy feelings is part of the intervention. This process must be given adequate time during the intervention. It is necessary to create conditions that encourage transparency. This could be accomplished by establishing acceptable norms and establishing a framework that promotes openness. The use of language that is understood by all parties involved in the conflict is referred to as a reliable communication signal. The stress experienced by both sides should be sufficient to motivate them but not excessive in order to achieve optimal tension in the scenario. Approaches to people, interests, possibilities, and criteria are all general principles in negotiation. Persons have various feelings and perspectives, thus it’s critical to distinguish between people and feelings. Interest. Rather than holding to inflexible stances that entrench the conflict, looking at party interests provides an avenue for resolving disagreement. In order Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 172

to come up with the optimum alternative for resolving dispute, options must be developed. The criteria for measuring the intervention’s success should be clear and objective. All of these definitions are relevant to us, and each one illustrates a different aspect of the problem. A parallel discussion is raging in the realm of ethics: should companies be regulated more heavily, or has the ethical foundation of citizenship been destroyed and has to be replaced before socially responsible behaviour can be expected? Whatever form this discussion takes, it appears to be about some type of social compact between corporations and society. This social contract indicates altruistic behaviour, which is the polar opposite of selfishness, whereas self-interest implies selfishness. Self-interest is at the heart of the utilitarian viewpoint championed by people like Jeremy Bentham, John Locke, and J. S. Mill. The pursuit of the greatest happiness for the greatest number, for example, is often seen as ethically right - despite the fact that the Utilitarian philosophy is actually much more based on selfishness than this – something to which we shall return later. In the same way, Adam Smith’s free-market economics is based on competitive self-interest. These powerful ideologies prioritise the individual’s interests over the collective’s. The social contract between all stakeholders in society, which is an important prerequisite of civil society, is the central pillar of social responsibility. This is also known as citizenship, but regardless of the term used, it is crucial to recognise that social duty must extend beyond current members of society. Social responsibility also entails a sense of obligation to future generations and members of society. Of course, because of the ramifications for other members of society both now and in the future, this includes a responsibility to the environment - which we shall return to later. However, since there is no universally accepted definition of CSR, the question of what constitutes corporate social responsibility arises. Image Source: www.freepik.com Page 173 Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management

10. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY “…CSR is a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis.” 1.1.1 Corporations are part of society However, an increasing number of writers have recognised that an organization’s operations have an impact on the external environment, and have recommended that one of accounting’s tasks should be to report on that impact. A concern with a broader view of firm performance is held by certain writers who display concern with the social performance of a business as a member of society at large, and such a suggestion initially surfaced in the 1970s. The value of considering a company’s social performance has not always been acknowledged, and it has been the topic of heated controversy. Thus Hetherington (1973:37) states “There is no reason to think that shareholders are willing to tolerate an amount of corporate non-profit activity which appreciably reduces either dividends or the market performance of the stock.” Conversely, writing at a similar time, Dahl (1972: 18) states “every large corporation should be thought of as a social enterprise; that is an entity whose existence and decisions can be justified insofar as they serve public or social purposes” Similarly Carroll (1979), one of the early CSR theorists states that: “business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical and discretionary expectations that society has of organisation at a given point in time”. More recently this was echoed by Balabanis, Phillips and Lyall (1998), who declared that: “in the modern commercial area, companies and their managers are subjected to well publicised pressure to play an increasingly active role in [the welfare of] society.” Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 174

1.1.2 Profit is all that matters Some writers believe that a corporation should not be concerned with social responsibility, and you will almost certainly come across Milton Friedman’s comment from 1970: “there is one and only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud”. Some people, on the other hand, are more sceptical about business behaviour. As a result, Drucker (1984) believed that: “business turns a social problem into economic opportunity and economic benefit, into productive capacity, into human competence, into well-paid jobs, and into wealth”. 1.1.3 CSR is conditional While Robertson and Nicholson (1996) thought that: “a certain amount of rhetoric may be inevitable in the area of social responsibility. Managers may even believe that making statements about social responsibility insulates the firm from the necessity of taking socially responsible action.” Moir (2001) is more ambivalent: “whether or not business should undertake CSR, and the forms that responsibility should take, depends upon the economic perspective of the firm that is adopted”. As can be seen, CSR is a contentious issue, and it is far from obvious that everyone believes it is necessary or relevant to modern business. 1.2 The effects of organisational activity Of course, all actions taken by an organisation will have an impact not just on the organisation itself, but also on the external environment in which the organisation operates. When examining the impact of an organisation on its external environment, it is important to remember that this environment encompasses the business environment in which the firm operates, the local sociocultural environment in which the firm is located, and the larger global environment. The organization’s effect can take numerous forms, including: Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 175

• The utilisation of natural resources as a part of its production processes • The effects of competition between itself and other organisations in the same market • The enrichment of a local community through the creation of employment opportunities • Transformation of the landscape due to raw material extraction or waste product storage • The distribution of wealth created within the firm to the owners of that firm (via dividends) and the workers of that firm (through wages) and the effect of this upon the welfare of individuals • And more recently the greatest concern has been with climate change and the way in which the emission of greenhouse gases are exacerbating this. As a result of these examples, it can be observed that an organisation can have a considerable impact on its external environment and even transform it through its operations. It can also be noted that these various effects can be considered as useful to the environment in some cases and as harmful to the ecosystem in others. Indeed, the same activities might be useful to some people while being harmful to others. “We are now, more than ever, aware of the potentially negative impact of business on the environment, whatever the nature or size of the business. There can only be positive results from developing sustainability – from benefiting your own bottom line to benefiting tomorrow’s industry to benefiting the environment in which we all live.” - Tony Blair, UK Prime Minister, May 2000 1.3 The principles of CSR It’s tough to define CSR and be definite about any such action because of the uncertainties surrounding its nature. It is therefore critical to be able to recognise such action, and we believe that there are three fundamental principles that underpin all CSR engagement. These are the following: • Sustainability; • Accountability; • Transparency. 1.3.1 Sustainability This is concerned with the impact that current actions have on the possibilities that are available in the future. When resources are used in the present, they are no longer available for use in the future, which is especially problematic when the resources are limited. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 176

As a result, extractive raw materials such as coal, iron, and oil have finite quantities and are not available for future use. Alternatives will be required at some point in the future to fulfil the duties currently provided by these resources. This may happen in the not-too-distant future, but the reality remains that as resources are depleted, the cost of acquiring the remaining resources rises, and so the operational costs of organisations rise. As a result, sustainability suggests that society should utilise no more of a resource than can be replenished. This can be characterised in terms of the ecosystem’s carrying capacity (Hawken 1993) and expressed using resource consumption input-output models. For example, the paper business has a policy of replanting trees to replace those that have been harvested, which keeps expenses in the present rather than temporally externalising them. When an organisation is viewed as part of a larger social and economic system, these consequences must be considered not only for the current evaluation of costs and value created, but also for the future of the company. The rate at which the organisation consumes resources in comparison to the rate at which resources can be regenerated would be included in sustainability measures. Unsustainable operations can be addressed by either building more sustainable operations or planning for a future with fewer resources than are currently available. In practise, most organisations strive for less unsustainability by improving resource utilisation efficiency. A programme to improve energy efficiency is one example. 1.1.1 Accountability This is concerned with an organization’s recognition that its actions have an impact on the external world and, as a result, taking responsibility for those impacts. As a result, this idea requires a quantification of the repercussions of activities made both internally and outside. More particularly, the notion implies that those quantifications be reported to all parties who are impacted by the acts. This entails informing external stakeholders about the consequences of the organization’s actions and how they influence those stakeholders. As a result, this idea suggests that the organisation is a part of a larger societal network, and that it owes responsibilities to everyone in that network, not just the owners. Along with this acceptance of responsibility, external stakeholders must recognise that they have the power to influence how the organization’s actions are carried out, as well as a role in determining whether or not such actions are justified, and if so, at what cost to the organisation and other stakeholders. As a result, accountability demands the establishment of acceptable environmental performance measurements as well as the reporting of the firm’s actions. This entails expenses on the part of the organisation in terms of establishing, recording, and reporting Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 177

such performance, and the benefits must outweigh the expenditures in order to be worthwhile. The value of the metrics used to the decision-making process, as well as the ease with which they promote resource allocation both inside the organisation and between it and other stakeholders, must be determined. The following characteristics must be present in such reporting: Understandability to all parties concerned; • Relevance to the users of the information provided; • Reliability in terms of accuracy of measurement, representation of impact and freedom from bias; • Comparability, which implies consistency, both over time and between different organisations. However, qualitative facts and judgments, as well as quantifications, will invariably be included in such reporting. This qualitativeness will make it difficult to compare impacts over time, and it will also imply that different consumers of the information may evaluate them differently, reflecting their own values and priorities. Few standard measures exist due to a lack of precise understanding of effects and the unavoidably judgemental character of relative affects. This, in and of itself, limits the inter- organizational comparison of such data. Although this limitation is troublesome for the development of environmental accounting, it is really beneficial to business managers because it removes the need to demonstrate good performance as anything other than a concept. 1.1.2 Transparency As a principle, transparency indicates that the Image Source: www.freepik.com external consequence of an organization’s actions can be determined from its reporting, and essential facts are not hidden within that reporting. As a result, utilising the information provided by the organization’s reporting methods, all of the repercussions of the organization’s actions, including external impacts, should be obvious to all. External consumers of such material require more transparency than internal users because they lack the underlying details and knowledge that internal users have. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 178

10.1 The principles of CSR As previously stated, this provides a foundation for performance measurement and evaluation while also allowing an organisation to consider its own socially and environmentally significant factors and plan accordingly without being compared favourably or unfavourably with organisations that have different priorities. 2.1 The prominence of CSR Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become much more prominent in recent years, not just in the academic and economic worlds, but also in ordinary life. There are numerous variables that have contributed to this interest, including: • Poor business behaviour towards customers • Treating employees unfairly • Ignoring the environment and the consequences of organisational action. Since then, other topics have taken centre stage in the public consciousness. One of them that has become more prominent is the problem of climate change, which has influenced CSR concerns by raising concerns about greenhouse gas emissions, notably carbon dioxide. Individuals nowadays frequently know and discuss the magnitude of their carbon footprint, when only three years ago, most people had no idea what a carbon footprint was. Another issue that has emerged is a concern about a company’s supply chain, or what is going on in the other companies with whom that company does business - their suppliers and their suppliers’ suppliers. People are particularly worried about the exploitation of people in underdeveloped nations, particularly the issue of child labour, but also sweatshops. As a result, it is no longer acceptable for a firm to claim that the conditions under which their suppliers operate are beyond their control and that they are therefore unaccountable. Customers have expressed their dissatisfaction with this and have called firms to account. And a number of high-profile retail corporations have recently stuck their hands up to acknowledge their fault and take very visible steps to rectify the situation. Surprisingly, a company’s popularity rises once it admits to having difficulties and takes moves to address them. They are demonstrating both the importance of honesty and the reasonableness of customers by doing so. Individual clients, according to the facts, are understanding and do not want perfection, but rather honesty and transparency. They also Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 179

want businesses to make an attempt to improve their behaviour and address their CSR issues. 2.2 Changing emphasis in companies The companies themselves have evolved as well. Greenwashing - the pretence of socially responsible behaviour through artistic reporting – is no longer a problem for them. Companies are now taking CSR considerably more seriously, not just because they recognise it as a key to economic success and a strategic advantage, but also because their employees care about social responsibility. So it’s logical to assume that individuals who care are driving the increased relevance of CSR - but those individuals aren’t just customers; they’re also employees, managers, owners, and investors in a firm. As a result, businesses are responding to external demands while also driving the development of responsible behaviour and reporting. As a result, responsibility – one of the core concepts of CSR – is becoming more widely recognised, and it is being met with more openness - another CSR principle. 2.1.1 Sustainability The third CSR principle is sustainability, which is a term that has suddenly become so prevalent that it has become omnipresent in both business and society. Sustainability is mentioned by every organisation, and the majority claim to have established sustainable practises. A lot of this is just bluster from individuals who, we believe, don’t want to deal with the unpleasant challenges that come with dealing with sustainability. As a result, there’s a risk that sustainability has supplanted CSR as a target for greenwashing. Nonetheless, evidence continues to build that the finest corporations have a positive impact on their surroundings, despite the fact that the link between organisations and society has been the topic of much debate, frequently of a critical nature. Furthermore, evidence continues to emerge that such socially responsible behaviour is excellent for business, not only ethically but also financially — in other words, corporate social responsibility is good for company and all of its stakeholders. As a result, ethical behaviour and a concern for people and the environment have been linked to improved corporate success. Indeed, proof of the benefits of socially responsible behaviour to company continues to accumulate, and most corporate executives no longer doubt this benefit. As a result, the nature of corporate social responsibility is a hot topic among business leaders and academics. Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 180

Most people believe they understand CSR and how to act responsibly at first – and everyone claims to be able to recognise socially responsible or irresponsible behaviour without being able to articulate it. As a result, there is widespread agreement that CSR refers to a company’s concern for community involvement, socially responsible products and processes, environmental concern, and socially responsible employee interactions (Ortiz-Martinez & Crowther 2006). Of course, issues of socially responsible behaviour are not new, and examples can be found all over the world, dating back to the early days of the Industrial Revolution and the concomitant founding of large business entities (Crowther 2002), as well as the separation of ownership and management – or the separation of risk from rewards (Crowther 2004). According to the European Commission, corporate social responsibility (CSR) is defined as “voluntary activity that displays concern for stakeholders.” However, a company’s problems begin here: how to balance the competing needs and expectations of various stakeholder groups while still caring about shareholders; how to practise sustainability; how to report this activity to those who are interested; and how to determine whether one activity is more socially responsible than another. The situation is tumultuous and contradictory. As a result, the writers to this book are interested in various elements of CSR, both theorising and putting CSR into reality. Image Source: www.freepik.com Page 181 Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management

Module 5 | Emerging Trends in Management Page 182