Publicité
Publicité

Contenu connexe

Similaire à شناسایی ائتلاف استراتژیک بهینه با در نظر گرفتن نقش نوآوری باز در طنجیره تامین چند سطحی با نظریه بازی ها (20)

Dernier(20)

Publicité

شناسایی ائتلاف استراتژیک بهینه با در نظر گرفتن نقش نوآوری باز در طنجیره تامین چند سطحی با نظریه بازی ها

  1. SYSTEM-THINKING THEORY Systems-thinking is a world view which allows appreciation of holistic systems, having interconnections between the elements of which systems-thinking is made of, called system- components. This includes human and non-human elements of the system,
  2. Each system interrelates and reacts to other living systems at higher and lower levels (subsystems), in addition to other systems at its own level.Living systems are organized “natural” hierarchies.Each system level is nested within other systems, exists in relationship with every other system, and affects every other system. Each one is unique and distinct, yet includes all the same characteristics of each other system—just the size is different. Systems within systems
  3. (1)A system is a collection of related parts that interact in an organized way for a purpose. (2) Living systems have defined boundaries. (3) Living systems are open systems. Holism is the principle that says the whole is not just the sum of the parts and, conversely, that a system can be explained only as a totality. All systems have boundaries that separate them from their environments. Relatively closed systems have rigid, impenetrable boundaries, whereas relatively open systems have more permeable boundaries between themselves and a broader suprasystem. Open systems exchange information, Closed boundaries tend to lead to fragmentation and separation. Characteristics of Living Systems
  4. (4) Living systems transform inputs into outputs. (5)Action toward multiple outcomes or goals is a characteristic of all living systems (6) Living systems display equifinality (the principle that the same results can be achieved with different initial conditions and through different ways). (7) Living systems are hierachical. (8) Living systems have interrelated parts Characteristics of Living Systems
  5. Characteristics of Living Systems (9)iving systems tend toward dynamic equilibrium (a natural state of balance and stability). (10) Living systems produce internal elaboration that leads naturally to greater comple
  6. Systems-thinking involves several principles, which on their own are looked upon as disciplines of systems- thinking. Anderson and Johnson (1997) provide the basic principles of systems- thinking:
  7. The ‘Big Picture’ principle demands widening one’s perspective to find a more effective solution (e.g. in stressful times, one tends to focus on the immediate, most pressing problem and this perceives only the effects of changes elsewhere in the system). Therefore, one should step back to look at the bigger picture and investigate the source of the problem, which would more likely identify a more effective solution ‘Big Picture’
  8. The ‘Long Term, Short Term’ principle suggests that the best approach to strike a balance about any decision is to consider short-term (e.g., a week, a quarter, a year) and long-term strategic changes impacting on better overall performance of the business) options and to look for the course of action that encompasses both. ‘Long Term, Short Term’
  9. The ‘Dynamic, Complex, and Interdependent’ principle stresses the fact that things change all the time, life is messy, and everything is connected. Essentially, this points out that the world is dynamic, complex and interdependent. The principle also advocates that simplification, structure and linear thinking have their own limitations and thus consideration should be given to a system’s relationships both within the system and with the external environment. ‘Dynamic, Complex’ and Interdependent’
  10. The ‘Measurable vs Non-measurable Data’ principle encourages organisations to value both quantitative (measurable, e.g., sales figures and costs) and qualitative (non-measurable, e.g., morale and attitudes) data and challenges the tendency to ‘see’ only what can be measured. ‘Measurable vs Non-measurable’
  11. The ‘We Are Part of the System’ principle highlights that the decision makers are often the contributor to their problems (e.g. a current problem can be the result of unintended consequences of a decision made or a solution implemented previously, including decisions made based on some kinds of mental assumptions, values and beliefs). ‘We Are Part of the System’
  12. ‫گرمتان‬‫نگاه‬‫از‬‫تشکر‬‫با‬
  13. Socio-Technical Systems Technology Human Capabilities Theory William J. Frey College of Business Administration University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez
  14. Definition: Socio-Technical System • Socio-Technical System • “an intellectual tool to help us recognize patterns in the way technology is used and produced”
  15. 1. STS as an environment • Socio-Technical systems provide a tool to uncover the different environments in which business activity takes place and to articulate how these constrain and enable different business practices. – Instrumenting action • enabling us to do new things • magnifying our ability to do old things – Constraining or determining action • we delegate actions and responsibility to technical artefacts • difficulty controlling complex systems
  16. Complexity constrains as well as enables • Tightly coupled systems – difficult to contain a failure by isolation; failures tend to cascade throughout the system • Non-linear causality – actions “ripple” throughout the system producing changes/effects that are difficult to predict
  17. 2. STS as System • STSs are Systems – A whole of interrelated parts that are related to one another and interact with one another • Requires systematic thinking: – actions feedback on the agent – the distinction between the agent (actor) and the objects targeted by agents (technical artifacts) begins to break down as artifacts – the environment or surroundings of action also feedback on the actor by constraining and enabling certain directions of action
  18. 3. STSs and their sub-environments • A STS can be divided into different parts or components that function as sub- environments – hardware, software, physical surroundings, stakeholders, procedures, laws, and information systems. – constrain and enable activities individually and collectively
  19. 4. STS embody values • moral values (justice, responsibility, respect, trust, and integrity) • non-moral values (efficiency, satisfaction, productivity, effectiveness, and profitability). • values can be located in one or more of the system components. • Often these values conflict with one another causing the system to change.
  20. 5. STSs change, tracing out a trajectory • STSs change and this change traces out a path or trajectory. – The normative challenge of STS analysis is to find the trajectory of STS change and work to make it as value positive and value realizing as possible. – Value positive trajectory? • Resolve value conflicts within system • Resolve value conflicts between different STSs – Value negative trajectory?
  21. Techno-Socio Sensitivity Respon- sibility Skill Description Module Activities Techno-socio sensitivity Socio-Technical Systems in Professional Decision Making Responsible Choice for Appropriate Technology “critical awareness of the way technology affects society and the way social forces in turn affect the evolution of technology” Socio-technical Systems 1. Different environments constrain and enable activity. 2.System of distinguishable but interrelated and interacting parts. 3. Embody / express moral and non-moral values. 4. Normative objective = tracing out a value positive path or trajectory of change. Identifying sub- environments How each constrains activity How each enables or instruments activity Value vulnerabilities and conflicts Plot out system trajectories or paths of change
  22. Technology, technical artifacts, social objects, natural objects
  23. Distinctions • Artifacts: objects that are not found in nature but are made, designed, and created by humans • Social Artifacts: “play a role in ruling the behavior of humans, their natural cooperation and the relationships between humans and social institutions” • laws, government, state, marriage, driving license, traffic laws, currency (money), organizations (corporations), contracts (including social contracts) • Artistic artifacts: works of art created for enjoyment and beauty • Technical artifacts: “material objects that have been deliberately produced by humans in order to fulfill some kind of practical function. • technical function – physical composition – instructions for use (use or user guide) • Technology: the knowledge and skill that goes into the making of technical artifacts – Applied science – Craft and skill (handed down from generation to generation)
  24. ‫گرمتان‬‫نگاه‬‫از‬‫تشکر‬‫با‬
  25. DISASTER RESILIENCE OF PLACE (DROP) MODEL Disaster events, whether natural (flood, heatwave, earthquakes, pandemics etc.) or human-made (cyber-attack, terrorism etc.), have a significant impact on the performance of business organisations (private, public and not-for-profit) and on the health and well-being of the communities to which they belong Background
  26. How organisations prepare for, respond to and recover from these impacts depends on their vulnerability and resilience to the disaster event. Those organisations that exhibit a low vulnerability and high resilience tend to recover quickly, using the experiences they gain to inform their preparedness and identify mitigation actions to reduce their vulnerability and/or enhance their resilience to a future event. Those organisations that exhibit a high vulnerability and low resilience tend to recover more slowly, or in many cases do not recover at all.
  27. The concept of resilience was introduced by Holling (1973, 1996, 2001) to describe the fluctuations in ecological systems exposed to external disturbance (disaster event) over time. Holling (1973, 1996) argued that such systems demonstrate two aspects of resilience: engineering resilience and ecological (later socio-ecological) resilience Resilience
  28. Engineering resilience describes the system’s behaviour close to its pre-existing equilibrium point, using resistance to the disturbance and speed of return to the equilibrium point as measures of the system’s resilience. In essence, engineering resilience is concerned with retaining the stability of the system during and after a disaster event Engineering resilience
  29. . Ecological resilience describes the reorganisation potential of the system to a new state of equilibrium following an external disturbance and is concerned with the magnitude of the disturbance that the system can absorb before reorganization occurs. In essence, ecological resilience is concerned with flexibility/rigidity of the system to a disaster event
  30. Vulnerability Whilst resilience is primarily concerned with the ability of a system to resist, absorb, accommodate, adapt to, transform and recover from a disaster event; vulnerability is concerned with the susceptibility of a system to a specific disaster threat
  31. Cutter et al. (2008) explored the relationship between vulnerability and resilience to disaster events in her Disaster Resilience of Place (DROP) model Disaster Resilience of Place (DROP) model
  32. Disaster Resilience of Place (DROP) model
  33. The DROP model views vulnerability and resilience as separate but linked concepts, arguing that the vulnerability/resilience of a system to a disaster event is defined by the antecedent relationships (inherent vulnerability and resilience) that exist between the interaction of natural systems, social systems and the built environment
  34. The antecedent conditions interact with the disaster event characteristics (which will vary depending on the nature of the disaster event, geographical location, etc.
  35. These effects can be reduced (or amplified) by any post-event coping measures (e.g. disaster management and resilience plans), and the full disaster impact is realised. The impact of the disaster event on a system is moderated by the absorptive capacity of the system. If the absorptive capacity is not exceeded, then recovery is relatively quick. If the absorptive capacity is exceeded, then the system either adapts, and recovery occurs relatively quickly, or doesn’t adapt, and recovery is slower or in extreme cases does not occur. Finally, if mitigation and preparedness occur, then the antecedent conditions are improved ahead of the next occurrence of the disaster event.
  36. ‫گرمتان‬‫نگاه‬‫از‬‫تشکر‬‫با‬
  37. ALIGNMENT THEORY
  38. Definition: generally, brings into harmony things that differ or could differ by making them consistent or in agreement with each other
  39. • Andolsen (2007, p. 35) refers to it as strategic alignment, defining it as “the link between an organisation’s overall goals and the goals of each of the units that contribute to the success of those overall goals”. Indeed, alignment theory has become a thread of strategic management thinking
  40. the following three dominant perspectives that rest on a different set of agreements about how organisations learn and perform • Process • relational • strategic
  41. five types of organisational alignment • horizontal alignment • vertical alignment • structural alignment • cultural alignment • environment alignment
  42. • Vertical alignment describes a condition in which every employee can articulate the enterprise’s strategy and explain how his or her daily work activities support that strategy. • Horizontal alignment breaks through the boundaries that so often separate companies from their customers.
  43. Business and CRE objects (Arkesteijn, 2019, p. 62)
  44. ‫گرمتان‬‫نگاه‬‫از‬‫تشکر‬‫با‬
  45. RADICAL INNOVATION THEORY • Sources of competitiveness • What in innovation? – Definition – Types of innovation processes – Features of innovation • Regional innovation system • Cambridge: a successful case • Birmingham: a RIS in the making
  46. Background • Schumpeter introduced the concept of ‘creative destruction’ in Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (Schumpeter, 1942) • the academic community has pushed a simple but very powerful and popular concept, which is mostly referred to nowadays as ‘radical innovation’, or ‘disruption’.
  47. CONCEPT • Most scholars in economics and strategic management who analyse technological innovation refer to Schumpeter’s seminal work • The concept of radical innovation has been then the subject of numerous publications covering specific and thematic issues such as uncertainty (Leifer et al., 2001; Rosenberg & Nathan, 1994), knowledge and learning
  48. INNOVATION • can be defined as the creation of a product or introduction of a process for the first time. • on the other hand, occurs if someone improves on or makes a significant contribution to an existing product, process, or service • can be classified as incremental and radical (disruptive) according to changes resulting from the innovation • also includes the creation and commercialisation of new knowledge and discoveries • argues that creativity can be channelled into innovation, and innovation can be channelled, in turn, toward economic development
  49. Innovation has been categorised into two different kinds • radical innovation • incremental innovation
  50. Incremental innovation is an improvement effort of something that already exists radical innovation is ‘the discovery of something completely new’
  51. • incremental innovation • based on prior knowledge and consist of substantial product, service or process improvements • although they have a certain degree of novelty, do not clearly break away from the already existing product, service, or process • Most innovations are incremental • being gradual enhancements or feature replacements to existing products, services, processes, and business models • have a sustaining nature and allow an organisation to maintain its current approach to target markets • they do not create new lines of business, nor do they create completely new markets for an existing
  52. radical innovation • Radical innovations, by contrast, correspond to disruptive change. The disruptive change can be related to technology, markets, society, or all three
  53. An innovation can be said to be radical when it has the potential to produce one or more of the following (1) an entirely new set of performance features (2) improvements in known performance features of five times or greater (3) a significant (30 percent or greater) reduction of cost
  54. Characteristics of radical innovation Radical innovations are disruptive Radical innovation is an innovation leadership concept aimed at destroying current products, services business models to create new markets and replace existing ones While incremental innovation can be managed top- down, radical innovation requires mentoring, leadership, and facilitation from the ground Radical innovation goes further than incremental innovation
  55. Characteristics of radical innovation create new lines of business Radical innovations take time Ten years is not a long time for this process Radical innovation life cycles are longer, more unpredictable, have more stops and starts, are more context-dependent in that strategic considerations can accelerate, retard, or terminate progress, and more often include cross-functional and or cross-unit teamwork in comparison with incremental innovations
  56. Radical innovations are multidimensional four major dimensions of uncertainty that are relevant for all radical innovation development projects • Technological • market • organizational • resource uncertainties
  57. Radical innovations are multidimensional Radical innovations are new combinations and represent serendipity. Radical innovations prompt significant subsequent technological development and exhibit novelty and ‘architectural’ innovation, i.e. rearranging the way design elements are put together in a system
  58. ‫گرمتان‬‫نگاه‬‫از‬‫تشکر‬‫با‬
Publicité