scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Frans van den Bosch

Bio: Frans van den Bosch is an academic researcher from Erasmus University Rotterdam. The author has contributed to research in topics: Competitive advantage & Corporate governance. The author has an hindex of 54, co-authored 215 publications receiving 19700 citations. Previous affiliations of Frans van den Bosch include Erasmus Research Institute of Management & University of Twente.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a conceptual framework is developed for reconciling the observed tension and pinpointing a key common characteristic of a European style of management, and a case study of Unilever Foods Europe is used to illustrate the proposed conceptual framework.
Abstract: textIn 1991, Thurley and Wirdenius claimed that international companies operating in European countries could, and should, make a strategic choice whether or not to develop a "European" approach or style of management. After the acceptance of the Treaty of Maastricht, and with the new European Union preparing to absorb applicants from the European Free Trade Association, their claim is becoming even more important. Not surprisingly, a European style of management, or "European management," is an important topic for business, business schools, and academic research. While a growing number of publications have been written on this subject, a brief review of the literature on European management reveals a clear tension between "integration opportunity" and "constraining diversity" issues as a challenging problem for managers in Europe. This article investigates whether key characteristics of a European style of management can be discerned. To this end, a conceptual framework is developed for reconciling the observed tension and pinpointing a key common characteristic of a European style of management. No attempt is made here to show that national styles of management such as Swedish or British management (Barsoux and Lawrence, 1990) will disappear in the future. On the contrary, we maintain that national styles of management are and will remain part of Europe's diversity (Lessem and Neubauer, 1994). We aim to improve our understanding of how management relates to the European business environment as a contingency factor. In particular, we investigate ways of approaching the above-mentioned management problem in Europe. In a general sense, our research contributes to the challenging field of international management research (Earley and Singh, 1995) as well. We begin with a short overview of the literature and draw attention to the tension between integration opportunities and constraining diversity for managers in Europe. We then introduce a managerial perspective in describing various relevant forms of an important contextual variable of Europe--namely, diversity. After developing a conceptual framework for reconciling this tension, we describe how this framework can focus attention on a key characteristic of a European style of management. We use a case study of Unilever Foods Europe to illustrate the proposed conceptual framework. In discussing our findings, we touch upon some implications for developing the distinctive managerial skills required by a European style of management and suggest directions for future research.

7 citations

01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: Innovatie in Nederland is te eenzijdig op technologie gericht Investeringen in de succesvolle toepassing van kennis zou een hogere prioriteit moeten hebben as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Innovatie in Nederland is te eenzijdig op technologie gericht Investeringen in de succesvolle toepassing van kennis zou een hogere prioriteit moeten hebben Evenals het creeren van nieuwe managementvaardigheden en het ontwikkelen van nieuwe organisatieprincipes Nederland moet terugkeren in de top-10 van ’s werelds meest innovatieve en productieve landen De vijf topprioriteiten die de nieuwe Nederlandse Innovatie Agenda beheersen, vormen in feite een pleidooi voor interne veranderingssnelheid, zelforganisatie en hoge exploitatie- en exploratieniveaus

7 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that managerial capabilities and organizing principles for innovation should have a higher priority on the Dutch innovation agenda, and they suggest to organize an annual innovation ranking of the most outstanding Dutch firms and to develop an innovation audit that measures firms' non-technological innovation capacity.
Abstract: In this essay, we challenge the present dominant emphasis in the Dutch Innovation Debate on the creation of technological innovations, the focus on a few core technologies, and the allocation of more financial resources. We argue that managerial capabilities and organizing principles for innovation should have a higher priority on the Dutch Innovation Agenda. Managerial capabilities for innovation deal with cognitive elements such as the capacity to absorb knowledge, create entrepreneurial mindsets, and facilitate managerial experimentation and higher-order learning abilities. These capacities can only be developed by distinctive managerial roles that enhance hierarchy, teaming and shared norms. Utilizing these unique managerial capabilities requires novel organizing principles, such as managing internal rates of change, nurturing self-organization and balancing high levels of exploration and exploitation. These managerial capabilities and organizing principles of innovation create new sources of productivity growth and competitive advantage. The dramatic fall back of the Netherlands in the league of innovative and high productivity countries of the World Economic Forum-Report can be mainly attributed to the present lack in the Netherlands of these key managerial and organizational enablers of innovation and productivity growth. We provide various levers for building unique managerial capabilities and novel organizing principles of innovation. Moreover, we describe the necessary roles that different actors have to play in this innovation arena. In particular, we focus on the often neglected but important role of strategic regulations that speed up innovation and productivity growth. They are the least expensive way to boost innovation in organizations in both the Dutch private and public sector. Finally, we discuss the implications for the Dutch Innovation Agenda. It should start with setting a challenging ambition, namely the return of The Netherlands within the WEF- league of the top-ten most innovative and productive countries of the world. Considering the under-utilization of available knowledge stemming from technological innovations, managerial and organizational determinants of innovation should receive first priority. These determinants have a high strategic relevance and should receive more public recognition. We suggest to organize an annual innovation ranking of the most outstanding Dutch firms, to develop an innovation audit that measures firms’ non-technological innovation capacity, and to create an overall innovation policy for fast diffusion of new managerial capabilities and adequate organizing principles throughout the Dutch private and public sector. In conclusion, we add five new items to the Dutch Innovation Agenda: 1. Prioritize administrative innovations Investments in management and organization determinants of absorption of knowledge and its successful application (administrative innovation) should have a higher priority than investments in technological innovations. 2. Build new managerial capabilities and develop novel organizing principles For these administrative innovations to succeed, firms have to build managerial capabilities (broad knowledge-base, absorptive capacity, managerial experimentation, higher-order learning) and various management roles (hierarchy, teaming, shared norms) to increase the assimilation of external knowledge and the utilization for innovation. Moreover, they have to develop novel organizing principles that increase internal rates of change, nurture self-organization and synchronize high levels of exploration and exploitation. 3. Set levers of innovation by creating selection environments that favor innovation and by redefining the roles of key actors Management has to create a proper organizational context to foster entrepreneurship and innovation (internal selection environment). Governmental agencies have to focus on innovation and productivity enabling strategic regulations (external selection environment). Moreover, research institutes, business schools, and consulting firms should not only focus on technological knowledge, but also on managerial and organizational knowledge for innovation. In the end, private small and large firms and public institutions have to recognize that they all must contribute to the national goal of increasing innovation and productivity growth. 4. Create a new challenging national ambition: return of the Netherlands within the top-10 The Netherlands has to return to the top-ten most innovative and productive countries in the world as reflected in international rankings such as the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index. 5. Proliferate an awareness and passion for innovation: Create public awareness and recognition of the societal relevance of outstanding managerial capabilities and organizing principles to innovation and productivity growth: o Initiate a Dutch innovation ranking in terms of management and organization; o Develop proper assessment tools for innovations in management and organization; o Enhance reporting on the progress on managerial and organizational innovation as part of modern corporate governance and as part of outstanding annual reports. These issues may contribute to rethinking the fundamental sources of innovation, productivity growth and sustainable competitive advantage of the Dutch economy.

7 citations

Posted Content
21 Jun 2000
TL;DR: In this paper, a conceptual framework of managerial knowledge integration and three levels of management, namely front-line, middle and top management, is presented, and propositions are derived relating knowledge integration with the creation of managerial capabilities and a firm's managerial competences.
Abstract: textThe purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework of managerial knowledge integration and to illustrate the framework for three levels of management: front-line, middle, and top management. Based on the framework, propositions will be derived relating managerial knowledge integration with the creation of managerial capabilities and a firm's managerial competences.

6 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify key dimensions of absorptive capacity and offer a reconceptualization of this construct, and distinguish between a firm's potential and realized capacity, and then advance a model outlining the conditions when the firm's realized capacities can differentially influence the creation and sustenance of its competitive advantage.
Abstract: Researchers have used the absorptive capacity construct to explain various organizational phenomena. In this article we review the literature to identify key dimensions of absorptive capacity and offer a reconceptualization of this construct. Building upon the dynamic capabilities view of the firm, we distinguish between a firm's potential and realized capacity. We then advance a model outlining the conditions when the firm's potential and realized capacities can differentially influence the creation and sustenance of its competitive advantage.

8,648 citations

Book
01 Jan 1995
TL;DR: In this article, Nonaka and Takeuchi argue that Japanese firms are successful precisely because they are innovative, because they create new knowledge and use it to produce successful products and technologies, and they reveal how Japanese companies translate tacit to explicit knowledge.
Abstract: How has Japan become a major economic power, a world leader in the automotive and electronics industries? What is the secret of their success? The consensus has been that, though the Japanese are not particularly innovative, they are exceptionally skilful at imitation, at improving products that already exist. But now two leading Japanese business experts, Ikujiro Nonaka and Hiro Takeuchi, turn this conventional wisdom on its head: Japanese firms are successful, they contend, precisely because they are innovative, because they create new knowledge and use it to produce successful products and technologies. Examining case studies drawn from such firms as Honda, Canon, Matsushita, NEC, 3M, GE, and the U.S. Marines, this book reveals how Japanese companies translate tacit to explicit knowledge and use it to produce new processes, products, and services.

7,448 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a distinction is made between the learning processes taking place among actors embedded in a community by just being there dubbed buzz and the knowledge attained by investing in building channels of communication called pipelines to selected providers located outside the local milieu.
Abstract: The paper is concerned with spatial clustering of economic activity and its relation to the spatiality of knowledge creation in interactive learning processes. It questions the view that tacit knowledge transfer is confined to local milieus whereas codified knowledge may roam the globe almost frictionlessly. The paper highlights the conditions under which both tacit and codified knowledge can be exchanged locally and globally. A distinction is made between, on the one hand, the learning processes taking place among actors embedded in a community by just being there dubbed buzz and, on the other, the knowledge attained by investing in building channels of communication called pipelines to selected providers located outside the local milieu. It is argued that the co-existence of high levels of buzz and many pipelines may provide firms located in outward-looking and lively clusters with a string of particular advantages not available to outsiders. Finally, some policy implications, stemming from this argumen...

3,942 citations

Book
01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: Nonaka and Takeuchi as discussed by the authors argue that there are two types of knowledge: explicit knowledge, contained in manuals and procedures, and tacit knowledge, learned only by experience, and communicated only indirectly, through metaphor and analogy.
Abstract: How have Japanese companies become world leaders in the automotive and electronics industries, among others? What is the secret of their success? Two leading Japanese business experts, Ikujiro Nonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi, are the first to tie the success of Japanese companies to their ability to create new knowledge and use it to produce successful products and technologies. In The Knowledge-Creating Company, Nonaka and Takeuchi provide an inside look at how Japanese companies go about creating this new knowledge organizationally. The authors point out that there are two types of knowledge: explicit knowledge, contained in manuals and procedures, and tacit knowledge, learned only by experience, and communicated only indirectly, through metaphor and analogy. U.S. managers focus on explicit knowledge. The Japanese, on the other hand, focus on tacit knowledge. And this, the authors argue, is the key to their success--the Japanese have learned how to transform tacit into explicit knowledge. To explain how this is done--and illuminate Japanese business practices as they do so--the authors range from Greek philosophy to Zen Buddhism, from classical economists to modern management gurus, illustrating the theory of organizational knowledge creation with case studies drawn from such firms as Honda, Canon, Matsushita, NEC, Nissan, 3M, GE, and even the U.S. Marines. For instance, using Matsushita's development of the Home Bakery (the world's first fully automated bread-baking machine for home use), they show how tacit knowledge can be converted to explicit knowledge: when the designers couldn't perfect the dough kneading mechanism, a software programmer apprenticed herself withthe master baker at Osaka International Hotel, gained a tacit understanding of kneading, and then conveyed this information to the engineers. In addition, the authors show that, to create knowledge, the best management style is neither top-down nor bottom-up, but rather what they call "middle-up-down," in which the middle managers form a bridge between the ideals of top management and the chaotic realities of the frontline. As we make the turn into the 21st century, a new society is emerging. Peter Drucker calls it the "knowledge society," one that is drastically different from the "industrial society," and one in which acquiring and applying knowledge will become key competitive factors. Nonaka and Takeuchi go a step further, arguing that creating knowledge will become the key to sustaining a competitive advantage in the future. Because the competitive environment and customer preferences changes constantly, knowledge perishes quickly. With The Knowledge-Creating Company, managers have at their fingertips years of insight from Japanese firms that reveal how to create knowledge continuously, and how to exploit it to make successful new products, services, and systems.

3,668 citations