For several years many of us at Peabody College have participated in the evolution of a theory of community, the first conceptualization of which was presented in a working paper (McMillan, 1976) of the Center for Community Studies. To support the proposed definition, McMillan focused on the literature on group cohesiveness, and we build here on that original definition. This article attempts to describe the dynamics of the sense-of-community force — to identify the various elements in the force and to describe the process by which these elements work together to produce the experience of sense of community.

Sense of community: A definition and theory

Effective organizations are configurations of management practices that facilitate the development of the knowledge that becomes the basis for competitive advantage. A market orientation, complemen...

Market Orientation and the Learning Organization

Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the International Communication Association/Speech Communication Association Conference on Interpretive Approaches to Organizational Communication, Alta, Utah, July 1981, and the Eastern Academy of Management meetings, Baltimore, Maryland, May 1982. I would like to express special appreciation to Mike Pacanowsky and Linda Putnam for organizing the Interpretive Conference, which provided the impetus as well as encouragement for the development of these ideas. Thanks also to Gareth Morgan, Linda Pike, Lou Pondy, and Karl Weick for their various forms of inspiration. This paper examines the significance of the concept of culture for organizational analysis. The intersection of culturetheory and organization theory is evident in five current research themes: comparative management, corporate culture, organizational cognition, organizational symbolism, and unconscious processes and organization. Researchers pursue these themes for different purposes and their work is based on different assumptions about the nature of culture and organization. The task of evaluating the power and limitations of the concept of culture must be conducted within this assumptive context. This review demonstrates that the concept of culture takes organization analysis in several different and promising directions.

/pdf/concepts-of-culture-and-organizational-analysis-3i9jlk2xcn.pdf

Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis

Innovation is defined as the development and implementation of new ideas by people who over time engage in transactions with others within an institutional order. This definition focuses on four basic factors new ideas, people, transactions, and institutional context. An understanding of how these factors are related leads to four basic problems confronting most general managers: 1 a human problem of managing attention, 2 a process problem in managing new ideas into good currency, 3 a structural problem of managing part-whole relationships, and 4 a strategic problem of institutional leadership. This paper discusses these four basic problems and concludes by suggesting how they fit together into an overall framework to guide longitudinal study of the management of innovation.

/pdf/central-problems-in-the-management-of-innovation-2g1fe8bbck.pdf

Central problems in the management of innovation

Current research offers alternative explanations to the “linkage” between the pattern of diversification and performance At least four streams of research can be identified None of these can be considered to be a reliable, predictive theory of successful diversification They are, at best, partial explanations The purpose of this paper is to propose an additional “linkage,” conceptual at this stage, that might help our understanding of the crucial connection between diversity and performance The conceptual argument is intented as a “supplement” to the current lines of research, rather than as an alternative explanation

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/106722/4250070602_ftp.pdf?sequence=1

The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance

• Presents the seven S concept, which introduced a framework for comparing the different approaches of Japanese and US management. • The framework lists the seven important categories that managers should take into account—strategy, structure, skills, staff, shared values, systems, and style. • Argues that a major reason for the superiority of the Japanese is their managerial skills, largely due to their vision, something found to be lacking in the West, where the tools are there but vision is limited. • Shows how beliefs, assumptions, and perceptions about management frequently constrain US managers. • Describes how Japanese managers enhance their modus operandi through dynamic visions, rather than superficial or generic statements of corporate intent.

Richard Tanner Pascale

Papers

The Art of Japanese Management