infonet-economy

Die empirische Forschung hat sich fast nicht mit der Frage nach den Erfolgsfaktoren von Projekten der organisatorischen Veränderung befasst. Um diese Lücke zu schliessen, wurde eine exploratorische Studie mit einer Erhebung bei neun Grossunternehmen durchgeführt. Aufgrund der Datenanalyse wurden die für den Projekterfolg massgeblichen Faktoren eruiert. Es handelt sich dabei um das Engagement der Entscheidungsträger, die sachliche Ausrichtung der Entscheidungen, die Klarheit der Ziele, Partizipation der Betroffenen und einen ganzheitlichen Ansatz der Projektrealisierung. Diese Ergebnisse wurden in den Tests bestätigt, sind also als robust zu betrachten.

Empirical Research has hardly dealt with the question of success factors in organizational change. To close that gap, we have used the data from a survey on change projects carried out in eight large cor-porations. Interviewees were the project managers and additional project staff in organizational change projects. By means of statistical analysis we discerned factors which crucially influence the success of such projects. A number of factors are distinctive for their strong influence on project suc-cess: Commitment of decision makers, focus of decisions (content as opposed to expressed interest), clearness of goals, participation, and a holistic approach to project management. Additional analyses were carried out to examine if these results held. This procedure triggered further insights, for exam-ple about varying degrees of influence from certain factors. We have not been able to falsify the initial results; on the contrary, they have gained in durability through the additional analyses. Therefore they can be considered as robust.

While most managerial interventions into organizational and business processes have the character of a direct interference, the interventions of consultants are rather indirect. They are meant to improve the organization and its performance, via a dialogue with the management. To clarify the sprcific role of consultants we shall introduce the concept of second-order intervention, therewith sharpening or, in a certain sense, redefining that role. We shall revert to a case study, which refers to a System Dynamics (SD) modelling and simulation project, to illustrate how a series of second-order interventions has opened new paths towards superior organizational competence and performance. This was an exploratory study, in the tradition of Action Research, not a hypothesis-testing venture.

The purpose of this chapter is to draw some lessons from an experience with the creation and implementation of innovative management models. The case in point is Cilag AG, one of the leading Swiss firms in the pharmaceutical industry. The demand for new and better management support has led to an organisational process whose emergence has been brought about with the help of management models at different levels of the business. These range from generic frameworks to detailed simulation models. We are focusing on core components of the Company Management Model. First, the Credo and Standards of Leadership, which provide the normative basis for corporate activities. Second, the Business Model, which includes a business simulation model with front-end cockpits for managers. Third, the Organisational Model, which contains the architecture for an overarching process-oriented design of the organisation. Finally, the Process & Product Model, which delivers maps and instruments as tools for management; quality, compliance and risk management in particular. The models have been created with a high level of participation from people throughout the organisation, under the leadership of the unit of Strategic Process Management & Methods (SPMM), which fulfils the role of an innovative turnplate and catalyst. The results of this approach are so remarkable that the managers are asking for more.

System Dynamics is a discipline for the modeling, simulation and control of complex dynamic systems. In this contribution, the methodology of System Dynamics-based modeling is argued to be a powerful and rigorous approach to theory-building. The strength od the pertinent process of theory development lies in its high standards for model validation, and in a combination of abductive reasoning with induction and deduction. The argument of the paper is underpinned by an application of System Dynamics to the elaboration of a theory in the new field of Cultural Dynamics.

The etymological root of "valid" is in the Latin word "validus", which denotes attributes such as strong, powerful and firm. A valid model, then, is well-founded and difficult to reject because it accurately represents the perceived real system which it is sup-posed to reflect. This system can be either one that already exists or one that is be-ing constructed, or even anticipated, by a modeler or a group of modelers.
The validation standards in System Dynamics are more rigorous than those of many other methodologies. Let us distinguish between two types of mathematical models, which are fundamentally different: Causal, theory-like models and non-causal, statistical (correlational) models [Barlas & Carpenter 1990]. The former are explanatory, i.e., they embody theory about the functioning of a real system. The latter are descriptive and express observed associations among different elements of a real system. System dynamics models are causal models.
Non-causal models are tested globally, in that the statistical fit between model and data series from the real system under study is assessed. If the fit is satisfactory, the model is considered to be accurate ("valid", "true"). In contrast, system dynamicists postulate that models be not only right, but right for the right reasons. As the models are made up of causal interdependencies, accuracy is required for each and every variable and relationship. The following principle applies: In case only one component of the model is shown to be wrong, the whole model is rejected even if the over-all model output fits the data [Barlas & Carpenter 1990]. This strict standard is conducive to high-quality modeling practice.
A model is an abstract version of a perceived reality. Simulation is a way of experimenting with mathematical models to gain insights and to employ these to improve the real system under study. It is often said that System Dynamics models should portray problems or issues, not systems. This statement must be interpreted in the sense that one should not try to set the boundaries of the model too wide, but rather give the model a focus by concentrating on an object in accordance with the specific purpose of the model. In a narrower definition, even an issue or problem can be conceived of as a "system", i.e., "a portion of the world sufficiently well defined to be the subject of study" [Rapoport 1954]. Validity then consists in a stringent correspondence between model system and real system.
We will treat the issue of model validation as a means of assuring high-quality models. We interject that validity is not the only criterion of model quality, the other criteria being parsimony, ease-of-use, practicality, importance, etc. [Schwaninger & Groesser 2008].
In the following, the epistemological foundations of model validity are reviewed (Chapter II). Then, an overview of the methods for assuring model validity is given (Chapter III). Further, the survey includes an overview of the validation process (Chapter IV) and our final conclusions (Chapter V).

The purpose of this contribution is to make the idea of modeling as theory-building operational. We conceive the modeling process as a theory-building process, thereby opening up a new perspective on the methodology of modeling in the social sciences. By reconceptualizing the notion of modeling, we hope to convey the advantages of more conceptual thinking in management. Practitioners could gain effectiveness in dealing with external complexity if they would espouse the modeling task as a disciplined reflection and communication geared toward the elaboration of theories. This contribution is based on projects in which System Dynamics models for real-world issues were constructed together with corporate partners. To clarify the isomorphic nature of theory-building and formal modeling and illustrate the approach to modeling as theory-building, one of these modeling ventures is described in detail