en pl
en pl

Central European Management Journal

Show issue
Year 2018 
Volume 26 
Issue 1

Company Actions and Value Drivers: Manager Reports from Polish Firms

Ryszard Kłeczek
Wroclaw University of Economics

2018 26 (1) Central European Management Journal

DOI 10.7206/jmba.ce.2450-7814.217

Article contents

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to identify what are the cause-effect patterns of how company actions influence value drivers in Polish frms.

Method: The method used in the study consists of (1) the generation of informant reports (stories) about what actions performed in their frms influenced the value drivers and (2) the identifcation of the repeating (replicating) patterns of such influence.

Results: The study identifes fve actions that reduce the unproductive time of participants of business processes and three actions influencing new product introductions or modifcations.

Managerial implications: Managers should (1) use standardization and automation, delegation of secondary activities, and trainings in teamwork to reduce unproductive time, more quickly fulfll contracts (with current products), and influence four fnancial value drivers. Moreover, they should (2) gather knowledge about the alternative ways of thinking about particular problems and (3) use personal participation of knowledge possessor’s teams in clients’ problem-solving places.

Limitations and future research: The author identifes fve limitations of the performed study and formulates relevant suggestions for future research.

Originality/value: The study contributes to management theory by (1) clarifying conceptual relations between the actions of frms (causes) and value drivers (effects) and (2) analyzing the manager reports about the real business value-creation processes.

References

  1. Argote, L., McEvily, B. and Reagans, R. (2003). Managing knowledge in organizations: an integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Management Science, 49(4): 571–582, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.49.4.571.14424 [Google Scholar]
  2. Balkundi, P., Kilduff, M., Barsness, Z.I. and Michael, J.H. (2007). Demographic antecedents and performance consequences of structural holes in work teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28: 241–260, https://doi.org/10.1002/job.428 [Google Scholar]
  3. Blumberg, M. and Pringle, C.D. (1982). The missing opportunity in organizational research: Some implications for a theory of work performance. Academy of Management Review, 7: 560–569. [Google Scholar]
  4. Boudreau, J., Hopp, W., McClain, J.O. and Thomas, L.J. (2003). On the interface between operations and human resources management. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 5(4): 179–203, https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.5.3.179.16032 [Google Scholar]
  5. Briers, M. and Chua, W.F. (2001). The role of actor-network and boundary objects in management accounting change: a feld study of an implementation of activity-based costing. Accounting. Organizations and Society, 26: 237–269, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(00)00029-5 [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social practice perspective. Organization Science, 12: 198–213, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.2.198.10116 [Google Scholar]
  7. Carlile, P. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5): 555–568, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0094 [Google Scholar]
  8. Carlile, P. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13: 442–455, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.4.442.2953 [Google Scholar]
  9. Carrillo, P.M., Robinson, H.S., Anumba, C.J. and Al-Ghassani, A.M. (2003). IMPaKT: A framework for linking knowledge management to business performance. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(1): 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (2004). Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organization. London: Sage Publications, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446280119 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, C.J. and Huang, J.W. (2009). Strategic human resource practices and innovation performance: The mediating role of knowledge management capacity. Journal of Business Research, 62: 104–114, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.11.016 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cho, T. and Korte, R. (2014). Managing knowledge performance: testing the components of a knowledge management system on organizational Performance. Asia Pacifc Education Review, 15: 313–327, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-014-9333-x [Google Scholar]
  13. Choi, B. and Lee, H. (2003). An empirical investigation of KM styles and their effect on corporate performance. Information and Management, 40: 403–417, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00060-5 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cross, R., Borgatti, S.P. and Parker, A. (2002). Making Invisible Work Visible: using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review, 44(2), Winter: 25–46, https://doi.org/10.2307/41166121 [Google Scholar]
  15. Faems, D., de Visser, M., Andries, P. and Van Looy, B. (2010). Technology Alliance Portfolios and Financial Performance: Value-Enhancing and Cost-Increasing Effects of Open Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27: 785–796, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00752.x [Google Scholar]
  16. Faems D., Van Looy B., Janssens M.I. and Vlaar P.W.L. (2012). The process of value realization in asymmetric new venture development alliances: Governing the transition from exploration to exploitation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 29: 508–527, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2012.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  17. Ferrin, D.L. and Dirks, K.T. (2003). The use of rewards to increase and decrease trust: mediating processes and differential effects. Organization Science, 14(1): 18–31, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.1.18.12809 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gómez, P.J., Lorente, J.J.C. and Cabrera, R.V. (2004) Training practices and organizational learning capability. Journal of European Industrial Training, 28: 234–256, https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590410527636 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kaplan, R.S. and Anderson S.R. (2004). Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing. Harvard Business Review, November: 131–138. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kaplan, R.S. and Anderson S.R. (2007). Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing. A Simpler and More Powerful Path to Higher Proft. Boston: Harvard Business Review School Press. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kłeczek, R. (2017). Where is value in b2b value proposition? The concept of value in research on selling, innovation management and NPD. Marketing i Rynek, 4: 4–11. [Google Scholar]
  22. Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, May: 86–92. [Google Scholar]
  23. Mårtensson, M. (2000). A critical review of knowledge management as a management tool. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(3): 204–216, https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270010350002 [Google Scholar]
  24. Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. (1990). Core competence of the company. HBR, May–June: 79–91. [Google Scholar]
  25. Rappaport, A. (1988). Cash Flow Analysis of Corporate Performance. Small Business Reports, 13(9): 80–86. [Google Scholar]
  26. Rappaport, A. (1986). Creating Shareholder Value. A Guide for Managers and Investors. New York: The Free Press. [Google Scholar]
  27. Schonberger, R.J. (2013). Time-Relevant Metrics in an Era of Continuous Process Improvement: The Balanced Scorecard Revisited. Quality Management Journal, 20(3): 10–18, https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.2013.11918353 [Google Scholar]
  28. Shah, R. and Ward, P.T. (2003) Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21(2): 129–149, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00108-0 [Google Scholar]
  29. Siemsen, E., Balasubramanian, S. and Roth, A.V. (2007). The Difference of Being Similar: Competence Similarity and Knowledge Sharing in Workgroups. Working paper. University of Illinois, Champaign, IL. [Google Scholar]
  30. Siemsen E., Roth A.V. and Balasubramanian, S. (2008). How motivation, opportunity, and ability drive knowledge sharing: The constraining-factor model. Journal of Operations Management, 26: 426–445, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Sung, S.Y. and Choi, J.N. (2014). Do organizations spend wisely on employees? Effects of training and development investments on learning and innovation in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35: 393–412, https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1897 [Google Scholar]
  32. Teece, D.J. (2010). Business Models, Business Strategy and Innovation. Long Range Planning, 43: 172–194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  33. Terho, H., Haas, A., Eggert, A. and Ulaga, W. (2012). It’s almost like taking the sales out of selling’ – Towards a conceptualization of value-based selling in business markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 41: 174–185, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2011.11.011 [Google Scholar]
  34. Töytäri, P., Brashear, T., Parvinen, A.P., Ollila, I. and Rosendahl, N. (2011). Bridging the theory to application gap in value-based selling. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 26(7): 493–502, https://doi.org/10.1108/08858621111162299 [Google Scholar]
  35. Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36: 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6 [Google Scholar]
  36. Windeck, D., Weber, J. and Strauss, E. (2015). Enrolling managers to accept the business partner: the role of boundary objects. Journal of Management and Governance, 19: 617–653, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-013-9277-2 [Google Scholar]
  37. Wouters, M. and Roijmans, D. (2011). Using Prototypes to Induce Experimentation and Knowledge Integration in the Development of Enabling Accounting Information. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28(2): 708–736, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01055.x [Google Scholar]
  38. Wouters, M. and Kirchberger, M.A. (2015). Customer value propositions as interorganizational management accounting to support customer collaboration. Industrial Marketing Management, 46: 54–67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.01.005 [Google Scholar]
  39. Yung, D.S. and O’Byrne, S.F. (2001). EVA and Value-Based Management. A practical Guide to implementation. New York: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar]
  40. Zhu, F., Sun X., Miller J. and Deng, Z. (2014) Innovations in Knowledge Management: Applying Modular Design. International Journal of Innovation Science, 6(2): 83–96, https://doi.org/10.1260/1757-2223.6.2.83 [Google Scholar]
  41. Argote, L., McEvily, B. and Reagans, R. (2003). Managing knowledge in organizations: an integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Management Science, 49(4): 571–582, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.49.4.571.14424 [Google Scholar]
  42. Balkundi, P., Kilduff, M., Barsness, Z.I. and Michael, J.H. (2007). Demographic antecedents and performance consequences of structural holes in work teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28: 241–260, https://doi.org/10.1002/job.428 [Google Scholar]
  43. Blumberg, M. and Pringle, C.D. (1982). The missing opportunity in organizational research: Some implications for a theory of work performance. Academy of Management Review, 7: 560–569. [Google Scholar]
  44. Boudreau, J., Hopp, W., McClain, J.O. and Thomas, L.J. (2003). On the interface between operations and human resources management. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 5(4): 179–203, https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.5.3.179.16032 [Google Scholar]
  45. Briers, M. and Chua, W.F. (2001). The role of actor-network and boundary objects in management accounting change: a feld study of an implementation of activity-based costing. Accounting. Organizations and Society, 26: 237–269, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(00)00029-5 [Google Scholar]
  46. Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social practice perspective. Organization Science, 12: 198–213, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.2.198.10116 [Google Scholar]
  47. Carlile, P. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5): 555–568, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0094 [Google Scholar]
  48. Carlile, P. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13: 442–455, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.4.442.2953 [Google Scholar]
  49. Carrillo, P.M., Robinson, H.S., Anumba, C.J. and Al-Ghassani, A.M. (2003). IMPaKT: A framework for linking knowledge management to business performance. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(1): 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  50. Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (2004). Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organization. London: Sage Publications, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446280119 [Google Scholar]
  51. Chen, C.J. and Huang, J.W. (2009). Strategic human resource practices and innovation performance: The mediating role of knowledge management capacity. Journal of Business Research, 62: 104–114, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.11.016 [Google Scholar]
  52. Cho, T. and Korte, R. (2014). Managing knowledge performance: testing the components of a knowledge management system on organizational Performance. Asia Pacifc Education Review, 15: 313–327, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-014-9333-x [Google Scholar]
  53. Choi, B. and Lee, H. (2003). An empirical investigation of KM styles and their effect on corporate performance. Information and Management, 40: 403–417, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00060-5 [Google Scholar]
  54. Cross, R., Borgatti, S.P. and Parker, A. (2002). Making Invisible Work Visible: using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review, 44(2), Winter: 25–46, https://doi.org/10.2307/41166121 [Google Scholar]
  55. Faems, D., de Visser, M., Andries, P. and Van Looy, B. (2010). Technology Alliance Portfolios and Financial Performance: Value-Enhancing and Cost-Increasing Effects of Open Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27: 785–796, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00752.x [Google Scholar]
  56. Faems D., Van Looy B., Janssens M.I. and Vlaar P.W.L. (2012). The process of value realization in asymmetric new venture development alliances: Governing the transition from exploration to exploitation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 29: 508–527, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2012.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  57. Ferrin, D.L. and Dirks, K.T. (2003). The use of rewards to increase and decrease trust: mediating processes and differential effects. Organization Science, 14(1): 18–31, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.1.18.12809 [Google Scholar]
  58. Gómez, P.J., Lorente, J.J.C. and Cabrera, R.V. (2004) Training practices and organizational learning capability. Journal of European Industrial Training, 28: 234–256, https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590410527636 [Google Scholar]
  59. Kaplan, R.S. and Anderson S.R. (2004). Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing. Harvard Business Review, November: 131–138. [Google Scholar]
  60. Kaplan, R.S. and Anderson S.R. (2007). Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing. A Simpler and More Powerful Path to Higher Proft. Boston: Harvard Business Review School Press. [Google Scholar]
  61. Kłeczek, R. (2017). Where is value in b2b value proposition? The concept of value in research on selling, innovation management and NPD. Marketing i Rynek, 4: 4–11. [Google Scholar]
  62. Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, May: 86–92. [Google Scholar]
  63. Mårtensson, M. (2000). A critical review of knowledge management as a management tool. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(3): 204–216, https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270010350002 [Google Scholar]
  64. Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. (1990). Core competence of the company. HBR, May–June: 79–91. [Google Scholar]
  65. Rappaport, A. (1988). Cash Flow Analysis of Corporate Performance. Small Business Reports, 13(9): 80–86. [Google Scholar]
  66. Rappaport, A. (1986). Creating Shareholder Value. A Guide for Managers and Investors. New York: The Free Press. [Google Scholar]
  67. Schonberger, R.J. (2013). Time-Relevant Metrics in an Era of Continuous Process Improvement: The Balanced Scorecard Revisited. Quality Management Journal, 20(3): 10–18, https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.2013.11918353 [Google Scholar]
  68. Shah, R. and Ward, P.T. (2003) Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21(2): 129–149, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00108-0 [Google Scholar]
  69. Siemsen, E., Balasubramanian, S. and Roth, A.V. (2007). The Difference of Being Similar: Competence Similarity and Knowledge Sharing in Workgroups. Working paper. University of Illinois, Champaign, IL. [Google Scholar]
  70. Siemsen E., Roth A.V. and Balasubramanian, S. (2008). How motivation, opportunity, and ability drive knowledge sharing: The constraining-factor model. Journal of Operations Management, 26: 426–445, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  71. Sung, S.Y. and Choi, J.N. (2014). Do organizations spend wisely on employees? Effects of training and development investments on learning and innovation in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35: 393–412, https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1897 [Google Scholar]
  72. Teece, D.J. (2010). Business Models, Business Strategy and Innovation. Long Range Planning, 43: 172–194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  73. Terho, H., Haas, A., Eggert, A. and Ulaga, W. (2012). It’s almost like taking the sales out of selling’ – Towards a conceptualization of value-based selling in business markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 41: 174–185, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2011.11.011 [Google Scholar]
  74. Töytäri, P., Brashear, T., Parvinen, A.P., Ollila, I. and Rosendahl, N. (2011). Bridging the theory to application gap in value-based selling. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 26(7): 493–502, https://doi.org/10.1108/08858621111162299 [Google Scholar]
  75. Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36: 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6 [Google Scholar]
  76. Windeck, D., Weber, J. and Strauss, E. (2015). Enrolling managers to accept the business partner: the role of boundary objects. Journal of Management and Governance, 19: 617–653, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-013-9277-2 [Google Scholar]
  77. Wouters, M. and Roijmans, D. (2011). Using Prototypes to Induce Experimentation and Knowledge Integration in the Development of Enabling Accounting Information. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28(2): 708–736, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01055.x [Google Scholar]
  78. Wouters, M. and Kirchberger, M.A. (2015). Customer value propositions as interorganizational management accounting to support customer collaboration. Industrial Marketing Management, 46: 54–67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.01.005 [Google Scholar]
  79. Yung, D.S. and O’Byrne, S.F. (2001). EVA and Value-Based Management. A practical Guide to implementation. New York: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar]
  80. Zhu, F., Sun X., Miller J. and Deng, Z. (2014) Innovations in Knowledge Management: Applying Modular Design. International Journal of Innovation Science, 6(2): 83–96, https://doi.org/10.1260/1757-2223.6.2.83 [Google Scholar]

Full metadata record

Cite this record

APA style

Kłeczek, Ryszard (2018). Kłeczek, R.. (2018). Company Actions and Value Drivers: Manager Reports from Polish Firms. Central European Management Journal, 26(1), 13-26. https://doi.org/10.7206/jmba.ce.2450-7814.217 (Original work published 2018)

MLA style

Kłeczek, Ryszard. Kłeczek, R.. “Company Actions And Value Drivers: Manager Reports From Polish Firms”. 2018. Central European Management Journal, vol. 26, no. 1, 2018, pp. 13-26.

Chicago style

Kłeczek, Ryszard. Kłeczek, Ryszard . “Company Actions And Value Drivers: Manager Reports From Polish Firms”. Central European Management Journal, Central European Management Journal, 26, no. 1 (2018): 13-26. doi:10.7206/jmba.ce.2450-7814.217.

Copyright info

copyright info

CC-BY-NC-ND

People also read: