What Triggers Management Innovation?

Lauri Koskela, John Rooke

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There is a popular tendency in management science towards what could be called “theory denial”: the denial of the significance of theory for the development of management thought and action. We contend that this theory denial is just wrong, in the light of empirical evidence, and that is a damaging idea, because it diverts the attention of the scholarly community away from the core issues of the field. In this paper, we consider two variants of this theory denial, purporting to reveal the serious problems in their justification. First, the approach stressing the importance of studying how ideas are translated into solutions by organizations is considered. It is shown that there two unsubstantiated assumptions, first about the relative lack of importance of the (solution) idea, and second about the prior existence of such ideas. Second, a recent influential view on management innovation and the process through which it emerges is examined. This view focuses on the individuals (from inside and outside the organisation) who drive the innovation process and on the phases of the innovation process itself. The motivation for change is represented as coming solely from a perceived shortfall between the organization’s current and potential performance. Ideas, it would seem, arise spontaneously to fill this gap. We present historical examples to argue that the genesis of innovative management thinking can be much more closely accounted for and that ideas can themselves have a role in motivating change. Through exemplary cases, we contend that new concepts of production have operated in a way resembling the role of a scientific paradigm, as defined by Kuhn. A leading aspect of such a paradigm is that it defines criteria for choosing problems. The concept precedes and drives the innovation, functioning as a paradigm which guides the development of detailed solutions to problems which otherwise would not be visible. Indeed, the developments of new concepts of production seem to have triggered a long-standing stream of interrelated management innovations. Thus, rather than arising spontaneously in response to organisational need, “management ideas” have arisen in the context of an emerging theory of production. Thus, we contend that the role of management scholars is not only to come up with creative ideas or to address the translation of ideas, as held in the mainstream view, but rather they should develop new concepts and theories on phenomena relevant for management (such as production), based also on a critical scrutiny of present ones, clarify and make explicit concepts in use that are implicit, and codevelop new methods based on proven or promising concepts.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction
EditorsYpe Cuperus, Ercilia H. Hirota
PublisherInternational Group for Lean Construction ( IGLC )
Pages337-344
Number of pages8
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2009
Externally publishedYes
Event17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction - Taipei, Taiwan, Province of China
Duration: 13 Jul 200919 Jul 2009
Conference number: 17

Conference

Conference17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction
Abbreviated titleIGLC17
CountryTaiwan, Province of China
CityTaipei
Period13/07/0919/07/09

Fingerprint

Management innovation
Trigger
Denial
Paradigm
Innovation process
Innovation
Justification
Management science
Management of innovation
Empirical evidence
Functioning

Cite this

Koskela, L., & Rooke, J. (2009). What Triggers Management Innovation? In Y. Cuperus, & E. H. Hirota (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction (pp. 337-344). International Group for Lean Construction ( IGLC ).
Koskela, Lauri ; Rooke, John. / What Triggers Management Innovation?. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. editor / Ype Cuperus ; Ercilia H. Hirota. International Group for Lean Construction ( IGLC ), 2009. pp. 337-344
@inproceedings{8c38f6fbc59d4dae98a4d6d5adc02e09,
title = "What Triggers Management Innovation?",
abstract = "There is a popular tendency in management science towards what could be called “theory denial”: the denial of the significance of theory for the development of management thought and action. We contend that this theory denial is just wrong, in the light of empirical evidence, and that is a damaging idea, because it diverts the attention of the scholarly community away from the core issues of the field. In this paper, we consider two variants of this theory denial, purporting to reveal the serious problems in their justification. First, the approach stressing the importance of studying how ideas are translated into solutions by organizations is considered. It is shown that there two unsubstantiated assumptions, first about the relative lack of importance of the (solution) idea, and second about the prior existence of such ideas. Second, a recent influential view on management innovation and the process through which it emerges is examined. This view focuses on the individuals (from inside and outside the organisation) who drive the innovation process and on the phases of the innovation process itself. The motivation for change is represented as coming solely from a perceived shortfall between the organization’s current and potential performance. Ideas, it would seem, arise spontaneously to fill this gap. We present historical examples to argue that the genesis of innovative management thinking can be much more closely accounted for and that ideas can themselves have a role in motivating change. Through exemplary cases, we contend that new concepts of production have operated in a way resembling the role of a scientific paradigm, as defined by Kuhn. A leading aspect of such a paradigm is that it defines criteria for choosing problems. The concept precedes and drives the innovation, functioning as a paradigm which guides the development of detailed solutions to problems which otherwise would not be visible. Indeed, the developments of new concepts of production seem to have triggered a long-standing stream of interrelated management innovations. Thus, rather than arising spontaneously in response to organisational need, “management ideas” have arisen in the context of an emerging theory of production. Thus, we contend that the role of management scholars is not only to come up with creative ideas or to address the translation of ideas, as held in the mainstream view, but rather they should develop new concepts and theories on phenomena relevant for management (such as production), based also on a critical scrutiny of present ones, clarify and make explicit concepts in use that are implicit, and codevelop new methods based on proven or promising concepts.",
keywords = "Management innovation, Theory",
author = "Lauri Koskela and John Rooke",
year = "2009",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English",
pages = "337--344",
editor = "Ype Cuperus and Hirota, {Ercilia H.}",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction",
publisher = "International Group for Lean Construction ( IGLC )",

}

Koskela, L & Rooke, J 2009, What Triggers Management Innovation? in Y Cuperus & EH Hirota (eds), Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. International Group for Lean Construction ( IGLC ), pp. 337-344, 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Taipei, Taiwan, Province of China, 13/07/09.

What Triggers Management Innovation? / Koskela, Lauri; Rooke, John.

Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. ed. / Ype Cuperus; Ercilia H. Hirota. International Group for Lean Construction ( IGLC ), 2009. p. 337-344.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

TY - GEN

T1 - What Triggers Management Innovation?

AU - Koskela, Lauri

AU - Rooke, John

PY - 2009/12/1

Y1 - 2009/12/1

N2 - There is a popular tendency in management science towards what could be called “theory denial”: the denial of the significance of theory for the development of management thought and action. We contend that this theory denial is just wrong, in the light of empirical evidence, and that is a damaging idea, because it diverts the attention of the scholarly community away from the core issues of the field. In this paper, we consider two variants of this theory denial, purporting to reveal the serious problems in their justification. First, the approach stressing the importance of studying how ideas are translated into solutions by organizations is considered. It is shown that there two unsubstantiated assumptions, first about the relative lack of importance of the (solution) idea, and second about the prior existence of such ideas. Second, a recent influential view on management innovation and the process through which it emerges is examined. This view focuses on the individuals (from inside and outside the organisation) who drive the innovation process and on the phases of the innovation process itself. The motivation for change is represented as coming solely from a perceived shortfall between the organization’s current and potential performance. Ideas, it would seem, arise spontaneously to fill this gap. We present historical examples to argue that the genesis of innovative management thinking can be much more closely accounted for and that ideas can themselves have a role in motivating change. Through exemplary cases, we contend that new concepts of production have operated in a way resembling the role of a scientific paradigm, as defined by Kuhn. A leading aspect of such a paradigm is that it defines criteria for choosing problems. The concept precedes and drives the innovation, functioning as a paradigm which guides the development of detailed solutions to problems which otherwise would not be visible. Indeed, the developments of new concepts of production seem to have triggered a long-standing stream of interrelated management innovations. Thus, rather than arising spontaneously in response to organisational need, “management ideas” have arisen in the context of an emerging theory of production. Thus, we contend that the role of management scholars is not only to come up with creative ideas or to address the translation of ideas, as held in the mainstream view, but rather they should develop new concepts and theories on phenomena relevant for management (such as production), based also on a critical scrutiny of present ones, clarify and make explicit concepts in use that are implicit, and codevelop new methods based on proven or promising concepts.

AB - There is a popular tendency in management science towards what could be called “theory denial”: the denial of the significance of theory for the development of management thought and action. We contend that this theory denial is just wrong, in the light of empirical evidence, and that is a damaging idea, because it diverts the attention of the scholarly community away from the core issues of the field. In this paper, we consider two variants of this theory denial, purporting to reveal the serious problems in their justification. First, the approach stressing the importance of studying how ideas are translated into solutions by organizations is considered. It is shown that there two unsubstantiated assumptions, first about the relative lack of importance of the (solution) idea, and second about the prior existence of such ideas. Second, a recent influential view on management innovation and the process through which it emerges is examined. This view focuses on the individuals (from inside and outside the organisation) who drive the innovation process and on the phases of the innovation process itself. The motivation for change is represented as coming solely from a perceived shortfall between the organization’s current and potential performance. Ideas, it would seem, arise spontaneously to fill this gap. We present historical examples to argue that the genesis of innovative management thinking can be much more closely accounted for and that ideas can themselves have a role in motivating change. Through exemplary cases, we contend that new concepts of production have operated in a way resembling the role of a scientific paradigm, as defined by Kuhn. A leading aspect of such a paradigm is that it defines criteria for choosing problems. The concept precedes and drives the innovation, functioning as a paradigm which guides the development of detailed solutions to problems which otherwise would not be visible. Indeed, the developments of new concepts of production seem to have triggered a long-standing stream of interrelated management innovations. Thus, rather than arising spontaneously in response to organisational need, “management ideas” have arisen in the context of an emerging theory of production. Thus, we contend that the role of management scholars is not only to come up with creative ideas or to address the translation of ideas, as held in the mainstream view, but rather they should develop new concepts and theories on phenomena relevant for management (such as production), based also on a critical scrutiny of present ones, clarify and make explicit concepts in use that are implicit, and codevelop new methods based on proven or promising concepts.

KW - Management innovation

KW - Theory

UR - https://www.scopus.com/record/display.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84856635901&origin=inward&txGid=58b936bf797f5d13325225c4bc6617ac

M3 - Conference contribution

SP - 337

EP - 344

BT - Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction

A2 - Cuperus, Ype

A2 - Hirota, Ercilia H.

PB - International Group for Lean Construction ( IGLC )

ER -

Koskela L, Rooke J. What Triggers Management Innovation? In Cuperus Y, Hirota EH, editors, Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. International Group for Lean Construction ( IGLC ). 2009. p. 337-344