Systemic assessment framework of a learning organization's competitive positioning

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to devise an innovative feasible, replicable and comprehensive assessment framework of a learning organization's competitive positioning. Design/methodology/approach: The three characteristics listed above are approached as follows. Feasible refers to being easy and not in need of much resources (time, personnel,...). This is done through early elimination of non-important variables. Replicable is having a well structured methodology based on scientific proven methods. Following this methodology would result in good results that can be explained if needed and replicated if deemed necessary. Comprehensive translates into a holistic set of indices that measure performance as well as organizational learning. Findings and Originality/value: The three attributes (feasible, replicable and comprehensive) have become crucial for ensuring any kind of added value for such a methodology that hopes to tackle the modern dynamic business environment and gaining a sustainable competitive advantage. Research limitations/implications: Such a methodology would require several full contextual applications to be able to set its final design. It entails thorough internal revision of a company's structure. Therefore a great deal of transparency and self-transcendence from the individual involved is a pre-requisite for any chance of success. Originality/value: It offers a systematic way to assess a company's performance/competitive positioning while accounting for the crucial attribute of organizational learning in its makeup.

[1]  M. Hauschild,et al.  Characterisation of social impacts in LCA , 2010 .

[2]  Alfred E. Thal,et al.  To LEED or Not to LEED: Analysis of Cost Premiums Associated With Sustainable Facility Design , 2012 .

[3]  Elita Amrina,et al.  Key performance indicators for sustainable manufacturing evaluation in automotive companies , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management.

[4]  Integrating System Dynamics in a Strategic Foresight Process for Firms in Production Networks , 2012 .

[5]  Antonio Leal,et al.  Measuring Organizational Learning as a Multidimensional Construct , 2011, Encyclopedia of Knowledge Management.

[6]  Karsten Nowrot.  Global Reporting Initiative , 2010 .

[7]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process: Economic, Political, Social and Technological Applications with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks , 2013 .

[8]  Larry Hatcher,et al.  A Step-by-Step Approach to Using SAS for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling, Second Edition , 2013 .

[9]  Magnus Söderlund,et al.  Stability and change in decision makers' perceptions of the firm's environment: An empirical study of causal attribution by a top management team , 1993 .

[10]  Dusya Vera,et al.  Organizational Learning , Knowledge Management , and Intellectual Capital : an Integrative Conceptual Model , 2001 .

[11]  Craig R. Carter,et al.  Behavioral supply management: a taxonomy of judgment and decision‐making biases , 2007 .

[12]  G. Nóbrega,et al.  Modeling for Learning Organizations and Qualitative Reasoning : Grounding a Case Study within IT Management , 2005 .

[13]  B. Beamon.  Supply chain design and analysis:: Models and methods , 1998 .

[14]  J. Hayward.  Model Behavior and the Strengths of Causal Loops: Mathematical Insights and a Practical Method , 2012 .

[15]  MEASURING AND REPORTING KNOWLEDGE-BASED RESOURCES : THE INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL REPORT , 2002 .

[16]  Jose Manuel Arias,et al.  Information systems supported organizational learning as a competitive advantage , 2013 .

[17]  S. Withers,et al.  Sustainability Reporting Guidelines: Which to Choose? , 2014 .

[18]  Larry Hatcher,et al.  A Step-by-Step Approach to Using the SAS System for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling , 1994 .

[19]  Rahul Roy,et al.  Capacity augmentation of a supply chain for a short lifecycle product: A system dynamics framework , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[20]  M. Braglia,et al.  Vendor Selection Using Principal Component Analysis , 2000 .

[21]  Farzad Tahriri,et al.  AHP approach for supplier evaluation and selection in a steel manufacturing company , 2008 .

[22]  P. Senge.  The fifth discipline : the art and practice of the learning organization/ Peter M. Senge , 1991 .

[23]  Andreas Rosenblad.  A Step-by-Step Approach to Using SAS-super-® for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modelling, Second Edition , 2015 .

[24]  Stephan Vachon,et al.  Green supply chain practices and the selection of environmental technologies , 2007 .

[25]  M. Reeves,et al.  The business of sustainability: what it means to managers now , 2009 .

[26]  Dixit Garg,et al.  Identifying and ranking of strategies to implement green supply chain management in Indian manufacturing industry using Analytical Hierarchy Process , 2013 .

[27]  David N. Ford,et al.  Mental models concepts for system dynamics research , 1998 .

[28]  L. Pretorius,et al.  A system dynamics approach to quality improvement programs in a heavy engineering manufacturing environment: A case study , 2012, 2012 Proceedings of PICMET '12: Technology Management for Emerging Technologies.

[29]  Jaeho Lee,et al.  Development of a new technology product evaluation model for assessing commercialization opportunities using Delphi method and fuzzy AHP approach , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[30]  Sumant kumar Bishwas.  Knowledge Management and Related Emerging Issues in Organizations : A Systems Thinking using Feedback Loop Analysis , 2012 .

[31]  L. V. Wassenhove,et al.  Sustainable Operations Management , 2005 .

[32]  A. Ford.  Modeling the Environment: An Introduction To System Dynamics Modeling Of Environmental Systems , 1999 .

[33]  Samuel Famiyeh,et al.  Sustainability and competitive advantage from a developing economy , 2016 .

[34]  Ali Azadeh,et al.  An integrated framework for continuous assessment and improvement of manufacturing systems , 2007, Appl. Math. Comput..

[35]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Decision making with the analytic network process , 2013 .

[36]  Catherine L. Wang,et al.  A Review of the Concept of Organisational Learning , 2002 .

[37]  Ahmet Beskese,et al.  Prioritization of organizational capital measurement indicators using fuzzy AHP , 2007, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[38]  Mohammad Dehghani,et al.  Analysis of Technology Effectiveness of Lean Manufacturing Using System Dynamics , 2013 .

[39]  Sanjay Jain,et al.  A framework for multi-resolution modeling of sustainable manufacturing , 2010, Proceedings of the 2010 Winter Simulation Conference.

[40]  David N. Ford.  A behavioral approach to feedback loop dominance analysis , 1999 .

[41]  Kazuaki Takahashi,et al.  Japan’s waste management policies for dioxins and polychlorinated biphenyls , 2009 .

[42]  Maöa Magzan.  MENTAL MODELS FOR LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS: BUILDING FUTURE DIFFERENT THAN THE PAST , 2012 .

[43]  J. Ashayeri,et al.  GLOBAL BUSINESS PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING: A SYSTEM DYNAMICS BASED APPROACH , 1998, Proceeding of Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing, 1997.

[44]  Nausheen Syed,et al.  The Linkage Between Knowledge Management Practices and Company Performance: Empirical Evidence , 2013 .

[45]  Larry Hatcher,et al.  A step-by-step approach to using SAS for univariate & multivariate statistics , 2005 .

[46]  Peter M. Senge,et al.  Modeling For Learning Organizations , 1994 .