leading organizations into adding value to society

Caderno de Idéias
CI0603 – May, 2006
ORGANIZA
TIONAL DIFFERENTIA
TION:
ORGANIZATIONAL
DIFFERENTIATION:
LEADING ORGANIZA
ALUE TO SOCIETY
ORGANIZATIONS
VALUE
TIONS INTO ADDING V
Léo FF.. C. Bruno
Professor, FDC
Centro Alfa – Campus Aloysio Faria
Av. Princesa Diana, 760 – Alphaville Lagoa dos Ingleses
34000-000 – Nova Lima, MG – Brasil
Tel.: 55 31 3589-7270 Fax: 55 31 3589-7402
e-mail: [email protected] – www.fdc.org.br
Layout (cover, visual programming and general editing)
Ismael Dias Campos
Proofreading
Irani Rodrigues L. Coutinho
Translation
Carlos Alberto B. da Silva
Publishing supervision
José Ricardo Ozólio
Teresa Goulart
Impression
Fundação Dom Cabral
2006
Professor Léo F. C. Bruno prepared this article and are responsible for its
contents. FDC is nowise responsible for the opinions herein expressed.
The authors approved the publication of this article in FDC Ideas Book
(Caderno de Idéias FDC).
Reproduction of this FDC Ideas Book (Caderno de Idéias FDC) is allowed,
provided sources are duly mentioned. To obtain further information, please
contact Teresa Goulart, through the electronic address: [email protected].
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 5
A PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR RATING ORGANIZATIONAL
DIFFERENTIATION ...................................................................................................... 5
Commitments ............................................................................................................................. 6
Results .......................................................................................................................................... 6
METHOD ....................................................................................................................... 8
RESULTS AND ANALYSES ........................................................................................... 9
CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................... 10
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 11
APPENDIX 1 – SET OF CLOSED INSTRUMENTS .................................................... 13
PUBLISHED TITLES ...................................................................................................... I
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
ORGANIZATIONAL DIFFERENTIATION:
LEADING ORGANIZATIONS INTO ADDING
VALUE TO SOCIETY
Léo FF.. C. Bruno
INTRODUCTION
You would be hard – pressed, in the near
future, to find a single organization of any
kind, that has not become more “social
accountable” – dependent on adding value to
society as a source of what attracts customers
and clients, besides having a competent
knowledge and information technology
management. We will come up with a model
to measure the extent to which an organization
pursue differentiation leading to the
organization differentiation index, which
measures the degree an organization add value
to society.
How can we promote and measure value
leadership? No single measurement will ever
describe an organization’s stocks and flows of
value leadership. Just as financial accounting
look at a number of indexes – return on sales,
return on investment, cash value added, to
name a few – to paint a picture of financial
performance, value leadership accounting
needs to look at organization performance
from several points of view. On the other
hand, what might be a key indicator for one
organization could be trivial for another,
depending on the industry environment.
Yet the existence of so many possible
measurements creates the risk that companies
will use too many of them, cluttering their
corporate dashboard with instrumentation
and, in the end, learning nothing important
because they know so much about what is
not important.
Therefore, tree principles should guide a
company in choosing what to measure:
• keep it simple – shoot for no more than a
dozen measurements;
• measure what is strategically important –
in this domain there are no simple recipes,
the capacity to learn from experience and
to conduct critical analysis is essential, and
• measure activities that produce value added
– lots of stuff that organizations measure
is only superficially related to value added.
In any way, a navigation tool, like a model,
may help a lot in driving a company for high
growth. Yet, a navigation tool should not only
tell you where you are but also show you
where you should be going.
A PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR
RA
TING ORGANIZA
TIONAL
RATING
ORGANIZATIONAL
DIFFERENTIA
TION
DIFFERENTIATION
In order to perform this, the Organizational
Differentiation Model (ODM) is suggested
(BRUNO, 2005).
The ODM is a comprehensive approach based
on two sets of organizational variables –
intervening variables called “commitments”
and a set of end-results variables called
“results”, aiming at assuring a strategic and
articulated logic across the company
businesses, designed to increase its market
value, achieved through the interaction of the
two sets of variables.
The model is based on the evaluation of eleven
major dimensions divided in two groups:
• commitments – encompassing “human
capital”, “innovation capital”, “process
capital”, “relationship capital”, “environment”
and “society”; and
• results – involving end-results as “operational
margin”, “net profit”, “capital turns”, “earns
before interest, taxes, depreciation and
amortization” (EBITDA), and “economic
value added” (EVA) or “cash value added”
(CVA).
Caderno de Idéias
maio, 2006
5
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
Commitments
Human Capital does not belong to the firm,
as it is a direct consequence of the sum of its
employees expertise and skills.
Process capital means the internal and external
processes that exist within the organization
and between it and the other players; namely
the relationship capital that is concerned with
the customers, suppliers, subcontractors and
other major player involved – as global business
is today a reality, it being difficult to
determine a company ’s boundary (JOIA,
2000); and innovation capital, a direct consequence
of the organization’s culture and its capacity
of creating new knowledge from the existing
supply. These last three capital sources
constitute what is called structural capital
that belongs to the company, and can be
traded, being the actual environment built by
the organization to manage and generate its
knowledge adequately. Ending up environment
and society means the way the organization
deals with the protection of natural resources
and the development of society as a whole.
In order to create an overall picture regarding
the commitments a set of closed instruments
was developed involving the six before mentioned
dimensions – see appendix 1.
This set of instruments will lead us to an
average score for the commitments, ranging
from “o” to “1”, considering that the relative
score involving each instrument has been
taken into account.
Results
The second group of dimensions are related
with hard data, in other words, organization’s
results. In order to analyze the operational
management performance the operational
margin has been selected. To make sure that
the stockholder is being satisfied both, the net
margin and the net capital turns, have been
chosen.
As far as cash generation is concerned the
EBITDA (earns before interests, taxes,
6
maio, 2006
Caderno de Idéias
depreciation and amortization) was selected
as indicator. Finally, to check the effectiveness
of the capital investments management, one
of the two indicators has been chosen, namely
cash value added (CVA) or economic value added
(EVA).
In order to create an overall picture regarding
results, their relative value, taken as reference
the ideal scores for the business, should be
considered and a simple average should be
computed. Negative results received “0” as
score, as well as performance indicators not
computed. In the case of CVA and EVA it is
necessary to consider at least one of them.
The advantage of the model is that it will lead
us to compute what is called the organizational
differentiation index (ODI) by multiplying the
final scores for commitments (C) and results
(R). This index shows the extent to which
the organization besides presenting positive
economic and financial results, are investing
in intangible assets, as well as on their
relations with the environmental aspects and
with society.
This index varies from “o” to “1”. The maximum
value means that the organization (imaginary
company) reached perfection, as far as
organizational differentiation is concerned, it
covers the total area of the bi-dimensional
model. Figure 1 presents the conceptual
framework of the model.
The differentiated organizations score high in
the organization differentiation index by
pushing the value they offer stakeholders to
new frontiers. They are “winners” in their
industries.
At the other extreme are the “beginners”,
businesses with differentiation indexes that
conform to the basic behaviour of the industry.
The other alternatives are “sponsored”
organizations meaning organizations scoring
high in the commitments and low in results,
and the “economic-financial” organizations,
being those scoring low in commitments and
high in results.
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
ORGANIZATIONAL DIFFERENTIATION
Market value
Intellectual capital
(intangible)
Book value
Physical
capital
Monetary
capital
Human
capital
•
R=
1
6
Relationship
capital
Environment
Society
Commitments (C)
ODI = R x C
Being:
0 ≤ ODI ≤ 1
0≤R≤1
0≤C≤1
indicator
Σ ideal score
6
Process
capital
X
Results (R)
Business indicators:
• Operational margin
• Net margin
• Net capital turns
• EBITDA
• EVA
• CVA
Innovation
capital
Social responsibility
Commitments indicators:
Quality of working life
Organizational learning
Management abilities
Managing innovation
Managing macro processes
Managing relationship and environment/society
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1
Source: Balance sheets
C=
1
6
indicator
Σ ideal score
6
1
Source: Closed instruments scores
Figure 1 – Organizational differentiation diagnosis model
Source: Bruno (2005).
Figure 2 shows the graphic interpretation of the model, where the scores of six imaginary
organizations (A to F) were plotted.
1
“Differentiated”
“Sponsored”
COMMITMENTS, (C)
“A” is a winner organization,
scoring high in both variables,
typically a differentiated organization.
Another advantage of using such
a model is the fact that the scores
in the closed instruments’
specific dimensions and on the
results performance indicators
may reveal significant room for
improvements in both variables,
commitments and results, as
depicted in figure 3, which shows
a gap per considered dimension,
leading to an action plan for
putting the organization in a
trajectory of evolution over the
course of time.
“high grow
path”
E
0,5
A
F
B
“Trajectory
of evolution”
“Economic- financial”
“Beginner”
D
C
0
0
Figure 2 – Organizational
differentiation model
Source: Bruno (2005).
1
0,5
RESULTS, (R)
ODI = R x C
Winner: “A”
R = 0.8 e C = 0.6
ODI = 0.48
Caderno de Idéias
maio, 2006
7
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
COMPANY
INDUSTRY
Actual score
Actual score
Ideal
Ideal
Operational Margin
RESULTS
Net Margin
Net Capital Turns
EBITDA
EVA
CVA
Action
plans
COMMITMENTS
Quality Working Life
Learning Organization
Management Abilities
Managing Innovation
Macro Processes Management
Environment/Society
0
1
0
1
Figure 3 – Gaps per considered dimensions
Source: Bruno (2005).
METHOD
The methodological procedure followed in
creating the present model is one among many
that can still be used in the near future and
represents an effort to overcome the paralysis
by analysis effect (Ansoff, 1984) too common
when dealing whit intangible things, leading
to endless discussions rather than practical
results. A model is good if it adequately models
and expresses the reality we are facing, rather
than the excess of rigour it applies itself,
measured by the number of variables taken
into consideration.
The method draws from the existing models
presented by Edvinsson and Malone (1997),
Roos et al. (1997), Stewart (1997), Sveiby
(1997), Klein (1998) and Winter (1998) who
has inspired Joia (2000) in the creation of a
heuristic frame model.
Earl (1997) leads us to infer that ascribing
value is worthwhile if linked with the
organization’s vision, mission, strategy, focusbased action plans and some performance
indicators. The composition of intellectual
capital as a whole is an exercise that has been
subject of discussions. Edvinsson and Malone
(1997) propose that intellectual capital is the
8
maio, 2006
Caderno de Idéias
arithmetic mean of all the capital components
in play. We have used this concept of calculation
for the dimensions encompassed in the
variable commitments. On the other hand, it
has been adopted the same calculation
concept for the indicators composing the variable results. Naturally, a very high correlation
between commitments’ values and results’
values is expected, as time goes on, in the case
of an individual organization (trajectory of
evolution), or in the case of a set of pairs of
the considered variables, if one consider a
group of organizations analized at a certain
point in time. Commitments on its own is
worthless. It must be understood as a way of
refining the company ’s business strategy,
through positive feedback (ARTHUR, 1990).
Therefore, a poor relationship between
commitments ratings and results scores is, by
definition, proof of either a bad model or
biased data as stated by Roos et al. (1997).
Some hidden effects, such as a kind of
“active inertia” (SULL, 1999) that delays
total and immediate deployment of the
benefits derived from heavy investments in
human and innovation capitals, which are
part of the commitments. This asynchronous
effect, is referred to as the “time-lag trap”, and
needs to be analyzed in depth.
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
The following steps were followed in the methodological procedure:
• analysis of some of the existing models to evaluate the intangible assets of an organization;
• selection of a well-known business strategy formulation model;
• building a bridge between strategy and commitments (intellectual capital plus environment
and society);
• definition of a set of closed instruments for scoring an organization’s commitments and its
dimensions (components), over the course of time;
• use this scoring system is a pilot study involving some selected organizations, and calculating
the correlation between commitments scores and results values; this computation can be
done for each individual organization over the course of time to identify the specific
organization trajectory of evolution;
• detection of some improvements required in the proposed model or in the instrumentation.
RESUL
TS AND ANAL
YSES
RESULTS
ANALYSES
In order to verify how the proposed model works in the real world, a pilot study was
conducted involving eight organizations of several sectors. The results are as shown in table 1.
TABLE 1 – Organizational differentiation pilot results
Sector
C
R
ODI
1
Health care
0.45
0.08
0.04
2
Paper & packing
0.63
0.45
0.28
3
Mechanical components
0.30
0.05
0.02
4
Electrical components
0.45
0.65
0.29
5
Transportation/logistics
0.30
0.50
0.15
6
Consumer electronics
0.35
0.25
0.09
7
Vehicles
0.48
0.70
0.34
8
Virgin media
0.49
0.22
0.11
Source: Bruno (2005)
C = Commitments; R = Results; ODI = Organizational Differentiation Index
Caderno de Idéias
maio, 2006
9
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
Another way of presenting the results is in the form of a graph as shown in figure 4.
1
COMMITMENTS, (C)
“Sponsored”
“Differentiated”
(2)
0,5
(7)
(8)
(1)
(4)
(6)
(3)*
(5)
“Beginner”
“Economic-financial”
0
0
*cross-reference with Table 1
0,5
1
RESULTS, (R)
Figure 4 – Graph showing the position of each of the considered companies
Source: Bruno (2005)
As can be seen in figure 4, the majority of the
considered organizations are located in the
“beginner” area of the graph. That means there
is plenty of space for improvements.
Computing the linear correlation coefficient
taking the two variables, commitments (C)
and results (R), involving the considered
organizations, the result was + 0.30, that
means a low positive correlation between the
considered variables. This result was expected
due two major reasons, the small sample size
and the active inertia (“time-lag trap”) that
delays total and immediate deployment of the
benefits derived from investments in intangible
company assets.
CONCLUSIONS
To add value to society in a knowledge
economy environment the organizations,
more than ever, need to increase their
investments in the intangible assets, once the
current balance sheet and income statement
10
maio, 2006
Caderno de Idéias
are able to present an X-ray of a company, i.e.
how it is today, but are not reliable tools to
foreseen its performance in the very near
future. This hidden treasure is nowadays
what really matters in a society in constant
turmoil. On the other hand we need to
consider, besides knowledge, the way the
organization relates itself with the
environment and with the community.
Despite the advances made in understanding
the nature of knowledge – both tacit and
explicit – and its transfer mechanisms within
an organization (NONAKA and TAKEUCHI,
1995) and among their partners
(BADARACCO, 1991), a long and difficult way
is still to be covered for assuring convergence
of the business world, the political
institutions, and the civil society, in order to
assure projects and decisions towards the
human society development (SAFTY, 2003).
Reliable measurements of these efforts are
only part of the game, what really matters is
the attitude of the decision-makers, and
leaders towards this direction.
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
A remaining research question is the relation between the ODI evolution and the market
value of the organization as time goes on. It is expected a positive relation between both, in
any way this is, as said before, a research question, therefore, there is no overnight answer.
REFERENCES
ANSOFF, H. I. Implanting strategic management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984.
ARTHUR, W. B. Positive feedbacks in the economy. Scientific American, Feb., p. 80-85,
1990.
BADARACCO, J. The knowledge link: how firms compete through strategic alliances.
Knowledge links. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, chapter 5, p. 107-128, 1991.
BRUNO, L. F. C. Índice de diferenciação organizacional. Belo Horizonte: Fundação Dom
Cabral, 2005.
EARL, M. Knowledge as strategy. In: PRUSAK, L. (Ed.). Knowledge in organisations.
Butterworth: Heinemann, p. 1-15, 1997.
EDVINSSON, L.; MALONE, M. Intellectual capital. Harper Business, 1997.
JOIA, L. A. Tecnologia da informação para a gestão do conhecimento em organização virtual.
Forthcoming. Revista Produção, Rio de Janeiro, 2000.
KLEIN, D. The strategic management of intellectual capital: an introduction. In: KLEIN, D.
(Ed.). The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital. Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998,
p. 1-7.
NONAKA, I.; TAKEUCHI, H. The knowledge-creating company: how japanese companies
create the dynamics of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1995.
ROOS, J.; ROOS, G.; DRAGONETTI, N.; EDVINSSON, L. Intellectual capital. Macmillan
Business, 1997.
SAFTY, Adel. Value leadership. Istanbul: University of Bahçesehir, 2003.
STEWART, T. A. Intellectual capital. Doubleday/Currency, 1997.
SULL, D. N. Why good companies go bad. Harvard Business Review, July-Aug. 1999,
p. 42-52.
SVEIBY, K. E. The new organisational wealth. Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc., 1997.
WINTER, S. Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. In: KLEIN, D. (Ed.). The Strategic
Management of Intellectual Capital. Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998, p. 165-187.
Caderno de Idéias
maio, 2006
11
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
APPENDIX 1 – SET OF CLOSED INSTRUMENTS
Six closed instruments were developed to
enable the computation of an overall picture
regarding the commitments variable. Three of
them are of the attitudinal type scale and
cover the following subjects: Quality of
Working Life, Learning Organization, and
Management Abilities. The first two are used
in surveys covering samples of the total
number of employees, the last one involves a
sample of the managerial population. The
three need to be validated regarding items of
the instrument and stability (reliability) of the
instrument as a whole.
d) Systematic Performance Appraisal
Processes,
On the other hand the other three
instruments are of the type fact finding and
cover the following subjects: Managing
Innovation, Macro Processes Management
and Environment & Society Management.
They don’t need statistical validation before
the final computations, and are applied only
to collect information from the management
level (sample).
l)
For each instrument the following dimensions
are considered:
r)
• Quality of Working Life:
a) Salary and Benefits,
b) Health and Safety Conditions at
Work,
e) Learning Recognition,
f)
Sharing Recognition,
g) Space for Learning,
h) Teamwork,
i)
Decentralization,
j)
Past Experience,
k) Shared Vision,
Leadership Involvement,
m) Multiple Defenders,
n) Mistakes Treatment,
o) Openness Climate,
p) Curiosity,
q) Continued Education, and
Actions Materialization.
• Management Abilities:
a) Leadership,
b) Interpersonal Skills,
c) Decision-Making,
c) Utilization and Development of
Competences,
d) Communication,
d) Growth Opportunities and Work
Stability,
f)
e) Social Integration at Work,
f) Constitutionalism at Work,
e) Strategy Definition,
Business Management, and
g) Innovation, Technology and Change
Management.
• Managing Innovation:
g) Work and Total Life Space, and
a) Strategy,
h) Social Relevance of Working Life.
b) Processes,
• Learning Organization:
a)
Personal Domain,
b) Systemic Thinking,
c)
c) Organization,
d) Alliances, and
e) Learning.
Mental Models,
Caderno de Idéias
maio, 2006
13
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
• Macro Processes Management:
a) Products,
b) Human Resources,
c) Decision and Information,
d) Products and Services Development,
e) Physical Resources,
f)
Market Attendance and Logistics,
g) Advertisement and Promotion,
h) Distribution Network,
i)
Technical Service,
j)
Market Share,
k) Company Image,
l)
Financial Results, and
m) Quality (products and services).
• Environment and Society Management:
a) Values, Transparency and Governance,
b) Suppliers,
c) Consumers and Clients,
d) Community,
e) Society and Government, and,
f)
14
Environment.
maio, 2006
Caderno de Idéias
Published Titles
PUBLISHED TITLES
To have access to full list, please contact:
Tel.: 55 31 3589-7346; fax: 55 31 3589-7402; e-mail: [email protected]
2006
CI0603
Organizational differentiation: leading organizations into adding value to society
society.
Léo F. C. Bruno. May, 2006.
CI0602
Brazilian business strategies from a sustainability point of view
view. Cláudio Bruzzi Boechat,
Maria Raquel Grassi, Raimundo Soares Filho. May, 2006.
CI0601
Organizacional culture: how to measure it. A case study
study. Léo F. C. Bruno, José Ofir Praia de
Souza. January, 2006.
2005
CI0525
Integrating marketing, manufacturing and resear
ch & development
research
development. Léo F. C. Bruno.
December, 2005.
CI0524
The basis of education in sustainability at a business school
school. Cláudio Bruzzi Boechat,
Maria Raquel Grassi. December, 2005.
CI0523
The entrepreneurial profile of managers at incubated companies: a case study
study.
Léo F. C. Bruno, Luciana Oliveira do Valle. December, 2005.
CI0522
Can the benefits accruing from a network alliance following the co-opetition model be
measured? The Star Alliance case
case. Giuseppe Maria Russo, Paulo César Motta. December,
2005.
CI0521
Value leveraging in energy effectiveness: the relationships channel experience at CEMIG
CEMIG.
Paulo Tarso Vilela de Resende, Lilian Maria Campolina Moraes. November, 2005.
CI0520
CI0519
Knowledge creation through inter-organisational collaborations: the role of shared practice,
interdependence and power balance
balance. Anna Goussevskaia. October, 2005.
CI0518
Interactive innovation: social capital, knowledge sharing, routines and setting up
inter-organisational networks
networks. Anna Goussevskaia, Rosiléia Milagres, Ana Luiza Lara de Araújo,
Rafael Tello. October, 2005.
CI0517
The financial returns of marketing investments: an application of the ROQ model
model. Áurea
Helena Puga Ribeiro, Ricardo Teixeira da Veiga, Daniela Vilaça Souza, Aline Favaro Reis, Marcelo
Nacif Rocha. October, 2005.
CI0516
Organisational modernity in people management as a basis to incorporate a competence
management model. José Henrique Motta de Castro, Zélia Miranda Kilimnik, Anderson de
Souza Sant’anna. October, 2005.
CI0515
CI0514
The W
orld Economic Forum (WEF) global competitiveness report 2005-2006
World
2005-2006. Carlos Arruda,
Rafael Tello, Diogo Lara. October, 2005.
CI0513
Strategies to set up collaborative environments with suppliers to manage supply chains in
Brazil
Brazil. Paulo Tarso Vilela de Resende, Guilherme Dayrell Mendonça, Bernardo Bellavinha Araújo.
October, 2005.
CI0512
Applying an intellectual capital measurement tool in an industrial company
company. Simone Maria
Libânio Rocha e Silva, Carlos Arruda. October, 2005.
CI0511
Learning forum: capturing tacit knowledge
knowledge. Maria Lúcia Goulart Dourado, Maria das Graças
Pinho Tavares. September, 2005.
15I
Caderno de Idéias
CI0510
The profitability measurements in value management models and the internal returns rate
analysis. Haroldo Moura Vale Mota. September, 2005.
of the company: a comparative analysis
CI0509
Backward linkages in the Brazilian automotive industry: the interaction between government
paper. Roberto Gonzalez
policies and multinational strategies and organisations – working paper
Duarte, Aldemir Drummond. September, 2005.
CI0508
Competitiveness in the productive chain
chain. Guilherme Dornas. August, 2005.
CI0507
Personal V
alues and Leadership Effectiveness
Values
Effectiveness. Léo F. C. Bruno, Eduardo G. E. Lay.
Leadership Development Center. August, 2005.
CI0506
World competitiveness yearbook 2005: an analysis of competitiveness indicators produced
eam
Team
eam. Carlos Arruda, Rafael Tello, Diogo Lara, Ana Luiza
by IMD. Competitiveness Center T
Lara. FDC Competitiveness Team. August, 2005.
CI0505
The development of technological capabilities in immature countries through collaborative
case. Rafael Tello, Ana Luiza Lara de Araújo,
innovation networks – the Brazilian Genolyptus case
Rosiléia Milagres, Anna Goussevskaia. Innovation Team. July, 2005.
CI0504
Inversion in the v olume of aggregate v alue (V
AV) within i ntermodal t ransportation s ystems
(VA
ystems.
Paulo Resende. Logistic Cell. April, 2005.
CI0503
Innovation at international companies in Brazil – a study of the f oundr
y industr
y . Virgínia
oundry
ndustry
Izabel de Oliveira, José Antônio Sousa Neto. Finance Cell. April, 2005.
CI0502
Financial management and value management in large brazilian companies – an empirical
investigation
investigation. Virgínia Izabel de Oliveira, José Antônio Sousa Neto. Finance Cell. April, 2005.
CI0501
The Global Competitiveness Report 2004 – 2005
2005. World Economic Forum (WEF). Carlos
Arruda, Rafael Tello, Diogo Lara, Ana Luiza Lara. FDC Competitiveness Team. January, 2005.
2004
CI0420
More competent professionals; more advanced managerial policies and practices? Anderson
de Souza Sant'anna; Zélia Miranda Kilimnik; Isolda Veloso de Castilho. Organisational Behaviour
and Organisation Cell. October, 2004.
CI0419
Executive retention in cross-border acquisitions: a knowledge-based view
view. Betania Tanure;
Roberto Duarte. Organisational Behaviour and Organisation Cell. October, 2004.
CI0418
The vision of 513 managers of the largest Brazilian companies on the management of
links. Beth Fernandes; Antonio Carvalho Neto. Organisational Behaviour
multiple contractual links
and Organisation Cell. October, 2004.
CI0417
Economic V
alue Added (EV
A) and Cash V
alue Added (CV
A): a comparative analysis
Value
(EVA)
Value
(CVA):
analysis. Haroldo
Moura Vale Mota; Virgínia Izabel de Oliveira. Finance Cell. October, 2004.
CI0416
Information technology and systems in the optimization of supply chains – a case from the
y . Marcelo Rodrigues; Paulo Resende. Logistic Cell. October, 2004.
industry
cement industr
CI0415
Integrated L ogistics and I nformation Technology in the supply chain management –
a case from the cement industr
y. Marcelo Rodrigues; Paulo Resende. Logistic Cell. October, 2004.
industry
CI0414
Embedding knowledge in a new manufacturing plant
plant. Paulo Prochno. Logistic Cell. October, 2004.
CI0413
A logistical study on the Brazilian network of harbors: doors to competitiveness
competitiveness.
Paulo Resende. Logistic Cell. October, 2004.
CI0412
Changing carriers: a study on carrier paths, anchors and metaphors in association with
competencies. Zélia Miranda Kilimnik; Isolda Veloso de
representations of professional competencies
Castilho; Anderson de Souza Sant'anna. Organisational Behaviour and Organisation Cell.
October, 2004.
CI0411
Corporate universities: from the dream of implementation to the challenge of management
– a case study
study. Alceu Morais de Queiroz; Roberto Costa Fachin; Anderson Sant'anna.
Organisational Behaviour and Organisation Cell. October, 2004.
II
16
Published Titles
CI0410
Dimensions of internationalization
internationalization. Linda Goulart. Serasa Innovation Nucleus. July, 2004.
CI0409
Creativity and innovation as a factor in the creation of value and competitive advantage.
The company’
company’ss pipeline model for creativity and innovation
innovation. Marcos Augusto Boro.
Competitiviness Nucleus. July, 2004.
CI0408
Developing an organization’
organization’ss entrepreneurial capability
capability. Afonso Otávio Cozzi; Carlos Arruda.
Entrepreneurship Nucleus. July, 2004.
CI0407
Retaining executives in transnational acquisitions: relationship between knowledge and creation
of value
value. Betania Tanure; Roberto Duarte. Organizational Behaviour and Organization Cell. July, 2004.
CI0406
Project finance theory and project control
control. José Antônio Sousa Neto; Virgínia Izabel de
Oliveira. Finance Cell. July, 2004.
CI0405
The value of art and the art of value
value. Michel Fleuriet. Finance Cell. July, 2004.
CI0404
Entrepreneurial volunteerism: a tool for the development of human competencies
competencies.
Ana Lúcia Moreira; Carlos Antônio Mattiuz; Sônia Custódio de Souza. April, 2004.
CI0403
Strategy conception and sensemaking process: exploring tendencies and integrating
concepts
concepts. Luiz Cláudio Junqueira Henrique; Gabriel Guimarães Henrique. Marketing Cell.
April, 2004.
CI0402
Proposal for an environmental monitoring model
model. Luiz Cláudio Junqueira Henrique.
Marketing Cell. April, 2004.
CI0401
How can (and must) top management contribute to successful projects?
Lúcio J. Diniz. January, 2004.
2003
CI0327
Acquisitions – a profile of operations in Brazil
Brazil. Betania Tanure; Vera L. Cançado.
Organizational Behaviour and Organization Cell. December, 2003.
CI0326
Free trade and transportation infrastructure in Brazil: T
owards an integrated approach
Towards
approach.
Paulo Resende; Joaquim J. M. Guilhoto; Geoffrey J. D. Hewings. Logistics Cell. December, 2003.
CI0325
Commitment, cooperation and interdependence as distinctive elements of the relationship
marketing between suppliers and carmakers: the case study of the Brazilian automotive
industr
y. Celso Cláudio de Hildebrand e Grisi; Áurea Helena Puga Ribeiro. Marketing Cell.
industry
December, 2003.
CI0324
Levels of customer loyalty and its antecedents – a proposal for an integrative model and
its operational measures
measures. Áurea Helena Puga Ribeiro; Ricardo Teixeira Veiga; Luis Antônio
Godinho. Marketing Cell. December, 2003.
CI0323
The relationship-oriented organisation
organisation. Áurea Helena Puga Ribeiro; Celso Cláudio Hildebrand
e Grisi; José Edson Lara. Marketing Cell. December, 2003.
CI0322
Marketing strategy in business to business financial services: implementing the ‘delivery’
attribute as a critical factor for differentiation and as a source of competitive advantage
advantage. Luiz
Carlos dos Santos; Áurea Helena P. Ribeiro; Reynaldo Diniz . Marketing Cell . December, 2003.
CI0321
Marketing of internal relationship in organizations
organizations. Áurea Helena Puga Ribeiro; Iêda Lima
Pereira. Marketing Cell. December, 2003.
CI0320
Alliances as a tool for effective innovation
innovation. Carlos Arruda; Linda Goulart. Innovation and
Entrepreneurship Nucleus. December, 2003.
CI0319
E-commer
ce, evolution or revolution in retail? Áurea Ribeiro. Marketing Cell. December, 2003.
E-commerce,
CI0318
Database Marketing: the basic tool for interactive and individualized marketing
marketing.
Áurea Helena Puga Ribeiro. Marketing Cell. December, 2003.
CI0317
Psychometric analysis of scales in A dministration s urveys: procedures and validation results of
modernity,, individual competencies and satisfaction at work
work. Anderson
measures of organizational modernity
de Souza Sant’anna. Organizational Behaviour and Organization Cell. December, 2003.
17
III
Caderno de Idéias
CI0316
Attraction and retention of young professionals showing potential for development, by
small and medium-size companies
companies. Luciana Carvalho de Mesquita Ferreira; Amyra Moyzes
Sarsur; Carlos Arruda. Organizational Behaviour and Organization Cell. December, 2003.
CI0315
Supermen, super companies? Anderson de Souza Sant’anna; Lúcio Flávio Renault de Moraes;
Zélia Miranda Kilimnik. Organizational Behaviour and Organization Cell. December, 2003.
CI0314
Where are the talents? Where is human resources management? Amyra Moyses Sarsur;
Rosangela Pedrosa Rezende; Anderson de Souza Sant’anna. Organizational Behaviour and
Organization Cell. December, 2003.
CI0313
Is the growing demand for new competencies being duly supported by modern
management practices and policies? Zélia Miranda Kilimnik; Anderson de Souza Sant’anna;
Talita Ribeiro da Luz. Organizational Behaviour and Organization Cell. October, 2003.
CI0312
Vigorous growth: the necessary realignments in production chains
chains. José Paschoal Rossetti.
Strategy Cell. October, 2003.
CI0311
Emerging global players: evidences from the internationalization processes of Brazilian firms
firms.
Álvaro Bruno Cyrino and Moacir de Miranda Oliveira Júnior. Strategy Cell. October, 2003.
CI0310
Explaining outcomes in competition among foreign multinationals in a focal hostmarket
hostmarket.
Aldemir Drummond; Subramanian Rangan. Strategy Cell. September, 2003.
CI0309
Alliances as effective renovation instruments
instruments. Carlos Arruda; Linda Goulart. Innovation and
Entrepreneurship Nucleus. September, 2003.
CI0308
Corporate finances and strategy: an empirical test connection links
links. Michel Alfredo Abras.
Strategy Cell. September, 2003.
CI0307
Corporate finances and business strategy: environmental turbulence, financial leverage
and performance of firms in the Brazilian business environment
environment. Michel Alfredo Abras.
Strategy Cell. September, 2003.
CI0306
Innovation and entrepreneurship in a Brazilian SME network
network. Linda Goulart; Afonso Otávio
Cozzi; Carlos Arruda. Innovation and Entrepreneurship Nucleus. September 2003.
CI0305
Building knowledge on strategy and competitiveness: a synthesis
synthesis. Mauro Calixta Tavares;
Luís Alexandre Simpson do Amaral. Marketing Cell. August, 2003.
CI0304
Institutional design of Brazilian regulatory agencies: Evidence of the national petroleum
agency. Luciana Carvalho de Mesquita Ferreira. Organizational Behaviour and Organization
agency
Cell. August, 2003.
CI0303
CI0302
Understanding the cross-cultural dimension in mergers and acquisitions
acquisitions. Betania Tanure
and Suzana Braga Rodrigues. Organizational Behaviour Cell. August, 2003.
CI0301
Supply chain perspectives given the status of technological and logistics systems in Brazil
Brazil.
Paulo Resende; Eduardo Gazolla. Logistics Cell. August, 2003.
2002
CI0227
Practical application of Kohli-Jaworski Construct in the evaluation of a company
.s degree
company.s
of orientation towards the market
market. Luiz Cláudio Junqueira Henrique; Mauro Calixta Tavares.
Marketing Cell. December, 2002.
CI0226
Value of brand and extensions: the consumer’
consumer’ss perspective
perspective. Luiz Cláudio Junqueira Henrique;
Mauro Calixta Tavares. Marketing Cell. December, 2002.
CI0225
Regulation and federation: the (non) creation of a Minas Gerais agency to regulate public
vice concessions
service
concessions. Luciana Carvalho de Mesquita Ferreira; Frederico Gonzaga Jayme Jr.
ser
Organization and Organizational Behaviour Cell. December, 2002.
CI0224
Global Players Research: investigation on the internationalization processes of companies in
Brazil. Álvaro Bruno Cyrino; Moacir de Miranda Oliveira Júnior. Strategy Cell. December, 2002.
Brazil
IV
18
Published Titles
CI0223
Competitive intensity
formance and sustainability: a longitudinal analysis of
intensity,, financial per
performance
the economic and financial performance of the 500 largest Brazilian companies in the
1990-1999 period
period. Álvaro Bruno Cyrino; Guilherme Costa Vale Dornas. Strategy Cell.
December, 2002.
CI0222
Influence of the accumulation of knowledge on strategies to enter international markets:
a study of major Brazilian companies
companies. Álvaro Bruno Cyrino; Moacir de Miranda Oliveira
Júnior. Strategy Cell. December, 2002.
CI0221
Structure and strategy: Chandler revisited
revisited. Fátima Ferreira Roquete; Mauro Calixta Tavares.
Marketing Cell. December, 2002.
CI0220
Internationalization strategies: a comparative study of steel industry companies
companies. Júnia
Cerceau; Mauro Calixta Tavares. Marketing Cell. December, 2002.
CI0219
Advantages and Disadvantages in cooperative relationships: the Usiminas-Fiat case
case. Antônio
Batista da Silva Júnior. Strategy Cell. October, 2002.
CI0218
Influence of Knowledge accumulation on strategies to enter international markets: a study
of the largest Brazilian companies
companies. Álvaro Bruno Cyrino; Moacir de M. Oliveira Júnior. Strategy
Cell. October, 2002.
CI0217
The cooperative relationship learning-oriented organisation
organisation. Áurea Helena Puga Ribeiro;
Celso Cláudio Hildebrand e Grisi. Marketing Cell. October, 2002.
CI0216
Entrepreneurial projects: applying project management to executive development
programs
programs. Lúcio José Diniz. October, 2002.
CI0215
Innovation in international enterprises
enterprises. Virgínia Izabel de Oliveira. Finances Cell. October,
2002.
CI0214
Institutionalisation of the transition from intervening to regulatory State: a study on the
creation of Brazilian infrastructure federal regulatory agencies
agencies. Luciana Carvalho de Mesquita
Ferreira; Allan Claudius Queiroz Barbosa. Organization and Organizational Behaviour Cell.
October, 2002.
CI0213
Strategic employability: how organizations change winning warriors into fragmented
subjects
subjects. Amyra M. Sarsur; Ronaldo André Rodrigues da Silva. Organization and
Organizational Behaviour Cell. October, 2002.
CI0212
Reconsidering labour relationships: new challenges of multiple labour linkages
linkages. Amyra M.
Sarsur; Vera L. Cançado; Maria Elizabeth R. Fernandes; Ruth S. Steuer. Organization and
Organizational Behaviour Cell . August, 2002.
CI0211
Semantic progression of the subject employability: case study of a telephony company
company.
Amyra M. Sarsur; Alexandre de P. Carrieri. Organization and Organizational Behaviour Cell.
August, 2002.
CI0210
¿Sería posible una arqueología de las organizaciones? Las perspectivas de aplicación en
empresariales. Amyra M. Sarsur; Ronaldo A. Rodrigues Silva. Organization and
las ciencias empresariales
Organizational Behaviour Cell. August, 2002.
CI0209
Longevity determinants of family companies
companies. Alden G. Lank. Family Company Nucleus.
August, 2002.
CI0208
Individual competencies, organizational modernity and satisfaction at work: an analysis
of Minas Gerais organizations under the point of view of administration professionals
professionals.
Anderson de Souza Sant’anna; Lúcio Flávio Renault de Moraes; Zélia Miranda Kilimnik.
Organization and Organizational Behaviour Cell. August, 2002.
CI0207
Management practices and challenges in regard to the new organizational architecture:
theoretical reflections
reflections. Amyra M. Sarsur; Maria Elizabeth R. Fernandes; Ruth S. Steuer; Vera
L. Cançado. Organization and Organizational Behaviour Cell. May, 2002.
CI0206
Managerial decision-making: an Anglo-Brazilian comparison
comparison. Carlos Arruda; David J. Hickson.
Organization and Organizational Behaviour Cell. May, 2002.
V
19
Caderno de Idéias
CI0205
The Brazilian competitive insertion in 2002
2002. Fabiana Santos; Carlos Arruda. Competitiveness
Nucleus. May, 2002.
CI0204
Managing culture as a competitive resour
ce in the globalisation era: from W
eber to Hofstede
resource
Weber
Hofstede.
Betania Tanure; Nice Braga. Organization and Organizational Behaviour Cell. May, 2002.
CI0203
E-business and third-party logistics
logistics. Garland Chow. Logistics Cell – International Partnership.
May, 2002.
CI0202
Orientation to clients: fad or strategy? Luiz Cláudio J. Henrique. Marketing Cell. January, 2002.
CI0201
Segmentation: what precedes the target-market strategy? Mauro Calixta Tavares. Marketing
Cell. January, 2002.
2001
CI0109
Tendencies in financial markets
markets. Juliano Lima Pinheiro. Finances Cell. September, 2001.
CI0108
EV
A® – The Economic V
alue Added and Brazil’
ACC calculation reasonable
Value
Brazil’ss reality: Is the W
WACC
EVA
for our industries? Guilherme Dornas. Finances Cell. August, 2001.
CI0107
Knowledge transfer and best practices in global corporate networks
networks. Moacir de M. Oliveira
Júnior; Phillip S. Sommer; Fabiano Colombini. Strategy Cell. August, 2001.
CI0106
Corporate strategies for repositioning within the value chain
chain. Paulo Resende. Logistics Cell.
August, 2001.
CI0105
Reconsidering employability
employability,, entrepreneurship and the ‘new’ management of human
resour
ces: a study of organizations and professions in Minas Gerais
resources:
Gerais. Amyra Moyzes Sarsur.
Organizational Behaviour Cell. August, 2001.
CI0104
The human dimension of dismissal processes
processes. Amyra Moyzes Sarsur; Marcus Vinícius
Gonçalves da Cruz. Organizational Behaviour Cell. August, 2001.
CI0103
People management challenges in environments with different types of labour linkages
linkages.
Georgina Alves Vieira da Silva; Maria Elizabeth Rezende Fernandes; Ruth S. Steuer; Vera L.
Cançado. Organizational Behaviour Cell. August, 2001.
CI0102
Sharing knowledge in professional services multinational companies: an exploratory study
of the advertisement industr
y . Moacir de M. Oliveira Júnior. Strategy Cell. August, 2001.
industry
CI0101
Gravitational balance between integrated logistics and the clustering process
process.
Paulo Resende. Logistics Cell. August, 2001.
VI
20