The following are the contents of this site which summarizes my most important learnings in BA 350 --

I. Institutional Theory and Philippine Taipans

II. Groupthink It

III. Change, Change, Change

IV. Maslow, Mayo and Herzberg: What Really Makes People Tick?
& Can Motivation Be Communicated?

V. Learning the Learning Organization

VI. Organizational Change and Development: The Role of Creative Mimesis in
Building Successful Organizations in the Philippine fast food industry.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Institutional Theory and Philippine Taipans


In an article I recently read from the internet entitled -- New Institutionalism – Origin, Definition, and Concepts, there is this overview which says: Institutional theory adopts an open system perspective: organizations are strongly influenced by their environments. But not only are competitive forces and efficiency-based forces at work, socially constructed belief and rule systems also exercise enormous control over organizations – both how they are structured and how they carry out their work (Scott, 2003).

To my mind, the forces in the environment which institutional theory speaks of particularly specially on what Scott ( 2003) stated as the “socially constructed belief and rule systems” that impinge on organizations or exercise enormous control can also be used in examining the success of Filipino taipans* in the Philippines. How they manage to build their “big organizations or little empires” despite the fact that everything in the Philippines seems to fall short of an excellent place for investing one’s money is a puzzle we want to address in this article.

These powerful and enterprising Filipino taipans are all of Chinese ancestry -- Gokongwei, Sy and Tan. What sets them apart from the many Filipinos who failed to reap the fruits of their own land may lie in the culture and the beliefs they have from the very beginning.

These taipans became successful despite the unequal opportunities and so many socio-political problems facing the Philippines. They managed to build their big organizations despite the grave economic difficulties of the country, the graft and corruption and too much politics and nepotism so pervasive in Philippine society.

What forces from within themselves do they harness in meeting head on the harsh environment of Philippine business and come out successful? Are Filipinos not as hardworking enough that when opportunities come knocking the door we always fail to answer ? Possibly, it is their beliefs that are unique to their culture and their experience of deprivation early on which Filipinos do not have.

As Wilson Lee Flores said: “Their successes were built and sustained fundamentally by decades of bold dreams, iron determination, meticulous planning, as well as traditional Confucian values of frugality, discipline, endless self-study and hard work.” Indeed, these values are most often not found in most of us. The 300 years under Spain’s influence and control hampers us not to excel in business and entrepreneurship. The different cultural traditions, beliefs and values of the ethnic Chinese minority who came to the Philippines many years ago were not influenced by what Flores termed as “anti-entrepreneur values” inculcated in us by the Spanish colonizers.

Mañana habit; the profligate endless fiestas we celebrate all year round; the wanton display of “wealth” and food; the bahala na system, padrino system and the “romanticization of poverty as noble” or worthy of future rewards were all drilled into our ancestor’s consciousness. Even the death and passion of Christ deeply embedded in our consciousness made us believe that sufferings and punishments are all stages to be re-lived in our personal lives [the concept of pasyon and the Filipino consciousness we usually encounter in AS during those turbulent undergrad years].

Gokongwei, Sy and Tan aside from contending with the difficulties in putting up their now successful organizations have to contend as well with past years of hardships and struggles. Their lives were a series of difficult transitions, not one that was wallowing in wealth and power since birth. They have faced the most difficult crisis involving both their personal and business concerns. This includes near-failure of some of their initial organization. Some of their hardships became part of the success stories which have been repeatedly told and retold and even became part of the values of organizations.

Henry Sy also known as the "Shopping Mall King" honed his skills in business in a dilapidated and almost burned down sari-sari store in Quiapo. To this day, Henry Sy stays in a rented office space bereft of any trappings of wealth and power. He dreams of setting up new and bolder business enterprises that would help boost the economy and provide many jobs for Filipinos. SM Foundation which takes care of helping the community has taken most of his time. He also helps in the education of Filipinos in business and technology science through the Asia Pacific College.

The highly controversial Lucio Tan oftentimes ceases to amaze everyone with his multi-billion ventures considering when he started everything -- his first ever factory went down and taken over by rival John Gokongwei. Prior to this, Lucio Tan during his younger years struggled in Bicol owning a junk shop. Like Henry Sy, his time is spent and devoted to Tan Yan Kee Foundation helping the community both here in the Philippines and abroad. Tan is actively pursuing other businesses and mergers with his ubiquitous yellow piece of paper for jotting down great ideas before he forgets about it.

Same hardship and struggle stories punctuated the life of trader Gokongwei. His youth was totally spent during World War II selling and buying anything of value. To this day, these stories never truly cease to inspire anyone. The 1997 financial crisis in Asia and the political ups and downs almost wiped him out clean. Today, he has been busy like the two other taipans in their own foundation. He has founded a children’s library at Robinson’s. From time to time, one may chance upon this guy sans bodyguard roaming around Robinson’s. He is into banking, telecommunication, petrochemical plant and other building and construction projects.

These taipans manage to build their respective highly successful organizations despite all the pressures and turmoil of doing business in the Philippines, guided by their ancestral beliefs, unique culture and values. These values are being transmitted to future Filipinos and ethnic Chinese minority through various institutions or foundations that with the proper attitude anyone can surmount any difficulties in the environment.

If we examine and relate the values of ethnic Chinese Filipinos under the microscope of Selznick and Barnard, we will see some characteristics why these taipans manage to build successful organizations.

The concept of building successful organizations can be seen from the perspective of Barnard and Selznick, both avid proponents of Institutional theory of organization (30s to 60s). Barnard said leaders must secure commitment and actively manage the informal organization while at the same time ensure that the organization simultaneously achieves its profit or economic goal.

The primary role of the person at the helm will be as shaper and manager of shared values in an organization. Essentially, the function of any manager is to provide the following: a system of communication, promote securing of essential efforts and formulate and define the purpose of the organization. A decade later Philip Selznick, posited a similar theory and harped on distinctive competence or what a particular company is good at and most others are not.

The following are traits basic in the success of an organization according to Selznick: an organization character, competence, institutional values and leadership.

Organizations become institutions only when they are infused with values which produce a distinct identity. Thus, leadership is not all about efficiency but setting basic mission and creation of a social organization capable of fulfilling that mission. This social organization is a product of social needs and pressures – a responsive adaptive organism.

These taipans have successfully and still continue to shape, manage, and share a vision to anyone who would listen to their success stories that like the proverbial Chinese sayings, problems are the same as opportunities and one therefore can not stop from acting on dreams.

Selznick’s idea of building an organization into an institution through infusion of values can be seen in the many foundations these taipans are currently operating. They are teaching and communicating the proper values for success to our youth while concurrently managing its profit and achieving its economic goals. The organization character, its distinct competence and the values of their respective organizations were all determined by their founders and continue to these days. These organizations are now veritable institutions. Their values moreover are very much different from their Spanish Filipino counterparts who inherited vast tracks of land in the beginning and therefore have no inkling of the forces that these taipans have to contend with in the past.

It is also to be noted that the millions of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) who are doing very well and achieving success and propping the present economy is proof that Filipinos in general are hardworking and resilient much like their Filipino Chinese brothers. The only thing that is probably holding us back is our disturbed past beliefs impinging in our psyche. The only thing that will really matter is how we can put to good use the money earned and saved by these OFWs.

Note:

* tai•pan, foreign head of business in China: a foreigner in charge of a business or trading operation in China, especially a powerful business tycoon [Mid-19th century. From Chinese (Cantonese) [daaihbaan])

REFERENCES

BOOKS
Scott, W. Richard. 2001. Institutions and Organizations, 2nd Edition. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage. Pages 1-216.

Scott, W. Richard. 1998. “Response to Hirsch’s Review Essay.” American Journal of
Sociology, 103:1047-1048

ARTICLES
Selznick, Philip. “Institutionalism ‘Old’ and ‘New’,” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 41 (1996), pp 270-277.

Flores, Wilson Lee. [Article published in the Philippine Star] May 26, 2003



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Groupthink It

The instinct for survival of an individual in a group plus the protection afforded in belonging to a group is at the heart of groupthink. Groupthink as posited by Janis (1982) is all about social conformity. Groupthink is that kind of faulty thinking often seen in groups where pressures for agreement override a look at the alternatives. The method for arriving at decisions is no longer rational but tinted with blind adherence to the group norms. This is agreeing to something, a decision or a planned action no matter what the consequences will be all in the name of eradicating any threats to the status quo.

Janis' keen observation of the Kennedy administration's unrelenting fear of communism being planted at their doorsteps is enough reason for the defender of the status quo to falter in its invasion of Cuba. Critical thoughts or the creative processes of looking for alternatives or solutions to the gnawing problem of communism somehow got sidelined with key people in Kennedy’s circle closing their eyes, mouths and ears displaying groupthink or a form of herd mentality.

Well meaning insiders who can contribute in changing or actualizing a more creative solution or plans were also made to abide or submit to pressures and to toe the line.

Later on in 1986, the same groupthink analysis by Janis was at the center stage once again with the Challenger fiery plunge to earth. RICHARD P. FEYNMAN, physicist at the California Institute of Technology who participated in the Challenger fiasco investigation concluded that the following factors interplayed and caused the Challenger's fall: faulty thinking of NASA people that since the Challenger has had a series of successful takeoffs and landings in the past ergo, it is safe for launch on that day; the public relations aspects and the adherence to strict schedule launch were emphasized more than safety concerns and checks; the weather and the performance of the O-rings were not factored in their safety checks too. To prove his point, he demonstrated during the hearing by dunking one of the rubber rings into a beaker of ice water and it became brittle and failed to function. His contentions: NASA people were not “living in a state of reality in assessing their missions….they had convinced themselves through faulty logic that everything was safe.”

Groupthink is very pervasive in most organizations. In fact, while reading the article and how it applies today, a cursory look at contemporary commercial airlines will tell us that as a whole these airlines work on a faulty logic that women are unstable in the cockpit. Thus, you only see male pilots and never the opposite. Janis' theory on groupthink is indeed a way for those belonging in organizations to avoid these traps on illogical and unrational thinking in group dynamics.
Groupthink theory has also been very useful to managers in building successful teams. According to Thompson (2003), managers in implementing change and building successful teams require that they assess their own behaviors to see where mistakes are being made and consider implementing new techniques and practices after a careful examination of its effects. Groupthink to my mind is one such negative aspect where managers can learn in the course of implementing change and team building in an organization of what to avoid. Team effectiveness can only be assessed on the basis of the synergy in the group – the collective critical thinking involved in a group and not blind obedience to standards and norms.

The interpretation and understanding of this phenomena in group dynamics behavior as examined by Janis is indeed a classic in its own right – the clarity and applicability in explaining or predicting human behavior in group setting is easily understood or a given. Likewise, the basis why people are motivated in preserving the status quo, silencing the oppositor and some other characteristics of group think like -- don’t rock the boat, offend no one in the group specially the leader are all valid observations by Janis which make sense.

Janis proceeded with an observation and a generalization and later derived specifics of the case to support it. The interpretation why a debacle based on erroneous assumptions or miscalculations would happen to an elite group of thinkers and movers in American society would probably account for Janis interests' in the phenomena. Janis concluded that the pressure to come up with a fast decision often short-circuiting the democratic processes – a shortcut is what usually causes messiness in future outcomes in groupthink actions and perspective.

Janis theory of groupthink can also be seen in other sociological and political studies and issues currently in vogue then such as “peer pressure” behavioral group studies with reference to the youth of the sixties; the “bandwagon effect” seen in politics wherein there is an observed behavior of people supporting a candidate because he or she is leading in the race regardless of the substance of his or her respective platforms. This groupthink mentality also became a vogue in the advertisers’ tendency to have movie stars and the like endorse a certain brand and expect people to follow. The validity then of Janis theory is much supported by other studies on group behavior of that era.

Present research like the one undertaken by Chocholik, Bouchard, Tan and Ostrow 1999 in hospital administration’s group decision making laid first the foundation to avoid groupthink mentality from needlessly impairing the results to be obtained in their study. They observed the propensity of “….traditional committee meetings and the influence of more powerful committee members….” to decide on the basis of groupthink and bandwagon effect.

Peter Greenfinch also utilized these terms – “group think” and “bandwagon effect” in the analysis of stocks performances. The concept of groupthink therefore with its origin in observed behavior of individuals and group has now been transposed to the behavior in the field of finance and stocks adding credence to the theory itself.

Modern organizations adapting to learning and rapid change in their environment are characterized by the complete absence of groupthink mentality. Questioning endlessly the norms of an organization requires critical thinking. While in groupthink mode, critical thoughts from individuals are pressured into submission.

Present scenarios of groupthink mentality are all easily seen in our present society. This means groupthinking happens most of the time and there is a need to guard against this tendency for its dire effects not only in critical thinking but also its disastrous outcomes. One author even traced it to the kind of upbringing we all have which start with our education of the youth. Most often, in the school environment, we are taught to maintain the status quo, follow the standards, offend no one in a group, don’t rock the boat etc. The pressure to socially conform is present and this made author Marilyn Ferguson once remarked, “….In contrasts to insects ….human beings start out as butterflies and end as cocoons…”

Senate too, during the impeachment failed to see the consequences of the groupthink mentality they employed in not opening the questionable bank accounts. And now again during the impeachment of Davide, the consequences of a constitutional crisis never occurred among the people who signed initially the impeachment document. Groupthink is present in this scenario for the simple reason that alternatives to working out an investigation of a co-equal body were never looked into and have been sacrificed all because Davide did not wish to kow tow to the wishes of those in legislature, a co-equal body. The concept of destroying a perceived foe or threat to the organization or group is central to the thesis of Janis.

The disastrous effect will always follow group thinking. Marcos in his last days made the same road to perdition by not seeing what is happening but just depending on what was fed forward to him. All the people around him also provided only the good news. As such, rationality did not prevail in most decisions made in the government then.

Janis theory is truly manifested in most organizations even those with good intentions.

Fraternities even have this kind of mentality pressured by the need to preserve the status quo and its traditions.

Another approach is to frame the question based on a study of the motivation an individual belonging to a group and why would he possibly succumb to the groupthink given his stature and credibility as an independent thinker in the past. We know that Maslow in his theory categorized the need to belong as a greater need than biological. But what about self-esteem and recognition? These two are higher than social interaction and belongingness needs and ergo the question is why would an individual sacrifice future recognition and self-esteem needs over social needs by joining a groupthink? This I think is one relevant research to add to Janis' theory of groupthink.

REFERENCES
BOOKS

Janis IL. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston,
Mass.: Houghton Mifflin, 1982:9.

Morgan (1997). Images of Organization. CA: Sage Publications.

OTHER SOURCES:

Internet Search:

1. Investigation into the Challenger Fiasco
http://www.msu.edu/~hought27/isp213h/feynman/research.html

2. Joan K. Chocholik, MHA, Susan E. Bouchard, Joseph K. H. Tan, PhD, and David N.
Ostrow, MD, MA (1999) The Determination of Relevant Goals and Criteria Used to
Select an Automated Patient Care Information System A Delphi Approach
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=61362

3. Thompson, L., (2003). Making the team: A guide for managers, 2nd edition. Upper
Saddle River, NJ. Prentice Hall.
http://www.leighthompson.com/books/MakingtheTeam/toc_long.htm

4. Glossary for groupthink and bandwagon effects –
http://lab.pava.purdue.edu/pol101/Text/BOOK/glossary.html

5. Peter Greenfich’s Stock image: Behavioral Finance FAQ
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pgreenfinch/bfglo/bfglo.b.htm



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Change, Change, Change

Van de Ven and Poole (1995) posited that “change is an empirical observation of difference in form, quality or state over time in an entity.” Change is one type of an event in an entity and that entity maybe an individual’s job or task, a group, a strategy, a program or a whole organization even the universality of things and its reality.

They both defined “development” as a “change process i.e., a progression of change events that unfold during the duration of an entity's existence from the initiation or onset of the entity to its end or termination. Process theory is an explanation on how and why an entity changes and develops.” One assumption they would like to avoid is that all development represents progress from a lower, simpler state to a higher, more complex one. This is one possible path development may follow but it is not the only one. Development can also follow a regressive path as in the case of decline of organization, ideas, even civilization.

Van de Ven’s accounting of the concept or theory of change is therefore very comprehensive and encompasses almost all types of change involving organizations and may even be applicable in the universality of things around us.

Van de Ven and Poole (1995) has a way of putting the changes in one umbrella shared by four people, i.e., there are four types of change according to them --
Types of change:

A typology of change process theories according to Van de Ven and Poole:

1. Life-cycle model depicts the process of change as progressing through a necessary sequence of stages.
Pioneers: Comte (1798-1857) Spencer (1820-1903) and Piaget (1896-1980)

2. Teleological development is defined as a cycle of goal formulation,
implementation, evaluation and modifications of goals based on learnings.
Pioneers: Mead (1863-1931) Weber (1864-1920) Simon (1916 -)

3. Dialectical is where conflicts emerge between opposing thesis and anti-
thesis and paving the way for synthesis
Pioneers: Hegel (1770-1831) Marx (1818-1883) Freud (1856-1939)

4. Evolutionary consists of repetitive sequence of variation. Selection and
retention or survival of the fittest.
Pioneers: Lamarck (1744-1829) Darwin (1809-1882) Mendel (1822-1884)
Gould and Eldridge (1977)

Van de Ven and Poole (1995) not only gave us the four fundamental types of change, they also averred that these types of change overlap, crisscross, happen simultaneously, sometimes one or two are more prominently occurring and the rest are subtle. In short, change is discontinuity. There is no pattern, guide or an element of predictability in change. We can only observe and categorize it and draw conclusions that change is inevitable.

I once did a paper on communication and change and before reading Van de Ven, I reported on the thesis that communication facilitates change in a way most theorists would look as solely being a series of more teleological and dialectical changes going on. This means setting up an objective or a goal and then after one goal has been achieved then another. It is a dialectic in the sense that there are involved clashes in weltanschauungs even among communicators. But after reading Van de Ven and Poole, I had a sudden change of mind Communication is a process that go side by side with human development therefore communication and human development encompasses all the motors of change as defined by Van de Ven. It is not purely teleological (e.g., typewriters to computers), nor dialectical ( people who designed the software program and the specification of a powerful computer these days dared to challenge the norm, mindset or paradigm of the past). Challenging a norm involves double-loop learning. Blindly following according to predetermined rules or protocol of doing things is dubbed as single loop learning type (Argyris and Schon, 1978) or thesis, anti-thesis and finally synthesis) but a combination of all. Thus, explains processes of change in human development wherein communication played a vital catalytic role.

Van de Ven and Poole also categorized various other theories and types of motors of change that are involved. In the human development progressions theory by Riegel (1976) [in Van de Ven and Poole], we can see that all the types of change are involved.

Overall, as a theory therefore, Van de Ven and Poole ideas of change answers the following and thus to my mind bears the stamp of a complete theory -- how change occurs, when change occurs and why.

As to other approaches in dealing with research about change, it is difficult to come up with anything considering the completeness of the theory. I did surmise before on the possibility of creative mimesis – [change occurring in an organization by copying other successful organizations and in turn even becoming more successful than the copied one] as a type of change not accounted by Van de Ven and Poole. Even the budding science of biomimicry, I surmised as not falling under any of the types of change enumerated by them. But then looking closely at the definition of teleological change one can now surmise that creative mimesis and the new science of biomimicry fall under the teleological interpretation of change. The key word is “learnings” as can be found in their definition of teleological change – “cycle of goal formulation, implementation, evaluation and modifications of goals based on learnings” (Van de Ven and Poole, 1995)


REFERENCES
BOOKS

Argyris, C. and D. A. Schon. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective.
MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978.

Davis, Stan and Botkin, Jim. How Business is Mastering the Opportunity of
Knowledge for Profit: The Monster Under the Bed. NY: Simon and Schuster,
1994.

Uris, Auren. 101 of the Greatest Ideas in Management. New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1986.
ARTICLES

Easterby-Smith, Mark et al (2000) “Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present
and Future,” Journal of Management Studies 37:6 Sept 2000

Van de Ven, Andrew H. and Marshall Scott Poole (1995). “Explaining Development
and Change in Organizations,” Academy of Management Review, 20, 3, pp.
510-540.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Maslow, Mayo and Herzberg: What Really Makes People Tick?
& Can Motivation Be Communicated?


To Maslow, his research was based on countless clinical studies, the use of analogy, some metaphors and logic and experience in formulating his theory about what motivates people or what makes people do what they do. Herzberg for his part interviewed 200 accountants and engineers and other researchers felt this was too small a sample to draw any conclusive evidence from. Mayo for his part was the only one who did actual laboratory experiments and took him six years to conclude his theory.

Before Maslow, Mayo and Herzberg, the paradigm of organization is in terms of work situation and the response of people to it, whether the work makes them productive or not. This is the birth of a tradition in science where man is the unit of analysis. It is thus called human relations perspective vis-à-vis management and this became the vogue then. Highlighted and emphasized were the examination of the workstation, the social context and the worker response.

Thus started the ideas that workers can only be productive depending on the leadership and motivation provided by the leaders.

Maslow, in 1943 advanced a theory suggesting that people are motivated by a series of needs, including monetary incentives, social acceptance and others. This is also the first time – a work of an academic theorist was taken seriously vis-à-vis management and productivity. According to Maslow, the clash is between the ego and the physiological. The ego needs or self-actualization needs are rarely satisfied. Thus, people have constant infinite need for more achievement, more knowledge and more recognition. On the one hand, the physiological, safety and social needs are finite and can be fairly well satisfied. In the end -- self actualization – the highest order needs begin to dominate a person’s behavior. Maslow termed this as fulfillment or self-actualization. An example will be what drives an artist to express himself on canvas or what motivates a student to work all day and go for a college degree at night. Employees or individuals may be at different levels of attainment of needs at different points in their lives. Thus, the role of the managers is to identify each level of attainment within the context of a hierarchy of needs and motivate them toward greater production. Critiques to Maslow state that needs are not sequential but rather concurrent or happen at times all at the same time. For example, a man maybe in the self-esteem stage i.e., liking the job or the recognition it brings and yet does not have any security of tenure in that job. Moreover, Maslow’s claim to universality of the theory may be culture bound as far as the sequence is concerned. This can be illustrated for example by some people who may easily satisfy physiological needs in first world countries, while a famous writer may be starving in some third world country.

Herzberg postulated the lower and higher level set of needs. According to him, the best way to motivate someone is to satisfy the higher level needs. The Lower level needs are seen vis-à-vis raise, better working conditions. These are needs but will not motivate people. The contention is that once a person has money, he will have escalation in his needs and thus ask for a higher pay etc.

However, Herzberg tells us - offer him encouragement in a job and by doing it the person is motivated. He called these as motivators or high level needs. The hygienes [the use of analogy] – does not make you healthy but it prevents your body from weakening are the things that won’t motivate a person. Hygiene factors are the following: pay/social benefits/supervisory styles and policies and physical working conditions– prevent dissatisfaction (lack of negative attitudes). It is the job content that motivates.

Reaction to Herzberg: Is money a motivator? To Herzberg money is hygiene but others consider it as a motivator – say one’s willingness to be hired and to remain in the employ of a given organization.

Elton Mayo for his part added new perspective in the analysis of organizations and management with his famous Hawthorne experiments. His hypothesis was finding the relation of the level of illumination in the work place to the efficiency of workers. The results bore no consistent relation between the two factors. When the illumination was reduced, output continued to increase. It was only when “moonlight” intensity of the lighting was used that the efficiency went down. He therefore concluded that there is a need for more studies on man’s traditional assumptions and actual behavior.

Other variables were looked into: the length of working days or rest periods were adjusted but still the production continued to increase. Later on, he will conclude that other things may be affecting worker behavior and output which he attributed to the following: changed social situations of the workers produced changes in their motivation. Group norms, general satisfaction and patterns of supervision were looked into as possible variables.

For the first time the notion that workers' behavior depended on something more than just financial incentives and physical work conditions became popular. Man who was seen as “inert tool” since the dawn of civilization to the time of Taylor became now a significant variable in the system.

The following are some insights culled from the results of the experiments:

1. Important insights into individual and group behavior

2. Attention was focused on the supervisory climate, providing impetus for research
on leadership.

The interest with these past great researchers in science and management was really prompted by the desire to know a little more “hints” about behavior of people in general. Hints in the sense that currently, the study of behavior is more of a hit and miss thing. It could be or it could be other factors that impinge on the human brain that produces a given behavior.

I call this intellectual reveries. What if we could attach the brain to a machine and record everything that is happening inside it. This way, research on human behavior will truly be reflective of the real state of mind of the people.

More than ever with the technology that is available, study of human behavior is becoming less and less of a “hit” and “miss” thing. If you can see on the monitor excitement of a specific area of the brain then you can conclude that indeed he is “motivated”. This is very much like what the Japanese did in measuring fatigue of drivers which they were able to do but this time they used a monitoring device that records the subjects’ voices.

The same intellectual reveries made me ask whether we can communicate motivation to humans. Research on what entice people to a particular product or what exactly to convey to workers and make them more productive is in the drawing plans. The use of communication in effecting change generally in human development and specifically in organizations [and motivating people in that organization] is at the core of my being. Organizations too, deal with both internal and external customers and hence any discussion on whether motivation can be communicated will rightfully cover both types of concern in this discussion.

Future changes spearheaded once again by those in the business of communicating to customers can be seen in the works of scientists of today as discussed in an article of Wells (2003). To Wells, these scientists are trying to unlock the chemical signals of the brain on why people buy a certain product when they see advertisements. Now, isn’t this another prompt for a change, so that man can fully understand how and what to communicate to consumers so that they will be all captive buyers? As it is, advertising, as communication medium is a “hit” and “miss” as far as understanding the behavior of consumers is concerned. This can be easily explained fully with the theories of Van de Ven and Poole where they argued that changes are a result of an imbalance in the change motors i.e., between prescribed motors (life-cycle and evolutionary) and constructive motors (teleology and dialectical). The PRESCRIBED MOTORS will be the company’s sense to adapt and survive in these trying times and the CONSTRUCTIVE MOTORS will be to learn what really prompts people to buy or what triggers the buy button in people [what motivates people too to become productive]. The imbalance with these motors of change is what prompt scientists together with those in business to probe the brains (through MRI or powerful magnetic resonance imaging machine) of people and understand what part to stimulate so that people will buy [or perhaps workers become more productive].

Knowing what specific part in the brain gets “excited” whenever a customer is on a buying mode will produce dramatic “changes” in the way people conduct their respective business. The only danger here would be an Orwellian “world” of Big Brother watching the populace or even Huxley’s Velvet Glove (Jermier, 1998). The article of Wells defended that such a scenario will never occur. Nevertheless, this scenario speaks of precision communication through advertising, which is to say the least very apt for our topic – i.e., can we communicate motivation? Is communication truly at the forefront of change and development?


REFERENCES
BOOKS

Dessler, Gary. Organization Theory- Integrating Structure and Behavior. NJ: Prentice
Hall, 2nd edition, 1986.

Gellerman, Saul W. Behavioral Science in Management. Penquin Books, 1974.

Griffin, Ricky W. Management. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1984.

Higgens, James M. The Management Challenge: An Introduction to Management. NY:
MacMillan Publishing Co., 1991.

Hodgetts, Richard M. Management: Theory, Process and Practice. Philadelphia: W.B.
Saunders Co., 1979.
Morgan (1997). Images of Organization. CA: Sage Publications.

Uris, Auren. 101 of the Greatest Ideas in Management. New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1986.

ARTICLES

Jermier, John (1998). “Critical Perspectives on Organization Control,” ASQ. 43(2), pp.
235-256.
Melanie Wells (2003). “In Search of the Buy Button,” Forbes Global September 1
Issue, pp. 34 -40.

Van de Ven, Andrew H. and Marshall Scott Poole (1995). “Explaining Development
and Change in Organizations,” Academy of Management Review, 20, 3, pp. 510-
540.

OTHER SOURCES:
Internet:

1. searched under “organizational theory”
http://www.cps.usfca.edu/ob/resources/theory.htm

2. working knowledge for business leaders
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/index.jhtml for the article --

Driven: How Human Nature Shapes Organizations by Paul Lawrence and Nitin Nohria [October 9, 2001]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


V. Learning the Learning Organization

Interests in the learning organization dated back since the early 50s and have continued up to the present. Its principles underlying the theory are still as clear and viable of helping create learning organization in the real sense. The difficulty lies with the proper environment, the leadership and of course the interrelationship of the social actors within that organization – their needs and aspirations. (Collins, 1996 -- ….difficulty in avoiding the social and political question underlying any changes….)

Whether a system based on learning organization is going to work or not, a lot really depends on the factors mentioned in the above.

In the article by Easterby-Smith, Crossan and Nicolini (2000) they all enumerated the various ways of examining the myriad concepts involved in building learning organization and the learned people staking the validity and usefulness of their research. Sometimes one viewpoint contradicts with another sans any possibility of reconciliation. Sometimes one theory about learning organization is supported and continued by the others.

Overall, the paper by Easterby-Smith, Crossan and Nicolini (2000) is a lot like what Reisman (1992) [in Management Science Knowledge: Its Creation, Generalization, and Consolidation] referred to as embedding strategy or combining all the aspects of theories to a single unifying model (if indeed this is possible). Reading the article is like a map guiding later generations of researcher where to step on -- one moment there is intense debate and then all of a sudden the heat tend to subside only to be replaced by another hotter issue.

This dialectical exchange of ideas and paradigm in the learning organization discipline seems to fit perfectly with what Van de Ven and Poole’s described as the disturbance in the prescriptive and constructive motors of change.

Future debates focusing on learning organization have shifted into the following: practice as a new unit of analysis; understanding how learning happens in the workplace or the design of ideal learning workplaces; and lastly, the issue of diversity of ideas and relationships of shareholders and people in an organization or the power and politics within a given organization.

Debates within the community regarding the proper way to transpose learning organization strategies in the workplace are all healthy discussions. In fact Reisman (1992) explained that incremental or ripple approach or the “n+1" mindset in doing research works is the best. Meaning the building up process or laying the good foundations for any theory is always welcome sight. Even journals of science await research works of this nature. Building fresh new explanations or adding something valuable to an existing theory is a must in the research field.

Easterby-Smith, Crossan and Nicolini (2000) concluded that the future is bright for learning organization. The focus now is on the things to do to enhance learning organization and how to create an environment and see or measure the practical benefits of its applications vis-à-vis building successful learning organizations.

In the case of Morgan’s (1997) explanation of learning organization, the ideal environment depends on the 5 Principles enumerated below which clearly explains how to grow learning organization in the workplace.

Principle 1 tells us TO BUILD THE WHOLE INTO ALL THE PARTS, i.e., organizational units are freely allowed to develop in a manner that enhances self organizing work groups to work while committed to continuous improvement processes. Principle 2 is about the IMPORTANCE OF REDUNDANCY or allowing free flow of communication among work groups which foster shared understanding, trust and commitment in the work place.

Another important principle is that of REQUISITE VARIETY and this means putting in the work group a variety of people with different background or expertise. Looking at various perspectives in seeing solutions to problems often is best when dealing with fast changing environments.

Another salient principle, which is the MINIMUM CRITICAL SPECIFICATION, simply means the absence of detailed rules, protocol and targets that hamper creativity and go against the grain of self organizing units. The vision and strategy enacted by top people in the organization will be enough to guide these self organizing work groups into greater productivity.

Lastly, at the very core of the discipline of LEARNING ORGANIZATION is the PRINCIPLE OF LEARNING TO LEARN, this means that a double loop learning (Argyris 1976) mode is encouraged and employed in the organization. Most often it’s been said that a lot of organizations have failed simply because of what Senge attributed to as an organization’s “learning disabilities” – not questioning the norms. People are sometimes simply content with the status quo.

Morgan’s last principle i.e., learning to learn is by the way the very foundation of any learning organization – the double loop learning which always involved changing the values of the organization and replacing with new ones [or new logic].[ As an aside, 3M is one organization where one can see all these principles, but the 3 –page limit of this report will not allow us to go into the details.]

Morgan’s holographic analogy is a good way of introducing the rich and varied topic of learning organization to tyros like us in the research field. One reading and you readily grasp the issues at hand.

Moreover, the book as a whole is replete with seeing practical images of theories in building or examining the behavior of people in an organization.

Overall, isn’t this what research is all about seeing how solutions can be utilized to banish human problems? [Selznick may have said this about focusing on social policy to address problems facing people rather than techniques in research….]

A combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches to research will always be best!

REFERENCES
BOOKS

Argyris, C. and D. A. Schon. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective.
MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978.

Drucker, Peter F. The New Realities. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1989.

Davis, Stan and Botkin, Jim. How Business is Mastering the Opportunity of
Knowledge for Profit: The Monster Under the Bed. NY: Simon and Schuster, 1994.

Morgan (1997). Images of Organization. CA: Sage Publications.

Reisman, Arnold (1992). Management Science Knowledge: Its Creation,
Generalization, and Consolidation. CT, USA: Quorum Books.

White, Randall P. The Future of Leadership: Riding the Corporate Rapids Into the
21st Century. Maryland USA : Philip Hodgson and Stuart Chineer, Pitman
Publishing, 1996.

Uris, Auren. 101 of the Greatest Ideas in Management. New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1986.
ARTICLES

Allen, Lawrence. “An Intriguing TQM Approach in Management Forum.” World
Executive Digest, January, 1997.

Collins, David (1996). “ New Paradigms for Change? Theories of Organization and
the Organization of Theories,” Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 9,4, pp 9 –

Easterby-Smith, Mark et al (2000) “Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present
and Future,” Journal of Management Studies 37:6 Sept 2000

Jermier, John (1998). “Critical Perspectives on Organization Control,” ASQ. 43(2),
pp. 235-256.

Van de Ven, Andrew H. and Marshall Scott Poole (1995). “Explaining Development
and Change in Organizations,” Academy of Management Review, 20, 3, pp.
510-540.

OTHER SOURCES:
Brochure; The K-Economy: Competitiveness, Survival and Growth. ASEAN-EC International Conference 2003 containing quoted material from Ruth Kaglia.
Senge’s Foreword to “The Living Company” by Arie de Geus, former planning executive of Royal Dutch Shell



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI.
“An essential difference between civilizations and primitive societies as we know them… is the direction taken by mimesis or imitation. … In primitive societies… mimesis is directed towards …the past, custom rules and society remains static. On the other hand, in societies in process of civilization, mimesis is directed towards creative personalities who commanded a following because they are pioneers. In such societies …society is in dynamic motion along a course of change and growth.”
— Arnold J. Toynbee 1889-1975, British historian
The River that Never Rests: the sense of continuous change
-- Image of river as divinity from Yoruba culture in Nigeria

Organizational Change and Development: The Role of Creative Mimesis in Building Successful Organizations in the Philippine fast food industry.


Chapter


I. INTRODUCTION


1.1 Background of the Study

The phenomenal success of the Philippine fast food industry is a good way to introduce this report on creative mimesis and its possible role in organizational building.
Palma in her 2002 report observed a trend punctuated by rapid growth of the fast food service industry. This is evidenced by the rapid expansion of the different fast food chains in MM, key cities and provinces. This despite the problems related to today’s economy.
Eating out has become a part of the way of life of most Filipinos. Possible drivers mentioned in her report are the higher income owing to double income of most families in the Philippines and fast changing lifestyles.
More Filipinos are also working including mothers and ergo less time to cook. Possible choice is to buy or partake of precooked food or eat outside.
The Philippines has a young population, ages 1-29 comprise about 64 percent of the total population, which heavily favors dining in fast food and casual/family restaurants. (GAIN Report, 2001)
The popularity of the food service concept came in the 80s and 90s. The industry has been steadily on the upswing by a steady double-digit growth until 1998. More and more Filipinos eat less at home. It has been observed that five (5) out of ten (10) Filipinos who eat out goes to fast food chains, three (3) to fine dining restaurants and the rest go to small food outlets and bakeshops. Fast foods’ popularity is attributed to convenience in going there -- where one gets fast hot meals at very affordable prices.

Performance of the Fast food industry. There are an estimated 50,000 restaurants in the country. The eating out spending of families, excluding corporate representation expenses, is currently valued at almost P90 billion (approximately $1.8 billion) with an average growth of 15% to 20% per annum over the last ten years. Growth slowed down since 1998 following the Asian Financial crisis. Past 5 years saw the entry of many food players. Local stores chain keep on expanding in major urban areas while foreign players are coming in. Local franchises have gone international like Red Ribbon Bakeshop, Max’s Restaurant, Josephine Restaurant and Jollibee. (Palma, 2002)

Food Spending. The food spending pattern of Filipino families continued to soar but its share to total spending had declined. The share of food to total spending went down from 44.2% in 1997 to 43.1% in 2000. Food spending amounted to P786 billion in 2000, a 26% increase from 1997 (National Statistics Office-Family Income and Expenditure Survey - NSO-FIES). Food consumed at home comprised 38.3%, a decline from 39.2% in 1997. By contrast, the share of eating out to total spending increased from 4.7% in 1997 to 4.9% in 2000. (Palma, 2002)
Industry Cluster Analysis. Eating out has become good business. The entry of new players is proof that it is on the up trend despite the economic slowdown. Growth translates to competition especially among the different categories of the food service business. In the quick service restaurant (fast food) segment, the total market in 2000 was over P30 billion.

Core companies or the dominant players in the fast food are Jollibee (entry: 1975), McDonalds (28% of the present market share if fast food, entry: 1981) Wendy’s (entry: 1983), KFC (entry: 1967), Kenny Rogers Roasters, Pizza Hut. Greenwich (JFC acquired in 1994) and Chowking (JFC acquired in 2000). (Palma, 2002)
In 2000, total system wide sales of JFC amounted to P20.3 billion, with Jollibee sales capturing 75% of the total, Greenwich, 11%; Chowking, 10%; and others, 4%. Kenny Rogers (entry: 1995) with 27 stores. Shakeys (entry: 1975) and Pizza Hut (entry: 1984). (Palma, 2002)

Supporting industries and services are in a tight squeeze for competition in the industry, since fast food players buy their ingredients from the best and cheapest sources. Players too, directly negotiate with producers, manufacturers and distributors for food beverage and packaging products to insure freshness and uniform quality at competitive prices. Some of the major local suppliers are SMC, Coca Cola, California Manufacturing Corp., Dole Phils., Philippine Dairy Products Corp., Kraft, Purefoods, General Milling, Goldilocks and Nestle. Many have to be imported – like beef, potato cheese and other dairy items that are not available locally. (Palma, 2002)

Critical success factors – advertising and promotion, proper pricing (note – mimesis in the pricing), quality of the food service and the facilities, product lines, extensive branch network, availability of raw materials and franchising system.
Competition in the fast food and market entry is very challenging. Market niching is key. New entrants need to project image that will shift brand loyalty. For them to survive in the market, they need to have well-managed logistics to supply multi-network system and sufficient funding to run aggressive marketing.

SWOT Analysis:
Increased share of eating out spending, convenience, varied menu, excellent ambiance, affordable price and easy accessibility are seen as Strengths. Weakness are the following: costs which are affected by dollar exchange fluctuations as most ingredients are imported, seasonality in some areas, and difference in the quality of the service.

Opportunities and threats can be seen in the stiff competition, market slowdown, shortage of raw materials, expansion to key cities, problems related to training of people and logistics, entry of foreign competitors who are more well muscled.

Prognosis medium term 5 years. Philippine food service industry appears cautiously optimistic backed up by steady growth in population, majority of which comprise the young people. Modest overall economic growth translates into increased higher per capita income. Bright prospects may attract more players and add to the competition. More competition will then lead to expansion in product lines therefore more choices, stiff pricing or price wars, more outlets competing, and other innovative strategies and ideas which go well for the industry. Expansion of malls which create a captured market. lead to diversification and mergers like Jollibee when it acquired Chowking and Greenwhich.

Franchising mainly in the fast food industry is one of the most developed and sophisticated in Asia with 90% success rate and is now the benchmark for the region. To date, the overall franchising industry in the Philippines continues to grow from 20-30 percent per year since the 1997 Asian financial crisis.
Numerous studies have been devoted to describing the growth of the fast food sector in the Philippines. Many Filipinos given the opportunity will go into food venture companies because of its phenomenal growth. The penchant for mimesis of successful models of organization is simply irresistible.

This study is an attempt to understand the role of mimesis in successful building of Filipino organizations in the context of institutional theory and the various contemporary change paradigms discussed in BA 350 class.


1.2 Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to describe the significant relationships between creative mimesis and building successful organizations in the Philippine fast food industry. Specifically, it attempts to answer the following questions.

What is creative mimesis?

What is the role of creative mimesis in change and development of an organization?

What is its role in building successful organizations in the Philippines?

Is there a significant relationship between creative mimesis and successful organizations in the Philippines?

What strategies can be used to meet the requirements of building successful ORGANIZATIONS THROUGH creative MIMESIS?

1.3 Objectives of the Study

This study aimed to meet the following objectives:
To determine the meaning of creative mimesis and the role of creative mimesis in the development of an organization.

To determine its ROLE in building successful organizations in the Philippines.

To ascertain whether there is a significant relationship between creative mimesis and successful organizations in the Philippines.

To recommend strategies for meeting the requirements of building successful ORGANIZATIONS THROUGH creative mimesis.

1.4 Significance of the Study

This study is deemed significant for the following reasons:

1. In general, it will resolve the issue of Filipinos’ vaunted penchant for “copying” things when in fact the “copying” they employed as discussed in this report shows genuine Filipino’s creative mimesis, genius and originality.

2. It will help us examine blue prints for organizational success in the Filipino context.

3. It will generate data which may be valuable to future Filipino organization whose end goal is the creation of an organization resilient enough to face the pressures of economic downturns and upturns.

4. It will help facilitate tuning or acquiring of a global mindset for Filipinos.

5. It will show how Filipino organization may differ from its Western counterparts in their perception of building a successful organization and managing change.

1.5 Limitations of the Study

This study was conducted focusing on a few established organizations in the fast food sector only and would only be applicable to the peculiarities of said organizations. Likewise the findings in this study are dependent on the information which the respondents are willing to provide. The time constraints for doing the report can only afford the study the luxury of interviewing officers and employees of choice established organizations in the fast food.
The majority of the successful players are seen as foreign organizations and not home grown ones, therefore limiting us to the latter only.

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE


2.1 What is Creative Mimesis

Mimesis (mim-eese'-iss) is defined in the dictionary as imitation; and specifically it refers to art and literature, or the imitation or representation, especially of speech or behavior etc.

Creative mimesis -- Creative, in the sense that it entails adopting and replicating behavior that augurs for improved quality of life for the individual or the organization.
The British historian, Arnold J. Toynbee (1889-1975), clearly enunciated what mimesis is when he said:
“An essential difference between civilizations and primitive societies as we know them… is the direction taken by mimesis or imitation. … In primitive societies… mimesis is directed towards …the past, custom rules and society remains static. On the other hand, in societies in process of civilization, mimesis is directed towards creative personalities who commanded a following because they are pioneers. In such societies …society is in dynamic motion along a course of change and growth.”

The succeeding section will give us a better understanding of the meaning of creative mimesis by examining first how people adopt and replicate behavior in general.

Castlefranci, C (2001) inquired on why people adopt a given behavior. The human mind is seen as an important tool that acts as “cognitive constraints or filters and mechanisms” for selecting behavior and what to adopt and replicate. The mind he asserted is “autonomous to social influences and act as selector or constraints for adoption and replication of observed behavior or culture.”
People as such cannot make another believe or do whatever he wants the other to believe or do. One should resort to intricate strategies i.e., education, persuasion, and even manipulation etc.

The mind believes something only on the basis of what the people believe and wish. They also learn to do something on the basis of their motives and of the perceived rewards. The cognitive processes like attention, memory, association, analogy and abstraction etc are therefore important factors to consider what behavior will people adopt and replicate.

Castlefranci, C (2001) is clear about this: if mimesis do not win within the mind of the individual, they cannot spread around in the population.
Mimesis is driven by the beliefs and motives inherent in one’s mind.

2.2 Possible Connection of Mimesis in Building Successful Organizations

Mimesis of human behavior as shown in the preceding section is always mediated by the human mind.
If the concept of mimesis is all around us i.e., people adopting and replicating behaviors of other people, people inspired by nature’s best ideas and then imitates these designs and processes to solve people’s problems [See biomimickry1]; then, why can we not equally apply mimesis to building successful organizations.

Again, there is a need to reexamine more thoroughly Castlefranci’s ideas on adoption and replication of behavior and derive a possible connection on whether mimesis can apply to building successful organizations.

Castlefranci posited the following assumptions about people and what goes inside their minds in adopting and replicating behavior. The first assumption talks of Cognitivism, that is when the person interprets and reacts in relations to information, events, situations, inputs in general and creates or attributes meaning or a value system to it.

Second assumption can be characterized by REASONS, this is when the person “activates, selects, prefers, pursues, gives up goals” on the basis of what a person believes. Briefly, the person is reasonably motivated for doing something.

The third assumption goes this way: people are as GOAL-DIRECTED (endowed with intention, planning and deliberation activities). They act and aimed at achieving certain anticipated results.

Given these assumptions of people in adopting and replicating behavior. Castlefranci created the following model:

[To View Figure 1 Click Here and when done click the back browser button]

Figure 1. Adoption and Replication of Behavior

The above model of the adoption and replication of behavior shows us that in general, a behavior has to be observed, then interpreted and understood as to its meaning and depending on the motivation and the reason for such behavior then only will the person adopt and replicate (and store and repeat) such a behavior. Variations may occur or adjustments of the copied behavior.

Moreover, Castlefranci named three important mechanisms for mimesis adoption and replication but for the present report we will illustrate only one called “means-ends” or “instrumental reasoning” type of learning behavior [note here the normative reasoning and compliance; the Identity or membership based reasoning] since this will be the only one to figure prominently in the description about creative mimesis in organizations.

The applicability of this mechanism can be easily understood if it is examined in a logical sequence and framed in the context of a behavior in an organization – If Adopter A sees M doing X quite successfully in generating sales – call it goal P, then Adopter A thru cognitive processes filters and eventually believes in X as a good means to growing sales -- achieving P. Adopter A will then will consider highly X as a possible means likewise for achieving goal P and then probably A will use X, as M does.

Adopter A has reasons (the evaluation of X) and motives (its need and problem) for adopting and replicating the behavior of M.
Castlefranci qualified that such mimesis learning of any feature X is not simply “emulation or echoing”, but it is based on some understanding of the purposes and reasons of M exhibiting it.

Castlefranci summarized that “individuals accept new behaviors, plans or tools as better solutions for their own problems, as good means for their goals; the group diffuse and preserve (memorize) and transmit the best (discovered) solutions.”

This theory most likely accounts for building social institutions, creating rules and transfer of technology opined Castlefranci. This theory therefore accounts too for the creative mimesis employed by organizations in our case.

Likewise, the greater the number of successful people or organizations who adopt a certain "solution" (mimesis of the ways or methods of an excellent organization) the more people and organization will go the same tried and tested way to success. Consider, the cycle of mimesis employed by those entering the fast food industry today, most likely they will start everything by learning through creative mimesis the steps or strategies employed by those who came ahead of them.

1.3 Building Successful Organizations: From the perspective
of Institutional Theory of Organization:

The concept of building successful organizations can be seen from the perspective of Barnard and Selznick, both avid proponents of Institutional theory of organization (30s to 60s).

Barnard said leaders must secure commitment and actively manage the informal organization while at the same time ensure that the organization simultaneously achieves its profit or economic goal.

The primary role of the person at the helm will be as shaper and manager of shared values in an organization. Essentially, the function of any manager is to provide the following: a system of communication, promote securing of essential efforts and formulate and define the purpose of the organization.

A decade later Philip Selznick, posited a similar theory and harped on distinctive competence or what a particular company is good at and most others are not.

The following are traits basic in the success of an organization according to Selznick: an organization character, competence, institutional values and leadership.
Organizations become institutions only when they are infused with values which produce a distinct identity. Thus, leadership is not all about efficiency but setting basic mission and creation of a social organization capable of fulfilling that mission. This social organization is a product of social needs and pressures – a responsive adaptive organism.

Selznick’s idea of building an organization into an institution through infusion of values can be seen in the subject of this report – the Philippine fast food industry. In particular, the case of Jollibee’s name comes to mind. The name itself came from a vision of employees working happily and efficiently like bees in a hive. The inherent values or philosophy established then, continues to these days through this story handed down through the years. The organization character, its distinct competence and the values were all determined by the founder of an organization, now a veritable institution by itself.

1.4 Building Successful Organizations: Managing Change from the
Perspective of Van de Ven and Poole (1995)

Van de Ven and Poole (1995) posited that “change is an empirical observation of difference in form, quality or state over time in an entity.” Change is one type of an event in an entity and that entity maybe an individual’s job or task, a group, a strategy, a program or a whole organization even the universality of things and its reality. Both of them spoke of change in the way that we account for change and development in an organization.
They both defined “development” as a “change process i.e., a progression of change events that unfold during the duration of an entity's existence from the initiation or onset of the entity to its end or termination. Process theory is an explanation how and why an entity changes and develops.” One assumption, they would like to avoid is that all development represents progress from a lower, simpler state to a higher, more complex one. This is one possible path, development may follow, but it is not the only one. Development can also follow a regressive path as in the case of decline of organization, ideas, even civilization.

Van de Ven and Poole (1995) has a way of putting the changes that we have witnessed in one umbrella shared by many, i.e., there are four types of change according to them --

Types of Change:

A typology of change process theories according to Van de Ven and Poole:

1. Life-cycle model depicts the process of change as progressing through a necessary sequence of stages.
Pioneers: Comte (1798-1857) Spencer (1820-1903) and Piaget (1896-1980)

2. Teleological development is defined as a cycle of goal formulation,
implementation, evaluation and modifications of goals based on learnings.
Pioneers: Mead (1863-1931) Weber (1864-1920) Simon (1916 - )

3. Dialectical is where conflicts emerge between opposing thesis and anti-
thesis and paving the way for synthesis
Pioneers: Hegel (1770-1831) Marx (1818-1883) Freud (1856-1939)

4. Evolutionary consists of repetitive sequence of variation. Selection and retention or survival of the fittest.
Pioneers: Lamarck (1744-1829) Darwin (1809-1882) Mendel (1822-1884)
Gould and Eldridge (1977)

Van de Ven and Poole (1995) not only gave us the four fundamental types of change, they also averred that these types of change overlap, crisscross, happen simultaneously, sometimes one or two are more prominently occurring and the rest are subtle. In short, change is discontinuity which means there is no pattern, guide or an element of predictability in change. We can only observe and categorize it and draw conclusions that change is inevitable.
The magnitude of change in the above driven by different motors or drivers of change significantly impacts on the character and directions of an organization and this is where creative mimesis come to play in the report. This also accounts for the creation of the distinct competence or character of the organization as Selznick previously described.

Meanwhile, the observed changes as per Van de Ven and Poole (1995) in most organizations are of teleological in nature, wherein there is a stated end goal and organizations adapt to achieve the series of goals. (Continuity of change through creation of another different goal, after one goal has been achieved).
This continuing teleological kind of change is easily seen and most paramount in most organizations today as they compete for greater share of the market.

1.5 Building Successful Organizations: Managing Resistance
to Change from the perspective of Kurt Levin and others

Psychologist Kurt Levin accounted for resistance to change. What makes people resist the changes around them and not just maintain the status quo? Below is an illustration of Levin’s force field in analyzing changes.

[To View Figure 2 Click Here and when done click the back browser button]

Figure 2. Confrontation of pros and con factors

To Levin, change will occur if the forces or factors favoring change are greater than its corresponding resistance. The forces for and against change or the pros and cons can be readily seen as the drivers for change. The strength of the forces augurs for change or maintenance of status quo. This model was expounded more by what Van de Ven and Poole asserted as change emanating from the disturbance between or among drivers – prescribed mode of change with those of constructive.
Levin’s views of change can also be seen in his concept of minimizing and maximizing the influential factors or simply Mini Max. This Idea originates in the field of economics and refers to suit a strategy which Kurt Levin utilized in dealing with resistance to change. Kurt Levin recommends that resistance is best overcome by minimizing the forces that oppose the change and simultaneously maximizing the favorable forces. The only way status quo is improved or replaced by a new one is by minimizing some factors and maximizing others.
On a personal level, these forces of change can be seen too or accounted in most literature dealing with human resources issues – example is Uris’ (1994) discussion of the concept of “self communication”, wherein people indulge in it in general in the evaluation of alternatives characterized by an internal battle within oneself of the pros and cons of one’s options. It is an ongoing internal dialogue and ends only when you decide.

Other concepts of change on a personal level can be seen in Self-image remodeling by Uris wherein he discussed the observation that the way people see themselves influences their behavior. This fact is proved by studies in which school children scored better than a similar group who saw themselves as 2nd rate.

1.6 Building Successful Organizations: Episodic and Continuous
Change from the perspective of Karl E. Weick

Weick (1999) in Organizational Change and Development spoke of organization adaptation, learning, intervention and transformation. Change to him is spiral as opposed to linear direction. According to his thesis – change involves these two types – episodic and continuous. Episodic follows the sequence unfreeze-transition-refreeze and the latter type involves freeze-rebalance-unfreeze. To view which change is occurring is to examine concepts related to inertia.
Change is seen also as failures to adapt. The challenge is to adapt to the new environment and through continuous change which Weick equated with “isolated” innovations create relevance that will create great benefits for the organization. The word change has to be converted to “changing” since this is a more accurate term since change is never turn on and off and as such never stops. This view is pretty much of the problem of locating constantly moving electrons in science. Weick also amplified the significant drivers of change in Van de Ven and Poole (1995).

1.7 Process Change and Organizational Effectiveness by
Evans and Ford 2001

Evans and Ford delineated a different type of change in organization. They called it PROCESS CHANGE in organization and are limited to a unit or a division in a particular organization. In contrast, STRATEGIC CHANGE TYPE which encompasses the whole of the organization is described by Weick (episodic) and those of Van de Ven and Poole (1995).

Evans and Ford spoke of PROCESS CHANGE – change which are “limited” or “small” changes within an organization through self-assessment using the Malcolm Baldrige Award Criteria for Performance Excellence (CPE).

Lately both observed the extensive use of CPE and has become a widespread practice among all types of organizations. Empirical evidence suggests that Baldrige Award-based assessment typically results in improvements to managerial processes.

The self-assessment functions as a “big picture” evaluation tool of how the organization, through its various processes of managing, is achieving their long-term objectives. Managers learn too about any assumptions and design flaws in the current processes that may prevent or impinge on the organization from achieving success.

Moreover, Evans and Ford said that the answers obtained from self-assessment can facilitate double-loop learning (questioning the norms) and enhance the organization through improved leadership activities, better listening to customers, or more efficient leaders’ mindset and perspective in coping with the business environment.

1.8 Creative Mimesis in Other Countries and Imperatives for Change

Mindsets oftentimes pose blinders to business and oftentimes prove fatal to most companies. The business as usual mindset has been said well often will mean sure enterprise death. The catch-up or me too mentality may likewise spell irrelevance or slower death (enterprise). But managing change or better yet creating change will mean enterprise survival and perhaps excellence.(Talisayon 2000)
Senge2 amplified these thoughts very well – “… [Many fortune 500] corporations die prematurely – the vast majority before their 50th birthday…. [due to] learning disabilities.”

The Japanese have this mentality of managing and creating change. Most companies in the West are pioneers in most areas. Television for example started in the US but what the Japanese did was to literally “tore apart” and examined the Zenith brand in the US and improve upon it. After this, Japanese companies lead by a long stride the manufacturing of quality television with greater features than the Zenith brand. The same cycle of creative mimesis are occurring with newly industrialized countries then to keep up with Japan and they were very successful.
These countries managed to capture the world market by learning, inspecting and creating changes.

Moreover, it is not only the creative mimesis they initially employed but also the mindset of constant learning and continuous improvement of the quality of their products by looking at the environment and unceasing questioning of the established norms.

According to a study made by the Royal Dutch Shell of Fortune 500 firms: The following are characteristics important in long lived successful firms: ability to learn and adapt, cohesion and identity (corporate persona), tolerance of differences, eccentricities and experimentations, decentralized and open to other possibilities and financially conservative.

Perhaps a combination of creative mimesis, effectively managing and creating change, continuous learning of the double loop type [questioning the norms], thereby infusing the organization with distinct competence and values will all spell success for organizations.

1.9 Understanding Creative Mimesis in the Philippine Setting

The values and the distinctive competence of globally successful McDonalds and (to a certain extent the case of Kentucky Fried Chicken who came in the Philippines in 1967) became the focal point in the case of Jollibee’s leader and American consultant as object of creative mimesis and institution building.

Thus, from a small ice cream parlor antedating Jollibee, the company president, Tony Tan Caktiong (better known as TTC) diversified into sandwiches because of the deepening impact of the oil crisis which he mused then will double the price of ice cream. Using the home-style Philippine recipe developed by TTC’s chef father and infusing the values of happy working bees in the workplace, not to mention, adopting and replicating the distinctive competence of giants – McDonalds and KFC, this recipe quickly became a favorite among Filipinos. A year later, with five stores in Metro Manila, the family incorporated Jollibee Foods Corporation.

Today, most organizations in the Philippines, giants like Shoe Mart and Jollibee are easily seen as vivid images of creative mimesis which carry along with it the distinct competence, organization character, institutional values and leadership as explained in institution theory by Selznick and Barnard.

The following are additional observations:

• Observed trend of mimesis by these successful Filipino entrepreneurs of the past of “globally successful companies”, rather than second rate companies.

• Observed surpassing of the very companies they “copied” as exemplified in the case of Jollibee vis-à-vis McDonalds etc.

• Observed characteristic of mimesis in stores’ operations system, product lines, overall service strategies, promotions and even values of the organizations. Franchising which guarantees success and growth is also what can be termed as mimesis-in-process for these companies.

• Creative mimesis or adoption and replication of more successful organizations have provided the ticket to success because it is very useful and the probability to improve the quality of the life of the organization and its transformation to a successful one is much greater.

• Today, people’s notions or ideas of growing the business have been dictated by a review of these success stories that grew their business through mimesis. Their mere act of review is in turn a creative mimesis.

Thus, the transformation from an unknown ice cream parlor to Jollibee of today with a captured double-digit market share of Philippine fast food industry and now aggressively entering the international market is one excellent local example of the use of creative mimesis in building successful organization.

III. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The succeeding pages detail the conceptual framework used to answer the questions in this study.

3.1 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework in this study is an elaboration of the model conceived by Castlefranci, C (2001). [Towards a Cognitive Memetics: Socio-Cognitive Mechanisms for Memes Selection and Spreading]

[To View Figure 3 Click Here and when done click the back browser button]

Figure 3. SIMPLE MODEL OF THE REPLICATION OF BEHAVIORS

The basic assumption in this model is that it follows a rather obvious and simple model of the replication of behaviors in people.

As stressed by the theory -- “behavior” does not spread automatically but through the understanding and interpretation of the mind of people. People have “to observe a behavior; then interpret/understand it; and then to have their own motives and reasons for performing (and store and repeat) such a behavior.”

Only on the basis of their understanding and of their motives and reasons can they replicate the same behavior or a variation of it.

Using the model above as jumping board, the conceptual framework used in this study, as shown in Figure 4. applied Castlefranci’s theory’s sequence of creative mimesis or “adopting and replicating” behavior(s) this time of one organization of another successful organization.

Moreover, the creative mimesis employed in the present study’s conceptual framework made a successful connection of creative mimesis with those relevant aspects characteristic of Selznick’s Institutionalism. Likewise, the various explanation of changes and development in organization’s life posited by Van de Ven and Poole, Weick and Evans and Ford supported well the present inquiry on whether there is a connection between creative mimesis and building successful organizations.

3.2 Stages to Creative Mimesis in Organizations

 Stage 1.

Change agent in the organization sees threat of a declining organization owing to disturbance in the environment. e.g., Oil crisis.
Change agent sees an opportunity for a new product e.g., diversification from ice cream to sandwiches.

Change agent scans the environment looking for a business model that will support its diversification and breathe life to a dying organization.
Change agent in the organization sees a “behavior of a successful organization” or business model.
Finally, change agent observed the success of a global organizations(i.e., KFC, McDonalds).

 Stage 2.
Change agent interpreted and understood the significance and utility of the observed “behavior of a successful organization” or business model vis-à-vis the threat and opportunities facing the organization. Thereby, creating an end goal (teleological-change-driver activated) plus the need for personal mastery and achievement (internal dialectical-change-driver activated) of the change agent.
[Note: at this juncture the principle of Self communication based on previous research occurs and this is characterized by the change agent of an on-going dialogue with himself i.e., evaluation of alternatives here and is generally characterized by a battle of the change agent (him) telling the change agent (him) the pros and cons of his options. It is an ongoing internal dialogue that ends when he decides on the object of his organization to mimesis. The principle of MiniMax can be seen in this instance too - meaning the change agent is seen as formulating steps or actions in minimizing and maximizing the influential factors that will impinge on the chances of successful transformation.]

 Stage 3
Change agent adopts and replicates the “successful behavior of the other organization”. This creative mimesis of another successful organization simultaneously created the blue print for characteristics important in making an organization into an institutional – with distinct competence, possessing organizational character and values through the change agent’s leadership.

[To View Figure 4 Click Here and when done click the back browser button]

Figure 4. STAGES OF CREATIVE MIMESIS AND “SPIRAL” CHANGE IN ORGANIZATION

Having accounted for the creative mimesis and the institutional aspects as shown in the illustration above (lower half of the illustration), the various theories underlying changes in an organization and the direction of transformation of the organization denoted as points “a” to “d” are noted (See Figure 4).

In the same illustration, the direction of change is spiral and not linear as postulated by Weik and integrates the concept of episodic and continuous changes within the framework. Points “a” to “b” and points “c” to “d” of the illustration are termed as episodic because the changes evident here are transformational in character which means that the changes are in the magnitude which impacts on the whole organization. (See also strategic change by Evans and Ford).

The gaps outside of points “a” to “b” and points “c” to “d” are what are usually termed as changes in the nature of continuous or process change i.e., affecting specific units within the organization only.

The conceptual framework therefore integrates creative mimesis and the various explanation of changes and development in the course of the existence of an organization.

The same conceptual framework sees the creative mimesis resulting in the transformation of an organization into an institution with its distinct competence and values infused into it by its leader.

Remarkably, the creative mimesis in an organization will continue well into the future. The only difference will be in the quality, magnitude and the effects to the organization.

Creative mimesis, in this sense has no end and well employed into the future in sustaining a long-lived institution. In fact, the race for benchmarking and best practices analysis employed in most successful organizations and the greater drive to integrate these in the organization are forms of creative mimesis.

Most of the successful companies are helped by creative mimesis, whether it involves BIG or SMALL changes facing these organizations.

Creative mimesis and building successful organizations go hand in hand together. Factors such as “sawa” to Filipinos may be attributable to the observed similarities in fast food offerings. These similarities may add impetus to new entrants in entering the industry who can offer a different experience altogether and yet maintain its bottom line well.

The observed promiscuity of fast food consumers (Cruz, 2000) point to further similarities than differences among these fast food players. The “price wars” are also indicative of the creative mimesis in these organizations prompting them to adopt and replicate a pot pourri of the value meal promotions and discounted special package which in the end will help the consumers in terms of affordability, but at the same time prove difficult for some of these organizations to survive.

Another relevant issue noted in the present conceptual framework of this study, although more research will be needed to validate this in the future, is the shift of a successful organization from a command and control type of organization where norms are usually not questioned to one which is characteristics of a learning organization – continually challenging the established norms. This is evident with Jollibee’s moving towards the direction of utilizing the Malcolm Baldrige Award Criteria for Performance Excellence or CPE(See Figure 4 Process change by Evans and Ford). CPE or this assessment tool allows the managers to see the whole picture and norms are questioned and appropriate changes are created. Is this what Selznick was trying to tell us in his article entitled Institutionalism “Old” and “New”? Perhaps!

Notably, creative mimesis in organization as delineated by the present study’s conceptual framework encompasses or are manifested in all the stages in the organization’s life, side by side with the various changes and development it has encountered and will encounter. Thus, regardless of whether the changes are episodic or continuous (process change) creative mimesis in building successful organizations are bound to be present.

3.3 Definition of Terms

o Mimesis (mim-eese'-iss) n. imitation; specifically a) in art and literature, imitation or representation, especially of speech or behavior etc. b) in biology, mimicry.

o Creative mimesis – adopting and replicating the behavior of successful
organization and using this to add quality to the life of the adopting organization.

o Change – is an empirical observation of difference in form, quality or state over time in an entity.

o Episodic change follows the sequence unfreeze-transition-refreeze To view which change is occurring is to examine concepts related to inertia.
(See also strategic change)

o Continuous change follows the sequence freeze-rebalance-unfreeze.
(See also process change)

o Change agent – stakeholder or the significant person or leader at the helm of change

o Strategic change – encompasses change that affects the whole organization.

o Process change –encompasses change that affects only a unit or division in an organization.

o Institutional theory – Selznick made a distinction that organization becomes institutional only when there is an infusion of values into that organization.

The organization also exudes with distinct competence (what a particular company is good at and most others are not)

The following are traits basic in the success of an organization according to Selznick:

Organizational character

Competence
Institutional values
Leadership


o Double loop learning -- learning depends on being able to take a “double look” at the situation by questioning the relevance of operating norms


IV. METHODOLOGY

The following section outlines the methods to be utilized in this study. Series of focus interviews using open-ended questions will be conducted to validate the significant relationships between creative mimesis and successful organizations.

4.1 Sources of Information

This qualitative research using focus interview is deemed more efficient and effective way of ferreting out the probable use of creative mimesis in building successful organizations by targeting select officers and senior manager employees of companies who are knowledgeable of the inner workings of their respective units or organizations and the industry as a whole.
Only the more visible players in the industry will be targeted: Jollibee, McDonalds, Chowking, KFC, Greenwich, Wendy’s, Max’s, Pizza Hut, Kenny Roger Roasters, Shakey’s, Smokey’s, Tropical Hut, A & W, Dunkin Donuts, Texas Chicken, Cindy’s, Kimchi, Goldilocks, Carl's, Henlin, DeliFrance, and Pollo Loco.

Only fast food companies with dine-in facilities will be considered. Coffee shops are not included.

4.2 Sample Size and Sampling Procedure

The focus interviews will select all the respondents who will be coming from each department or unit in the abovementioned fast food companies. Respondents are expected to be knowledgeable of the following various areas where creative mimesis in a successful organization may most likely reside or be present --

• Similarities and Differences in price
• Similarities and Differences in market and promotions
• Similarities and Differences in store design and layout
• Similarities and Differences in products
• Similarities and Differences in service standards
• Similarities and Differences in uniforms, policy and regulations
• Similarities and Differences in labor selection, recruitment, training &
development processes.



4.3 Development and Validity/Reliability of Research Instruments3

The following are the salient questions to be asked of the respondents including the rationale involve:

PART 1 QUALIFICATION OF THE RESPONDENT

Q: How long have you been handling this department or unit?
Q: How long have been in the fast food industry?
Q: Same field or area of expertise?

PART 2 LEARNING SUCCESSFUL BEHAVIOR(S) OF OTHERS

Q: How do you continuously upgrade your department’s capability to deliver results and stay competitive?
Q: How do you manage change?
Q: How do you support the company’s overall direction and “above the rest” mindset or competitiveness?

PART 3 PRACTICE AND ACTIVATION OF CREATIVE MIMESIS

Q: What are examples of the improvements you have done in the last six months?

Q: What inspired you to implement these improvements?
Note: If inspiration came from another company --

Q: Do you normally draw lessons from other companies who are more successful when handling improvements in your area?

PART 4 LOCATION OF MODEL (S) FOR DOING CREATIVE MIMESIS

Q: Are these companies or organizations local? Global organizations?


PART 5 PAST HISTORY AT CREATIVE MIMESIS - REVALIDATION

Q: Are you usually inspired by other organization’s best ideas and then considers these designs and processes in solving your own department’s problems?

Part 6 CRITERIA UTILIZED IN DOING CREATIVE MIMESIS
Q: What criteria or relevant considerations do you normally use whether to use or dump the practices of other organizations?

The focus interview questionnaire in the above are divided into 6 parts and the rationale for asking these questions are the following:
QUALIFICATION OF THE RESPONDENT [Part 1] seeks to establish the respondent’s varied experience as well as expertise vis-à-vis specific areas of the focal point of the study – the fast food organization.
LEARNING SUCCESSFUL BEHAVIOR OF OTHERS [Part 2] this is included to determine the respondent’s coping behavior vis-à-vis giving results and contributing to the overall success of the organization. It will also determine to a certain extent the degree of success of the respondent in coping and managing change and how information and learnings are derived.

PRACTICE AND ACTIVATION OF CREATIVE MIMESIS [Part 3] set the various ways the respondent will process the available information and learnings and put these into implementation mode.

LOCATION OF MODELS [PART 4] seeks to locate the source of the respondent’s access to information and learnings – local successful companies or global organizations?

PAST HISTORY OF CREATIVE MIMESIS [Part 5] is a revalidation on whether the respondent past experiences and successes utilize creative mimesis as a matter of necessity in managing.

CRITERIA UTILIZE IN ACCEPTING MIMESIS [Part 6] seeks to determine the cognitive process employed in accepting and selecting the myriad information and learnings to replicate.

Part 1 to 6 questions are all deemed relevant considering that these go through the same process or stages delineated in our model for creative mimesis i.e., change agent is faced with specific organizational concerns, then scans the environment and sees successful behavior of other organization. Then through a cognitive process of interpretation and understanding the change agent will decide on whether to adopt and replicate the same behavior to his organization, modify to suit the particular milieu of the organization or not at all.

The above design and format of the questionnaire will ensure answers that will elicit both conscious and unconscious practices and real applications of borrowed behavior from other successful organizations by the target respondents.
The need for careful recording and analysis of the whole set of interviews are in order to be able to validate whether the study will show significant relationship between creative mimesis and its active role in building successful organization.
The following hypothesis will be consulted through a statistician who will help test for significance:


Ho creative mimesis is not related or independent in building successful organizations (null hypothesis)

H1 creative mimesis is related in building successful organizations (alternative hypothesis)


Furthermore, the focus interviews will guarantee absolutely the confidentiality of the answers or the sources.

The convenience of the respondent will be uppermost and will take at the most 30 minutes of their time.

A hard copy of the questionnaire will also be given to each respondent. Likewise, this questionnaire will be drafted using English as the medium to match the respondents’ educational profile and to facilitate the time factor involved in answering.

A pretest of the questionnaire will be conducted to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the interview instrument by actual interviews of two people from the academe and another two industry experts in food service.

4.4 Selection of Study Sites

The head offices of the following top players in the fast food industry will be the venue for conducting the focus interviews: Jollibee, McDonalds, Chowking, KFC, Greenwich, Wendy’s, Max’s, Pizza Hut, Kenny Roger Roasters, Shakey’s, Smokey’s, Tropical Hut, A & W, Dunkin Donuts, Texas Chicken, Cindy’s, Kimchi, Goldilocks, Carl's, Henlin, DeliFrance, and Pollo Loco.

4.5 Administration of Questionnaire

The approval and coordination with the President of each of the company will be undertaken and will facilitate too the proper selection and qualifications of the respondents.

Appointments will be made and only one interview per day will be undertaken in a company.

Schedule or calendar of activities will fit in all the respondents within a time frame of one and a half months.

The series of focus interviews will use tape recordings preferably a video tape, so as to ensure accurate data and information processing. Likewise, a two page summary of the highlights of each focus interview will be created.


4.6 Data Analysis:

Analysis and comparison of answers to the questionnaire and bringing to the surface some important patterns, concepts and relationships observed will be made.


V. PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION & ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS

5.1 Profile of the respondents

5.2 The Relationship of CREATIVE MIMESIS in building successful organizations.


VI. SUMMARY [AND CONCLUSIONS]
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS [Tentative pending results]

Creative mimesis and its possible significance in building successful organizations will have to be looked into and the obviousness of the matter as seen in the case of one giant fast food will not deter future researchers in introspecting about the possible implications such studies on creative mimesis have on organizational learning and behavior as a whole.

Possible implications like creating a blue print for organizational success based on creative mimesis of successful organizations and the use of creative mimesis in building successful organizations not having any obvious ethical barriers (copying ideas) at all considering the present information and knowledge century is marked by wealth generated by means of ideas and constant learning (Ruth Kaglia, 2003). Ideas are all around us and these belong to all for FREE.
Moreover, other possible benefits of further studies in this area will focus on the transition of organization from one paradigm to the other – organization exhibiting institutionalism to an organization of the double loop learning type. Is this real transition or substitution of one paradigm with another? Or is it characteristic of synthesis of two major ideas explaining organizational behavior i.e., Selznick’s institutionalism and learning organization?

Notes:

1 Lately, there is mention of a new science called biomimicry (from bios, meaning life, and mimesis, meaning to imitate). This new science studies nature's best ideas and then imitates these designs and processes to solve human problems. Janine Benyus termed it as "innovation inspired by nature."

2 Peter Senge’s Foreword to “The Living Company” by Arie de Geus, former planning executive of Royal Dutch Shell


3 Research and the collection of qualitative data through participant observation and open interviews. [See: (Richter, 1998) in Easterby-Smith, Crossan and Nicolini (2000)Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present and Future. Journal of Management Studies 37:6 September 2000].



REFERENCES

Books

Argyris, C. and D. A. Schon. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978.

Castlefranci, C (2001). Towards a Cognitive Memetics: Socio-Cognitive
Mechanisms for Memes Selection and Spreading. Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission,5.

Drucker, Peter F. The New Realities. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1989.

Davis, Stan and Botkin, Jim. How Business is Mastering the Opportunity of
Knowledge for Profit: The Monster Under the Bed. NY: Simon and Schuster, 1994.

Ford, Matthew W. and James R. Evans. Baldrige Assessment and
Organizational Learning: The Need for Change Management, Quality Management Journal University of Cincinnati Volume 8 • Issue 3 • July 2001

Jeffrey, Victor and Lindsay Birley. (2000) Super Brand: An Insight into 50
Philippine Super Brands Volume 2. Superbrands Publications Philippines, Makati City: MM

Morgan, Gareth (1996). Images of Organization. Thousand Oaks, California:
Sage.
"Selected Readings in Business Research", Compiled by The Division of
Research, Ateneo Graduate School of Business, (Makati: 1979).

Sobel, Milo. (1993) The 12 Hour MBA Program: The Key Concepts and
Techniques in a Fraction of Time, NY: Prentice Hall.

Uris, Auren. 101 of the Greatest Ideas in Management. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1986.

Weick, Karl E. (1999) ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT.
Annual Review of Psychology, 1999

White, Randall P. The Future of Leadership: Riding the Corporate Rapids Into
the 21st Century. Maryland USA : Philip Hodgson and Stuart Chineer, Pitman Publishing, 1996.

Articles

Allen, Lawrence. “An Intriguing TQM Approach in Management Forum.” World
Executive Digest, January, 1997.

Collins, David (1996). “ New Paradigms for Change? Theories of Organization
and the Organization of Theories,” Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 9,4, pp 9 -

Easterby-Smith, Crossan and Nicolini (2000). “Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present and Future.” Journal of Management Studies 37:6 September 2000.

Jermier, John (1998). “Critical Perspectives on Organization Control,” ASQ.
43(2), pp. 235-256.

Kwak, Mary. “The Innovation Factor: Part III Innovation, We Trust Creation
Nation A Brief History of Innovation: Ordinary People, Extraordinary Creativity.” HOME Magazine October 1, 2002

Selznick, Philip. “Institutionalism ‘Old’ and ‘New’,” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 41 (1996), pp 270-277.

Van de Ven, Andrew H. and Marshall Scott Poole (1995). “Explaining
Development and Change in Organizations,” Academy of Management Review, 20, 3, pp. 510-540.

Electronic Publishing and Other Sources

Cruz, Danilo Rueda (2000). Quality Perceptions of the Filipino Fast Food Consumers. Dissertation UP Department of Hotel, Restaurant and Institution, CHE, UP Diliman.

Lectures and power point presentations of Dr. Serafin D. Talisayon, Professor,
Technology Management Center, University of the Philippines and Vice
President, Knowledge Management Association of the Philippines:
-- Enterprise Management in the Knowledge Century

Brochure; The K-Economy: Competitiveness, Survival and Growth. ASEAN-EC International Conference 2003 containing quoted material from Ruth Kaglia: “The knowledge economy is one that relies primarily on the use of ideas rather than physical abilities, on the application of technology rather than transformation of raw materials or the exploitation of cheap labor.”

HSM 450 Lecture Notes by Dr. Eric Williams
Focus Interview/Groups.
www.hmi.missouri.edu/course_materials/Executive_HSM/semesters/S2001/HS

Department of Trade and Industry, Press Release
8 August 2003 ON FRANCHISING in the Philippines

Global Agriculture Information Network (GAIN) Report
October 02, 2001

Palma, Ana Cecilia S. 2002. An Update on the Philippine Fast food Industry (1)
Center for Food and Agri-Business UA&P.

Other sources consulted about Jollibee: Bartlett and O. Connel (1998) HBS Case and the Philippine Star October 18, 2003 page B-4 for Jollobee
Other sources consulted about McDonalds: OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT sixth edition HEIZER AND RENDER, 2001.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other great links:

Serve Them Right

Research Matters

- posted by danny rueda cruz @ 11:01 PM