In 2005 and 2006, almost sixty Dutch National Sport Federations (NSFs) participated in a special program for creating a marketing strategy for the next four years. This program was initiated and organized by NOC*NSF (the Dutch Olympic Umbrella Sports Organization). The NSFs had to joint the project to receive funds. For most of them it was the first time they seriously analyzed the market with the aim of developing new programs. The purpose of this paper is to explore to what extent Dutch NSFs are capable to change their structures to become more market oriented and more market responsive in order to write strategic plans. The changed structures are investigated using the "institutional theory" (Tolbert & Zucker, 1996) and are explained by exogenous (market context and institutional context) and endogenous (interests, values, power dependencies, and capacity for action) dynamics from the neo-institutionalist framework (Greenwood & Hinings, 1996). In 2005 NSFs were expected to be in a pre-institutionalized stage, i.e. they were supposed to develop new organizational structures in response to specific problems (Kikulis, 2000). Now, approximately 1½ years after finishing their strategies, the question arises whether they have reached the semi-institutional stage, i.e. whether the new structures or actions are diffused across organizations, yet still subject to change and whether old structures are yet eroding (Kikulis, 2000). Methods Studying the intended structural change of NSFs requires an in-depth study of their social reality and the reactions and interpretations of involved actors, including their applied meanings to certain situations. Greenwood & Hinings (1996) plead for detailed comparative case-studies when studying institutional changes. Therefore three NSFs has been selected: The Royal Dutch Korfball Federation (KorfFed); The Royal Dutch Billiards Federation (BillFed); and the Dutch Jeu de Boules Federation (JeuFed). These three federations differ on size, amount of housed sports, number of associated clubs, sorts of intermediary decision making bodies, employed FTE's, and more. Therefore it is expected that the tempo of institutionalization of the new, market oriented, structures, will differ among them. Sugden & Tomlinson (2002) developed a multi-method style of qualitative research for making sense of the deep, inside information below the surface of everyday life. They call it the "Brighton method. Applying the Brighton method for this research implies that the three cases will be studied with respect to their history, their present marketing actions, their results and the changes in their organization. In-depth interviews, document analysis (policy plans, marketing plans and more), and where possible observations and participations are used to create a critical and investigative view of the organizations in change. Results The KorfFed used the marketing program to further develop existing programs. Although the outcomes of these programs were not new, the program has opened the eyes of the president, director and staff members. They are now conscious of the urgency of a market orientation, and a marketing orientation (a marketing position has already been introduced), and they see opportunities in attracting non-competition playing korfball players. They have, however, not yet reached the phase of semi-institutionalization of the market oriented structures. This can be concluded from the following: - The organization still has an ad-hoc character; - Some board members still make decisions based on their own insights rather than on information from the professional part of the organization; - Decisions to start programs are still grounded on subsidy possibilities rather than on market possibilities. Interest dissatisfaction and power dependencies are the main dynamics that form barriers in the planned organizational change. The BillFed is a federation that covers four disciplines, i.e. pool, snooker, carom, and billiard 3 cushions. The federation used to act upon these four disciplines. The marketing program has made clear that the BillFed should act upon target groups instead of on these disciplines. Therefore, the federation created a vision to reach youth, young adults, as also elderly people. Carrying out this new vision requires a market orientated structure (focus on target groups) instead of an internal orientated structure (focus on discipline groups). This new vision is created on an upper level (general board together with professional staff) in the organization. This federation also introduced a professional marketing position. Unfortunately, the underlying layers remain slightly passive and are not willing to work along the new structures, which mean that the new structures have not been diffused across the whole organization. Interest dissatisfaction, value commitments and power dependencies are the problematic dynamics. The JeuFed used to have a strong competition and tournament (internal) orientation, while many jeu-de-boules players play the game just for fun. The marketing program has created the insight that the just-for-fun players are also an important target group. Hence, 3 projects are developed to make club membership more attractive for all jeu-de-boules players. Since the federation never worked with projects before, they just found out that implementing projects such as these requires new structures. The JeuFed has just arrived in the pre-institutionalized phase, still far away from the semi-institutionalized chapter. Power dependencies and a lack of capacity for change are influencing dynamics in this case. Discussion Although it is already 1½ years ago that Dutch NSFs finished their marketing program, in none of the described cases the new structures have reached the semi-institutional stage. These new structures or actions are not yet diffused across the organizations, and the old structures are not eroding. In all three cases another combination of endogenous dynamics are influencing the process of organizational change. Continuing research is needed to find out whether these federations will ever reach the next stage of institutionalization and which dynamics will play an important role.
Many organizations have undergone substantial reorganization in the last decade. They re-engineered their business processes and exchanged proprietary, not integrated applications for more standard solutions. Integration of structured data in relational databases has improved documentation of business transactions and increased data quality. But almost 90% of the information that organizations manage is unstructured, cannot easily be integrated into a traditional database. When used for organizational actions and transactions, structured and unstructured information are records. They are meant and used as evidence. Governments, courts and other stakeholders are making increasing demands for the trustworthiness of records. An analysis of literature of the information, organization and archival sciences illustrates that accountability needs the reconstruction of the past. Hypothesis of this paper is that for the reconstruction of the past each organization needs a combination of threemechanisms: enterprise records management, organizational memory and records auditing. Enterprise records management ensures that records meet the quality requirements needed for accountability: integrity, authenticity, controllability and historicity. They ensure records that can be trusted and enhance the possibilities for the reconstruction of the past. The organizational memory ensures that trusted records are preserved for as long as is necessary to comply with accountability regulations. It provides an ICT infrastructure to (indefinitely) store those records and to keep them accessible. Records auditing researches the first two mentioned mechanisms to assess the possibility to reconstruct past organizational actions and transactions. These mechanisms ensure that organizations have a documented understanding of [1] the processing of actions and transactions within business processes; [2] the dissemination of trusted records; [3] the way the organization accounts for the actions and transactions within its business processes; and [4] the reconstruction of actions and transactions from business processes over time. This understanding is crucial for the reconstruction of the past and for organizational accountability.
MULTIFILE
Aim of this study is to understand which approach (expert or process orientated) sport club consultants use in succesfully raising the organizational capacity of voluntary sport clubs in the northern part of the Netherlands. Around 130 professional sport club consultants are active in the northern part of the Netherlands, but it is not clear which approach they use in raising the organizational capacity of the clubs within a specific context and if this approach is effective. Theoretical backgroundA sport club with great organizational capacity has the ability to offer their sport, now and in the future, in a sustainable and socially responsible way to (potential) members. Dutch voluntary sport clubs (VSCs) are facing several challenges in perceived consumerist behavior by members (Van der Roest, 2015), demands by the government to attribute to the social policy agenda (Coalter, 2007) and declining number of members in complex contexts (Wollebæk, 2009). Between 300-500 sport club consultants, mostly funded by local governments or sport associations, are tasked to raise the organizational capacity of these VSCs in the Netherlands. Most consultants play an expert role delivering generic interventions on specific topics as recruiting volunteers, sponsorships or positive behavior support. The other consultants play a process consultation role in which a holistic strategic change approach is used for more sustainable organizational development (Schein, 1999). The context of the organizations (VSC’s) is determining which approach is the best in developing the organizational capacity. But most of the time consultants use the same, mostly expert role, in consulting the organizations (Boonstra & Elving, 2009). Therefore it is not clear which approach (expert or process orientated) sport club consultants in the Netherlands use in raising the organizational capacity of VSC’s in different contexts. Methodology, research design, and data analysisThe study will be conducted from March 2017 till the end of July 2017 in the northern part of the Netherlands. In March we have started with identifying successful sport club consultants in three steps: these steps show a qualitative description of the current competences, approaches and interventions (repertoire) as seen by the sport club consultants in our target group:1) A group of experts have been gathered to formulate criteria for the competences, approaches and interventions of a successful process orientated sport club consultant. 2) The criteria from step 1 are validated by theory about organizational development and consulting of organizations. Thereafter the criteria are processed into a digital survey 3) The survey has been send to n=130 sport club consultants in the northern part of the Netherlands. 4) Based on the output of the survey, profiles will be developed of different types sport club consultants (process orientated, mediator, supporter, coach, expert) and the approaches per type of consultant. For each profile a ranking will be made based on which criteria (from step 1) the consultants meet. This ranking will be used to make a selection of successful sport club consultants to conduct research in five multiple case studies. From June on multiple case studies will be conducted in which five process consultants are working with a VSC. A case study protocol will be developed that observe the consultant in three sessions at the club. In addition interviews will be conducted with the consultant, the board of the club, and other relevant stakeholders. With a cross-case synthesis patterns will be developed in the way the consultants worked and how these approaches were interpreted and valued by the various stakeholders. Results, discussion, and implications/conclusionsIn the expected results both approaches and interventions (repertoire) of the consultant as their competences and qualities are analyzed which will result in the profiling of the active sport club consultants. We also gain insights in which approach of the sport club consultants is the most effective in raising the organizational capacity of a VSC in a given context. New insights on how consultants can successfully contribute to the sustainable organizational development of VSCs will be presented.
Digital transformation has been recognized for its potential to contribute to sustainability goals. It requires companies to develop their Data Analytic Capability (DAC), defined as their ability to collect, manage and analyze data effectively. Despite the governmental efforts to promote digitalization, there seems to be a knowledge gap on how to proceed, with 37% of Dutch SMEs reporting a lack of knowledge, and 33% reporting a lack of support in developing DAC. Participants in the interviews that we organized preparing this proposal indicated a need for guidance on how to develop DAC within their organization given their unique context (e.g. age and experience of the workforce, presence of legacy systems, high daily workload, lack of knowledge of digitalization). While a lot of attention has been given to the technological aspects of DAC, the people, process, and organizational culture aspects are as important, requiring a comprehensive approach and thus a bundling of knowledge from different expertise. Therefore, the objective of this KIEM proposal is to identify organizational enablers and inhibitors of DAC through a series of interviews and case studies, and use these to formulate a preliminary roadmap to DAC. From a structure perspective, the objective of the KIEM proposal will be to explore and solidify the partnership between Breda University of Applied Sciences (BUas), Avans University of Applied Sciences (Avans), Logistics Community Brabant (LCB), van Berkel Logistics BV, Smink Group BV, and iValueImprovement BV. This partnership will be used to develop the preliminary roadmap and pre-test it using action methodology. The action research protocol and preliminary roadmap thereby developed in this KIEM project will form the basis for a subsequent RAAK proposal.
Digital transformation has been recognized for its potential to contribute to sustainability goals. It requires companies to develop their Data Analytic Capability (DAC), defined as their ability to manage and analyze data effectively. Despite the governmental efforts to promote digitalization, there seems to be a knowledge gap on how to proceed, with 37% of Dutch SMEs reporting a lack of knowledge, and 33% reporting a lack of support in developing DAC. While extensive attention has been given to the technological aspects of DAC, the people, process, and organizational culture aspects are as important, requiring a comprehensive approach and thus a bundling of knowledge from different expertise. Therefore, the objective of this KIEM proposal is to identify organizational enablers and inhibitors of DAC through a series of interviews and case studies, and use these to formulate a preliminary roadmap to DAC.
Collaborative networks for sustainability are emerging rapidly to address urgent societal challenges. By bringing together organizations with different knowledge bases, resources and capabilities, collaborative networks enhance information exchange, knowledge sharing and learning opportunities to address these complex problems that cannot be solved by organizations individually. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the apparel sector, where examples of collaborative networks for sustainability are plenty, for example Sustainable Apparel Coalition, Zero Discharge Hazardous Chemicals, and the Fair Wear Foundation. Companies like C&A and H&M but also smaller players join these networks to take their social responsibility. Collaborative networks are unlike traditional forms of organizations; they are loosely structured collectives of different, often competing organizations, with dynamic membership and usually lack legal status. However, they do not emerge or organize on their own; they need network orchestrators who manage the network in terms of activities and participants. But network orchestrators face many challenges. They have to balance the interests of diverse companies and deal with tensions that often arise between them, like sharing their innovative knowledge. Orchestrators also have to “sell” the value of the network to potential new participants, who make decisions about which networks to join based on the benefits they expect to get from participating. Network orchestrators often do not know the best way to maintain engagement, commitment and enthusiasm or how to ensure knowledge and resource sharing, especially when competitors are involved. Furthermore, collaborative networks receive funding from grants or subsidies, creating financial uncertainty about its continuity. Raising financing from the private sector is difficult and network orchestrators compete more and more for resources. When networks dissolve or dysfunction (due to a lack of value creation and capture for participants, a lack of financing or a non-functioning business model), the collective value that has been created and accrued over time may be lost. This is problematic given that industrial transformations towards sustainability take many years and durable organizational forms are required to ensure ongoing support for this change. Network orchestration is a new profession. There are no guidelines, handbooks or good practices for how to perform this role, nor is there professional education or a professional association that represents network orchestrators. This is urgently needed as network orchestrators struggle with their role in governing networks so that they create and capture value for participants and ultimately ensure better network performance and survival. This project aims to foster the professionalization of the network orchestrator role by: (a) generating knowledge, developing and testing collaborative network governance models, facilitation tools and collaborative business modeling tools to enable network orchestrators to improve the performance of collaborative networks in terms of collective value creation (network level) and private value capture (network participant level) (b) organizing platform activities for network orchestrators to exchange ideas, best practices and learn from each other, thereby facilitating the formation of a professional identity, standards and community of network orchestrators.
