Search results

Academic libraries have endured rapid change in the past two decades that has had repercussions on how they manage their organization and deliver library services. Skyrocketing costs, especially for journals, explosive growth in new technologies, fiscal exigencies caused by a tightening of public financing of most academic institutions, demands for greater accountability, and the onslaught of electronic delivery of networked information, are just some of the major obstacles libraries are encountering (Lubans, 1996; Riggs, 1993; Shaughnessy, 1987). Customers of academic libraries are increasingly less satisfied because of limited resources and the difficulties they encounter in accessing printed material in a traditional library facility (Doughtery, 1992). The emergence of textual materials in electronic form has added a new dimension to this discontent. While such resources have the potential for meeting the information needs more dynamically, the costs for information have been exorbitant, particularly since full electronic texts have not been sufficient in coverage to supplant printed resources (Tenopir, 1993). These phenomena require academic libraries to use a more integrated and flexible approach to problem solving (Gapen, Hampton & Schmitt, 1993).

Early writings about teamwork in healthcare emphasized that healthcare providers needed to evolve from a team of experts into an expert team. This is no longer enough. As patients, accreditation bodies, and regulators increasingly demand that care is coordinated, safe, of high quality, and efficient, it is clear that healthcare organizations increasingly must function and learn not only as expert teams but also as expert multiteam systems (MTSs).

In this chapter, we offer a portrait of the robust, and albeit complex, multiteam structures that many healthcare systems are developing in order to adapt to rapid changes in regulatory and financial pressures while simultaneously improving patient safety, quality, and performance.

The notion of continuous improvement rooted in continuous learning has been embraced as a battle cry from the boardroom to the bedside, and the MTS concept offers a meaningful lens through which we can begin to understand, study, and improve these complex organizational systems dedicated to tackling some of the most important goals of our time.

The entrepreneurial vision, strategic goals, organizational capabilities and processes, alone, will not be adequate to attain business success, unless there is a quality management philosophy in the company (Al-Dhaafri, Al-Swidi, & Yusoff, 2016). Successful entrepreneurial endeavours essentially rest on action, assertiveness, persistence and know-how of leadership (Azyan, Pulakanam, & Pons, 2017) who comprehend the application of quality management methods as a long-term ‘quality journey’. The appropriate implementation of a quality management system (QMS) or total quality management (TQM) system results in enhanced organizational performance (Sahoo & Yadav, 2017).

A wide range of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have nowadays been aware of the indisputable importance of quality and have reaped the benefits of TQM, having in mind that TQM is not just a method or a tool but a whole business philosophy. TQM is a systematic approach that focuses on continuous improvement of the organizational processes with the participation and contribution of all the stakeholders, so as to manage and enhance quality, productivity and customer satisfaction. It is the best way for the enterprise's growth and domination in the contemporary national and international competitive marketplace (Kriemadis, Thomopoulou, & Sioutou, 2017). According to several studies, by embracing the TQM philosophy, SMEs can compete in the global competitive environment (Womack & Roos, 1990; as cited in Karani & Bichanga, 2012; Sainis & Kriemadis, 2019; Pashiardis & Kriemadis, 1999).

The present study aims to develop a generic TQM model for SMEs in order to improve their competitiveness, productivity and quality as well as to enhance their entrepreneurial orientation.

Achieving continuous innovation performance still poses a major challenge to established companies as it requires high flexibility and adaptability in usually efficiently structured organisations. One way to tackle this challenge lies in establishing effective behaviours to successfully establish and apply innovation leadership mechanisms in an organisation. The emerging agile leadership style could provide such effective behaviours, as it addresses the demand for flexibility and adaptability on the organisational level. Despite these clear parallels research on the link between agile leadership and innovation leadership, and their possible combined contribution to drive continuous innovation performance is still in its infancy. Accordingly, the present study examines the behaviours of agile leaders to promote continuous innovation in established companies. It applies a discovery-driven research process of agile leaders to derive and categorise their behaviours. The subsequent comparison of the identified agile leadership behaviours with innovation leadership mechanisms from existing literature leads to eight specific, combined agile leadership principles within the three categories empowerment, performance enhancement, and support for continuous innovation. Eventually, this basis allows the conceptualisation of a first exploratory framework with the identified behaviours as possible enablers, and innovation leadership mechanisms as possible mediators for the continuous innovation performance, subject to test. These findings enhance existing theory by clarifying a possible link between agile leadership and continuous innovation. That way, practitioners can profit from concrete principles for agile leaders to inspire and enable continuous innovation in individuals and teams.

In this chapter we study job design. Do organizations plan precisely how the job is to be done ex ante, or ask workers to determine the process as they go? We first model this decision and predict complementarity among these following job attributes: multitasking, discretion, skills, and interdependence of tasks. We argue that characteristics of the firm and industry (e.g., product and technology, organizational change) can explain observed patterns and trends in job design. We then use novel data on these job attributes to examine these issues. As predicted, job designs tend to be “coherent” across these attributes within the same job. Job designs also tend to follow similar patterns across jobs in the same firm, and especially in the same establishment: when one job is optimized ex ante, others are more likely to be also. There is evidence that firms segregate different types of job designs across different establishments. At the industry level, both computer usage and R&D spending are related to job design decisions.

This chapter covers total quality management (TQM) with respect to the Lean and Six Sigma methods used to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of hospitality operations. In the first section, TQM is discussed. In the second section, Lean and Six Sigma techniques are examined individually. Then, Lean and Six Sigma are connected with an example of a housekeeping case study that applies both methodologies. In the third section, business analytics are explored and statistical process control analysis is demonstrated using a hotel room cleanliness example. The fourth section summarizes the concepts of change management, which is critical for embracing the philosophies of TQM. Finally, project management is discussed in the fifth and last section.