I would like to make a few observations about the role of practice, knowing and words within innovation, and why evaluation needs to be understood as an equally essential part of it. I contend that knowledge cannot be shared, but knowing can be made sharable. Innovation is in part a matter of how organizations help make knowing sharable. The meaning of a word cannot be shared, but meaningful practice using that word can be made sharable. Making meaning sharable means making a word a tool of effective organizational practice. Within an organizational culture, words have the function of linking what we know with those things that they represent within organizational practice. That is, words need to have a particular sharable meaning within an organization's culture. Accordingly, this on-going dynamic push and pull of making meaning sharable within an organizational culture is a significant resource for innovation. Finally, a better understanding of practice, knowing, and words as tools of an organizational culture is vitally important if we are to learn to innovate more effectively. But this alone cannot assure that we will innovate responsibly. If we are to avoid simply becoming more efficient at producing poorer quality things in increasingly irresponsible ways, we need to make evaluation part of innovation. Evaluation by its nature can be a tool of innovation—and it is the only tool that can enable us to assess whether our practices, the contexts that afford them, and the aims that they serve are not only effective but also responsible.
This paper argues for organizational dynamics generated through “representing,” meaning to linguistically express concrete or abstract things. This is composed of two processes. The first is the process by which all sorts of objects, people and events are correlated through a set of already-held concepts. Through this process, we can interpret the world meaningfully. The second is to have access to a shared language, in which we are able to exchange meaning and concepts through.The market for products is not given to producers and customers and is created through competition, so representing a product category serves the function of stabilizing a conceptual system of products between producers and customers. However, once a representation gains legitimacy and takes on symbolic elements such as values and norms, it is taken advantage of by various stakeholders, and various practices are implemented under the same representation. This may result in extending and changing the objectives denoted by a representation. We term this process “representative isomorphism” from the institutional perspective. Institutional theory has been routinely focused on the homogenization of organizational structure and practices within the organizational field. However, institutionalism had as its genesis the study of symbolism such as myth and ceremony in organizations.This paper then examines representative isomorphism through theorization by culturally legitimated theorists, and especially the political process, through a case study of local production of agricultural products for local consumption. The meanings attached to local production for local consumption are enlarged in the policy formation of dietary education by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. We illustrate that representative isomorphism in this case is characterized by the reciprocal usage of representations among actors, and anchoring (explaining unfamiliar events using well-known representations).
The literature on leadership has undergone significant evolution, and most of the studies assess a leader’s viewpoint and employ quantitative research methods.Although leader’s viewpoint and methods of quantitative research are very important for the study of leadership, the follower’s viewpoint and methods of qualitative research are also essential. To understand leadership, both the leader’s and follower’s viewpoint needs to be considered, and it is important for leader to understand the follower’s interpretation of leadership. The phenomenon of leadership cannot be effective without the support of followers. The qualitative approach is appropriate to understand the follower’s viewpoint, because it can distinguish an individual’s perspective of the phenomenon. This study clarifies both the follower’s perception of leadership and the leader’s perception of the follower’s viewpoint. The interview method is considered to be the most suitable method for this study. This paper discusses three case studies, the human resources department of the electric company; the development of the drug, Aricept, used in the palliative treatment of Alzheimer’s disease; and the corporate revitalization of Phoenix Electric Co., Ltd. Interestingly, these case studies indicates three categories in the follower’s perception of leadership: enlightenment, agreement, and appreciation. Enlightenment indicates that followers acquire a new way of thinking from the leader. Agreement indicates that followers realize and are willing to follow the leader’s vision. Appreciation indicates that followers admire the leader’s contribution to the organizational purpose.
Though many people including leading leadership researchers believe that leadership matters, the relationship between leadership factor and outcomes is ambiguous. The research stream called “Romance of Leadership” has revealed that people have a tendency to attribute outcomes to leadership and glorify it without taking actual causes into consideration. This paper examines five questions about this phenomenon. What is attributed? What leaders are attributed to? Under what situation do people attribute? What followers attribute? And how do they attribute? Contributions to organization theory, practical implications, and future research avenue are discussed.
This presentation shows the roles of artifacts to the innovation in the organization. First of all, I clarify two features of artifacts. One is physical properties.They can accelerate an innovation by increasing a common view and common understanding among people. The other one is values and meanings. They are connected with organizational culture. Secondly, I explain the mechanism of the innovation creation which an artifact leads. Finally, I suggest the management of artifacts for realizing the innovation.
This study aims to refine the concept of Kotozukuri. Kotozukuri has various definitions by authors or research themes. In this study, Koto is discussed in relation to the words Mono-more than thing and object- and Kotoba-more than words and expression, a sort of representation-.In terms of the relationship between Kotozukuri and Monozukuri, it could be identified into three types from existing discussion. Those are Kotozukuri as an extension of or supplement to Monozukuri, Kotozukuri as an indispensable for Monozukuri and Kotozukuri as a more independent concept. We emphasize the Kotozukuri as a more independent concept not strongly supported by Mono and Kotoba to explain a specific social event.Besides, Kotozukuri is analysed with two different processes, “the emergence phase” and “the dissemination phase.” The emergence of Kotozukuri is to produce the aggregation of some action pattern and is to form a bundle of routine. It can be said that Kotozukuri has been disseminated, if a bundle of routine-even a part of it- are reproduced by sharing of experiences of someone at another time and another place.In the final part of this study, we pick up the Kasugai KIZUNA’ case which is the effectual environmental education at the several elementary schools by the local human networks as a social innovation to clarify about the uniqueness of Kotozukuri’s dissemination.
This study examines customer interactions at traditional-style sushi bars in Tokyo using an ethnomethodological and conversation analytic approach. Actual interactions were videotaped and analyzed in detail. The findings suggest that sushi chefs test customers by posing a difficult question, that less experienced customers show their orientation to whether their answer is appropriate, and that experienced customers produce a concise answer without such orientation. This is all done in a routine, mundane, and matter-of-fact way. The chefs define that their customers should be able to answer the question without any problem and customers demonstrate their competence through minimal and concise actions. The customer interaction is not only about exchanging information as to what the customers want but also about presentation and negotiation of selves. As an implication, it is briefly discussed that services can be seen as a struggle; beyond meeting customer needs and satisfying customers.