The Relationship between Dimensions of Innovation Economy and Key Factors of Organizational Bidimensional Leadership-Managerial Model: The Case Islamic Azad University Board of Trustees and Founders

Subject Areas : Human resources management)

Mina Ghadami ¹ , Aliakbar Rezaee ² , Abasali Ghayoumi ³

1 - PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Affairs, Research and Sciences Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Affairs, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3 - Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Affairs, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2019-07-19 Accepted : 2020-03-04 Published : 2020-12-21

Keywords: motivation, Learning, accountability, Systemic factors of leadership-management, dimensions of innovation economics,

Abstract :

Globalization and constant inter-organizational interaction have proved conventional leadership styles as inefficient factors in organizational survival and growth. What organizations need now is innovative leadership that can allocate materials and human resources in line with organizational goals and expand capacities to optimize the use of available resources. The purpose of the present applied enquiry was hence to explore the relationship between dimensions of innovation economy and key factors of organizational Bidimensional leadership-managerial model. To this end, Board of Trustees and Founders atIslamic Azad University, comprising 66 members, was selected via census as the research population. Initially, relevant research data were collected through library survey and a researcher-made questionnaire was designed under the supervision of experts in the field to be completed by the research participants. The research data were then statistically analyzed through SPSS software. Therefore, the use of two aspects of leadership-management based on the method of innovation economics can create the value of learning and the motivation and commitment of employees as a whole, which can lead to a two-dimensional excellence of employees and the organization.

References:

"Hawken, A. Lovins, A., and Lovins, H. (1999), Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution, Harvard Business Review.

Amory B. Lovins , L. Hunter Lovins and Paul Hawken, "A Road Map for Natural Capitalism, Harvard business review, 77(3), 145-211.

"Leibold, M., Probst, G. and Gibbert, M. (2005). Strategic Management in the knowledge Economy, New York: Wiley, (Second Edition),1-355.

C. O’Reilly and M. Tushman, (2008), “Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator’s Dilemma,” Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185-206.

Christine M. Beckman. (2006), “The Influence of Founding Team Company Affiliations on Firm Behavior,” Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 741-758.

 Jansen, G. George, F. Van den Bosch, and H. Volberda. (2008), “Senior Team Attributes and Organizational Ambidexterity: The Moderating Role of Transformational Leadership,” Journal of Management Studies, 45(5),  982-1007.

Clark Gilbert. (2005), “Unbundling the Structure of Inertia: Resource versus Routine Rigidity,” Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 741-763.

 O’Reilly, CH., Caldwell, D. F., Chatman, J. A. Margaret, L., and William S. (2010), “How Leadership Matters: The Effects of Leaders’ Alignment on Strategy Implementation,” Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 104-113.

Wendy K. Smith and Michael L. Tushman. (2005), “Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams,” Organization Science, 16(5), 522-536.

Davenport, T., Leibold, M., and Voelpel, S, C. (2006). Strategic management in the innovation economy, Publisher: Wiley.

Teece D., J. (2007), “Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance,” Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.

Hippel, E., Thomke, S. and Sonnak, M. (1999). "Creating Breakthroughs at 3M." Harvard Business Review, 43(4), 50.

Justin J. Jansen, Dusya Vera, and Mary Crossan. (2009), “Strategic Leadership for Exploration and Exploitation: The Moderating Role of Environmental Dynamism,” Leadership Quarterly, 20(1), 5-18.

Livengood, R. S., and Reger R. K. (2010), “That’s Our Turf! Identity Domains and Competitive Dynamics,” Academy of Management Review, 35(1), 48-66.

Nemanich, L. A. and Vera, D. (2009), “Transformational Leadership and Ambidexterity in the Context of an Acquisition,” Leadership Quarterly, 20(1), 19-33.

Bazerman, M., and Watkins, M. (2003), Predictable Surprises: The Disasters You Should Have Seen Coming, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Benner, M., and Tushman, L. M. (2003), “Exploitation, Exploration and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited,” Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 256.

Moore, J.S. (1993). "Predators and Prey: A New Ecology of Competition", Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 80.

Shabani, Ali, Taghavi, Hosein (2011). Investigating the relationship between innovative leadership and organizational behavior in Tehran liberaries, journal of library researches. 62-39. [In Pershian]

Hotberg and K. Robert. (2000), "Backcasting from Nomoverlapping Sustainability Principles-A Framework for Strategic Planning". Informational Journal of Sustainable Development and Wild Ecology 7(4), 291-308.

McDonough, W. (1992), "Hannover Principles: Design for Sustainability Prepared for EXPO 2000 The World’s FairHannover, Germany.

Tushman, M.L. and O'Reilly, C.A. (1996), "Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change". California Management Review,38(4), 18.

Various authors have recently emphasized the differences in economie activity due to ways in which value is created since about 1990. One insightful analysis is by

Germany, R. and Muralidharan, R. (2001). "The Three Phases of Value Capture: Finding Competitive Advantage in the Information Age, Stramegy & Business,  22(1), 1-10.

Weick, K.E. (2001). Making of the Organization. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Lid:p 52.