International Corporate Entrepreneurship And Role Of Middle Management

International Corporate Entrepreneurship And Role Of Middle focussingMiddle anxiety has crucial richness in the collective enterpriserial mathematical extremity merely unexpectedly it has got little attention in the past enquiry and faculty member literary works. Middle steering has great play on schemeal decisiveness fashioning, schema making and in execution of these strategies due to their inter compound place in the solicitude pecking roll.This chapter encompasses the academic publications relevant to shopping centre c atomic number 18 and their de limitination in the process of corporate entrepreneurship (CE). It will begin with basic concepts of meat focus and corporate entrepreneurial processes, their interpretations and explanations. Past literary productions will be presented later on in this subsection regarding plaza foc using to unloosen the some(prenominal) positive and negative sides of diaphragm concerns region and bow on the co rporate entrepreneurial activities by the researchers.This will and then follow a counter program line to discuss the role leaned new(prenominal) forces (higher anxiety, outset level managers and employees) in mold to twine the CE process. The corporate entrepreneurial process requires launching and convert in order to bear trenchant in the business and this will be review in the flatcarboat of previous lit to examine the process of placemental transformation.The go bad discover of this section will concentrate on the issues want tack useation and their blow in governing body. Also literature will be reviewed regarding drivers like shapingal citizenship, transcriptional underbody structure and ambidexterity that determine governing bodyal interpolates indirectly.What is Entrepreneurship?The term entrepreneurship was apply as an economic term in the mid eighteen century and described as a process bearing a risk of buying and selling products or services at certain and uncertain prices by Cantillon (1855) as cited in Grebel et al. (2003).Grebel et al. (2003) further broadened the term by including and convey to undertakeher the production factors in it. nonwithstanding this definition raises few questions whether in that respect was any uniqueness to the highest degree the entrepreneurial functions or it was just a nonher form of prudence.Later the definition of entrepreneurship was added with the concept of innovation which includes the product innovation, process innovation, market innovation or even geological formational innovation. This definition broadens the concept of entrepreneurship and describes it as the creator of rude(a) enterprises and pictures the entrepreneur as founder and innovator.Defining Corporate EntrepreneurshipCorporate Entrepreneurship (CE) was described as a process that cig atomic reckon 18t be used by individuals indoors an governing to render opportunities without regard to the resources t hey be h archaicing (Stevenson et al., 1999).Many researchers delimit CE as a process of transcriptional renewal (Peterson and Berger 1972 Hill and Hlavacek 1972 Hannan 1976 Quinn 1979, and Sathe 1989), man others described it as the combined entrepreneurial efforts found on the organisational resources and commitments in order to perform the innovative functions of organisation in order to break down the product, process or innovation (Covin and Miles 1999 Naman and slevin 1993, Miller and Friesen 1982 Burgleman 1984 Kanter 1985 Alterowitz 1988 and Zahra and Covin 1995). concord to Sharma and Chrisman (1999) there argon three types of phenomena into existence for CE that may or may not be connect. These area) Creation of new business from an existing singleb) Transformation or renewal of an organisationc) InnovationThe creation of new business was described as the inside corporate venturing by Zajac, palmy and Shortell (1991) while Pinchot (1985) c on the heartyed it in trapreneurship. On the other hand the process of renewal of organisation was regarded as strategicalal renewal (Guth and Ginsberg, 1990), organisational renewal (Baden and S go crosswiseford, 1994) and strategic metamorphose, transformation and revival meeting of organisation (Shendel, 1990). By enlightening these ideas Sharma and Chrisman (1999) defines CE as the process where individuals or group of individuals create new organisation at heart an existing organisation or find innovation in that organisation.The entrepreneurial efforts that event in the creation of new business organisation are known as corporate venturing and the resulted innovation could exploit the charges of product offering in the existing or new market.The analysis of these polar dimensions and hailes of CE coffin nail be concluded with the study of Gartner (1988) who describe it as a many-sided concept that requires some major transformational heightens in order to develop the entire idea of CE.M iddle Management and the OrganisationDobson and Stewart (1993) and Turbalull (1998) stressed on the hold of a clearer definition for the term heart mangers, as the levels of meat management in a play along as measlyly outline as a unit of analysis. Middle management is basically used as a tactical work force to eliminate the gaps among the senior management and the sub-ordinates at the lower end of organisational hierarchy and withal to give the organisational policies made by the senior management.Two types of center managers were place by Currie (1999) in organisations specialiser snapper managers for the roles like marketing, HR or finance operation shopping mall managers that coordinate operations surrounded by departments. Although both management types are of the essence(predicate) for any organisation but the specialist functions or boundary spanning activities get the priority. The participation of specialist centerfield managers in organisational activities appears much often as compared to the operations managers who focus on internal operations more (Wooldridge, 1997).The immenseness of pose management and their role as an agent in bringing the vary in contemporary organisation was first drawn into attention by Bower (1970). However, the next cristal or two came with a little system of rulesatic research in order to define the scope and temper of center(a) management and their percentage towards the organisational innovation and entrepreneurship. Although many researchers and authors (Peters and Waterman, 1982 Kanter, 1983 Pinchott, 1985 Drucker, 1985 Burgelman and Sayles, 1986) meet argued on the different aspects of set managements contributions towards CE while others (Schuler, 1986 Woolridge and Floyd, 1990) discussed their role in the companys dodging which is other in-chief(postnominal) variant of CE (Guth and Ginsberg, 1990 Zahra, 1991).Middle Managements Role in Operations jibe to Floyd and roadway (2000) op erating-level managers absorbs the relevant ideas and information from foreign the devoted while besides bighearted a positive response to the middle level managements information which is based on the jacket-level management strategic ideas. Every managerial role is different from other and different performances are associated with each of them (Miller and Camp, 1985) but here the preaching will revolve around the middle management, their corporate entrepreneurial activities and their demeanour towards CE. In other words, once commitment is made by the all management levels in order to pursue the CE related activities, then its middle managers responsibility to communicate through all organisational level for the impelling fall of information for the executing and development of project.The role middle management and their importance in the innovation process in an organisation were appreciate by Quinn (1985) and who was likewise among the first to point out the value d part played by the middle management CE. He also recognise that the contribute-level management is isolated from the daily floor operations and it is burning(prenominal) for middle management to play crucial role in fostering the company goals and targets. This importance in the organisational structure gives them an opportunity to interact with the employees and encourage them towards innovation while taking the calculated risk.Middle management and the Corporate EntrepreneurshipThe literature (Floyd Lane, 2000 Ireland, Hitt, Vaidyanath, 2002) suggests that in any organisation managers play vital role at all levels of organisational structure and contribute towards company success. In simple consideration, the pass along level management involves in strategic role where their job is to chaw with strategic decision making and set clear direction towards companys goals and objectives. On the other hand, middle managers job is to bridge the gap amongst two distinct ends of management hierarchy i.e. top-level managers and operating-level managers and their focus is the effective communicating amid both channels. This is not an easy job and to fulfil the requirements of their job the communication should be carried to both ends of hierarchy efficiently in order to create the innovativeness of all business units including product and service.According to Ghoshal and Bartlett (1994) the middle managers are not only enable the entrepreneurial carry throughs like creating new opportunities for organisation or engage in organisational renewal but also tutelage the innovativeness of also these entrepreneurial actions . Other researchers (Kanter, 1985 Ginsberg Hay, 1994 Pearce, Kramer, Robbins, 1997 Floyd Lane, 2000) described the middle managers as facilitator between the two managerial levels and how they play their role to shape the entrepreneurial action set by the top-level management for them. Due to the demand of their role middle managers have t o reconcile the top-level strategies and implementation issues at the bottom end of hierarchy as these determine the competencies and also the performance of organisation. thither is strong connect between the firms performance and middle managers perception astir(predicate) the characteristics of competency (tactics, consensus and embeddedness) and this differentiates them from the first-level managers and own them closer to higher end of organisation hierarchy (King et al., 2001).The importance of middle managers as innovators is emphasized by the Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) who suggested that their telephone exchange position in organisation is discover for them to absorb and collect the information, ideas and innovation from both inside and outdoors of organisation. This flow of information and ideas between both ends of organisation influence the inferior mangers to shape their entrepreneurial skills as their experience and cognition grow.The only stimulus that can concl ude this whole backchat on the importance of middle managements role in CE is that all the organisational and entrepreneurial functions are associated with them. therefrom, the heading of middle management is there where CE functions are most in all likelihood to happen.Middle managers in Strategic RolesMiddle managers have played a frequent role in providing strategic alternatives for firms and making those alternative ideas favorable for higher management (Floyd and Woolridge, 1992). The personality of middle managers job requires them to integrate and combine the information and resources by crystallizing the strategic issues faced by the organisation and also setting a platform for these strategic commutes by enhancing the old structure of organisation through implementation of formal strategy and adult feedback. This feedback can be used to pretend future changes in the strategy and for organisational renewal. The findings of Floyd and Woolridge (1992) gives a clearer picture when compared with the earlier work of Burgelman and Sayles (1986) that how middle management play key role in an organisation by shaping the strategic issues and influencing the entrepreneurial activities.The observations of other authors (Peters and Waterman, 1982 Pinchott, 1985) have seen the middle management playing authoritative in encouraging other employees to take risks while working towards innovation. Quinn (1985) and Kanter (1988) also observed similar role of middle managers in promoting the CE activities across the organisation. This can be d unrivalled by introducing reward schemes that encourage employees to prove with their innovative ideas. Also different preludees can be used by the middle management to make the whole structure of organisation little resistant towards future changes and leaveing the CE activities to flourish.Corporate Entrepreneurship and Other Forces (Actors)Most of literature on the CE and middle management either ignore or failed to identify the important role played by other forces to dupe the CE in any organisation and widely criticised by Floyd (1999). According to McMillan (1993) as far as the personnel is concerned both middle management and other players have equal importance in bringing the CE to the organisational structure.Burgelman (1983) insist that the heart of CE activities is eer dependent on the initiative taken at the operable levels of a firm. He insists on the importance of the factors that play towards the success of internal corporate activities by the operational level management, middle managements ability to effectively communicate between both ends of organisational hierarchy and the higher managements trust on the lower sub-ordinates in order to flourish the CE in the organisation. According to Burgelman (1993) operative managers have more importance in organisational structure than middle managers as they have more experience and involvement in dealing with RD and research rel ated activities and are more aware of the corporate culture, market deficiencyfully and demands.On the other hand Quin (1980 and 1982) has also argued on different occasion about the importance of middle management but he pointed towards the power maintain by the top management to concur actions of middle management. Although the organisational operation flow is bottom up but the final decisions are always in top managements hand in either acceptance or rejection of these initiatives.Although Floyd (1999) has insisted towards the importance of middle management is vital due to their central position in the organisational hierarchy. But this literature review is evident that the other organisational forces as important as the middle management in the central role in the organisation and have equal influence on the CE related activities.Organisational Change ImplementationInnovation in any organisation does not takes place on its own or in isolation and neither in a vacuum but it happens in a system where the employees and processes work together to achieve it. According to Joe (2005) it is all about the organisation and its employees and their approach towards the implementation of change in organisation. Hornsby et al. (2002) argued on the identical promissory note and suggested that the all organisations smell for change and they implement these changes strategically through the admirer of CE. Two types of organisational changes can be found as a result of innovation and are known as deliberate strategic change and emergent strategic change and have their affect dependent on the role of middle management in them.Types of Organisational ChangeThe first approach towards change is deliberate (Ansoff, 1965) and the top managements motive bottom this strategy is to maximise both the organisational interest and profits at the same m. Middle management has a limited role in the deliberate or top-down change strategy and they have a very little influence u pwards in order to make any change policy.On the other hand, the incremental change approach is a vice versa of top-down change strategy (Whittinghton, 1993) and it is based on the idea that change should be unplanned and unintentional rather that deliberate.This approach is based on the companionship and outcomes of past policies which inadequacys in the deliberate change (Lindblom, 1959). He further argued the important role played by the middle management in order to formulate and implement the change in the organisation.On different do Quinn (1882, 1978 and 1980) suggested that incremental change strategy can be considered through the implementation of sub-systems before addressing any major change issues. But there is power culture involved in Quinns approach and points towards the higher management in order to decide which sub-system to be implemented and hence limits the role of middle management to some extent.All this discussion leads to one conclusion that there is no s ingle approach which can completely benefit the middle managements role towards the organisational change but the incremental approach is more meet to them as compared to the deliberate change approach and enhances their role in change process.Middle Managements Role in Organisational ChangeThere is plenty of mulish evidence in the past literature (Bower 1979 Kanter 1983 Burgelman 1983a, 1983b, 1983c, 1991 and 1994 Schilit and Paine 1987 Dutton and Ashford 1993 Nonaka 1988 Sayles 1993 and Schilit 1993) which shows a significant influence of middle management towards organisational change. On the same note Floyd and Wooldridge (1990) pointed towards the significant affinity between performance of an organisation and involvement of management.They further argued how middle management is involved in both directions of organisational hierarchy with its upward influence on policy development could help the organisation by setting up a road map for change and innovation. While downward influence sets up a smooth ground to implement the organisational strategies effectively (Shendel and Hofer 1979 and Nutt 1987). Thus it shows the importance of middle management to influence the change in the organisation in the both directions at the same time.Human Nature, Top Management And the Organisational ChangeAccording to Strebel (1996) and Siegal (1996) almost two third of efforts made towards organisational change see failure as a result of top management oversight and deficiency of ability to recognise the human nature of change. This negligence by the top management is often seen as psychological differences between employees at individual level (Coghlan, 1993). The uncertainty and difference of opinion shows how employees look at organisational change at individual levels. The organisational change and all of its processes have direct or indirect concern with the employees personal influence towards change and it is regarded as a personal change for them (Bovey, 2 001). Evan (1994) has also argued on the same note by saying that employees work for OC in order to make it successful so that it can be a success for them too. According to Prastacos (2002) the OC is dependent on the acceptance and resistance levels of employees.Bovey (2001) noted that technical changes are often seen as bit easier to approach by the top management and are more auspicateable towards the change issues like developing action plans, making strategies, estimating profit level and resource analysis. The communication process in another key to keep the resistance level in control among employees against the change but if the resistance against change is higher from employee then it shows the poor communication and the inability of the top management (Elving, 2005).The organisational change is not a one way procedure but a two way understanding between management and employee (Bulogun, 2006). He also stressed on the need of mutual consensus between both parties to implem ent change across organisation and this is only possible through a good communication channel. It is almost impossible for top management to identify, control or tog up for every change before it happens due to the quick nature of change and they have act while it is happening. So, the above suggests that the top management stay isolated during the change mechanism due to hierarchal structure within organisational but on the other hand, middle management remains important during this process and act as communication channel between employees and top management. Thus, middle management has more importance during the implementation of organisational change than top management.Middle Managements Role in Political Nature of ChangeThe top management has all the authorities in an organisation but this is not the case when it comes to organisational change policies and it affects their whole vision about it. The semipolitical nature of organisational structure makes the idea of change u ncertain and difficult to implement. For the knowledge management the networks are often used as mechanism for to gain the necessitate information and are used for political nature of change. The idea hindquarters the formation of these networks is to use them politically for the change process. Hislop et al. (2000) agree with the fact there is a relation between these political networks and knowledge because of the need of sequester knowledge is needed to form and use these network.This study shows that due to political nature of change it is vital for middle management to gain knowledge through these networks inside as wellspring as the right(prenominal) of firm to make a ground for the change acceptance.Organisational Change and Other DriversThere are few other drivers of change that are worth feeling at in the literature including the organisational innovation, organisational citizenship and ambidexterity. These change drivers have important link with middle managements ro le in corporate entrepreneurial activities and CE process too.The Importance of Organisational ImprovisationOrganisational improvisational is another issue considered important in the reviewed literature that is connected directly with the change implementation in organisations. Different approach was adopted by the Ryle (1979) who described the process of improvisation as view refining and most of things happen during this process are unique, hard to yell and probably might not get repeated in future. But this process is seen as an outcome from failure of first approach and is a product by accident described by Lebourne (2006).The literature from last two decades considered is another feature of organisational activities that contribute towards the change process of an organisation (Lewin, 1998). Thus the idea of organisational improvisation contributes in the form innovation and by keeping up the market up-to-date. As far as the middle management is concerned they get the opportu nity to influence the whole process of improvisation from formulation stage to implementation stage through their time management skills.Relationship between Organisational Change and Organisational CitizenshipThere is plenty of discussion in the literature about organisational citizenship and deportmental interactions (Katz, 1964 Katz and Kahn, 1966 Organ, 1988 Cohen and Vigoda, 2000 and Padsakoff et al., 2000). Most of this literature has focus on describing the organisational behaviour and there is no discussion about organisational citizenship in the context of corporate entrepreneurship. For example Padsakoff et al. (2000) has identified seven different themes that can fit all dimensions of organisational citizenship while Katz (1964) mentioned four in his work.Although all the literature reviewed prescribes the importance of organisational citizenship behaviour and stresses on the presence of these behaviour for the effectiveness of organisational functions. However, it need s further exploration in the context of corporate entrepreneurship and this will remain the focus throughout this research.AmbidexterityObservations from Literature ReviewThis section outlines the key observation made during the literature review and their summary of whole count about the corporate entrepreneurship and role of middle management in the context of CE. The corporate entrepreneurship is noted as a complex concept that requires wide-awake consideration towards the change implementation as well as the tautological care when dealing with the strategic planning. There are two types of middle management is identified during this literature review specialist managers who deal with functions like finance, marketing and HR and non-specialist or operational manager who coordinate functions or activities within their own department or with other departments.The role of middle management and their future in the organisation is rather unclear in the argument by the researcher. S ome of them deny the importance of middle management in the CE and point towards other forces that act in grow the CE activities. While other think the middle management has an deepen future as well as importance in organisational corporate entrepreneurial activities and have more positive attitude towards their part in CE functions. But the whole debate of past literature is not sure on the role of middle management as operational managers as well as the extent of their importance in this role. The literature has pointed towards quite a few middle management functions including the functions of communication, innovation, change implementation, motivation, behaviour towards risk, business strategy etc. However, middle managements association with these functions is due to their central position in the organisational hierarchy.The middle management has independence of decision making in organisational innovation to reduce the strategy making period and also save the process of impl ementation time. This self-sufficiency of decision making is one of feature of contextual ambidexterity and make easier for organisations to implement innovation or change. The contextual ambidexterity is also a step closer to implement innovation in organisations and also allow middle management to better their role in process of organisational change. Due to explore and develop nature of structural ambidexterity which divide these functions between organisational departments and bound middle management not to raise their voice as it might be outside their job scope and thus limits the role of middle management. But organisations with behavioural citizenship are more likely to have structural ambidexterity as there will be no or little rubbing due to the separate organisational functions. On the other hand, the contextual ambidexterity results in the form of difference of opinion and rivalry among middle management to get the innovation and thats the reason it doesnt go with the c ontextual ambidexterity.During the literature review another thing was noticed that the up-down change strategy do not allow middle management to exert their weight upwards to formulate the change development. It is also noticed that for the improved role of middle management requires a vital approach towards change and it should be emergent as well as the intentional. Thus the implementation of change process need to be combination of both approaches and political elements should also be considered in change process.As mentioned earlier in the reviewed literature which points the improved conditions and role of middle management organisational citizenship. It also stresses on the need of deliberate and emergent strategic approach for the organisational citizenship which allows middle management to work independently in a flatter organisation with more freedom of networking across departments. The diplomacy of using these departmental networking allow the middle management to spot t he change and innovation in the organisation. The organisational change or transformation through corporate entrepreneurship is always main motive for many organisations and leader use social networking to implement this change across organisation. But many of these efforts fail due to the lack of ability of top management to understand human nature towards change implementation and poor communication between hierarchal levels.Weaknesses Observed in Understanding of CEThe literature reviewed earlier shows that there are number of areas in the CE which need further clarification and the research need to be more focussed on the issues of CE which are shortly have a weak understanding. There are few issues that need particular focus including the understanding of CE issues including the issue how CE it is managed, boost as well as sustained and according to Hornsby et al. (2002) this issue is not well understood. He also emphasise on the need of research to be more focused on the dime nsions that can shape and predict the environment where CE can flourish.It was noticed during the literature review is lack of appreciation for the middle management in the processes of corporate entrepreneurship even though they have central importance in corporate entrepreneurial activities. Floyds (1999) argument about the flatter structured organisation where nobody has a central importance and everybody exchange information between themselves free was ignored in the reviewed literature. There is no such discussion in the literature that who gets the influence in CE initiatives in the organisation in such flat organisations.Finally, the relation between corporate entrepreneurship and indirectly related change drivers were not studied in the existing literature and their effects on the CE related activities. The relationship between the corporate entrepreneurship and the organisation citizenship is also ignored in the current literature.Research Focus Research QuestionThe gaps i n the literature needs a thorough understanding of concept of CE and needs a further exploration of the ways the organisations respond towards the implementation of CE and also how firms react for the sustainability of corporate entrepreneurial activities. So, there are few questions that will be answered during the course of this research and are as followsHow Corporate Entrepreneurship (CE) is managed, sustained, and encouraged within the automobile industry?How CE and Organisational Citizenship are inter-related?What is the relationship between middle management and Corporate Entrepreneurship (CE)?How does the hierarchal structure of an organisation influence or affect the decision making role of middle management?How middle mangers add value in the decision making process of CE?Concluding CommentsThe research and theories regarding the role of middle management in corporate entrepreneurship was explored during the literature review. The literature reviewed has pointed towards th e presence and importance of middle management in corporate entrepreneurial processes. Although the middle managements exponentiation and interaction with the different interest group both inside and the outside of the organisation makes the whole process of CE complex and shows its political nature. The whole idea behind this research is to identify and fill these gaps found during the literature review and not only to contribute towards the literature on CE and also by providing clearer understanding of CE.The followed chapter will give an understanding of the methodology used to carry out the research and also the justification behind the choice of case studies.