Leadership, administrative heritage and absorptive capacity

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to identify critical success factors for the management of change in transition economies.Design/methodology/approachFour longitudinal case studies of Russian oil companies covering a ten‐year period from 1995, based on 71 in‐depth interviews. Examines organisational change from a resource‐based and organisational learning perspective.FindingsExplains how top managers firstly, break with administrative heritage to increase absorptive capacity and secondly, leverage administrative heritage for rapid implementation of change. Intra‐ and cross‐case analyses demonstrate that absorptive capacity increases and organisational change occurs where the top management team has radically different skills and mindsets from the dominant logic of the post‐Soviet organisation, an entrepreneurial orientation and the capability to drive through change due to a top‐down management style.Research limitations/implicationsThe research is restricted to four case studies. However, the critical success factors identified could apply to any large, conservative and bureaucratic organisation undergoing change. This represents an interesting avenue for research on organisational turnaround in the West.Practical implicationsAn understanding of the critical success factors for dealing with administrative heritage will assist managers in transition economies and in turnaround situations in the West.Originality/valueThe speed of change in the Russian oil industry provided a unique setting for research into organisational change in transition economies. On the basis of cross‐case analyses, a new theoretical framework was developed to explain the change process.

Stages of Organizational Transformation in Transition Economies: A Dynamic Capabilities Approach

“…This imprinting from the previous socialist institutional and economic system impacts firms' awareness of the need to change operating capabilities that were fitted to a planned rather than a market economy (Kriauciunas and Kale, 2006). These historically grounded constraints have proven to be hard to overcome (Dixon and Day, 2007; Michailova and Husted, 2003; Vlachoutsicos and Lawrence, 1996).…”

Market orientation of business schools: a development opportunity for the business model of University Business Schools in transition countries

“…legislation, higher education fi nancing model). From the academicinstitutional aspect, the following indicators have the largest impact on those schools: a) Administrative heritage: All organisations in a transition economy, including University Business Schools, are entwined with the administrative heritage of the processes, norms and values associated with the socialist planned economy (Dixon & Day, 2007). b) Autonomy in management of Business Schools in transition countries depends to a large extent on the degree of the institutionally assigned (by government authorities and legislation, university regulation) range of decision-making and operation competencies.…”

Supervisors’ Transformational Leadership: Personality and Management Practices as Antecedents

“…Так, продемонстрировано, что трансформационное лидерство особенно востребовано в контексте коллективистских культур [Jung, Avolio, 1999] и на «пере-ломных» этапах жизненного цикла органи-зации, в кризисных ситуациях, на ранних стадиях организационных изменений, ко гда надо «взломать» существующие организа-ционные структуры и практики, преодолеть сопротивление менеджмента и работников, приверженных старым моделям поведения [Dixon, Day, 2007;Dixon, Meyer, Day, 2010]. Значимость трансформационного лидер-ства особенно велика в тех секторах бизне-са, успех которых определяется эффектив-ным использованием интеллектуаль ного, креативного, инновационного потенциала сотрудников.…”