Mobility at work

Kietzmann, Jan; Plangger, Kirk; Eaton, Ben; Heilgenberg, Kerstin; Pitt, Leyland; Berthon, Pierre

doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2013.03.003

Cited by 86 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, contextual ambidexterity relies on decision making and organizational structures that provide a suitable environment for managing tradeoffs in which an individual manages the conflicting goals, rather than engraining ambidexterity into organizational characteristics [27], [34]. A prior study suggests a typology of different work practices with alternative implications for performance and innovativeness [45]. Other theoretical advances on contextual ambidexterity seek to understand the nomological net of contextual ambidexterity in greater depth.…”

Section: Contextual Ambidexteritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Software Development Process Ambidexterity and Project Performance: A Coordination Cost-Effectiveness View

Werder

Maedche

et al. 2021

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software development process ambidexterity (SDPA) is the ability to demonstrate both process alignment and process adaptability simultaneously. Realizing process ambidexterity has recently been suggested as an effective approach to improving the performance of software development (SD) projects. To understand the mechanisms underlying the effects of ambidexterity, we focus in this study on the mediating effects of coordination, one of the most important activity in SD projects. Specifically, we hypothesize a mediating effect of coordination costs and coordination effectiveness on the relationship between SDPA and project performance. We conducted a quantitative study involving 104 SD projects across 10 firms to test the model. The results strongly suggest that the positive relationship between SDPA and project performance is negatively mediated by coordination costs and positively mediated by coordination effectiveness. We validate our research model with a case study in an organization employing several hundred IT professionals and derive several practical implications on this basis.

show abstract

Section: Contextual Ambidexteritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Software Development Process Ambidexterity and Project Performance: A Coordination Cost-Effectiveness View

Werder

Maedche

et al. 2021

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These workers perform knowledge-intensive work, enjoy a relative degree of autonomy, and have flexible working arrangements (Cavazotte, Lemos, & Villadsen, 2014). Moreover, they are dependent on information to execute their activities (Kietzmann et al, 2013). Their tasks are rarely repetitive and require a variety of abilities and resources to be accomplished (Cavazotte et al, 2014;Harmer & Pauleen, 2012;Kietzmann et al, 2013).…”

Section: The Context Of Mobile Work and Its Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous literature already indicated that one of the main challenges is the MKW's relationship with their colleagues, affecting not only the related learning and collaborative processes, but also their participation in organizational activities in general (Koroma, Hyrkkänen, & Vartiainen, 2014). Working alone restricts the MKW's opportunities to form and keep up interpersonal relationships (Kietzmann et al, 2013), increases their lack of support, and also generates the feeling of being invisible, or not included, in the parent organization (Koroma et al, 2014). Working on the move can negatively affect organizational inclusion and the sense of belonging to a work team (Chen & Nath, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, through DSR, we applied these kernel theories from the Social Sciences to the development of an artifact and its evaluation in the MKW's real settings. The adopted approach is relevant because MKW are increasingly becoming distributed in time and space and there is a need to understand their participation in collaborative and learning activities in this context Kietzmann et al, 2013;).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding Collaborative Problem-Solving on the Move: A Design Science Research Journey

Rodríguez‐Sánchez

Klein

2020

BAR, Braz. Adm. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of globally distributed teams and the evolution of mobile technologies have increased the number of mobile knowledge workers (MKW). MKW are professionals who frequently work on the move, far from a fixed workplace, performing knowledge-intensive activities. MKW often work alone, which leads them to face constant challenges in their work practices and difficulties to get timely knowledge to solve their problems alone. Still, little is known about how the collaborative problem-solving is carried out in the MKW's context. To address this gap, we adopted the Design Science Research (DSR) as a research method, and we applied activity theory (AT) and expansive learning as theoretical foundations to understand the MKW's context. We created an artifact-a method implemented via a mobile app-to support collaborative problem-solving processes on the move, which allowed us to understand better how these processes occur, contributing not only to problems resolutions but also to organizational learning.

show abstract

“…The interviewees are thus considered as agents of change and members of a community of practice. A community of practice, after Lave and Wenger [230], is a group of people who share a craft or a profession (food issues here) and they share experiences over time, common sense making and self-regarding, either physically or virtually [231,232]. Although the food professionals live in different countries and work in different domains of the food system, they are all connected via their Twitter account, where they regularly post messages on food-related issues.…”

Section: Describing the Sample: Food System Professionals With Socialmentioning

confidence: 99%

Food as Commons or Commodity? Exploring the Links between Normative Valuations and Agency in Food Transition

Pol

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The food system, the most important driver of planetary transformation, is in a deep crisis. Therefore, seeking a sustainable and socially-fair transition pathway becomes an issue of utmost priority for our own survival. The consideration of food as a commodity, a social construct that played a central role in driving this crisis, remains the uncontested narrative to lead the different transition pathways what seems rather contradictory. By exploring the normative values in the transition landscape, this paper seeks to understand how relevant is the hegemonic narrative of “food as commodity” and its alternative of “food as commons” to determine transition trajectories and food policy beliefs. Applying the Multi-level Perspective framework and developing the ill-studied “agency in transition”, this research enquired food-related professionals that belong to an online community of practice (N=95) on valuation of food dimensions and agency in food transitions to check whether the valuation of food is relevant to explain personal stances in transition. Results suggest the socially-constructed view of food as commodity is positively correlated to the gradual reforming attitude, whereas food as commons is positively correlated to the counter-hegemonic transformers regardless the self-defined position in the transition landscape (regime or niches). At personal level, there are multiple loci of resistance with counter-hegemonic attitudes in varied institutions of the regime and the innovative niches, many of them holding this discourse of food as commons. Conversely, alter-hegemonic attitudes are not positively correlated to this alternative discourse and they may inadvertently or purportedly reinforce the ‘‘neoliberal narrative’’. Food as commons, a different narrative whose rationale is explained in the paper, seems to be a relevant framework that could enrich the multiple transformative constituencies that challenge the industrial food system and therefore facilitate the convergence of movements that reject the commodification of food.

show abstract

Mobility at work

Cited by 86 publications

References 78 publications

Software Development Process Ambidexterity and Project Performance: A Coordination Cost-Effectiveness View

Software Development Process Ambidexterity and Project Performance: A Coordination Cost-Effectiveness View

Understanding Collaborative Problem-Solving on the Move: A Design Science Research Journey

Food as Commons or Commodity? Exploring the Links between Normative Valuations and Agency in Food Transition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About