Aim of this study is to understand which approach (expert or process orientated) sport club consultants use in succesfully raising the organizational capacity of voluntary sport clubs in the northern part of the Netherlands. Around 130 professional sport club consultants are active in the northern part of the Netherlands, but it is not clear which approach they use in raising the organizational capacity of the clubs within a specific context and if this approach is effective. Theoretical backgroundA sport club with great organizational capacity has the ability to offer their sport, now and in the future, in a sustainable and socially responsible way to (potential) members. Dutch voluntary sport clubs (VSCs) are facing several challenges in perceived consumerist behavior by members (Van der Roest, 2015), demands by the government to attribute to the social policy agenda (Coalter, 2007) and declining number of members in complex contexts (Wollebæk, 2009). Between 300-500 sport club consultants, mostly funded by local governments or sport associations, are tasked to raise the organizational capacity of these VSCs in the Netherlands. Most consultants play an expert role delivering generic interventions on specific topics as recruiting volunteers, sponsorships or positive behavior support. The other consultants play a process consultation role in which a holistic strategic change approach is used for more sustainable organizational development (Schein, 1999). The context of the organizations (VSC’s) is determining which approach is the best in developing the organizational capacity. But most of the time consultants use the same, mostly expert role, in consulting the organizations (Boonstra & Elving, 2009). Therefore it is not clear which approach (expert or process orientated) sport club consultants in the Netherlands use in raising the organizational capacity of VSC’s in different contexts. Methodology, research design, and data analysisThe study will be conducted from March 2017 till the end of July 2017 in the northern part of the Netherlands. In March we have started with identifying successful sport club consultants in three steps: these steps show a qualitative description of the current competences, approaches and interventions (repertoire) as seen by the sport club consultants in our target group:1) A group of experts have been gathered to formulate criteria for the competences, approaches and interventions of a successful process orientated sport club consultant. 2) The criteria from step 1 are validated by theory about organizational development and consulting of organizations. Thereafter the criteria are processed into a digital survey 3) The survey has been send to n=130 sport club consultants in the northern part of the Netherlands. 4) Based on the output of the survey, profiles will be developed of different types sport club consultants (process orientated, mediator, supporter, coach, expert) and the approaches per type of consultant. For each profile a ranking will be made based on which criteria (from step 1) the consultants meet. This ranking will be used to make a selection of successful sport club consultants to conduct research in five multiple case studies. From June on multiple case studies will be conducted in which five process consultants are working with a VSC. A case study protocol will be developed that observe the consultant in three sessions at the club. In addition interviews will be conducted with the consultant, the board of the club, and other relevant stakeholders. With a cross-case synthesis patterns will be developed in the way the consultants worked and how these approaches were interpreted and valued by the various stakeholders. Results, discussion, and implications/conclusionsIn the expected results both approaches and interventions (repertoire) of the consultant as their competences and qualities are analyzed which will result in the profiling of the active sport club consultants. We also gain insights in which approach of the sport club consultants is the most effective in raising the organizational capacity of a VSC in a given context. New insights on how consultants can successfully contribute to the sustainable organizational development of VSCs will be presented.
Aim of this study is to understand which approach (expert or process orientated) sport club consultants use in succesfully raising the organizational capacity of voluntary sport clubs in the northern part of the Netherlands. Around 130 professional sport club consultants are active in the northern part of the Netherlands, but it is not clear which approach they use in raising the organizational capacity of the clubs within a specific context and if this approach is effective. Theoretical backgroundA sport club with great organizational capacity has the ability to offer their sport, now and in the future, in a sustainable and socially responsible way to (potential) members. Dutch voluntary sport clubs (VSCs) are facing several challenges in perceived consumerist behavior by members (Van der Roest, 2015), demands by the government to attribute to the social policy agenda (Coalter, 2007) and declining number of members in complex contexts (Wollebæk, 2009). Between 300-500 sport club consultants, mostly funded by local governments or sport associations, are tasked to raise the organizational capacity of these VSCs in the Netherlands. Most consultants play an expert role delivering generic interventions on specific topics as recruiting volunteers, sponsorships or positive behavior support. The other consultants play a process consultation role in which a holistic strategic change approach is used for more sustainable organizational development (Schein, 1999). The context of the organizations (VSC’s) is determining which approach is the best in developing the organizational capacity. But most of the time consultants use the same, mostly expert role, in consulting the organizations (Boonstra & Elving, 2009). Therefore it is not clear which approach (expert or process orientated) sport club consultants in the Netherlands use in raising the organizational capacity of VSC’s in different contexts. Methodology, research design, and data analysisThe study will be conducted from March 2017 till the end of July 2017 in the northern part of the Netherlands. In March we have started with identifying successful sport club consultants in three steps: these steps show a qualitative description of the current competences, approaches and interventions (repertoire) as seen by the sport club consultants in our target group:1) A group of experts have been gathered to formulate criteria for the competences, approaches and interventions of a successful process orientated sport club consultant. 2) The criteria from step 1 are validated by theory about organizational development and consulting of organizations. Thereafter the criteria are processed into a digital survey 3) The survey has been send to n=130 sport club consultants in the northern part of the Netherlands. 4) Based on the output of the survey, profiles will be developed of different types sport club consultants (process orientated, mediator, supporter, coach, expert) and the approaches per type of consultant. For each profile a ranking will be made based on which criteria (from step 1) the consultants meet. This ranking will be used to make a selection of successful sport club consultants to conduct research in five multiple case studies. From June on multiple case studies will be conducted in which five process consultants are working with a VSC. A case study protocol will be developed that observe the consultant in three sessions at the club. In addition interviews will be conducted with the consultant, the board of the club, and other relevant stakeholders. With a cross-case synthesis patterns will be developed in the way the consultants worked and how these approaches were interpreted and valued by the various stakeholders. Results, discussion, and implications/conclusionsIn the expected results both approaches and interventions (repertoire) of the consultant as their competences and qualities are analyzed which will result in the profiling of the active sport club consultants. We also gain insights in which approach of the sport club consultants is the most effective in raising the organizational capacity of a VSC in a given context. New insights on how consultants can successfully contribute to the sustainable organizational development of VSCs will be presented.
Aim of the researchAim of this study is to understand which approach (expert or process orientated) sport club consultants use in succesfully raising the organizational capacity of voluntary sport clubs in the northern part of the Netherlands. Around 130 professional sport club consultants are active in the northern part of the Netherlands, but it is not clear which approach they use in raising the organizational capacity of the clubs within a specific context and if this approach is effective. Theoretical backgroundA sport club with great organizational capacity has the ability to offer their sport, now and in the future, in a sustainable and socially responsible way to (potential) members. Dutch voluntary sport clubs (VSCs) are facing several challenges in perceived consumerist behavior by members (Van der Roest, 2015), demands by the government to attribute to the social policy agenda (Coalter, 2007) and declining number of members in complex contexts (Wollebæk, 2009). Between 300-500 sport club consultants, mostly funded by local governments or sport associations, are tasked to raise the organizational capacity of these VSCs in the Netherlands Most consultants play an expert role delivering generic interventions on specific topics as recruiting volunteers, sponsorships or positive behavior support. The other consultants play a process consultation role in which a holistic strategic change approach is used for more sustainable organizational development (Schein, 1999). The context of the organizations (VSC’s) is determining which approach is the best in developing the organizational capacity. But most of the time consultants use the same, mostly expert role, in consulting the organizations (Boonstra & Elving, 2009). Therefore it is not clear which approach (expert or process orientated) sport club consultants in the Netherlands use in raising the organizational capacity of VSC’s in different contexts. Methodology, research design, and data analysisThe study will be conducted from March 2017 till the end of July 2017 in the northern part of the Netherlands. In March we have started .with identifying successful sport club consultants in three steps: these steps show a qualitative description of the current competences, approaches and interventions (repertoire) as seen by the sport club consultants in our target group:1) A group of experts have been gathered to formulate criteria for the competences, approaches and interventions of a successful process orientated sport club consultant. 2) The criteria from step 1 are validated by theory about organizational development and consulting of organizations. Thereafter the criteria are processed into a digital survey 3) The survey has been send to n=130 sport club consultants in the northern part of the Netherlands. 4) Based on the output of the survey, profiles will be developed of different types sport club consultants (process orientated, mediator, supporter, coach, expert) and the approaches per type of consultant. For each profile a ranking will be made based on which criteria (from step 1) the consultants meet. This ranking will be used to make a selection of successful sport club consultants to conduct research in five multiple case studies. From June on multiple case studies will be conducted in which five process consultants are working with a VSC. A case study protocol will be developed that observe the consultant in three sessions at the club In addition interviews will be conducted with the consultant, the board of the club, and other relevant stakeholders. With a cross-case synthesis patterns will be developed in the way the consultants worked and how these approaches were interpreted and valued by the various stakeholders. Results, discussion, and implications/conclusionsIn the expected results both approaches and interventions (repertoire) of the consultant as their competences and qualities are analyzed which will result in the profiling of the active sport club consultants. We also gain insights in which approach of the sport club consultants is the most effective in raising the organizational capacity of a VSC in a given context. New insights on how consultants can successfully contribute to the sustainable organizational development of VSCs will be presented.
Digital transformation has been recognized for its potential to contribute to sustainability goals. It requires companies to develop their Data Analytic Capability (DAC), defined as their ability to collect, manage and analyze data effectively. Despite the governmental efforts to promote digitalization, there seems to be a knowledge gap on how to proceed, with 37% of Dutch SMEs reporting a lack of knowledge, and 33% reporting a lack of support in developing DAC. Participants in the interviews that we organized preparing this proposal indicated a need for guidance on how to develop DAC within their organization given their unique context (e.g. age and experience of the workforce, presence of legacy systems, high daily workload, lack of knowledge of digitalization). While a lot of attention has been given to the technological aspects of DAC, the people, process, and organizational culture aspects are as important, requiring a comprehensive approach and thus a bundling of knowledge from different expertise. Therefore, the objective of this KIEM proposal is to identify organizational enablers and inhibitors of DAC through a series of interviews and case studies, and use these to formulate a preliminary roadmap to DAC. From a structure perspective, the objective of the KIEM proposal will be to explore and solidify the partnership between Breda University of Applied Sciences (BUas), Avans University of Applied Sciences (Avans), Logistics Community Brabant (LCB), van Berkel Logistics BV, Smink Group BV, and iValueImprovement BV. This partnership will be used to develop the preliminary roadmap and pre-test it using action methodology. The action research protocol and preliminary roadmap thereby developed in this KIEM project will form the basis for a subsequent RAAK proposal.
Collaborative networks for sustainability are emerging rapidly to address urgent societal challenges. By bringing together organizations with different knowledge bases, resources and capabilities, collaborative networks enhance information exchange, knowledge sharing and learning opportunities to address these complex problems that cannot be solved by organizations individually. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the apparel sector, where examples of collaborative networks for sustainability are plenty, for example Sustainable Apparel Coalition, Zero Discharge Hazardous Chemicals, and the Fair Wear Foundation. Companies like C&A and H&M but also smaller players join these networks to take their social responsibility. Collaborative networks are unlike traditional forms of organizations; they are loosely structured collectives of different, often competing organizations, with dynamic membership and usually lack legal status. However, they do not emerge or organize on their own; they need network orchestrators who manage the network in terms of activities and participants. But network orchestrators face many challenges. They have to balance the interests of diverse companies and deal with tensions that often arise between them, like sharing their innovative knowledge. Orchestrators also have to “sell” the value of the network to potential new participants, who make decisions about which networks to join based on the benefits they expect to get from participating. Network orchestrators often do not know the best way to maintain engagement, commitment and enthusiasm or how to ensure knowledge and resource sharing, especially when competitors are involved. Furthermore, collaborative networks receive funding from grants or subsidies, creating financial uncertainty about its continuity. Raising financing from the private sector is difficult and network orchestrators compete more and more for resources. When networks dissolve or dysfunction (due to a lack of value creation and capture for participants, a lack of financing or a non-functioning business model), the collective value that has been created and accrued over time may be lost. This is problematic given that industrial transformations towards sustainability take many years and durable organizational forms are required to ensure ongoing support for this change. Network orchestration is a new profession. There are no guidelines, handbooks or good practices for how to perform this role, nor is there professional education or a professional association that represents network orchestrators. This is urgently needed as network orchestrators struggle with their role in governing networks so that they create and capture value for participants and ultimately ensure better network performance and survival. This project aims to foster the professionalization of the network orchestrator role by: (a) generating knowledge, developing and testing collaborative network governance models, facilitation tools and collaborative business modeling tools to enable network orchestrators to improve the performance of collaborative networks in terms of collective value creation (network level) and private value capture (network participant level) (b) organizing platform activities for network orchestrators to exchange ideas, best practices and learn from each other, thereby facilitating the formation of a professional identity, standards and community of network orchestrators.
Social enterprises (SEs) can play an important role in addressing societal problems. SEs are businesses whose primary objective is to generate social impact (e.g. well-being, social wealth and cohesion, and ecology) through a market-based model. SEs achieve this through a hybrid business model, trading-off financial and social value creation objectives. SEs typically face higher costs, for example because of ethical sourcing principles and/or production processes centering around the needs of workers who are vulnerable or hard-to-employ. This results in SEs’ struggling to scale-up due to their relatively costly operating model. Traditional management techniques are not always appropriate, as they do not take into account the tensions between financial and social value creation objectives of SEs. Our project examines how continuous improvement, and in particular the philosophy and tools of Lean can be harnessed to improve SEs competitiveness. Lean organizations share many values with SEs, such as respect for people, suggesting a good fit between the values and principles of Lean and those of SEs. The consortium for this project is a cooperation between the research groups Improving Business and New Marketing of the Center of Expertise Well-Being Economy and New Entrepreneurship and the minor Continuous Improvement of AVANS Hogeschool, and the SME companies Elliz in Company and Ons Label. The project consists of two phases, an exploratory phase during which the question “in what ways can the philosophy and tools of Lean be used by Social Enterprises?” will be addressed. Interviews and focus groups will be conducted with multiple SEs (not only partners). Participant observation will be conducted by the students of the minor Continuous Improvement at the partner SEs. During the second phase, the implementation of the identified principles and tools will be operationalized through a roadmap. Action research will be conducted in cooperation with the partner SEs.
