Diffusion of operational capabilities knowledge: The social skills perspective

Biazzin, Cristiane; Sacomano Neto, Mario; Candido, Silvio Eduardo Alvarez

doi:10.1590/0103-6513.20200015

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Research Article • Prod. 30 • 2020 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6513.20200015 copy

Diffusion of operational capabilities knowledge: The social skills perspective

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Paper aims

This paper aims to understand how the social skill of managers influence the diffusion of operational capabilities in food and auto parts manufacturing networks.

Originality

There are taken-for-granted beliefs that its diffusion is based on replicating or transferring resources and practices from one site to another. This study is one of the first ones to discuss operational capability and socially skilled actors.

Research method

Two polar cases were analyzed through the Strategic Action Fields perspective based on a qualitative perspective and 17 in-depth interviews.

Main findings

Results demonstrate that diffusion of capability among various actors in subsidiaries will depend on a series of multidimensional factors that influence this process as the stability, state, and relationship between fields. Moreover, members tend to adopt a logic (perception of the world) that reflects the point of view of the group, and from this, the actors construct their narratives, recognize the legitimacy and justify their actions.

Implications for theory and practice

These perspectives have scarcely been explored in Operations management till today and shall open a new dialogue between Operations Strategy and Organization Studies. It offers practical guidance for diffusing and deploying operational capabilities.

Keywords:
Operational capabilities; Operations; Strategy; Fields and social skills

Company A	Company B
CEO	Latam Business Director
Production Manager	Project Manager 1
Quality Manager	Project Manager 2
HR Manager	Engineering Manager
Industrial Director	Quality Manager
Plant Manager 1	Plant Manager
Plant Manager 2	Lean Manufacturing and Excellence Manager
Continuous Improvement Manager	Lean Manufacturing and Excellence Manager
Engineering Manager
RandD and Innovation Manager

	Evidence	Evidence
	Case A	Case B
Field stability	Indifference over any positive movement of other fields. “[…] our plant is unique. I do not believe it could be feasible to share anything with another unit. They have their way of working, which I do not trust at all. I do prefer to run the shop floor as we have been doing for a long time.”*	We are continually looking for benchmarking other fields’ best practices. Evidence of mimetic behavior. “I realize that we have several weaknesses here, and I’ve been pushing my team to be closer to other sites, try to grasp how they solve common issues. I am sure that we could learn a lot from others’ experiences, even considering that the Brazilian environment is quite different anyway”^*
Higher common principle	Be public, recognition and self-love “Partnership with a university would be nice for the company image.” “[…] we are recognized as the first choice of our customers in the sweets and snacks market. Even considering that some customers start enquiring about China as a new supplier, we do not believe there would be a gap shortly.”*	Best in class, look for process improvement continuously, things under control, efficiency “[...] Things are very homogeneous among the factories, as what you see here you will see in anyone. The organization you see here, you will see outside in any unit. It's the same picture, the same way of doing things everywhere.”*
System Dependence Level	Resistant to any threat the field may suffer, they do not verbalize criticism of their field, but that of the others. On the contrary, they have a self-image as a reliable organization. The defensibility of the status quo is limited. “The management of unit X is trying to copy the way we are doing things here. It shows how weak they are. Top management realized it as well. I think it is a bad thing, as they do not have the same expertise as we do.”	Actors rely on the organization for the trajectory, origin, and previous successes. They respect the rules. Nevertheless, they realize that they have low individual control over the system, and even though on some occasions, the actors disagree with the decisions taken, they follow them. “[…] Germany (the Headquarter) does not accept any change without its previous approval. We cannot do anything by ourselves. And that’s OK.”*
State of field	Crisis/Uncertainty	Emergent
State of field	All decisions are taken at the unit level. There is no clear operations strategy for the entire organization. Internal misalignment – managers do not recognize competition (managers do not perceive, e.g., Chinese entry into local market impacting status quo). Plant rivalry, each unit was protecting its knowledge and resources from the others. “Each plant has its way to manage the operations. It brings flexibility and self-sufficiency to the plant manager to solve problems. It doesn’t make any sense to standardize the process. We will lose all the efforts we made in the past if we do it. It does not make sense.” “[…] we heard some customers have been buying from Chinese factories. It seems to be a fashion, in my opinion. China has similar good products, but I don’t think they would impact strongly on our market. Our customers will perceive that it is not worth transporting candies from China to Brazil. They know our brand is well established”*	All decisions are made in HQ (Germany). HQ has control over all the unit/ plant network resources, and it influences the market as a whole.

State of worthiness	Singular reputation, recognition, visibility	Reliability, standardization of process, and behavior. “[...] Things are very homogeneous among the factories, as what you see here, you will see in anyone. The organization you see here, you will see outside in any unit. It's the same picture, the same way of doing things everywhere.”*
Relation of worth, power and control mechanisms	Identification, strength	Hierarchical control
Relationship between fields	Indifference, there is a rare exploration of knowledge-sharing by actors. There is a critical team in charge of continuous improvement. However, plant managers are not motivated enough to share experiences.	Openness, the organization encourages teams to talk, creation of forums and global meetings for discussing best practices and moving forward.

Associação Brasileira de Engenharia de Produção Av. Prof. Almeida Prado, Travessa 2, 128 - 2º andar - Room 231, 05508-900 São Paulo - SP - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: production@editoracubo.com.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * sacomanoneto@gmail.com