Hybrydyzacja przedsiębiorstw w kontekście nowych modeli pracy

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Wojciech Dyduch
Katarzyna Bratnicka-Myśliwiec

Abstrakt

Głównym celem niniejszego artykułu jest próba lepszego zrozumienia zjawiska hybrydyzacji przedsiębiorstw, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem zmian zachodzących w dotychczas wykorzystywanych modelach pracy. W artykule przywołano podstawy teoretyczne przedsiębiorstwa hybrydowego, a także wskazano na jego wymiary i dostrzegalne sprzeczności. W kolejnej części skoncentrowano się na pracy hybrydowej jako jednym z wymiarów przedsiębiorstwa mieszanego. Wreszcie, zostały przedstawione wyniki sondażu przeprowadzonego wśród 48 przedstawicieli kadry zarządzającej przedsiębiorstw, które wdrożyły model pracy hybrydowej.

Pobrania

Dane pobrania nie są jeszcze dostepne

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Jak cytować
Dyduch, W., & Bratnicka-Myśliwiec, K. (2022). Hybrydyzacja przedsiębiorstw w kontekście nowych modeli pracy. Studia I Prace Kolegium Zarządzania I Finansów , (184), 35-48. Pobrano z https://econjournals.sgh.waw.pl/SiP/article/view/2937
Dział
Dział główny

Bibliografia

1. Alexander A., De Smet A., Langstaff M., Ravid D. [2021], What employees are saying about the future of remote work, McKinsey & Company.
2. Alexius S., Grossi G. [2018], Decoupling in the age of market-embedded morality: responsible gambling in a hybrid organization, „Journal of Management and Governance”, 22 (2), s. 285– 313.
3. Ambos T. C., Fuchs S. H., Zimmermann A. [2020], Managing interrelated tensions in headquarters – subsidiary relationships: The case of a multinational hybrid organization, „Journal of International Business Studies”, 51, s. 906–932.
4. Arellano-Gault D., Demortain D., Rouillard C., Thoenig J-C. [2013], Bringing public organization and organizing back in, „Organization Studies”, 34 (2), s. 145–167.
5. Ashforth B. E., Reingen P. H. [2014], Functions of dysfunction: Managing the dynamics of an organizational duality in a natural food cooperative, „Administrative Science Quarterly”, 59 (3), s. 474–516.
6. Barrero J. M., Bloom N., Davis S. J. [2020], Why working from home will stick, Becker Friedman Institute for Economics Working Paper, University of Chicago.
7. Battilana J., Lee M. [2014], Advancing research on hybrid organizing – Insights from the study of social enterprises, „Academy of Management Annals”, 8, s. 397–441.
8. Battilana J., Sengul M., Pache A. C., Model J. [2015], Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations: The case of work integration social enterprises, „Academy of Management Journal”, 58 (6), s. 1658–1685.
9. Bhattacharyya S. S., Thakre S. [2021], Coronavirus pandemic and economic lockdown; study of strategic initiatives and tactical responses of firms, „International Journal of Organizational Analysis”, January.
10. Bika Z., Joy S. [2018], Family business as a longstanding hybrid organisation: Logic revision as a strategy for maintenance, „Academy of Management Proceedings”, 1, s. 17392.
11. Bocken N. M. P., Short S. W., Rana P., Evans S. [2014], A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes, „Journal of Cleaner Production”, 65, s. 42–56.
12. Borys T. [2009], Organizacje międzynarodowe wobec globalnych problemów, „International Journal of Management and Economics”, 25, s. 45–63.
13. Boyd B., Henning N., Reyna E., Wang D. E., Welch M. D., Hoffman A. [2017], Hybrid organizations. New business models for environmental leadership, Routledge, New York.
14. Caringal-Go J. F., Teng-Calleja M., Franco E. P., Manaois J. O., Zantua R. M. S. [2021], Crisis leadership from the perspective of employees during the COVID-19 pandemic, „Leadership & Organization Development Journal”, 42.
15. Choudhury P., Foroughi C., Larson B. [2021], Work‐from‐anywhere: The productivity effects of geographic flexibility, „Strategic Management Journal”, 42 (4), s. 655–683.
16. Chudziński P., Cyfert S., Dyduch W., Zastempowski M. [2020], Projekt Sur (vir) val: czynniki przetrwania przedsiębiorstw w warunkach koronakryzysu, „e-mentor”, 5 (87), s. 34–44.
17. Civera C., Cortese D., Mosca F., Murdock A. [2020], Paradoxes and strategies in social enterprises’ dual logics enactment: A csQCA between Italy and the United Kingdom, „Journal of Business Research”, 115, s. 334–347.
18. Davies I. A., Chambers L. [2018], Integrating hybridity and business model theory in sustainable entrepreneurship, „Journal of Cleaner Production”, 177, s. 378–386.
19. de Lucas Ancillo A., del Val Núñez M. T., Gavrila S. G. [2021], Workplace change within the COVID-19 context: a grounded theory approach, „Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja”, 34 (1), s. 2297–2316.
20. Dey M., Frazis H., Loewenstein M. A., Sun H. [2020], Ability to work from home: evidence from two surveys and implications for the labor market in the COVID-19 pandemic, „Monthly Labor Review”, June, s. 1–19.
21. Doherty B., Haugh H., Lyon F. [2014], Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda, „International Journal of Management Reviews”, 16 (4), s. 417–436.
22. Erdogan I., Rondi E., De Massis A. [2020], Managing the tradition and innovation paradox in family firms: A family imprinting perspective, „Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice”, 44 (1), s. 20–54.
23. Franken E., Bentley T., Shafaei A., Farr-Wharton B., Onnis L. A., Omari M. [2021], Forced flexibility and remote working: Opportunities and challenges in the new normal, „Journal of Management & Organization”, 27 (6), s. 1131–1149.
24. Germain M. L., McGuire D. [2022], Using Developmental Relationships to Foster Trust in Effective Virtual Teams: Lessons in Emergency Preparedness from the COVID-19 Pandemic, w: HRD Perspectives on Developmental Relationships (s. 273–303), red. R. Ghosh, H. M. Hutchins, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
25. Gigauri I. [2021], New economic concepts shaping business models in post-pandemic era, „International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Economy”, 1 (33).
26. Haigh N., Hoffman A. J. [2011], Hybrid organizations: the next chapter in sustainable business, „Organizational Dynamics”, 41 (2), s. 126–134.
27. Hammer J., Pivo G. [2017], The triple bottom line and sustainable economic development theory and practice, „Economic Development Quarterly”, 31, s. 25–36.
28. Hamouche S. [2021], Human resource management and the COVID-19 crisis: implications, challenges, opportunities, and future organizational directions, „Journal of Management & Organization”, April.
29. Howe L. C., Menges J. I. [2021], Remote work mindsets predict emotions and productivity in home office: A longitudinal study of knowledge workers during the Covid-19 pandemic, Human-Computer Interaction.
30. Ingram A. E., Lewis M. W., Barton S., Gartner W. B. [2016], Paradoxes and innovation in family firms: The role of paradoxical thinking, „Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice”, 40 (1), s. 161– 176.
31. Leppäaho T., Ritala P. [2022], Surviving the coronavirus pandemic and beyond: Unlocking family firms’ innovation potential across crises, „Journal of Family Business Strategy”, 13 (1).
32. Lund S., Madgavkar A., Manyika J., Smit S. [2020], What’s next for remote work: An analysis of 2,000 tasks, 800 jobs, and nine countries, McKinsey Global Institute, s. 1–13.
33. Mair J., Mayer J., Lutz E. [2015], Navigating institutional plurality: Organizational governance in hybrid organizations, „Organization Studies”, 36 (6), s. 713–739.
34. Martins V., Ferreira M., Braga V. [2021], The role of the fourth sector in the context of the COVID‐19 pandemic, „Strategic Change”, 30 (2), s. 179–184.
35. Miron-Spektor E., Ingram A., Keller J., Smith W. K., Lewis M. W. [2018], Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem, „Academy of Management Journal”, 61 (1), 26–45.
36. Nadiv R. [2021], Home, work or both? The role of paradox mindset in a remote work environment during the COVID-19 pandemic, „International Journal of Manpower”, December.
37. Nikolopoulos K., Punia S., Schäfers A., Tsinopoulos C., Vasilakis C. [2021], Forecasting and planning during a pandemic: COVID-19 growth rates, supply chain disruptions, and governmental decisions, „European Journal of Operational Research”, 290 (1), s. 99–115.
38. Pache A. C., Santos F. [2013], Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics, „Academy of Management Journal”, 56 (4), s. 972–1001.
39. Peattie K., Morley A. [2008], Eight paradoxes of the social enterprise research agenda, „Social Enterprise Journal”, 4 (2), s. 91–107.
40. Phillips S. [2020], Working through the pandemic: Accelerating the transition to remote working, „Business Information Review”, 37 (3), s. 129–134.
41. Pradies C., Aust I., Bednarek R., Brandl J., Carmine S., Cheal J., Cunha M. P., Gaim M., Keegan A., Lê J. K, Miron-Spektor E., Nielsen R. K., Pouthier V., Sharma G., Sparr J. L., Vince R., Keller J. [2021], The lived experience of paradox: How individuals navigate tensions during the pandemic crisis, „Journal of Management Inquiry”, 30 (2), 154–167.
42. Raaijmakers A. G. M., Vermeulen P. A. M., Meeus M. T. H., Zietsma C. [2015], I need time! Exploring pathways to compliance under institutional complexity, „Academy of Management Journal”, 58, s. 85–110.
43. Raghavan A., Demircioglu M. A., Orazgaliyev S. [2021], COVID-19 and the new normal of organizations and employees: an overview, „Sustainability”, 13 (21), 11942.
44. Raport Future Business Institute [2021], https://branden.biz/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Future_Business_Institute_raport-Praca-zdalna.pdf.
45. Rauter R., Jonker J., Baumgartner R. J. [2015], Going one’s own way: drivers in developing business models for sustainability, „Journal of Cleaner Production”, 140, s. 144–154.
46. Sako M. [2021], From remote work to working from anywhere, „Communications of the ACM”, 64 (4), s. 20–22.
47. Secinaro S., Corvo L., Brescia V., Iannaci D. [2019], Hybrid organizations: A systematic review of the current literature, „International Business Research”, 12 (11), s. 1–21.
48. Shane S. A. [1996], Hybrid organizational arrangements and their implications for firm growth and survival: A study of new franchisors, „Academy of Management Journal”, 39 (1), s. 216–234.
49. Schieman S., Badawy P. J., Milkie M., Bierman A. [2021], Work-life conflict during the COVID- 19 pandemic, „Socius”, 7.
50. Smite D., Moe N. B., Klotins E., Gonzalez-Huerta J. [2021], From forced working-from-home to working-from-anywhere: Two revolutions in telework, arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.08315.
51. Stoker J. I., Garretsen H., Lammers J. [2021], Leading and working from home in times of COVID-19: On the perceived changes in leadership behaviors, „Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies”, 29 (2).
52. Sull D., Sull C., Bersin J. [2020], Five ways leaders can support remote work, „MIT Sloan Management Review”, 61 (4), s. 1–10.
53. Szukalski P. [2020], Polski rynek pracy w cieniu COVID-19. Obraz w mediach zajmujących się problematyką gospodarczą, „Rynek Pracy”, 175 (4), s. 6–15.
54. Waldman D. A., Siegel D. S., Stahl G. K. [2020], Defining the socially responsible leader: Revisiting issues in responsible leadership, „Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies”, 27, s. 5–10.
55. Xu N., Sun Y., Chen J., Wang Z., Chen Z., Yang B., Wang P., Zhou J. [2021], Ergonomics Evaluation of Home Office Environment, International Conference on Man-Machine-Environment System Engineering, Springer, Singapore, s. 466–473.