Implementing a Holographic Organization Design

Implementing a Holographic
Organization Design: The Case
of GABO:mi
Erika Jacobi1
Abstract
This case describes the implementation of a holographic organization design at a European research
project management firm. The case firm, GABO:mi, underwent a phase of rapid growth. Their headcount nearly doubled, which left them challenged to the maintenance of the flexible self-organization
of their teams. During a collaboratively conducted change initiative, the organization determined that
a holographic organization design would best serve their business objectives. A six-phase change initiative was conducted to help the case firm identify their unique success factors and decide how to bring
these factors forward into the new organization design. The change process leveraged a collaborative,
appreciative and systemic approach throughout all phases, from assessment to implementation. The
process itself, thereby, closely resembled the organization design that was later implemented.
Keywords
Holographic organization design, appreciative intelligence, organizational development, organizational
change
Introduction
This article1
provides a thorough analysis of the collectively conducted organization redesign of a
rapidly growing European research project management firm. As a result of this change initiative, the
case firm, GABO:mi, implemented a holographic organization design, which helped maintain the necessary information flow amongst all functions and preserved the capability of their teams to self-organize
despite a rapidly growing headcount. Undergoing a second wave of rapid growth, GABO:mi faced
Case
South Asian Journal of
Business and Management Cases
4(1) 2–13
© 2015 Birla Institute of Management Technology
SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
DOI: 10.1177/2277977915574034
http://bmc.sagepub.com
Disclaimer: Erica Jacobi has written this case solely for class discussion of programmes in management education. The author
does not intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of any managerial or administrative situation. The case study
does not represent or endorse the views of the management about the issues in the case. The author may have disguised certain
names and other identifying information to protect confidentiality where needed. The case has been compiled from both primary
and secondary sources of information.
1 President, LC GLOBAL Consulting Inc., New York, USA.
Corresponding author:
Erika Jacobi, President, LC GLOBAL Consulting Inc., 641 Lexington Avenue, 13th floor, New York, NY 10022, USA.
E-mails: jacobi@lc-global.com; ejacobi@email.fielding.edu
Jacobi 3
the challenge of maintaining the existing flexible self-organization and information management
aspects, preserving the organization’s vibrant culture and continuing to meet the high-quality standards
demanded by the organization’s objectives. The change initiative followed an appreciative, systemic and
collaborative approach. The appreciative assessment (Cooperrider, 1990; Thatchenkery, 2005; Watkins,
Mohr & Kelly, 2001) focused on the organization’s key success factors and organizational values.
The underlying objective of this appreciative assessment was to identify factors that were working
extraordinarily well and to not only preserve them but also to enhance them systemically. The selfdescribed vibrant organizational culture supported both collaboration and self-organization. The goal of
the change initiative was to collectively understand the crucial success factors of the organization and
to increase the overall awareness of how best these factors can be utilized in the new organization design.
Data collection included all members as well as all levels of the organization. The constellations for
the interviews varied depending on the project phase. The appreciative interviews were conducted under
the axiom that whatever information was retrieved would be considered important for the planned
organization redesign (Cameron, 2008; Cameron, Dutton & Quinn, 2003; Dutton, 2003; Seligman, 2011;
Thatchenkery, 2005, 2011; Thatchenkery & Metzker, 2006). The collected data were analyzed to increase
the collective awareness of how core organizational success factors could be implemented to ensure
that the parts reflected the whole and vice versa.
The data revealed relatively early on that a holographic organization model (Johannessen & Hauan,
1993; Mapes, 2000; Morgan, 2006) would be the best choice for the case company. The remainder of the
process was used to understand and develop the most effective holographic organization design for
GABO:mi. Ultimately, leveraging the organization’s collective intelligence along with the results from
the appreciative assessment led to the successful implementation of a tailored holographic organization
design. This tailored holographic organization design allowed the case company to double its headcount
in under a year. The vital information flow was maintained if not improved, despite significant growth of
the organization, which had been one of the main goals of the change initiative.
The case described in this article provides a threefold example of showing first that the information
systems can determine the design and structure of an organization (Galbraith & Lawler, 1993). Second,
it shows that collective organizational learning has an immediate effect on the organization’s structure,
culture, information and politics (Travica, 1999). Third, it shows the successful use of an appreciative,
collaborative and systemic approach to develop and implement a new organization design in general and
a holographic organization design in particular.
Holographic Organizations
The notion of looking at organization from an information system perspective is relatively novel
(Travica, 1999). Galbraith (1973) was one of the first researchers to establish a link between organization
design, generation and maintenance of information and the uncertainty level under which organizations function. In relatively stable conditions, hierarchical structures move problems up until the
necessary information for their resolution is found (Travica, 1999). Organizations that typically deal
with high levels of uncertainty and volatility, however, require a higher level of differentiation
(Ashby, 1960; Lawrence & Lorsch, 1967) and a more flexible organization design (e.g., Mintzberg,
1993). Morgan (2006) contends that two notions are essential for the information approach to
organizations: the framework of organizational learning (Argyris & Schön, 1995) and the concept of
self-organization. To demonstrate how information can consistently be gained, managed and leveraged
(Travica, 1999) in an organization, Morgan (2006) introduces the metaphor of the brain epitomizing the
notion of a hologram.
4 South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases 4(1)
Organization Seen as a Brain
The brain has the capability to function fully for its most important purposes even if 90 per cent of it
has been removed (Morgan, 2006). The brain consists of individual cells each of which carry the same
information (Johannessen & Hauan, 1993; Mapes, 2000; Morgan, 2006). Information can be passed
on to a neighbouring cell, which can then replace the information lost by the others. This flexible structure results in the capability to continuously self-organize and allows for survival, even at the cost of
effectiveness.
With its unique structure, which allows for duplication of information, the brain bears a resemblance
to a hologram. Showing a similar connectivity, its parts reflect the whole. The connectivity for both
the brain cells and individual parts of the hologram is abundant, creating a system that continuously
exchanges information exponentially regardless of where this information originates or is controlled.
It is thus both specialized and generalized (Morgan, 2006, p. 95). The holographic principles that
facilitate such self-organization are (1) all parts mirror the whole; (2) connectivity and redundancy;
(3) simultaneous generalization and specialization; and (4) capacity to self-organize (Morgan, 2006,
pp. 97–98). To regulate the required redundancy, Ashby (1960) suggests the principle of requisite
variety, which signifies that the internal diversity of the self-regulating system must match the
variety and complexity of its environment in order to deal with the challenges posed by that specific
environment.
It becomes apparent that if one sees an organization as a brain the organizational structures, management style and decision making processes all of which will have to be adapted. The bureaucratic and
hierarchical mechanisms that work well in a mechanistic worldview and in a hierarchical organization
do not support the delicate balance and freedom for self-organization, creativity and self-motivation of
an organization mirroring a brain. Hierarchy and design for efficiency are replaced with the capability
of an organization to learn collectively.
Cybernetics
The Greeks were amongst the first to adapt the idea of steersmanship, or kubernetics, as an apt mechanism for reacting rapidly and efficiently to unforeseen circumstances. They also applied it to the art of
governing people and to statesmanship. The relatively new field of cybernetics – which combines studies
of information, communication and control – applies many of these Greek concepts, most likely gained
from the experience of steering boats in high seas (Morgan, 2006, p. 84). When we try to manoeuvre
a boat through water, we flexibly adapt to any given circumstance and to any wave that comes along. We
steer and countersteer continuously in order to stay on course and reach our final destination. Similarly,
cybernetics helps organizations learn to learn and thereby possibly evolve beyond Simon’s (1965)
observed pitfall of bounded rationality where organizations strive for workable solutions rather than
sustainable solutions.
Learning can be defined as ‘the detection and correction of error’ (Argyris, 2002, p. 137). Depending
on whether or not the governing values and behaviours are changed while correcting the detected
mistakes, we can further distinguish between double-loop and single-loop learning (Argyris, 2002).
In a holographic organization, both types of learning are needed (Johannessen & Hauan, 1993; Mapes,
2000; Morgan, 2006; Travica, 1999). When an organization is viewed as a brain and is designed for the
information to flow by holographic principles, it automatically has an effect on a range of other organizational factors (Morgan, 2006). The impact is at least fourfold: (a) the need for organization culture to
Jacobi 5
foster accountability, trust, sharing and to allow for role ambiguity; (b) the need for close monitoring of
how information is sought, shared and communicated across boundaries because information flow rules
all decision-making; (c) greater need for special dispersion than structure, formalization and hierarchy;
and finally (d) the need for internal politics to be governed by expert power rather than structural and
hierarchical power (Travica, 1999, p. 28).
In the following, we will see how the case firm cocreated and successfully implemented a holographic, brain-like organization design, and how the collective decision impacted all vital areas of the
organization starting from recruiting via leadership strategies to motivational structures.
The Case
GABO:mi is a highly specialized European research project management consulting firm based in
Munich, Germany. The company emerged in 2005 as a spin-off of the former parent company GABO.
This spin-off had become necessary to stress GABO:mi’s heavy focus on European research project
management and to establish GABO:mi as a new brand. The consulting firm helps research groups apply
for the millions of euros research grants available annually from the European Union (EU). The application process can be challenging due to its heavy regulations. GABO:mi provides all services necessary
during the initial phase, starting from contract negotiations and financial management to orchestrating
all lines of communication as well as the final filing of the application. The consulting firm’s business
model is built on orchestrating the entire research project. From the start, GABO:mi takes the same risks
as the research group and is included in the research process until the project receives its grant funds.
Due to the nature of their business, the organization relies on the capability to quickly on-board highly
specialized project managers who can function as fully engaged ‘all-rounders’. The firm’s project managers need to have a high capability for self-organization, flexible team collaboration and fluid knowledge management. Since these managers work on various projects, it is crucial for them to stay informed
on the details of the highly specialized projects in order to be able to take over from one another at any
given time. As an organization grows, however, the flow of information often becomes more complicated. When GABO:mi started in 2005, there were only a handful of project managers. They soon grew
to a headcount of over thirty full-time staff, project and IT managers. Therefore, in 2012, the two chief
executive officers (CEOs) of GABO:mi deemed it necessary to restructure the organization as a result of
the growing demand in the market. In honour of the collaborative nature of the planned redesign and the
fact that it inherently dealt with learning to grow on more than one level, the initiative was named
‘Growing together’.
Objectives
The overarching goal for the required change process was to help the firm grow in a healthy and sustainable way by redesigning important organizational structures. The main focus lay on establishing a
new leadership level that would help distribute the workload and information flow faster and more
efficiently. Thus far, the management had been the centre of knowledge, quality and project management. With the expected growth, it was clear that the capacity of this workflow design had reached
its limits. A new design was needed to support the entire league of highly qualified research project
managers to guarantee a smooth information flow and to maintain a high-quality standard during
these times of growth and beyond. All initiatives and achievements were to reflect the unique business
6 South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases 4(1)
objectives and organizational climate of the firm. GABO:mi’s business objectives and organizational
climate were considered to be the components that shaped an outstanding organizational culture,
which one could feel while entering the organization, and for which GABO:mi had won awards for three
consecutive years.
Specific agreed-upon goals were to (a) develop an organization design that is capable of fostering
all company objectives effectively and sustainably and that honours the current and future headcount growth; (b) implement effective team and leadership structures that mirror the organizational
climate and culture; (c) nurture a mindset within the team and entire organization that is supportive of the necessary changes and nature of business in the research project management field;
and (d) sustain a healthy growth process as well as the organizational values ‘open, joyful, connected,
engaged, and good’.
Approach
After extensive preliminary conversations with the management we decided on a collective, systemic
and appreciative approach. On a practical level, the reasons were to (a) choose a collective approach
encompassing the participation of all members of the organization in order to match the level of seniority, capability to self-organize and learn collectively which the organization evidentially harboured;
(b) choose an appreciative approach to fully and collectively understand the current success factors,
values and culture of the organization before aiming to change them; and (c) choose a systemic approach
in order to effectively mirror the identified success factors in the rather fluid project teams.
Conceptually, the notion of conducting a cocreative and participatory change process is based on
a postmodern understanding that reality is a social construct in which a common language, identity
and sense-making (Gergen, 2009; Weick, 1969, 1988, 1993, 1995) determine the collective action.
Since reality is a social construct in this perspective, a change of this reality in a collective way can be
conducive to a successful outcome of the change process and can provide new opportunities for
all members. The systemic approach we applied is based on the understanding that an organization
that is seen as a system is composed of interrelated structured components that cooperate with each
other in behavioural processes. As such, problems and opportunities are always parts of the overall
system and mirror it at the same time (Bertalanffy, 1969; Gmür, Bartelt & Kissling, 2010; Meadows,
2008). The appreciative approach applied in this case aimed to leverage the organization’s ability to see
the positive potential unfolding within the present situation and to develop the capacity to act on it in
order to realize its full potential (Cooperrider, 1990; Dutton, 2003; Johnson & Leavitt, 2001; Thatchenkery,
2005, 2011; Thatchenkery & Metzker, 2006; Watkins et al., 2001). Since it was clear from the beginning
that staff and owners wanted to preserve as much as possible from their organizational culture and
existing work process, the focus on learning how to collectively appreciate the best of ‘what is’ was
emphasized throughout the entire process (Cooperrider, 1990; Watkins et al., 2001).
Method
The project was divided into six phases to capture as many nuances as possible of the multi-vocality
(Boje, 1991, 1995) of the organization. Phase 1 started with an appreciative assessment of the provided
collection of written data: the history and prehistory of the organization, the economical details, financial
figures, hiring profiles, objectives, philosophy, goals, demographics, incidents and human resource
Jacobi 7
endeavours were analyzed to identify vital patterns and indispensable success factors of the organization.
In phase 2, we had several 4–6-h-long sessions with the owners who also functioned as the CEOs of
the firm. We discussed their perspectives on success factors, values, life-giving factors, issues, perspectives and limitations. Our sessions consisted of a semi-structured interview procedure that followed an
appreciative and systemic analysis outline. After every session, we prepared a written summary of the
results and reported it to the CEOs. The results were discussed each time until a common understanding
of the vital features was achieved.
Phase 3 consisted of similar semi-structured interviews with staff, project and IT managers grouped
by availability, seniority, frequency of project collaboration and position or field of expertise. The
set questions examined (a) what each group thought to be unique about the organization; (b) what
they appreciated about the system; (c) how they would describe their everyday procedures and ways
of collaboration; (d) which components were perceived as vital to keep the required information and
work flow alive; (e) which factors were challenging to the employees; and (f) what suggestions the
employees had at that point to mitigate these challenges. In addition, in this phase of the project, we
focused on sharing and holding each other to the systemic, collective and appreciative approach—a
procedure that we used to help inform and educate each other on a new way of communicating and
viewing incidents.
Phase 4 consisted of a day-long off-site meeting with the entire organization. We shared the results of
phases 1, 2 and 3. Participants openly communicated their collective concerns, hopes and aspirations.
After briefing the entire organization on what the participants considered the current situation, culture,
values, success factors, risks, and challenges to be, the various groups discussed and agreed upon
important goals. Participants floated in and out of the various groups in a World Café (Brown & Isaacs,
2005) manner. Once again, we shared and agreed upon the results. We closed the session with the
understanding that, for the moment, the management would reserve the right to take the information and
fine-tune the collectively developed solution that they thought would be most suitable. The staff widely
echoed and welcomed this approach.
In phase 5, we developed a solid prototype of the new organization design. We asked all stakeholders
if and how they could see themselves in their new roles. We discussed possible pitfalls and advantages
of the new roles. Images for communicating the selected procedures and design to the entire group were
found and prepared. After a test period of approximately 3 months, the prototype was discussed in detail,
to then be fine-tuned and implemented in phase 6.
Results
The process provided the organization with an abundance of information. For the purpose of this article,
the focus will be on the results regarding the organization design.
Results of Phase 1
The organization design initially presented itself to be confined to two hierarchy levels. In order to
distribute the workload and information flow more in the future, the management contemplated a new
leadership level. Nonetheless, there were considerable concerns about whether the team would accept
another hierarchy level. On the one hand, it was clear that more leadership was needed to develop the
8 South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases 4(1)
many new entrants; on the other hand, the team members were accustomed to self-organization.
The members of the organization often described this as a value clash. In a collaborative effort, we found
that the organization design, as depicted in Figure 1, harboured considerable nuances on a closer look.
We discovered that the organization had previously attempted a mentorship programme that had never
been fully implemented due to the anticipated hierarchy issues. By taking an appreciative look at the
current design, an underlying consistent mentorship idea revealed itself throughout the organization:
each new employee was assigned a mentor, much like how the project managers often functioned as
unofficial mentors to each other. We also found that the strategic CEO functioned as a mentor to the
operational CEO much in the same way. Therefore, we decided to highlight the hidden mentorship structure and officially implement it along with clear guidelines regarding it. The new mentorship orientation
is depicted in Figure 2.
The benefits of the design displayed in Figure 2 were threefold: (a) there would be a much clearer
understanding of the roles of the two CEOs; (b) the mentors in the team would feel more empowered to
function in a fluid leadership role; and (c) the workload and knowledge transfer would automatically
start shifting away from the top management to the individual mentors in their new official roles. But
this was just the first step in the redesign.
Figure 1. Original Organization Design
Source: Author and GABO: mi.
Figure 2. Organization Redesign after Appreciatively Discovering ‘What Is’
Source: Author and GABO: mi.
Jacobi 9
Next, we revisited the cultural values of the organization, which so far had been defined as ‘open,
joyful, connected, engaged and good’. We analyzed these values from the perspective of honouring
what was truly needed and practiced within the organization. We discovered that the overall values
depicted only one side of the required and applied skill set. When we took a closer look, we found that
the organization and its members needed a skill and value set that had to be twofold. In daily practice,
the required skill set varied depending on the actual phase of the projects. Therefore, the two sets of
cultural values were crystallized as follows:
1. For the mostly virtual, international project work: openness, diversity, internationality,
virtuality, mobility, flexibility, social language and communication skills and independent and
autonomous ability to self-organize and connect to a team and to the customer.
2. For compliance with the EU fund application guidelines and further research related work:
precision, absolute love for detail, compliance with authority and guidelines, ‘working by the
book’, detailed know-how and expert language and communication skills.
Appreciating the variety and differences in the organizational culture led us to understand that both
skill sets were needed as a basis for the organization’s talent development, hiring and promotion strategies. A wide discrepancy between the required skill sets and values became evident as did the need for
stressing the relevance of both sets of values in order to maintain a high level of quality in future.
Results of Phase 2
During phase 2, an overwhelming majority of the participants confirmed the organizational culture to be
‘joyful, open, connected, engaged, and good’. Every group noted that the organizational culture inspired
every member to strive towards achieving the best possible results. The members of the organization
perceived this as the main source of a deep connectedness to the organization, which continuously
fuelled a vibrant organizational climate. However, the participants pointed out that the required learning
curve from project to project was steep and the new project managers in the organization felt that they
needed more support. All participants of the inquiry voiced a deep concern regarding the heavy workload
the operational CEO functioned under. While the top of the organization had been worried that the
very senior staff and project managers would be unhappy over another layer of leadership, more than
80 per cent of the team requested an additional leadership level during this phase. The two-level hierarchy was collectively perceived as a bottleneck to the required information flow. While all members of
the organization stated that they felt extraordinarily connected to the organization, projects and to one
another, the new-entry project managers reported that they could see numerous ways of reducing the
anxiety and uncertainty level during the on-boarding phase.
Additionally, the members of the organization detailed the precise course for their projects. The entire
group recognized how much the external project set-up resembled the overall needed internal project
set-up. They later used their codiscovered project outline as the basis for the future organization design
that mirrored all cells of the existing system.
Results of Phases 3–6
The new organization design was prototyped as a result of the off-site meeting. The strategic CEO would
take an official advisory role as a mentor to the operational CEO. The operational CEO would function
10 South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases 4(1)
as the head quality auditor to mentor another senior project manager in the same role. Four senior
members of the team were appointed to function as overall mentors and information flow controllers on
each floor of the GABO:mi building. To ensure a leadership model that mirrored the self-regulating and
non-hierarchical organizational culture and values, the information flow controllers were compared with
air traffic controllers. Their task was to ensure the information flow and to keep the two quality auditors
as well as all floor members informed at all times—to ensure the safe ‘take off’ and ‘landing’ of every
project without obtaining any disciplinary leadership functions. The information flow controllers were
to self-coordinate amongst each other, carrying the collected information from floor to floor. Additionally,
they would help coordinate the regular mentorship process, which was as fluid as ever and achieved in a
self-regulatory way. The overall mentors and information traffic controllers would be fully involved in a
reduced number of projects to honour the fluidity of their roles. The other project managers would function as mentors to the less senior project managers or to each other as needed and as self-assigned. We
paid special attention to the mentorship of the amended situational company values, which were compared to the right and left side of the brain; one set of values was needed for the project management
aspect of the job and another set of values for the work that ensures compliance with the rules and regulations of the EU. The new-entry project managers were to be integrated soon into the mentoring process
as the group believed that the best learning for both the individual and the collective could come only
through helping each other. To bridge the time for them to become mentors, they were consistently
encouraged to introduce new ideas for the on-boarding system.
All members in the new or modified roles, such as the top management and the information traffic
controllers, were given the chance to develop into their new roles through a coaching process. The
rest of the team organized their own learning and development plans as they had done in the past.
Recruiting and on-boarding processes were changed to include the amended values and required
skill sets. New-entry employees started working on a booklet that would introduce the entire process to
future employees and took responsibility for being their mentors. The organization chart was amended
to the version shown in Figure 3. The levels in this graph do not indicate hierarchies; they are only to
mirror the floors the people happen to work on. The mentorship roles change fluidly, which is indicated
by the arrows.
Figure 3. Holographic Organization Design for GABO:mi – First Model
Source: Author and GABO: mi.
Notes: X = project manager, x = rotating mentor; curved arrows = constant role shift between project managers and mentors
and fluid information flow, C = information flow controllers, QM = Quality Management.
Jacobi 11
Management and employees alike considered the principal achievements in this change initiative
to be that its results were so widely accepted by all employees and that it provided the opportunity
for the organization to grow further in the future. Additional benefits were seen in the broadened
capability of learning to learn as a collective, keeping the information flow alive and creating the right
balance between connectivity and redundancy as well as self-organization and mentoring. The
organization and its members have continued to function successfully in a highly specialized as well as
in a general way, a capability which was highlighted through the implementation of the holographic,
brain-like organization design. Since then, GABO:mi has doubled in size and kept the same quality
standards, economic success and most of all the same organizational climate and overall values ‘open,
joyful, connected engaged, and good’.
Conclusion
This analysis of a European research project management firm in a niche segment outlines how an
organization can be seen and function holographically like a brain. The implemented organization design
displayed the five characteristics of a holographic organization: (a) all parts are reflected in the whole;
(b) the organization self-organizes; (c) the organization creates connectivity and redundancy; (d) it finds
ways to learn as a whole; and (e) the organization displays a requisite variety (Ashby, 1960) to fully
mirror all required demands of the environment it functions in. The appreciative, systemic and collaborative change initiative leveraged to design and implement this holographic organization model
crystallized what was already working well and identified how these unique success factors could be
reflected in all parts of the organization.
Implementation of the streamlined and tailored holographic organization design had a wide-ranging
impact on other areas of the organization as well. Two sets of newly highlighted organizational values,
depicted as the two sides of the brain, became part of the new on-boarding and mentoring programme.
The leadership culture and team culture and the existing initiatives were adapted accordingly to help the
organization learn as a collective. The newly implemented system allowed GABO:mi to maintain its
typical work style of flexible team self-organization and constant vital information flow while building
a sustainable platform for the organization’s growth.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to express sincere thanks to GABO:mi Gesellschaft für Ablauforganisation : milliarium mbH
& Co. KG for providing the support to develop this case and the permission to present this case under the title of
‘Growing Together’: A Case in Point for an Appreciative, Systemic and Cooperative Organization Redesign’ at the
International Conference on Management Cases 2014 and publish in the conference proceedings and journals.
Note
1. The case study is a revised and updated version of the case study ‘Growing Together: A Case in Point for an
Appreciative, Systemic and Cooperative Organization Redesign’ presented and discussed at the International
Conference on Management Cases (ICMC) held on December 4th and 5th of 2014 at Birla Institute of
Management Technology, Greater Noida (India). There are no changes in the context and analysis. The case was
compiled from primary sources with support from GABO:mi Gesellschaft für Ablauforganisation : milliarium
mbH & Co. KG.
12 South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases 4(1)
References
Argyris, C. (2002). Double-loop learning, teaching, and research. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
1(2), 206–220.
Argyris, C. & Schön, D. (1995). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective, 1978. Massachusetts:
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Ashby, W.R. (1960). An introduction to cybernetics. London: Chapman & Hall.
Bertalanffy, L.V. (1969). General system theory. New York, NY: George Braziller.
Boje, D.M. (1991). The storytelling organization: A study of story performance in an office-supply firm.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(1), 106–126. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/617956
659?accountid=10868
———. (1995). Stories of the storytelling organization: A postmodern analysis of Disney as ‘Tamara-Land’. The Academy
of Management Journal, 38(4), 997–1035. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/199832995?
accountid=10868
Brown, J. & Isaacs, D. (2005). The world café: Shaping our futures through conversations that matter. San Francisco,
CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Cameron, K.S. (2008). A process for changing organizational culture. In Thomas G. Cummings (Ed.), Handbook
of organizational development (pp. 429–445). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Cameron, K.S., Dutton, J. & Quinn, R.E. (Eds) (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new
discipline. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Cooperrider, D.L. (1990). Positive image, positive action: The affirmative basis of organizing. In S. Srivastva &
D. Cooperrider (Eds), Appreciative management and leadership (pp. 91–125). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Dutton, J.E. (2003). Energize your workplace: How to build and sustain high-quality connections at work.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Galbraith, J.R. (1973). Designing complex organizations. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing.
Galbraith, J.R. & Lawler, E.E. (1993). Organizing for the future: The new logic for managing complex organizations
(pp. 373–380). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gergen, K.J. (2009). An invitation to social construction. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Gmür, B., Bartelt, A. & Kissling, R. (2010). Organization from a systemic perspective. Kybernetes, 39(9), 1627–1644.
Johannessen, J.A. & Hauan, A. (1993). Linking network organization to holographic design: Future industrial
organization. Kybernetes, 22(4), 6–23.
Johnson, G. & Leavitt, W. (2001). Building on success: Transforming organizations through an appreciative
inquiry. Public Personnel Management, 30(1), 129–136.
Lawrence, P.R. & Lorsch, J.W. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration.
Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Mapes, J.J. (2000). Holographic teams. Executive Excellence, 17(3), 17. http://search.proquest.com/docview/2045
97464?accountid=10868
Meadows, D.H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. White River, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.
Mintzberg, H. (1993). Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,
Inc.
Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Seligman, M.E. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York, NY:
Free Press.
Simon, H.A. (1965). Administrative behavior (Vol. 4). New York: Free Press.
Thatchenkery, T.J. (2005). Appreciative sharing of knowledge: Leveraging knowledge management for strategic
change. Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Publishing.
Thatchenkery, T.J. (2011). Appreciative intelligence for transformative conversations. In G.D. Sardana &
T.J. Thatchenkery (Eds.), Positive initiatives for organizational change and transformation (pp. 63–77).
New Delhi: Macmillan.
Jacobi 13
Thatchenkery, T.J. & Metzker, C. (2006). Appreciative intelligence: Seeing the mighty oak in the acorn. San Francisco,
CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Travica, B. (1999). New organizational designs: Information aspects. Stamford, CN: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Watkins, J.M., Mohr, B.J. & Kelly, R. (2001). Appreciative inquiry: Change at the speed of imagination.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Weick, K.E. (1969). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
———. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies, 25(4), 305–317.
———. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 38(4), 628–652. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/203920836?accountid=10868
———. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: SAGE Publications.

Get professional assignment help cheaply

Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? Are you scared that your paper will not make the grade? Do you have responsibilities that may hinder you from turning in your assignment on time? Are you tired and can barely handle your assignment? Are your grades inconsistent?

Whichever your reason may is, it is valid! You can get professional academic help from our service at affordable rates. We have a team of professional academic writers who can handle all your assignments.

Our essay writers are graduates with diplomas, bachelor, masters, Ph.D., and doctorate degrees in various subjects. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college diploma. When assigning your order, we match the paper subject with the area of specialization of the writer.

Why choose our academic writing service?

• Plagiarism free papers
• Timely delivery
• Any deadline
• Skilled, Experienced Native English Writers
• Subject-relevant academic writer
• Adherence to paper instructions
• Ability to tackle bulk assignments
• Reasonable prices
• 24/7 Customer Support
• Get superb grades consistently

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH GRADE VALLEY TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT