This is the published version Creed, Andrew 2011, The smart face of organizations : should emotion play a role?, in The new faces of organizations in the 21st century : volume 1, NAISIT Publishers, Toronto, Canada, pp.32-49. Available from Deakin Research Online http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30036086 Reproduced with the kind permission of the copyright owner Copyright: 2011, North American Institute of Science and Information Technology (NAISIT)

CHAPTER 2

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOULD EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

Andrew Creed

Deakin University, Australia

ABSTRACT

This chapter acknowledges the development and relevance of smart organizations but questions whether emotional intelligence has been adequately factored into the strategies that are being implemented. Contemporary information technology can allow for better reading of the emotional cues but it is rarely being used to full capacity for this purpose in smart organizations. IQ has tended to outweigh EQ in the smart organization. Two key recommendations are made about how to effectively build the two identified aspects of smartness into daily strategic activity. Being prepared to learn, and being willing and able to build relationships in the organizational network are the tools of trade for a knowledge leader in a properly smart organization.

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOULD EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

INTRODUCTION

The landscape of modern organizations has been revolutionized by many forces in

the macro environment from history and politics to religion and science. It is, perhaps,

through the applied arm of science in the shape of technological tools that the most

profound transformations have taken place. The industrial revolution that harnessed

the energy of fire and metal and merged this with scientific knowledge spawned tools

of such productive power that new markets were created and the factors of production,

including the labor force, were and are increasingly stretched.

A new revolution in information technology has grown from the post-industrial

milieu. Processing power and inter-networked communication and data storage

capacity has grossly expanded on a global scale and begun to reformulate the structural

boundaries of organizations along the way. Organizational strategy has been severely

tested as issues with data security, intellectual property and strategic competitive

advantage have emerged from the inexorable digitization of information. The nature

of work itself for the people involved has also drastically shifted. New organizational

forms have emerged in the global organizational network, some of which call themselves

smart organizations. This may be a positive development but critical thinking about

this emergence may also be warranted. One of the central issues is to explore the nature

of smartness or intelligence and we wonder whether emotion plays any part in this

schema? To this end, the chapter addresses five main questions

1. What are the key concepts of this face?

2. Why are smart face of organizations important in the 2l5t century?

3. What are the critical success factors of smart face of organizations?

4. What steps are required to create a smart face of organization?

5. What is the future of smart face of organizations?

The chapter objective is to answer these five questions and provide managers of

modern organizations a way forward in this increasingly complex but promising

landscape.

KEY CONCEPTS OF THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS

The late Twentieth Century saw the consolidation of computer technology

in organizational processes from the smallest enterprises through to the largest

33

THE NEW FACES OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE 2l51 CENTURY

bureaucracies (Jensen, 2010). In the open democracies of the world, industrial and

post industrial development continued to intensify competition, engage outsourcing

opportunities, and build service-based enterprises, all of which demanded enhanced

intelligence systems so that strategic options could be fully considered (Prusak, 2001).

In addition, the less open economies were able to embed new technology into their

organizations and the inexorable march toward inter-networked communication and

data management systems continued with increasing alignment on a global scale

(Bienefeld, 1988; Pickles, 2010; Ferretti & Parmentola, 2010).

The Twenty First Century has forged ahead with huge and growing databases

contributing to a thriving field of knowledge management applications. Increasingly

responsive and mobile communication systems interface today with database driven

knowledge creation opportunities at a faster rate than ever before (Berman, Christner

& Bell, 2010; Brook & Plugge, 2010). Organizations are no longer faced with a lack

of strategic information; the problems are more commonly related to information

overload and the need to manipulate copious data in such ways to generate useful

strategic knowledge. A related issue is information security when technology is now so

integrated and communication between digital devices so easy that organizations can

lose proprietary data too efficiently (Bhattacharyya, 2010). This unique data situation

is analogous with the concept of a brain and the idea of being smart or intelligent, as

in knowing how and when to develop ideas and make key decisions. Managers have

begun to use the terms 'smart organization' or 'smart company' to indicate an ideal set

of structures, strategies and processes that should be in place in the inter-connected and

information-rich global environment (Zhong, Hole & Radin, 2010).

Intelligence underpins the concept of the smart organization. Intelligence is a

complex phenomenon composed of discrete elements such as data, responsiveness and

context, but also continuous processes such as evaluation, adjustment and improvement

(Luhn, 1958; Sternberg & Detterman, 1986). People and systems need to align for

the full expression of all the elements and processes that feed the intelligence that

characterizes smart organizations. This chapter expands upon the history and features

of smart organizations. In addition, a perspective is presented about different kinds of

intelligence, especially emotional intelligence, which have been overlooked in recent

experiences and literature emerging in this field.

COMPONENTS AND FUNCTIONS

What is the most important function of a smart organization? Commentary varies

34

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOUU) EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

from a focus on decision-making intelligence (Matheson & Matheson, 1998; Davenport,

2009) to a reliance on information and communications technology (Mezgar, 2006),

or a preoccupation with strategic competitive advantage (Raden & Taylor, 2007). This

chapter supports this range of functions and proposes another in the expression of

emotional sensitivity, especially in the context of the significant individual and social

impact an organization has while operating. Recent research has had a focus upon the

technical components of a smart organization, such as;

• Data, information and wisdom

• Secure data storage facilities

• Appropriate data processing equipment

• Fast and functional internal and external communications network

• Competent people to operate the systems

• Appropriate procedures and policies

• Systematic feedback and evaluation mechanisms

• Culture of learning

• Internal and external responsiveness to new and changing situations

• Ability at all levels to interpret and understand the meanings of collected data

Smart organization research tends to focus upon the capturing, processing and

storing of data; thus accentuating technological applications; or else the strategic and

policy implications of centralizing the management of knowledge, and restructuring

the organization to make the strategic most of new knowledge. Some literature touches

upon the kind of organizational culture that is required to ensure competitive advantage

is maintained by clever use of information. As a result, industry examples of smart

organizations are often in the information technology sector (such as, Google, Intel and

Microsoft) or the research and development sector (such as, AT&T Bell Laboratories,

DuPont Central R&D, and 3M). In most cases, relatively light treatment is given to the

people management components other than to suggest smart people are needed to make

up a smart organization. This appears to parallel the situation in the early 1900's after

the spread of scientific management and production line techniques across the world.

The success of mass production through scientific management was a technologically

·driven phenomenon and, despite having some positive human impact through the

better organization of work processes and environment, there were persistent questions

about the repetitive nature of production line work and an overemphasis on the non­

human production factors.

35

THE NEW FACES OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE 2J5T CENTURY

The human relations movement emerged partly in response to critique regarding the

perceived coldness of scientific management (Follett, 1918; McGregor, 1960; Drucker,

1977). This chapter considers whether history is repeating itself in the guise of the

modern smart organization. Has information technology become too imposing on our

work in the same way that production line technology once did? Have the emotional

needs of human beings been inadvertently overlooked? To this end, we undertake a

closer examination of intelligence and learning in the organizational context so that a

fuller picture can emerge for further research.

LEARNING AND THE NEURAL NETWORK

One facet that distinguishes a smart organization from other kinds is the positioning

of learning, training and development at the core of organization-wide strategy rather

than as a set of programs managed only by the human resources department (Deiser,

2009). In this context, there are many components of an organization that should become

part of the biology of smartness. Deiser (2009) sees five levels of learning (standard,

customized, organization design, business design, and industry design) delineating

three core foci (people, organization and strategy). Such a broad perspective ensures

that the components of a smart organization should start at strategic and design levels

and filter all the way through to people and systems on the ground.

Learning is central to creating and maintaining the smart organization. Defining

learning is, of course, necessary but also quite elusive. Learning can be said to occur

where there is a relatively permanent change to behavior as a result of feedback obtained

from experience. The continuous nature of this definition needs to be acknowledged.

For instance, the experience one is currently having can be called learning, but one's

response immediately after the experience also falls within the definition. Learning is at

once an event but also a process. The constant feeding back of information as the result

of experience to generate new experiences as a result of responses is very dynamic. This

is why the metaphor of the organization as a brain or neural network (Bailey, 2007;

Morgan, 2008; Mukherjee, 2009; Jacobs, 2010) emerges in the literature as a relevant

point of reference. The brain is a constantly networked, constantly working mechanism.

Collecting, processing and transmitting data dynamically produce neural impulses that

emanate to all sections of the body and also require simultaneous feedback. This is

the phenomenon by which we come to know people or organizations as 'smart.' A

responsive person capable of learning and readily adapting is known to be brainy or

36

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOUJ"D EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

smart. Likewise, an organization replete with technology and people interacting with

dynamism and timeliness can simulate this type of smart.

One element of the brain metaphor is the emergent nature of thoughts. Entire systems

of neurons in a brain must fire simultaneously for any particular thought to form. There

are innumerable varieties of neural network alignments to correlate with the endless

types of thoughts, decisions and actions that the human brain can express (Harmon­

J ones & Winkielman, 2008; Schut, 2010). Organizations exhibit similar kinds of activity

pulsations for every different kind of decision and action. For instance, the staff and

managers involved in developing a new marketing initiative need to act in concert and

clear communication for the initiative to be successful. In the same organization for a

different kind of decision; for example, tightening an expenses budget; a different set of

people, departments and procedures has to fire up to carry out the decision successfully.

There may well be individuals who act as hubs in the networks of connections in

both of the examples, but mostly whole different sets of people and connections are

seen to coordinate around the objectives. If a time lapse CT scan could be taken of

organizational activity the brightly colored maps would show markedly different

patterns in different regions of the organization as different activities are conceived,

developed and implemented.

Some brain research highlights the adaptive nature of neural networks (Haber &

Rauch, 2010; Hameroff, 2010). Even when significant damage is inflicted, the brain has

an ability to divert pathways and reconnect neurons in order to continue functioning

around various tasks (Anderson, 2010). In people and organizations, such an ability to

adapt is essentially a type of learning. When an old way of doing something is lost or

redundant, we are able to find new ways. In a similar fashion, the core of innovation in

organizations is essentially a process of learning. Smart organizations can be portrayed

as brain-like in the way they adapt and learn and ultimately succeed by quickly

developing strategies appropriate to the changing situations in which they operate. The

question remains, however, about what role emotion should play if smartness is only

about learning and adapting? The answer starts to appear with closer scrutiny of the

concept of intelligence.

THE IQ/EQ DIFFERENCE: DOES THE HEAD NEED A HEART?

While defining learning has its own challenge, coming to agreement about the nature

37

THE NEW FACES OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE 2l51 CENTURY

of intelligence is equally difficult. People are known to express intelligence in all kinds

of ways. Sometimes people can be called very smart on all kinds of measures. At other

times, a person might express intelligence only in a very specific field and appear quite

inept in some other discipline.

The measurement of intelligence quotients (IQ) emerged in the field of psychology

during the Twentieth Century and a debate promptly ensued about the application of

such metrics. The reduction of intelligence to a single number, for some, misrepresents

the diverse nature of true intelligence (Rushton & Jensen, 2010; Lynn, 2010). Others

maintain the IQ measure is at least an indicator of potential or capability, even if current

knowledge in a field is not fully developed (Resnick, 1979). The fact remains that

intelligence has become popularly associated with a particular mental acuity in regard

to memory and speed of recall of facts. For instance, successful engineers, computer

programmers and mathematicians are commonly associated with the concept of

intelligence. People who work in the fields of humanities and social sciences may not

be as readily compared with the intelligent types prominent in the more 'pure' sciences.

However, few can argue that particular nurses, artists, marketers, politicians, and a

variety of other examples, do not express a kind of intelligence.

In recent times, efforts have been made to highlight a different kind of intelligence; one

more closely aligned to care, compassion and the emotional side of human experience.

The argument is that emotions do, in fact, play an important role in the workplace

(Donaldson-Feilder & Bond, 2004; Goleman, 2006; Abrahams, 2007). Good leadership,

good teamwork and good negotiation all rely on a highly refined sense of how people

around us are feeling and responding to the things we do and say. Since so much about

organizational strategy and activity depends upon people and relationships, a high

emotional quotient (EQ) is increasingly crucial if one is going to be a competent manager

(Chemiss, 2010). There are echoes of Follet (1918) and the prime exponents of behaviorism

in this sentiment (McGregor, 1960; Maslow, 1954; Herzberg, 1959; McClelland, 1955).

The smart organization may be here to stay, but it may be time to reconsider what place

machines versus people play in generating the modern version of smartness.

BENEFITS AND IMPORTANCE OF THIS FACE

There is an undeniable need for objective data and a clear, direct information

processing system so that strategic knowledge can be extracted and utilized by

38

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOULD EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

organizations. To be smart is to have the information and the ability to succeed in a

competitive environment. While we are proposing that traditional ideas of intelligence

should be tempered with recognition of the cooperative and emotional aspect of human

relations, the organizational imperative is still about gaining and retaining a competitive

strategy. This section considers how a wider scoping, equitably effective knowledge

management system can enhance competitiveness.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

Knowledge and information management are key aspects of smart organizations

(Polanyi, 1966; Nonaka, 2007). Competitive advantage in contemporary business

environments depends upon the efficient functioning of the neural network (the

integrated IQ) of the organization (Matheson & Matheson, 1998; Porter, 2008). When

data and knowledge are developing in a healthy and constant interchange, we have

the basis of the learning organization (Senge, 1993). Constantly referring to double

feedback loops enables continual adaptation and maintenance as well as creation of

new competitive advantages. The management of knowledge in this way is a crucial

organizational characteristic.

It is also useful to recognize the body of knowledge associated with emotions and

relationships in the organizational environment? I tis widely recognized that the political

aspects of work are significant (Drory & Vigoda-Gadotb, 2010; Marques, 2010; Gotsis

& Kortezi, 2010). Few managers would deny that getting along with the right people

is necessary to ensuring key strategic tasks are accomplished. Further, the people who

tend to have the longer and more sustainable careers in organizations are more often

cognizant of the needs of others. The needs of others can certainly be (and often are)

manipulated in Machiavellian ways, but collaboration and consensus approaches also

function well to deliver value and mutual benefit (Takeishi & Numagami, 2010). The

skilful exercise of politics depends much upon awareness of others and sensitivity

to the thoughts and feelings of everyone involved negotiations. Effective knowledge

management, therefore, should deal with both hard and soft data about influences,

pystems and people.

RESPONSES TO INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL FORCES

Strategic factors in the internal and external environment of smart organizations

39

THE NEW FACES OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE 2l5T CENTURY

are important monitoring points in knowledge management. In a smart (high IQ)

organization, instantaneous environmental scanning is at the heart of strategy. There is

an enhanced role for analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (Sheate

& Partidario, 2010). The opportunities and threats are obvious targets for surveillance

with advanced data collection and knowledge management tools; however, strengths

and weaknesses are also readily exposed when targeted and timely monitoring and

feedback are obtained at key points in organizational processes.

CONTINUOUS FEEDBACK LOOPS IN THE INFORMATION NETWORK

There appears to be a central role for feedback in learning, however, some alternate

views exist (Jacobs, 2010). The manager of a smart organization at least needs

to understand the nature of feedback and the role it can play in the formation and

evaluation of strategy. As well as a tool for objectively monitoring factual intelligence,

feedback is a central mechanism in the more subjective realm of emotional intelligence.

The information network can sometimes be portrayed as objective and devoid of

emotion when, in fact, it is embedded within and contributes to a full range of emotional

experiences (Ark & Selker, 1999). The manager who can use feedback of emotional cues

to facilitate a more empathetic human relationship with staff is in a stronger position,

especially when guiding people through the constant change that is imposed by the

feedback loops.

CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS

There is a set of factors that managers in a smart organization can survey to ensure

a better balance of knowledge and emotion in the implementation and adjustment of

strategy. Getting the emphasis right in relation to systems and processes, as well as

people and relationships, is the key.

PEOPLE AND RELATIONSHIPS

People play a crucial role even in smart organizations where technology can

predominate. Organizational strategy cannot be enacted without the goodwill and

competence of key people. Organizational structure is also dependent upon people. The

very basis of an organizational chart is the positions that people occupy. The people of

an organization fulfill the essential facilitative and relational roles that are crucial for the

40

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOULD EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

proper functioning of smart organizations and the realization of organizational strategy.

TECHNOLOGY: SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES

Despite recognizing the importance of people, it must also be noted that the

intellectual consistency and memory functions of modern information technology and

systems are in many ways surpassing those of the merely human. There are numerous

organizational functions carried out today that could not be done without the superior

capabilities of IT. Robots also carry out physical functions that one person or even a large

group of people could not. There is a dual force field that makes modern organizations

successful: advanced technological tools combined with thoughtful and humane

processes; or, the head and the heart that must work together.

Figure 1. Does the head need a heart?

Systems and Processes

People and Relationships

(Source: Author)

Figure 1 portrays a dynamic within which rests the potential for imbalance. An over

reliance on computed information for decision making leaves the organization open to

fundamental errors of data input. Likewise, too much focus on appeasing people in the

processes can leave the important efficiency aspect of systems languishing. Keeping the

balance is important in order for the organization to maximize the benefits of intelligence

(Becker-Asano & Wachsmuth, 2010).

41

THE NEW FACES OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE 2JST CENTURY

REQUIRED STEPS TO CREATE THIS FACE

Now we can arrive at pragmatic recommendations for the smart organization in

order to guide managers on the integration of intelligence and emotion. Interfacing

people with information technology does not remove the need for people to still connect

with people. While there is significant flux in the field, there are signals and anchors

by which managers can generate appropriate activity. The literature and examples of

smart organizations suggest that managers and staff need to express a fundamental

preparedness to learn, along with an implicit and thorough knowledge of the neural

network metaphor and ways of building relationships with people in that context.

PREPAREDNESS TO LEARN

The source of a sustainable competitive advantage is a thorough understanding of

the strategic situation and an ability to adapt as required by environmental changes. To

be truly intelligent, an organization and its key people need to have a propensity for

continuous learning. The concept of the learning organization (Senge, 1993) draws upon

the action learning and continuous improvement literature to explain how learning is

fundamental to becoming a smart organization (Pedler, 2008). Emotional learning is

equally as dependent on cyclical feedback loops as any intellectual Endeavour. Indeed,

it might be argued that the sensitivity of our emotional sides is primarily a result of

magnified awareness of environmental feedback. It is from our sensitivity to incoming

data, and the development of internalized feelings as a reaction, that individuals learn

to express what we commonly call emotion. Strategic thinking and emotive behaviors

are both predetermined by processes of learning. A preparedness to understand and

embrace learning equates to a conscious choice to continuously improve; sometimes in

rapid, emotive ways, sometimes in slower objective ways; which, when combined in the

right situation, is a hybrid but highly intelligent disposition.

BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS IN THE NETWORK

Organizations are essentially networks of people, processes and technologies coming

together around a strategy and evolving through structural alignments. In a time

when information and communication technology enables many kinds of articulations

within networks, and transportation technology makes the space between people

and places less of a barrier, network theory is experiencing a boom (Mukherjee, 2009;

Sawhney & Nambisan, 2010; Miles, Snow, Fjeldstadt, Miles & Lettl, 2010). There are

42

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOULD EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

sociological aspects of learning and managing in an organization that is networked. The

relationships in a network are strongly affected by ethical factors. As a result relational

perspectives become more important and emotional sensitivity ensures a greater

emphasis on diversity management. In a hyper-connected global environment, all of

these relationship variables come to the fore (Creed, Zutshi & Ross, 2009).

CHALLENGES AND FUTURE OF THIS FACE

With the ideal smart organization in mind, a question remains about the constantly

changing landscape of organizational development. What is the future of work and

organizations? Will intelligence and emotion always be important? This section reviews

emerging concepts and links them to the smart organization as we currently understand it.

NETWORKED ENVIRONMENTS: THE EDGE OF CHAOS

Organizations currently operate within an intensified global environment

interconnected simultaneously with myriad other organizations. Blurred corporate and

national boundaries have contributed to challenges with data processing and information

security. The evolving development of network and systems theory perspectives is

changing our understanding of the best ways of managing in complex times (Atwater,

Kannan, & Stephens, 2008). The metaphor of the neural network brings with it the

emergent, almost chaotic pulsations of neural energy. There is a beautiful synergy about

the simultaneous flaring of different segments of a network of connections, but there is

also a strong hint of danger - or a release of energy that may accidentally break open a

once stable system. This dynamism requires information systems to be making the most

of the exponential increases in processing power that have occurred in recent decades.

Multi-perspective data inputs, fuzzy logic applications, and more frequent cycles of

feedback evaluation have each become cheaper and more easily implemented. Perhaps,

the only significant barrier rests in the decisions of managers regarding implementation

of appropriate information systems. The human factor within smart organizations is

composed of feelings as well as ideas. Ensuring that the heads and the hearts of staff are

equally engaged is a challenge that has been before and that now calls again.

A PLACE FOR EMOTION: FINDING BALANCE OF HEART AND MIND

It is possible, until this time the technology of smartness has unintentionally

43 '

THE NEW FACES OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE 2JST CENTURY

overshadowed the feelings that people have always had about their work and their

relationships with others. In the same way that scientific management in the last century

needed invigoration from the behaviorists to remind about the feelings of people at

work, information technology and smart organization concepts may now be ready for

adjustment to also give people's feelings a better position. Two key recommendations

have been made about how to effectively manage from this review of the literature

and phenomena of smart organizations. Being prepared to learn, and being willing

and able to build relationships in the organizational network are the tools of trade for

a knowledge leader in a smart organization. If organizational leaders and staff can

now recall how to monitor and respond appropriately to emotional as well as objective

data cues then a semblance of balance can be restored. IQ remains important because

competitive strategy must always be front of mind, but EQ has a flavor to add even to

strategy. Even in the implementation of strategy, a constant monitoring and reflection

upon feedback, including emotional data, can make overall strategy and leadership

more responsive and successful.

Future developments in this field may involve case studies and action research projects

designed to explore more richly the emerging concepts. Due to the flux and transformation

that derives from rapid teclmological and strategic change, it is from practical and lived

experience that the future managers of smart organizations are likely to draw their greatest

continuous learning and demonstrate best practice for ongoing research.

CONCLUSION

Smart organizations are replete with technology and people interacting with

dynamism and timeliness. Smart organizations are important because industrial and

post industrial development continues to intensify competition, engage outsourcing

opportunities, and build service-based enterprises, all of which demand enhanced

intelligence systems in order to generate competitive advantage. The critical success

factors of smart organizations are to get the emphasis right in relation to technological

systems and processes, and also people and relationships. The steps for creating a

smart organization involve managers and staff developing a preparedness to learn, and

engaging with ways of building relationships with people in the neural network. The

future of smart organizations is one that makes the most of exponential increases in

processing power but also ensures appropriate measures and responses to emotional

cues in the daily operations.

44

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOULD EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Thought leadership in the early stages of this book chapter was shared with Dr

Ambika Zutshi, a good colleague with a smart mind, and a heart, who would not accept

contributing author notation but who deserves credit for helping to establish the theme

and focus.

REFERENCES

Abrahams, D. (2007). Emotional intelligence and army leadership: Give it to me straight! Military Review, 87 (2), 86-93.

Anderson, M. (2010). Neural reuse: A fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33 (1), 245-266.

Ark, W. & Selker, T. (1999). A look at human interaction with pervasive computers. IBM Systems Journal, 38 (4), 504 - 507.

Atwater, J., Kannan, V. & Stephens, A. (2008). Cultivating systematic thinking in the next generation of business leaders. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 7 (1), 9-25.

Bailey, C. (2007). Cognitive accuracy and intelligent executive function in the brain and in business. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1118 (1), 122-141.

Becker-Asano, C. & Wachsmuth, I. (2010). Affective computing with primary and secondary emotions in a virtual human. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Systems, 2010 (20), 32-49.

Berman, S., Christner, R. & Bell, R. (2010). Actions to implement three potent post­crisis strategies. Strategy & Leadership, 38 (5), 26-32.

Bhattacharyya, A. (2010). Information resource management: The organizations' need for a secure approach. SRELS Journal of Information Management, 47 (3), 1-10.

Bienefeld, M. (1988). The significance of the newly industrializing countries for the development debate. Studies in Political Economy, 25 (1), 7-39.

Brook & Plugge. (2010). Strategic sourcing of R&D: The determinants of success. Global Sourcing, 55 (1), 26-42.

Cherniss, C. (2010). Emotional Intelligence: Toward Clarification of a Concept. dustrial and Organizational Psychology, 3 (2), 110-126.

45

THE NEW FACES OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE 21 ST CENTURY

Creed, A., Zutshi, A. & Ross, J. (2009). Relational ethics in global commerce. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 7(1), 35-49.

Davenport, T. (2009). Make better decisions. Harvard Business Review, 2009 (11), 117-123.

Deiser, R. (2009). Designing the smart organization: How breakthrough corporate learning initiatives drive strategic change and innovation. Mobipocket Edition. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Donaldson-Feilder, E. and Bond, F. (2004). The relative importance of psychological acceptance and emotional intelligence to workplace well-being. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling, 32 (2), 187-203.

Drory, A. & Vigoda-Gadotb, E. (2010). Organizational politics and human resource management: A typology and the Israeli experience. Human Resource Management Review, 20 (3), 194-202.

Drucker, P. F. (1977). People and performance: The best of Peter Drucker on management. New York: Harper's College Press.

Ferretti, M. & Parmentola, A. (2010). FDI knowledge spillovers and host government policies: the Iranian experience. European Business Review, 22 (2), 175-194.

Follett, M. P. (1918). The new State - Group organization: The solution for popular government. New York: Longman, Green and Company.

Goleman, D. (2006). The socially intelligent leader. Educational Leadership, 64 (1), 76-81.

Gotsis, G. & Kortezi, Z. (2010). Ethical considerations in organizational politics: Expanding the perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 93 (1), 497-517.

Haber, S. & Rauch, S. (2010). Neurocircuitry: A window into the networks underlying neuropsychiatric disease. Neuropsychopharmacology Reviews 35 (1), 1-3.

Hameroff, S. (2010). The "conscious pilot" -dendritic synchrony moves through the brain to mediate consciousness. Journal of Biological Physics, 36 (1 ), 71-93.

Harmon-Jones, E., & Winkielman, P. (2008). Social neuroscience: Integrating biological and psychological explanations of social behavior. New York: Guilford.

Herzberg, F. (1959). The motivation to work. N.Y., Wiley.

Jacobs, C. S. (2010). Management rewired: Why feedback doesn't work and other surprising lessons from the latest brain science. New York: Portfolio.

46

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOULD EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

Jensen, M. (2010). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 22 (1), 43-58.

Luhn, (1958). A business intelligence system. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 2 (4), 314 - 319.

Lynn, R. (2010). IQ differences between the north and south of Italy: A reply to Beraldo and Cornoldi, Belacchi, Giofre, Martini, and Tressoldi. Intelligence, 38 (5), 451-455.

Marques, J. (2010). Workplace spirituality versus workplace politics: what's wrong with becoming a "NON"? Human Resource Management International Digest, 18 (4), 3 - 6.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.

Matheson, D., & Matheson, J.E. (1998). The smart organization: Creating value through strategic R&D. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

McClelland, D. C. (1955). Studies in motivation. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. Toronto: McGraw-Hill.

Mezgar, I. (2006). Integration of JCT in smart organizations. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishers.

Miles, R., Snow, C., Fjeldstadt, 0., Miles, G. & Lettl, C. (2010). Designing Organizations to Meet 21st-Century Opportunities and Challenges. Organizational Dynamics, 39 (4), 1-11.

Morgan, G. (2008). Images of organization. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Mukherjee, A. (2009). Leading the networked organization. Leader to Leader, 2009 (52), 23-29.

Nonaka, I. (2007). The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 85 (7/8), 162-171.

Pedler, M. (2008). Action learning for managers. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Pickles, J. (2010). The spirit of post-socialism: Common spaces and the production of diversity. European Urban and Regional Studies, 17 (2), 127-140.

Polanyi, M. (1966). Tacit knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Porter, M. (2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 78 (1 ), 1-16.

47

THE NEW FACES OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE 2PT CENTURY

Prusak, L. (2001). Where did knowledge management come from? IBM Systems Journal, 44 (4), 1002 -1007.

Raden, N., & Taylor, J. (2007). Why you need smart enough systems. Short cut. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall.

Resnick, L. (1979). The future of IQ testing in education. Intelligence, 3 (3), 241-253.

Rushton, J. & Jensen, A. (2010). Race and IQ: A theory-based review of the research in Richard Nisbett's intelligence and how to get it. The Open Psychology Journal, 3 (1), 9-35.

Sawhney, M., & Nambisan, S. (2010). The global brain: Your roadmap for innovating faster and smarter in a networked world. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Wharton School.

Schut, M. (2010). On model design for simulation of collective intelligence. Information Sciences, 180 (1), 132-155.

Senge, P. M. (1993). The fifth discipline field book: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. New York: A Currency Book, published by Doubleday.

Sheate, W. & Partidarioc, M. (2010). Strategic approaches and assessment techniques­Potential for knowledge brokerage towards sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30 ( 4), 278-288.

Sternberg, R. J., & Detterman, D. K. (1986). What is intelligence?: Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and definition. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Takeishi, A. & Numagami, T. (2010). Boundaries of innovation and social consensus building: Challenges for Japanese firms. Dynamics of Knowledge, Corporate Systems and Innovation, Part 1, 25-42.

Zhong, L., Hole, D. & Radin, J. (2010). Globalizing work in the life science industry: Key people and organization considerations. Journal of Global Business Administration, 2 (2), pp.128-139.

ADDITIONAL READING

Horstmann, G. (2009). Visual search for schematic affective faces: Stability and variability of search slopes with different instances. Cognition and Emotion, 23, 355-379.

48

THE SMART FACE OF ORGANIZATIONS: SHOULD EMOTION PLAY A ROLE?

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Emotional Intelligence (also referred to as EQ): a kind of intelligence more closely

aligned to care, compassion and the emotional side of human experience than the usual

measure of IQ.

Intelligence: a complex phenomenon composed of discrete elements such as

data, responsiveness and context, but also continuous processes such as evaluation,

adjustment and improvement.

Learning: a relatively permanent change to behavior as a result of feedback obtained

from experience.

Organizations: networks of people, processes and technologies coming together

around a strategy and evolving through structural alignments.

Smart Organization: an organization replete with technology and people interacting

with dynamism and timeliness.

49