The Organisational Antifragility Assessment Matrix: a framework for analysing and enhancing uncertainty absorption capabilities

• Autorzy: Bartuseviciene Ilona , Butkus Mindaugas , Schiuma Giovanni

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17512/pjms.2024.30.2.03

Warianty tytułu

PL

Matryca Oceny Antykruchości Organizacyjnej: ramy do analizy i wzmacniania zdolności absorpcji niepewności

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Previous studies have revealed that antifragility can be perceived as an organisational capability that successfully equips organisations to undergo transformation and self-reinvention when confronted with uncertainties. Hence, this study aims to reveal the core enabling factors contributing to its development. It undertakes a systematic literature review that addresses the following questions: How can we conceptualise organisational antifragility? What are the critical structural enabling factors affecting an organisation’s antifragile capability? As a result, this study delineates three pivotal domains to unveil the enabling factors affecting organisational antifragility. First, a working definition of antifragility is designed and proposed. Second, an analysis of the structural dimensions affecting the development of antifragility is outlined. Finally, the DENSER Organisational Antifragility Assessment Matrix framework for modelling the fundamental structural elements of organisational antifragility is proposed. The proposed matrix intends to present initiatives to assess how the components within the structure interact. Hence, establishing an indicator system to measure each component is foreseen as a limitation of this study and a critical future direction.

PL

Wcześniejsze badania wykazały, że antykruchość można postrzegać jako zdolność organizacyjną, która skutecznie umożliwia organizacjom przechodzenie transformacji i samoodnawianie się w obliczu niepewności. Celem niniejszego badania jest zatem ujawnienie kluczowych czynników umożliwiających rozwój tej zdolności. Przeprowadzono systematyczny przegląd literatury, który odpowiada na następujące pytania: Jak można konceptualizować antykruchość organizacyjną? Jakie są krytyczne strukturalne czynniki umożliwiające rozwój zdolności antykruchości organizacji? W rezultacie badanie to wyróżnia trzy kluczowe obszary umożliwiające identyfikację czynników wpływających na antykruchość organizacyjną. Po pierwsze, zaprojektowano i zaproponowano roboczą definicję antykruchości. Po drugie, przedstawiono analizę wymiarów strukturalnych wpływających na rozwój antykruchości. Po trzecie, zaproponowano ramy DENSER Organisational Antifragility Assessment Matrix (Matryca Oceny Antykruchości Organizacyjnej DENSER) do modelowania fundamentalnych elementów strukturalnych antykruchości organizacyjnej. Proponowana matryca ma na celu przedstawienie inicjatyw do oceny, w jaki sposób poszczególne elementy w strukturze oddziałują między sobą. Ustanowienie systemu wskaźników do pomiaru każdego komponentu jest postrzegane jako ograniczenie tego badania oraz istotny kierunek przyszłych badań.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

organisational antifragility; assessment; framework; uncertainty; capabilities

PL

antykruchość organizacyjna; ocena; ramy; niepewność; zdolności

• Wydawca: Czestochowa University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Management Studies
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: Vol. 30, No. 2
• Strony: 37--55
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 54 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Bartuseviciene Ilona

• Institute of Regional Development, Vilnius University Siauliai Academy, Lithuania

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6260-9370

autor

Butkus Mindaugas

• Institute of Regional Development, Vilnius University Siauliai Academy, Lithuania

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2381-5440

autor

Schiuma Giovanni

• Department of Engineering, Libera Università Mediterranea; Italy

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4990-9330

Bibliografia

• 1.Abbas, R., Munoz, A., (2021). Designing antifragile social-technical information systems in an era of big data. Information Technology and People, 34(6), 1639-1663.
• 2.Adobor, H., (2024). How organizations can benefit from volatility: The promise of antifragility and some cautionary notes. Organizational Dynamics, 101098.
• 3.Arsawan, I. W. E., Koval, V., Suhartanto, D., Harbar, Z. and Maslennikov, Y., (2022). Employee-driven innovation capability: the role of knowledge, creativity, and time sufficiency. Intellectual Economics, 16(2).
• 4.Aven, T., (2015). The Concept of Antifragility and its Implications for the Practice of Risk Analysis. Risk Analysis, 35(3), 476-483.
• 5.Bajaba, A., Bajaba, S. and Simmering, M. J., (2024). When resilience is not enough: Theoretical development and validation of the antifragility at work scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 231, 112818.
• 6.Bajaba, A., (2022). Antifragility: Disorder as the Wind That Energizes the Fire Within Us.
• 7.Bartuseviciene, I., Rakauskiene, O. and Valackiene, A., (2022). Assessing the resilience of organizations in the context of uncertainty. Measuring business excellence.
• 8.Blečić, I., Cecchini, A., (2020). Antifragile planning. Planning Theory, 19(2), 172-192.
• 9.Bolivar, R., Moreno, G. and Rico, D., (2023). The manager’s role in job satisfaction is due to multi-mediation effects. Intellectual Economics, 17(1), Article 1.
• 10.Botjes, E., Van Den Berg, M., Van Gils, B. and Mulder, H., (2021). Attributes relevant to antifragile organizations. 1, 62-71.
• 11.Bridge, S., (2021). Facing uncertainty: An entrepreneurial view of the future? Journal of Management and Organization, 27(2), 312-323.
• 12.Butkus, M., Schiuma, G., Bartuševičienė, I., Rakauskiene, O. G., Volodzkiene, L. and Dargenyte-Kacileviciene, L., (2023). The impact of organizational resilience on the quality of public services: Application of structural equation modeling. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 18(2).
• 13.Cañizares, J. C., Copeland, S. M. and Doorn, N., (2021). Making Sense of Resilience. Sustainability, 13(15), 8538.
• 14.Corvello, V., Felicetti, A., Troise, C. and Tani, M., (2023). Betting on the future: How to build antifragility in innovative start-up companies. Review of Managerial Science.
• 15.Corvello, V., Verteramo, S. and Giglio, C., (2023). Turning crises into opportunities in the service sector: How to build antifragility in small and medium service enterprises. Tqm Journal, 35(5), 1211-1223.
• 16.Dahal, R. K., Ghimire, B., Karki, D. and Joshi, S. P., (2023). Elevating Job Search Effectiveness: The Significance of Self-Directed Learning and Self-Control. Intellectual Economics, 17(2).
• 17.de Bruijn, H., Groessler, A. and Videira, N., (2020). Antifragility as a design criterion for modelling dynamic systems. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 37(1), 23-37.
• 18.Dekkers, R., Carey, L. and Langhorne, P., (2022). Making Literature Reviews Work: A Multidisciplinary Guide to Systematic Approaches (1st ed. 2022 edition). Springer.
• 19.Derbyshire, J., Wright, G., (2014). Preparing for the future: Development of an ‘antifragile’ methodology that complements scenario planning by omitting causation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 82, 215-225.
• 20.Equihua, M., Aldama, M. E., Gershenson, C., López-Corona, O., Munguía, M., PérezMaqueo, O. and Ramírez-Carrillo, E., (2020). Ecosystem antifragility: Beyond integrity and resilience. PeerJ, 8, e8533.
• 21.Feduzi, A., Faulkner, P., Runde, J., Cabantous, L. and Loch, C., (2022). Heuristic methods for updating small world representations in strategic situations of knightian uncertainty. Academy of Management Review, 47(3), 402-424.
• 22.Fiorini, R. A., (2017). Would the big government approach increasingly fail to lead to good decision?: A solution proposal. Kybernetes, 46(10), 1735-1752. Scopus.
• 23.Fiorini, R. A., (2019). A Strategic Proposal for the New Society: Surviving and Flourishing from Chaos. In R. Poli and M. Valerio (Eds.), Anticipation, Agency and Complexity (pp. 149-171). Springer International Publishing.
• 24.Frumkina, A., (2023). Theoretical and Empirical Models of Organizational Learning Processes in Knowledge Management. Economics. Ecology. Socium, 7(3).
• 25.Fulmer, C. A., Ostroff, C., (2016). Convergence and emergence in organizations: An integrative framework and review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(S1), S122- S145.
• 26.Gershenson, C., (2015). Requisite variety, autopoiesis, and self-organization. Kybernetes, 44(6/7), 866-873.
• 27.Ghasemi, A., Alizadeh, M., (2017). Evaluating organizational antifragility via fuzzy logic. The case of an Iranian company producing banknotes and security paper. Operations Research and Decisions, 27(2), 21-43.
• 28.Giordino, D., Troise, C., Culasso, F. and Cutrì, L., (2024). The operationalization of antifragility through organizational slack and the moderating effect of firms reliance on collaborative networks. European Journal of Innovation Management, ahead-ofprint(ahead-of-print).
• 29.Gonzales, M. R., (2024). Apocalypse unleashed: A critical perspective on complexity science, catastrophes, and black swan events in international business. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 20(1), 94-120.
• 30.Größler, A. (2020). A managerial operationalization of antifragility and its consequences in supply chains. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 37(6), 896-905. Scopus.
• 31.Hole, K. J., (2022). Tutorial on systems with antifragility to downtime. In Computing (vol. 104, issue 1, pp. 73-93). Springer.
• 32.Ishak, A. W., Williams, E. A., (2018). A dynamic model of organizational resilience: Adaptive and anchored approaches. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 23(2), 180-196.
• 33.Johnson, J., Gheorghe, A. V., (2013). Antifragility analysis and measurement framework for systems of systems. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 4(4), 159-168.
• 34.Kennon, D., Schutte, C. ́ S. L. and Lutters, E., (2015). An alternative view to assessing antifragility in an organisation: A case study in a manufacturing SME | Elsevier Enhanced Reader.
• 35.Kirsop-Taylor, N., (2022). Leaping Forwards, Bouncing Forwards, or Just Bouncing Back: Resilience in Environmental Public Agencies Through after the Austerity Decade. Environmental Management.
• 36.Markey-Towler, B., (2018). Antifragility, the Black Swan and psychology. Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, 15(2), 367-384.
• 37.Molines, M., Sanséau, P.-Y. and Adamovic, M., (2017). How organizational stressors affect collective organizational citizenship behaviors in the French Police: The moderating role of trust climate? International Journal of Public Sector Management, 30(1), 48-66.
• 38.Munoz, A., Billsberry, J. and Ambrosini, V., (2022). Resilience, robustness, and antifragility: Towards an appreciation of distinct organizational responses to adversity. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(2), 181-187.
• 39.Munoz, A., Todres, M. and Rook, L., (2021). Empowering Organisations to Gain From Uncertainty: A Conceptualisation of Antifragility Through Leveraging Organisational Routines in Uncertain Environments. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 15(3), 23-42.
• 40.Nikookar, E., Varsei, M. and Wieland, A., (2021). Gaining from disorder: Making the case for antifragility in purchasing and supply chain management Elsevier Enhanced Reader.
• 41.O’Reilly, B., (2019). No More Snake Oil: Architecting Agility through Antifragility. In E. Shakshuki (Ed.), 10th international conference on ambient systems, networks and technologies (ant 2019) / the 2nd international conference on emerging data and industry 4.0 (edi40 2019) / affiliated workshops (vol. 151, pp. 884-890). ELSEVIER.
• 42.Orth, D., Schuldis, P. M., (2021). Organizational learning and unlearning capabilities for resilience during COVID-19. The Learning Organization, 28(6), 509-522.
• 43.Rajala, T., Jalonen, H., (2022). Stress tests for public service resilience: Introducing the possible-worlds thinking. Public Management Review.
• 44.Ramezani, J., Camarinha-Matos, L. M., (2019a). A collaborative approach to resilient and antifragile business ecosystems. Procedia Computer Science, 162, 604-613.
• 45.Ramezani, J., Camarinha-Matos, L. M., (2019b). Novel Approaches to Handle Disruptions in Business Ecosystems. In L. M. Camarinha-Matos, R. Almeida, and J. Oliveira (Eds.), Technological Innovation for Industry and Service Systems (pp. 43-57). Springer International Publishing.
• 46.Ramezani, J., Camarinha-Matos, L. M., (2020). Approaches for resilience and antifragility in collaborative business ecosystems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 151, 119846.
• 47.Ruiz-Martin, C., López-Paredes, A. and Wainer, G., (2018). What we know and do not know about organizational resilience. International Journal of Production Management and Engineering, 6(1), 11-28.
• 48.Russo, D., Ciancarini, P., (2017). Towards Antifragile Software Architectures. Procedia Computer Science, 109, 929-934.
• 49.Sagala, G. H., Őri, D., (2024). Antifragility, resilience and collaborative networks of SMEs: A theoretical foundation. European Journal of Innovation Management, ahead-ofprint(ahead-of-print).
• 50.Taleb, N. N., (2012). Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder. United States Random House.
• 51.Taleb, N. N., (2007). The Black Swan. United States Random House.
• 52.Termeer, C. J. A. M., van den Brink, M. A., (2013). Organizational Conditions for Dealing with The Unknown Unknown. Public Management Review, 15(1).
• 53.van Daalen, E., (2020). On the meaning and operationalization of antifragility: Comment on the paper by Grossler. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 37(6), 906-907.
• 54.Zhang, F., Welch, E. and Miao, Q., (2018). Public Organization Adaptation to Extreme Events: Mediating Role of Risk Perception. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(3), 371-387.
• 55.Zivanovic, S., Djurovic, S., Abramovic, N., Poberezhets, O. and Udovychenko, V., (2023). The importance of the organizational learning concept in the sustainable management of organizations. Intellectual Economics, 17(1).

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa nr POPUL/SP/0154/2024/02 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki II" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki (2025).