Third International Conference on Research Methods ISEOR/Academy of Management 15 & 16 June, 2011

1. US Business Leader Reactions to SEAMAlex Erolin & Bob Randall, Doctoral StudentsUniversity of St. Thomas Third International Conference on Research Methods ISEOR/Academy of Management 15 & 16 June, 2011 Lyon, France

2. Purpose • Introduce SEAM to US business leaders • Record reactions • Identify common themes

3. Data Collection • 25 doctoral students from academic, for-profit and non-profit organizations introduced to SEAM in three-day class at the University of St. Thomas • Seven for-profit business leaders introduced to SEAM in ~ one hour meetings

4. Findings…Big Picture • SEAM is a complex topic to introduce • US business leaders have genuine interest in SEAM and want to know more about it • US business leaders are looking for new organizational improvement programs

5. US Business Leaders: How Do We Create a People Advantage? • Leaders acknowledge they have dysfunctions in their organizations • US business leaders want to know how to get better results from their people • “Everyone can buy the same equipment, gain access to the same customers and raise capital, but not everyone has the same people and that is what will make or break us”(April, 2011, Interview with Tom Carman, Wenger).

6. US Business Leaders: What’s Next? • LEAN and Six Sigma are inadequate on their own – SEAM can complement them • Lean “…misses the whole aspect of social interactions and resulting behaviors that SEAM addresses”(March, 2011, Blackboard, Silverman). • Leaders do not really know how to reduce dysfunctions in their organizations

7. US Business Leaders: What’s Next? • Leadership and teamwork development are needed, but are often not sustained • HORIVERT addresses top management and plants seeds at the lower levels to identify dysfunctions • HORIVERT approach is appealing because it feels like it has a better chance of sticking

8. US Business Leaders: Concerns with SEAM • Organizational resistance to change was number one concern cited • SEAM might be viewed as “…the flavor of the day organizational improvement program. Some of our people have their eyes glaze over when we roll out a new improvement effort”(April, 2011, Interview with Tom Carman, Wenger).

9. US Business Leaders: Concerns with SEAM • Long implementation period is a concern to business leaders that need to post quarterly improvements and worry about management turn-over

10. US Business Leaders: Je ne comprend pas! • How can SEAM be implemented in complex organizations with multiple locations? • SEAM terminology is hard to follow and understand

11. OD Professionals: Can You Handle the Truth? • How will US business leaders react to the mirror effect? • SEAM implies organizational performance is a management issue and that “much of the dysfunction comes from management”(Conbere, ODOC 945 class discussions, UST, Spring 2011).

12. OD Professionals: Patience Is a Virtue • Can US businesses implement something as complex as SEAM? • Can US businesses exert the patience to learn about SEAM and implement it properly?

13. Discussion: US Business Leaders Want to See Case Studies of SEAM • Leaders want to know more about SEAM • Leaders would like to see actual ROI’s • Leaders would like to see actual implementation examples

14. Conclusions: SEAM Appears to Have a Future in the US • There is pent up demand for an improvement program that addresses dysfunction • Leaders like the HORIVERT approach and the sustainable aspects of SEAM • Complexity and length of implementation are two concerns leaders have about SEAM • Leaders want to know more about SEAM

15. References Beckhard, R. (2006). What is organization development? In J. V. Gallos (Ed.), Organization development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Burke, W. W. (2008). A contemporary view of organization development. In T. G. Cummings (Ed.), Handbook of organization development. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Conbere, J., & Heorhiadi, A. (2011). Socio-economic approach to management [Abstract].OD Practitioner, 43(1), 6-10. Erolin, Alex & Randall, Bob. (2011). Socio-Economic Approach to Management [PowerPoint Presentation]. Fagenson-Eland, E., Ensher, E. A., & Burke, W. W. (2004).Organization development and change interventions.Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(4), 432-464. Abstract retrieved from doi:101177/0021886304270822 Mirvis, P. H. (2006). Revolutions in OD. In J. V. Gallos (Ed.), Organization development (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

16. References Petersen, P. B. (1987). The contribution of W. Edwards Deming to Japanese theory and practice.Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings, 133-137. Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2008).Mastering hidden costs and socio-economic performance. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Schein, E. H. (2008). From brainwashing to organization therapy. In T. G. Cummings (Ed.), Handbook of organization development. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Weisbord, M. R. (2004).Productive workplaces revisited. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.