This article was downloaded by: University of Bucharest On: 03 december 2014, At: 05:04 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1t 3jh, UK Technology analysis & Strategic management Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www. tandfonline. com/loi/ctas20 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks to evolve towards sustainable development Cristiano Cagnin a b & Denis Loveridge c a DG Joint research Centre, Institute for Prospective and Technological Studies (IPTS), Seville, Spain b Center for Strategic Studies and Management (CGEE), SCN Quadra 2, Bloco A, Ed. Corporate Financial center, 11 andar, Sala 1102, CEP 70712-900, Brazil c Manchester Institute of Innovation research (MIOIR), Manchester Business school, University of Manchester, UK Published online: 28 aug 2012. To cite this article: Cristiano Cagnin & Denis Loveridge (2012) A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks to evolve towards sustainable development, Technology analysis & Strategic management, 24:8, 797-820, DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2012.715488 To link to this article: http://dx. doi. org/10.1080/09537325.2012.715488 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be verified independently with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is forbidden expressly. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www. tandfonline. com/page/termsanndconditions Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 Technology analysis & Strategic management Vol. 24 No. 8 september 2012,797 820 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks to evolve towards sustainable development Cristiano Cagnina, b*and Denis Loveridgec adg Joint research Centre, Institute for Prospective and Technological Studies (IPTS), Seville, Spain; bcenter for Strategic Studies and Management (CGEE), SCN Quadra 2, Bloco A, Ed. Corporate Financial center, 11 andar, Sala 1102, CEP 70712-900, Brazil; cmanchester Institute of Innovation research (MIOIR), Manchester Business school, University of Manchester, UK This paper suggests a dynamic framework of continual learning to enable a business to develop a capacity to anticipate and address change within the networks in which it is embedded, using future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) thinking to shape the business's path towards sustainable development. The proposed framework has been devised to enable a firm to become a participant that helps shaping the path to a common vision within its network being flexible enough to adapt to the changing circumstances of the environment and of its relationships. The objective is to help organisations create a tailored as well as a common strategy in their network of relationships with the support of FTA, achieving influence among their partners to progress towards higher levels of sustainable development, in order to reach the desired common vision of sustainability. Keywords: network vision; management framework and path to sustainable development; dialogue and interaction; disruptive and transformative change; FTA and complex ecosystems 1. Introduction Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) thinking is used in an explanation and a model of how companies create enduring continuity needed for sustainable development (Brundtland 1987). This paper suggests a dynamic framework of continual learning to enable businesses to anticipate and address change in the networks within which they are embedded. The behaviour of these networks is analysed from the perspective of sympoietic complex systems. Embedding FTA within the proposed management dynamic framework enables business networks to develop their sympoietic system capability, through interactions and inclusive dialogue, thus contributing to a business's successful continuity. The sustainable development of a business depends on the integration of sustainable thinking into mainstream decision-making and core operational processes: this differs from the triplebotttomline approach (Elkington 1998.**Corresponding author. Email: cristianocagnin@gmail. com ISSN 0953-7325 print/ISSN 1465-3990 online 2012 Taylor & francis http://dx. doi. org/10.1080/09537325.2012.715488 http ://www. tandfonline. com Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 798 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Sustainability can be defined as the capability of an organisation to persist into the long-term future: sustainable developmentwould then be needed the processes tomove towards sustainability (SIGMA2001. Therefore, policy-makers'responses to sustainability are multifaceted choices that must consider the interdependencies between the many dimensions of sustainable development. Hence, business sustainability evolves from the linear concept of a value chain introduced by Porter (1985) or the current paradigm of supply chain management or value nets (Bovet and Martha 2000a, 2000b, 2000c, 2000d, 2000e. The analysis of value within a firm (Porter 1980, 1985a, 1985b,1991, 1997), through the integration of customers into the chain (Mcstravic 1999) and later the incorporation of suppliers/deliverers as well as customers (Bovet and Martha 2000 ), leads to a network of value creation. Value is translated still by an‘economic'bottom line and, in this context, is decoded in financial returns to shareholders based on operation efficiency and/or customers'and/or suppliers'/deliverers'engagement, with the ultimate goal of satisfying customers'needs. The concept of a value chain became fundamental to strategic planning once Porter described how a firm can use it to identify sources of differentiation choose the breadth of its competitive scope, improve its organisational design, perform cost and efficiency analysis, and identify sources of interrelationships between business units (O'sullivan and Geringer 1993). Developments in this approach, such as the natural value chain and value nets, bring into the scenario the requirement of aligning customers and also suppliers in the decision-making process and the operational procedures needed to carry out the necessary value activities to achieve the ultimate goal of satisfying the end-customer. All these approaches focus on the operational processes or value activities, and their necessary supporting procedures, to transform basic inputs into final goods or services. These can and should be triggered by customers to enable the process to be effective and able to deliver the expected value. However to deliver wealth, aligned with social and environmental benefits, to shareholders and to stakeholders within society, value has to be redefined. To do so, the research outlined in this paper builds upon a critical view of value creation and competitive advantage in both supply chain management and corporate social responsibility (CSR. The overall research strategy is depicted in Appendix 1. Currently, both supply chain management and CSR use financial rhetoric (e g. social, ethical and environmental) embedded in shareholder logic. In this paper, a new concept of networked sustainability (Cagnin 2005) is introduced as an evolution of the value Net value is redefined to be a triple-bottom-line balance of the creation of economic, environmental and social values to and by all actors within a business's network: the redefinition is based on universal principles (Covey 1997) shaped by six dimensions of sustainability (Bursztyn et al. 1999; Loveridge 1999; Cagnin 2005), namely social (S), spatial-technological (ST), economic (E), ecological (Ec), political (P) and values-norms (V)( acronym SSTEEPV. In this context, Section 2 outlines that current models responsible for moulding a business's competitive advantage sustainably are weak in the nature of stakeholders'involvement in strategic partnerships. There is a rising importance in comprehending the advantages that firms can gain from network relationships (Hoffman 2000) and in understanding how networks operate and how a network environment can enhance the core competencies of a firm: these lead to sustainable competitive advantages. Hence, there is still a latent need to understand howother stakeholders can bring value to a firm and vice versa to help shape different sustainable competitive advantages. Section 3 describes that networked sustainability goes one step beyond the value net by consideriin the global system within which a firm is embedded, including nature and different stakeholders within society in one interconnected system. Such a network has to operate as a cyclical system where value is redefined from Porter's strategies, on cost leadership and differentiation, to Be downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 799 represented by a triple-bottom-line balance or the creation of economic, environmental and social values to and by all actors within the network. It is based on universal principles and shaped by the other three pillars of sustainable development: spatial-technological, institutional-political and cultural-values. Cooperation and dynamic partnerships (Holliday, Schmidheiny, and Watts 2002) are the cornersstone of networked sustainability. Moreover, the value activities in the network must align and integrate operational processes, as in a traditional value chain, but also be able to build an approach in which actors in the network participate in defining common vision and strategy. The important questions are as follows: which activities play a key role in enabling businesses to access new sources of competitive advantage and should be considered as value activities of a network and what roles can FTA play as well as how the network value activities ought to evolve in time to shape business sustainability? In Section 4, the value-creating activities managed across a business network are linked to the ability of a network to self-organise: it must also be able to anticipate and respond to transforming disruptive change. The proposed management framework and the roles that FTA can play are introduced then comparing networks to complex sympoietic systems. Finally, Section 5 summarises the main conclusions and outlines implications for policy and subsequent decision-making. 2. Analysis of existing tools and their gaps Since the 1990s, a range of tools have been brought in to help companies design their path to sustainable development. The processes and activities embrace the necessity for internal and externna communication of social and ethical actions; stakeholder dialogues; organisational change, fair and ethical negotiations; fair work conditions; training and education of human resources; environmental and animal protection; community development and human rights, among others. Existing tools (Appendix 2) operate in two broad areas: first, in a group of critical principles that need to be internalised into the core of the organisation's operations to shape the route towards sustainable development and, second, to compose management approaches. These seek to support firms while they implement monitoring and reporting of the activities that each enterprise believes are needed to achieve an enhanced triple-bottom-line business performance. There remains a gap between offering the crucial principles and values that should mould an organisation's behaviour and how these are translated into activities able to shape specific actions according to its context in individual, network and organisational culture (Caldow and Kirby 1996. The situation seems to rely on the ability to build a group of generic behaviours or actions over which a company can correlate its own culture in order to design its individual path towards sustainable development and implement the envisaged plan. The group of generic behaviours or actions is that which should be promoted so that companies can effectively follow their (network) vision of sustainable development. Each of the most used business sustainability tools (Appendix 2) is allocated according to the four main functions that the tool can perform inside companies and the six dimensions of sustainability. The current gaps that are being tackled by the proposed framework in comparison to the analysed tools are depicted also. The focuses of the four functions are as follows: Principles and values: primarily universal principles and their learning aspect, that is, how companies integrate or‘internalise'the underlying principles into their vision so that they can be translated further into their core business operations. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 800 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Table 1. Existing tools and their relation to the PDCA cycle. PDCA cycle and Life-cycle Management system analysis ISO 14001 AA 1000 SIGMA Decide to be in business Environmental policy definition P Design the business Objective and scope Planning Planning Planning D Run the business Inventory analysis Implementation and operation Accounting Delivery C Monitor the business Impact evaluation Verification and corrective action Auditing and reporting Monitor, review and report A Sustain the business Interpretation Critical analysis by leadership Embedding Leadership and vision Source: Chehebe (1998), ISO (2012), D'Avignon (1996), Cajazeira (1997), Donaire (1999), Maimon (1999), Accountability (1999), BSI (2003. Actions or behaviours: the actions or behaviours needed to promote the translation of the principles embedded in the vision into broad activities that, shaped by a firm's individual context and culture, will offer different and clear possibilities to implement the organisation's (network) vision of sustainable development. Management approach: supporting a company's selection among the underlying possibilities of improvement so that it can shape a strategy to achieve the desired vision of sustainable development and implement the designed plan to meet this vision, as well as monitoring the business and its stakeholders'performance. Operation performance: verifying and reporting the business performance improvement through established and specific indicators so that one can redefine its strategy and shape a new plan for the next cycle of improvement. Table 1 gives a brief overview of some of the tools depicted in Appendix 2 and how these generally relate to the PDCA (plan do check act) cycle (Campos 1992; SIGMA 2001), which describes the layer behind business management systems. The continuous improvement cycle found in the PDCA is the key process for driving learning and innovation in an organisation. These tools are based on continuous improvement cycles as firms need to undergo a whole cycle of implementation in order to learn for the next cycle and are, therefore, able to deal only with incremental changes rather than with disruptive ones. 3. Maturity model: a path towards networks'sustainable development 3. 1. Network value activities Traditionally, in a network, value activities are the building blocks by which a firm creates products and services valuable to its stakeholders: value chain activities are divided into primary activitiie (physical creation of a product) and support activities (support the interrelationships among primary activities). In a nontraditional network, value activities remain undivided since they all leverage and support each other: they need to be integrated to be considered as‘primary'for the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 801 Figure 1. Business sustainability activities model. Source: Cagnin (2005. development and delivery of responsible products and services across the network throughout their life cycle. The heart of a network becomes interaction alignment and integration of all operatiion and their supporting activities across products and services among all its actors. Would that be enough to achieve this life-cycle objective? For the six dimensions of sustainability to be embedded in a firm's core operations, its operatiiona activities must be integrated throughout its network and in alignment with a common strategy across the network. The latter depends on creating an interactive dialogue through active participation and mutual understanding among the actors involved to enable the whole network to pursue the same vision of sustainable development. The accomplishment of such a vision depends on how each firm and its network of relationships interact across the network to align value-creating activities. The common and complementary elements between the needs of value creation within a firm's network, and the intangible assets underlying sustainable development are partnerships, strategy, communication, competencies, motivation, technology and operations. These are needed the activities for the creation of value in sustainable development (Cagnin 2005. Appendix 3 summarrise the main characteristics of these value activities. Figure 1 depicts the business's Activities Model and shows the main value-creating activities that a business needs to sustain it in the long term. These activities require capabilities that are intrinsically complex and interdependent: these must be learnt and practised simultaneously across the network. Theactivities Model (Figure 1) is based on the quantum leaps model devised by Shelton (1997), which describes the necessary capabilities needed to transform our organisations and ourselves to achieve quantum organisations. These are assumed to be critical to a business's sustainable Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 802 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge development, since it is based on a vision that characterises the universe as a nonlinear dynamic system, unpredictable, subjective and able to self-organise (Maturana and Varela 1980, 1997; Capra 1997; Dempster 1998,2000; Maturana 1998. 3. 2. Basis for the management framework and roles that FTA can play The proposed management framework aims to support the achievement of a business with aligned socioeconomic environmental performance across its network that helps firms develop a participaativ process throughout to shape a common vision of sustainable development to be pursued by all actors involved in the system. Moreover, it should link the activities that need to be performed at each stage to build an organisation's ability to know itself (how things are done in the present), enabling the design of the necessary actions to achieve the desirable future (how things ought to be done according to the business's and its networks'vision). It is the process of seeking in the present to bridge the gap between the present and the future continuously, to enhance and enable a business to sustain competitive advantages and follow its path to sustainable development. The framework is dynamic to incorporate changes along the way and enable its own evolution following the organisation's and its networks'progress towards the common vision of sustainable development. The dynamic capability and ability to behave as a complex system are what enable the system to adapt to disruptive changes. Rather than looking for one generic business model for sustainability firms should work out their own model that brings new opportunities through dialogue and interaction, being transparent and accountable to stakeholders (Brinch-Pedersen 2003). Hence, firms should use the evolutionary lessons as a main step in integrating sustainable development into the business model. The management framework is also based on a broad management system that can be applied to any business, based on the PDCA cycle. Nevertheless, the learning process (a feature of foresight) embedded in the proposed framework differs from the one entrenched in other management tools (Appendix 2) as learning also occurs according to the capabilities accumulated within the systems'operation. Learning is then a continual process that also takes place during each implementation cycle: the firm will be armed then with better and clearer opportunities for an evolutionary leap in sustainability performance and to deal with disruptive change, in alignment with the partners in its network. According to Gertler and Wolfe (2002), networked learning enables a process of adaptation that is participatory and interactive and in which social relations and the communication of insights and knowledge (Georghiou et al. 2008) are critical for successful outcomes. This can be operationalised, to a great extent, through processes and tools that enable spaces for inclusive dialogue to take place (Shelton 1997; Cagnin 2005; Boden et al. 2010; Cagnin, Amanatidou, and Keenan 2012. Embedding this form of dialogue in the proposed management framework improves the ways in which stakeholders are perceived by one another and also the ways that they are involved in decision processes. In turn, these lead to further mutual experimentation and collaborative learning. Collaborative learning is the basis of this evolutionary leap founded on an inclusive and active dialogue among all parties in the network: stakeholders can then identify their expectations and attach concrete meaning and actions to the business's values (Giversen 2003). Trust must be achieved by developing the confidence of all parties in every link of the network's intent and behaviour (Lund 2003. To build this kind of trust, all parties need to engage, as equals, in dialogue through an inclusive approach (Olsen 2003). Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 803 The development of effective and lasting partnerships is critical, requiring a common identity (a true feeling of who‘we'are as partners as well as of who each actor is as individuals) and of legitimacy (important to sustain credibility, recognition and success)( Hardis 2003). Trust cannot be taken for granted but needs to be encouraged continuously and stimulated by practising every day what is preached. Dialogue to develop‘meta-learning'across the network is crucial. It is the recognition of others'feelings or points of view (appreciation is another part of foresight) since this breaks down existing limits, brings coherence to everybody involved and builds revolutionary ideas of what is possible (Shelton 1997). The expression‘meta-learning'was created by Losada (1999) and defined as‘the ability of a team to dissolve attractors that close possibilities for effective action and to evolve attractors that open possibilities for effective action'.'Meta-learning can also be understood as the ability to learn how to learn and/or think (Losada 2001). According to Losada (1999), high-performance teams need an inclusive dialogue approach for all stakeholders in the network. It seems to be critical to creating a continual collaborative learning process across the network and brings value to all the involved parties, allowing an evolutionary leap in sustainability performance to materialise. The broad stages of this management framework are described in Appendix 4, which includes the need for an inclusive dialogue approach with all stakeholders in the network with FTA permeating all processes: this is believed to be the basis of driving the achievement of high-performance continual learning and to bringing ultimate value to all parties involved in the network. Moreover, FTA supports one to deal with complexity (Saritas 2006) to process and interpret weak signals, wild cards (Amanatidou et al. 2012; Könnölä et al. 2012) and alternative options (Bezold et al. 2009; Boden et al. 2010; Cagnin and Könnölä, forthcoming) to support decisionmakking All these are critical to reconcile creativity and rational analysis (Shelton 1997; Cagnin 2005. Also, these are required to link learning and strategy to a long-term common vision of where an organisation wants to position itself within possible alternative futures. These include partners 'and stakeholders'views of what the future might entail. It also considers where all actors see themselves both individually and collectively within these alternative futures. The link between learning and strategy around a common vision in the network enables trust to be developed across the system through participatory instruments. These take into consideration the diversity of views across the network and the collective articulation of visions and expectations. However such a common vision to be pursued across the system should be based upon the mutual positioning of network actors in relation to future needs (Cagnin, Amanatidou, and Keenan 2012. Ultimately, interactions (Maturana and Varela 1980,1997; Capra 1997; Dempster 1998,2000; Maturana 1998; Cagnin 2005) between actors need to be reinforced to allow the coordination and mobilisation of necessary skills and resources towards a common target, aligning therefore strategy and operations across the system. Hence, FTA plays a significant role in anticipating and managing disruptive and transformattiv changes and does so by providing spaces for mutual appreciation, and recognition of each other's feelings, for mutual learning, knowledge sharing and experimentation, all of which are critical to building the kind of interactions and inclusive dialogue across the network that lead to trust, legitimacy and a common identity. The latter are paramount for invention within the network. The anticipatory role of FTA allows an inclusive debate of possible and desirable futures and articulation of visions and expectations needed to reach a common goal and an adaptive path to follow, including the necessary resources which should be developed jointly, mobilised and coordinated. Table 2 outlines the main roles that FTA can play within such a framework. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 804 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Table 2. Contributions of FTA. Management system FTA roles Decide to be in business FTA supports mutual learning and shared understanding of network actors'views and feelings as well as of risks, opportunities, system capabilities and dynamic changes, all of which are critical to achieve a common vision of sustainable development as well as to mobilise and coordinate resources Design the business FTA as a source of strategic intelligence provides insights into possible and desirable directions and works as a source of trust as well as of transparency and legitimacy of options and decisions, clarifying the pros and cons of choices in the definition of a common strategic path to follow and resources to be prioritised Run the business FTA creates spaces for experimentation, learning and mutual appreciation, for the development of new or improved linkages and networks, and for the achievement of common ground, shared perspectives, dynamic multilateral partnerships, trust and adaptation as actors interact, new ideas emerge and existing and new knowledge are combined Monitor the business FTA PROCESSES lead to an enhanced responsiveness of the network, to change in attitudes and behaviours and to joint-up decisions for change in order to steer solutions to emerging challenges through an inclusive approach as well as further experimentation and learning, helping therefore the network to undertake systemic transitions and new configurations Sustain the business FTA enables the network to continue to exist in the long run by enabling it to behave as a complex living system as actors interact and connect through inclusive dialogue and mutual respect, in which each and every node of the network becomes an embedded participant that actively shapes the path to a common vision of sustainability Source: Cagnin et al. 2008,2012. 3. 3. Maturity model: how the network value activities evolve in time For a company, sustainable development is a major challenge. The limited notion of what constituute‘sustainable development'is itself a riddle that any company faces. For most, the undeclared psychological imperative is to maintain‘successful continuity'and their independence. The secoon unspoken but implicit theme for a company is knowing that successful continuity, measured by being able to secure future profits and a strong share price, for a limited time horizon, will be maintained through interdependence between itself and a swarm of suppliers and customers. Businesses organise themselves to achieve these ends through activities under the rubric FTA but these are not an all-important part since there are checks and balances exerted by many features of the swarm of companies in which the company is embedded. It is not an entity that can organise its‘world'for its own benefit to the exclusion of benefits for others. The dynamism of a swarm or a network may be thought of as autopoiesis (Maturana andvarela 1980), but this applies strictly to an organisationally closed self-regenerating system. Dynamic and complex business networks are not of this kind, since they are always organisationally open, or partially so, to invasion by new participants or new elements. Sympoiesis (Dempster 1998) attempts to describe the boundaryless nature of system behaviour (more will be said about sympoiiesi later) and is a closer approximation to the behaviour of a network of businesses all of which are seeking successful continuity for themselves and indirectly for the network itself. What role does FTAPLAY in successful continuity while attempting to followwhat a firm believes to be its sustainable development and that of its mutually supporting network of businesses? Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 805 Foresight cannot remove the uncertainties any business faces and actually invests in: it does provide two important messages, namely what may be important to do to help secure successful continuity and what to avoid doing to prevent self-destruction. Of these two messages, the first is the most exciting and attracts much attention, but it is the second message that is the most important. Attention to the three basic requirements of foresight, appreciation, anticipation and learning, all of which imply numeracy, is a basic requirement for successful continuity. Foresight can also expose a range of equally likely paths into the future that may permit more insightful decisions to be made by a business. The armoury of methods that can be used to support and inform aspects of these decisions is considerable, but it does not remove the element of judgement and risk that accompanies any form of decision-making. Foresight demands thatwittgenstein's dictum that‘methods pass the problem by'be in mind constantly. Equally, Al Haig's dictum that‘vision without discipline is daydream'(Haig 1984) is necessary to prevent the outcomes of foresight becoming too expansive. Once foresight has provided insights into possible business directions, forecasting and technollog assessment are essential associates, both of which bring an element of legitimacy and transparency to the overall decision-making process. Both forecasting and technology assessmeen provide a more factual and numerical understanding of a business's financial and technical risks opportunities and system capabilities, together with returns to stakeholders. In these ways, FTA can lead to the development of new (or enhanced) networks or linkages (stronger interactioons with the achievement of common ground, joint visions and enhanced responsiveness among the network members. In these different ways, FTA can and does contribute to a business's successful continuity. FTA cannot remove the uncertainty that surrounds its contribution to or nature of sustainable development in the wider context of its supporting network and society as a whole. The Maturity Model is an attempt to build FTA's contributions to a structure heavily dependent on the flow of ideas, data and information into a business and its network decision-making in its place in society. The aim of the Maturity Model is to shape a possible business path towards sustainable developmment outlining how the network value activities ought to evolve in time to shape business sustainability. It offers the possibility for each firm to assess its position regarding five maturiit levels for sustainable development. Consequently, a business can build a tailored, common strategy throughout its network of relationships: it may also influence partners in their progress towards higher levels of sustainable development. The Maturity Model suggested in Table 3 (Cagnin 2005) uses the notion of evolution in which a company will be seeking to achieve its (network) vision of sustainable development in uninterrrupte cycles of improvement. The design of the Sustainability Maturity Model is founded on universal principles as well as the maturity of behaviours that can lead to the development of a mature business throughout its network of relationships (Cagnin 2005) and considers a number of other related attempts (Perlman and Takacs 1990; Katzenbach and Smith 1993; Eckenfelder 1997; Elrod and Tippett 1999; Berg et al. 2002; Kwak and Ibbs 2002; von Zedtwitz 2002; Rosenbeer 2003; Verweire and Berghe 2003; Entovation International 2004; Losada and Heaphy 2004; Fredrickson and Losada 2005. As a reminder, the model seeks to enable a common strategy and/or strategies aligned across the network, founded on a shared vision for sustainable development to be pursued by all actors, with interdependent and agreed roles; a cooperative interactive network rooted in communication channels that allow relevant and agreed information to flowfreely to create a common base of knowledge shared among partners to ensure that trust is enhanced; and Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 806 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Table 3. Business sustainability maturity model. Maturity levels 3-Managed with no 4-Excellence at corproate 5-High-performance Value activity 1-Ad hoc 2-Planned in isolation integration level sustainability net Strategy-Overhead, driven by regulation, complaints, management directives and cost of accidents and impacts-No processes or controls in place and no support from leadership/senior management-Success depends on individual efforts; change factors as an unpredictable serendipity-Sustainability functionally isolated; firm's main objective is to gain capital efficiency-Objectives only partly known-Systematisation of existing practices-Objectives identified but not in alignment with business target (to gain operational efficiency)- Supporting mechanisms are informal, according to needs (access to past information)- Policies defined and the firm has strengths in doing similar work; focus on processes and activities planning-Change factors as processes and activities interdependence-Decision based on risk/reward-Integration starts; but still seen as separate subject-Objectives are known; firm's target is to gain product/service quality and main objective is to enhance the firm's image-Negative impact prevention driven by processes-Balance between emotions and rationality not achieved-Responsibility assigned to a unit or team-Measuring is coordinated-Customers as driver, focus on productivity and efficiency-Target is on cost reduction aiming competitive advantages-Seek social environmental improvement, goals quantified and measurable; objectives revised; focus on planning and controlling multiple activities-Shared vision, individual awareness and leadership exist-Positive emotions lead to creativity and intution-Formal and powerful processes-Sustainability-driven firm-Positive emotions (ratio at or above 2. 90) lead to creativity across the sustainability net, focus on innovative ideas-Participative process; strategies and activities aligned and integrated across the net-Collaborative innovation and continuous sustainability performance improvement system, inter-group learning-Values (universal principles) embedded in every process Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 807 Partnerships-Selection driver is price-Hierarchical structure-Functionally driven-Competition among partners-Selection driver is delivery-Matrix structure where partners interact and proactive collaboration starts to be felt-Selection driver Is distributed quality coordination structure where structured collaboration starts to be felt-Stakeholders'engage and trust are leveraged through dialogue-Communities of practice structure (focus on values)- Driver is trust, values and mission are defined jiontly-Symbiotic network structure-Education across the net Motivation-Environment of we/they competition between individuals-Behavioural structure with no sense of ownership-Structure of individual teams (no focus on collective performance; reward/punishment systems-Cooperation starts to be felt-Cooperation between interdependent teams-Informal training of sustain ability and necessary skills and practice-Teamwork, reward systems-Dialogue and conversations lead to individual discovery/learning-Teams Share experiences-Self-managing teamwork, high-performance teams in the net-Inclusive dialogue and active participation , common vision Competencies-Information paper processing and fast accountability-No individual, team or organisational learning-Information general support, comply with speed requirements-Individual learning to comply with functional roles-Information improve decisions-Team learning promoted to improve decision-making and business efficiency-Information strategic resource-Training and education-Quality of transferable knowledge is predicted Information flow free and a common base of knowledge in the net maximises individuals'learning and creativity Communication -Minimal processes and channels in place-Processes and channels are on project-to-project basis-Based on the firm's core competencies and objectives-Based on feedback loops and information persistence-Interpersonal and technological channels in use-Based on cross boundary learning and knowledge flow-Intuition and rational analysis become complementary (Continued) Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 808 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Table 3. Continued) Maturity levels 3-Managed with no 4-Excellence at corproate 5-High-performance Value activity 1-Ad hoc 2-Planned in isolation integration level sustainability net Technology-Focus on manual individdua routine automatiion craft development character-Embryonic-Databased, IT used to build systems that cross functions and allow data-sharing stimulus to support decisions-Information based; IT used to build applications centred on processes rather than on functions, synchronised with the strategy-Flexible infrastructure basis to enable communication and information flow through the firm; firm's self-organising capability-Cooperative sustainabiliit net-Network's self-organisation-Continuous learning/adaptation-Creativity in decisionmakkin Operations-Focus on understanding and estabilishing basic processes that are linked not to strategy; end-of-pipe solutions; individual abilities-Policies support practicces aim to reduce impacts with better use of materials and natural resources-Structured processes/activities-Firm-wide understandiin of activities, roles and responsibilities-Idea for integration/alignment-Streamlined processes/activities Autonomous, flexible and integrated processess/activites; use of renewable energy sources and fewer natural resources-Processes/activities/values aligned across the net; functional silos removed (information flow)- Systemic processes/systems Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 809 a high-performance partnership where all parties feel motivated both as individuals and membeer of interdependent groups, finding meaning and satisfaction in everything they do, and where intuition/creativity/emotions and rational analysis reconcile and become two complementary parts of the decision-making processes and of the necessary means to ensure an alignment of economic, environmental and social performance along the network. 4. Management framework The proposed management framework emphasises the creative aspect of living systems where FTA is key to enable the kind of dialogue and interactions required to allow business networks to behave as sympoietic complex systems. In this context and according to Hock (1999), enterprises must be able to combine, with harmony, order and chaos, competition and cooperation, which characterise the fundamental principles of any organism, organisation or complex system, as well as of evolution and nature. Maturana andvarela (1980) agree when affirming that every organism has the power to self-generate by means of autopoiesis, which implies continuous auto-production and reproduction (Maturana and Varella 1997): autopoietic systems produce and are a product of themselves (Rocha 2003). Interpreting complex systems from the perspective of ecosystems, Dempster (1998) coined the expression sympoietic systems, indicating three main differences, related to key system characteristics between autopoiesis and sympoiesis: 1. autopoietic systems have defined self boundaries, while sympoietic systems do not; 2. autopoietic systems are self-produced, whereas sympoietic systems are produced collectively; and 3. autopoietic systems are closed organisationally, while sympoietic systems are organisationally ajar. Dempster (2000) concludes that these differences mean that autopoietic systems are oriented homeostatic, development, centrally controlled, predictable and efficient, whereas sympoietic systems are homeorhetic, evolutionary, distributively controlled, unpredictable and adaptive. According to Dempster, one of the most important differences between autopoietic and sympoietic systeem relates to the balance between their ability to maintain their identity despite changes in the environment or to adapt their identity to fit changes. The above descriptions present a useful heuristic to complex systems and the interactions between the dimensions of sustainable development spatial-technological, social, economic, environmmenta or ecological, political-institutional and cultural-values. Living systems share matter, information and energy with their external environments: there is simultaneous autonomy and interdependence. According to Rocha (2003), complex systems require interactivity: in the same way, it is not possible to understand living systems without perceiving the systemic relationshhip of cells and there is no possibility of comprehending social systems without taking into consideration the connections that individuals establish with their worlds. Interactive relationships create emergent possibilities, such as those that are believed to be ingrained in the management framework proposed. The information and knowledge which are shared throughout the business networks can lead to the networks'adaptation and evolution, but also enable all actors within such networks to progress towards higher levels of sustainable development. What one part does to another is interpreted indefinitely and informed to form more complex chains. Also the interactions among all the actors within networks characterise the existence of such a system or the network itself. The stronger the interactions between the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 810 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge components of the network, the greater will be its flexibility. The system will then be able to make evolutionary leaps characterised by the appearance of emerging properties. In this context, trust in each other and in one's own emotions (Fell and Russell 1994; Damasio 1996; Maturana 1998; Losada 1999,2001; Fredrickson and Losada 2005) is crucial for choosing a sustainable path to life or for moving the whole system towards higher levels of sustainable development. Dialogue and information-sharing, founded on trust, are pre-requirements. Features of universal ethics or universal principles and those of respect (Zohar 1990; Cagnin 2000) can be linked with Losada's notions of high-performance teams and organisations: individuaal and corporations should have the ability to respect each other. These might be the necessary characteristics to enable actors within business networks to perform at higher levels and to improve their quality of life. Included here are respect and responsibility built upon inclusive dialogue and active participation, along with conflicts, generating transparency, development (Giversen 2003; Larsen 2003) and ability to live with the paradox of chaos and order, competition and cooperation, through sympoietic system capability. Social change implies that people within a society must change: this happens either through encounters outside the specific social system or via reflections through language (Maturana and Varela 1997. Dialogue, respect and emotions for others'feelings are critical; the emotions of individuals build their rationality (Damasio 1996) and their human actions (Maturana 1998. Basic emotions are thus the basis of the operationalisation of living organisms, and these change as the environment changes. In other words, an individual adapts to his/her environment to avoid disintegration. The adaptive management framework developed (Table 4) can help corporations embed their social and environmental responsibilities in their products and services and throughout their networrks Simultaneously, this enables change towards a common vision using tools which can support firms through the process to shape business sustainable development throughout their networks of relationships. Table 4 highlights the main processes involved at each stage of the broad business management system (Appendix 4 according to the network's value activities (Figure 1). In this context, it is worth highlighting Appendix 5, which puts the proposed managemeen framework into context. The latter shows some of the management tools currently in use and places the management framework at the top of the figure for comparison. Comparatively, this indicates that an organisation can progress towards sustainable development more efficiently and responsibly by integrating the six dimensions of sustainability into its core operations. The framewoor then exhibits the promise of embedding, in its structure, critical principles that are taken often not into account by existing tools and shows the necessary activities and the interrelationships that need to be managed systemically to shape business sustainability. FTA is embedded in the management framework to facilitate inclusive dialogue across the network, enabling actors to anticipate and manage disruptive and transformative changes. The kind of dialogue supported throughftaprovides a newparadigm able to deal with unpredictability and support decision-making effectively by using models, such as sympoiesis, that emphasise the creative aspect of living systems which, according to Tuomi (2011), is critical to address some of the epistemic and ontological assumptions that underlie much of the current FTA practice. Hence, embedding FTA within the proposed management framework enables a network to develop its sympoietic system capability: this is critical for the achievement of common ground, joint visions and enhanced responsiveness among the network members including truly novel aspects of how the future might evolve. Simultaneously, individual firms actively shape the future as an embedded network participant promoting a common vision within it and mobilising and coordinating the necessary resources towards achieving such a vision. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 811 Table 4. Business sustainability management framework. s e i t i v i t C a-b U s s e i t i v i t C a s e g a t S Stakeholder participation Based on Inclusive Dialogue and Continuous learning enabled through FTA Decide to be in business Defining and reviewing the vision of sustainability Strategy Establish leadership commitment; and strategic architecture definition and review Partnerships Identify and engage with stakeholders Motivation Identify and define actions needed to enable the creation of motivation and an inclusive dialogue throughout the network Competences Core competences definition and review Communication Communication channels and processes definition and review Technology Technology infrastructure definition and review Operations Operations alignment definition and review Design the business Defining and reviewing the strategy to implement the vision of sustainability Strategy Strategic and tactical planning definition and review Partnerships Partnerships selection; building; and leveraging Motivation Motivational channels and processes selection; building; and leveraging Competences Competences selection; building; leveraging; and core competences protection Communication Communication channels and processes; building; and leveraging Technology Existing IT, systems (IS), strategic, managerial and operational technologies analysis and selection Operations Marketing and/or commercial; production; procurement; financial; human resources; legal Run the business Implementing the vision of sustainability Business Sustainability Maturity Model Business Path to Sustainability Comparing present performance (as it is) with the business and the network vision for sustainability (as it ought to be) in order to keep the firm on track of its designated vision Monitor the business Collecting and monitoring relevant information to keep the business on track of its vision of sustainability Strategy Performance, environment, capabilities, constraints, opportunities, and changes and improvements possible Partnerships Partnerships selection; building; and leveraging Motivation Motivational channels and processes selection; building; and leveraging Competences Competences selection; building; leveraging; and core competences protection Communication Communication channels and processes; building; and leveraging Technology Technology selection; building and leveraging Operations Internal operations and network relationships, performance reporting Sustain the business Achieve the identified vision of sustainability and giving subsidies for the creation of a new vision Verify if the firm achieved its objectives along the network and preparing the whole network to walk into a higher sustainability maturity level 5th Maturity Level Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 812 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge 5. Conclusions Some notions are set out of what is involved in managing a business towards sustainable developmmen within the Brundtland criteria (Brundtland 1987). Through its components (foresight, forecasting and technology assessment), FTA has an undeniably arduous role to play. It must facilitate a different kind of dialogue and interactions to take place across business networks to support effective decision-making: this is paramount. Consequently, firms will be enabled to anticipate and manage disruptive and transformative changes, allowing network partners to evolve together and creating an evolutionary leap in sustainability performance. The implications for policy and decision-making are manifold. Regardless of seeing the world based on three interdependent pillars businesses, civil society and governments the truth is that all three sectors have to advance more or less at the same speed and in the same direction. Progress towards sustainable development may depend on building dynamic partnerships among these three pillars (Holliday, Schmidheiny, andwatts 2002. In this context, the kind of dialogue required across a business network demands the inclusiiv participation of governments and overall societies, apart from those businesses which shape the network. This shall be enabled by the proposed management framework. However, both governments and firms should take part of the responsibility for educating society and promoting active citizen participation in decision-making, through inclusive dialogue, which can be achieved through FTA APPROACHES and methods (Cagnin et al. 2008). This is a key aspect for policy interventtion Ultimately, this would also enable the development of a common base of knowledge and sustainability vision, as well as foster positive emotions and connectivity across networks by leveraging the number of interactions and opportunities for dialogue. Notes on contributors Cristiano Cagnin used to work as a scientific officer at JRC-IPTS and is now a senior advisor of STI (Science, Technology and Innovation policy and strategy at CGEE. He is actively working in research and practice in RTDI (Research, Technollogy Development and Innovation), business strategy and sustainability, environment management, cleaner production and foresight. He is developing EU and national projects related to sustainable manufacturing, RTDI priority-setting and regional coordination as well as joint programming and also supporting policy-making through the early identification of weak signals of emerging issues. Denis Loveridge is Honorary Visiting professor at Manchester Institute of Innovation research (MIOIR), Manchester Business school, University of Manchester, after 44 years in industry. He has wide experience in the management of corporate development, energy matters and corporate venturing to create new high-technology businesses, large and small, relating to long-term directions of change in the business environment. He has negotiated technology licences based on intellectual property, for business growth and business advantage. References Accountability. 1999. Accountability 1000 framework standards, guidelines and professional qualification. http://www. accountability. org/(accessed June 2012. Amanatidou, E.,M. Butter, V. Carabias, T. Könnölä, M. Leis, O. Saritas, P. Schaper-Rinkel, and V. van-Rik. 2012. On concepts and methods in horizon scanning: Lessons from initiating policy dialogues on emerging issues. Science and Public policy 39, no. 2: 208 21. Berg, P m. Leinonen, V. Leivo, and J. Pihlajamaa. 2002. Assessment of quality and maturity level of R&d. International Journal of Production Economics 78, no. 1: 29 35. Bezold, C.,C. Bettles, C. Juech, E. Michelson, J. Peck, and K. Wilkins. 2009. Foresight for smart globalizatiion accelerating & enhancing pro-poor development opportunities. Alexandria, VA: Institute for Alternative futures. http://www. rockefellerfoundation. org/uploads/files/cf248c9f-3d6c-434a-9d1e-7909bb4c1feb. pdf (accessed July 2012. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 813 Boden, M.,C. Cagnin, V. Carabias, K. Haegeman, and T. Konnola. 2010. Facing the future: Time for the EU to meet global challenges. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European union. http://ftp. jrc. es/EURDOC/JRC55981. pdf (accessed July 2012. Bovet, D. M, . and J. A. Martha. 2000a. Value nets: Breaking the supply chain to unlock hidden profits. New york: John Wiley & Sons. Bovet, D. M, . and J. A. Martha. 2000b. Lessons from the innovators. Supply Chain Management Review, 4, no. 2: 85 91. Bovet, D. M, . and J. A. Martha. 2000c. Unlocking the rusty supply chain. Harvard Management Update 5, no. 6, Guest Column. Bovet, D. M, . and J. A. Martha. 2000d. Value nets: Reinventing the rusty supply chain for competitive advantage. Strategy & Leadership, 28, no. 4: 21 6. MCB University Press. Bovet, D. M. and J. A. Martha. 2000e. From supply chain to value net. Strategic management. Journal of Business strategy, 21, no. 4: 24 8. Brinch-Pedersen, M. 2003. The Nordic case of partnerships in an international context. In Corporate values and responsibillit the case of Denmark, ed. M. Morsing and C. Thyssen, 1st ed.,192 8. Denmark: Samfundslitteratur, Narayana Press. Brundtland. 1987. Report of World Commission on Environment and Development our common future. Oslo: UN. BSI. 2003. The sigma guidelines: Putting sustainable development into practice a guide for organisations. London: Published by BSI for the SIGMA project. Bursztyn, M.,et al. 1999. C&t para o desenvolvimento sustentável Formulação e Implementação de Políticas Públicas Compatíveis com os Princípios do Desenvolvimento Sustentável definidos na Agenda 21. Cagnin, A. H. 2000. Em Busca de uma Ética Ecocêntrica. Master thesis, Universidade de Brasília, Centro de Desenvolvimento Sustentável, Brasília. Cagnin, C.,E. Amanatidou, and M. Keenan. 2012. Orienting EU innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play. Science and Public policy 39, no. 2: 140 52. Cagnin, C.,M. Keenan, R. Johnston, F. Scapolo, and R. Barré eds. 2008. Future-oriented technology analysis strategic intelligence for an innovative economy. Heidelberg: Springer. Cagnin, C, . and T. Könnölä. Forthcoming. Global foresight: Lessons from scenario and roadmapping process on manufacturing systems. Futures. Cagnin, C. H. 2005. An information architecture to enable business sustainability. Phd thesis. Manchester: University of Manchester. Cajazeira, J. E. R. 1997. ISO 14001 Manual de Implantação. Rio de janeiro: Qualitymark ed. Ltda. Caldow, J. C, . and J. B. Kirby. 1996. Business culture: The key to regaining competitive Edge in Competing in Information age strategic alignment in practice, coord. J. N. Luftman. Newyork: Oxford university Press. Capra, F. 1997. Web of life: A new scientific understanding of living systems. Newyork: Knopf Publishing Group. Chehebe, J. R. 1998. Análise do Ciclo de Vida de Produtos: Ferramenta Gerencial da ISO 140000. Rio de janeiro: Qualitymark ed. Ltda. Covey, S. 1997. Putting principles first. In Rethinking the future, ed. R. Gibson, 34 46. London: Nicholas Brealey. Damásio, A r. 1996. O Erro de Decartes: Emoção, Razão e o Cérebro Humano. São paulo: Editora Companhia das Letras. D'Avignon, A. 1996. Normas Ambientais ISO 14000 Como Podem Influenciar sua Empresa. Rio de janeiro: CNI. Dempster, B. 1998. A self-organizing systems perspective on planning for sustainability. B. Sc. Thesis, University of British columbia, Vancouver, Canada. Dempster, B. 2000. Sympoietic and autopoietic systems: A new distinction for self-organizing systems. Proceedings of theworld Congress of the Systems sciences and ISSS 2000, Toronto, Canada. Donaire, D. 1999. Gestão Ambeinatl na Empresa. São paulo: Atlas, 2 Ed. Eckenfelder, D. J. 1997. It's the culture, stupid. Occupational Hazards 59, no. 6: 41 4. Elkington, J. 1998. Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: New Society. Elrod, P. D.,II, and D d. Tippett. 1999. An empirical study of the relationship between team performance and team maturity. Engineering Management Journal 11, no. 1: 7 14. Entovation International. 2004. The characteristics of 5th generation management. http://www. entovation. com/assessment/fifthgen. htm (accessed December 2004. Fell, L, . and D. Russel. 1994. An introduction to‘Maturana's'biology. In Seized by agreement, swamped by understanding, ed. L. Fell, D. Russell, and A. Stewart. Sydney: Hawkesbury Printing, University ofwestern Sydney. Fredrickson, B. L, . and M. Losada. 2005. Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing, American Psychologist 60, no. 7: 678 86. Georghiou, L j. Casingena Harper, M. Keenan, I. Miles, and R. Popper R.,eds. 2008. The handbook of technology foresight. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 814 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Gertler, M. S, . and D. A. Wolfe. 2002. Local social knowledge management: Community actors, institutions and multilevel governance in regional foresight exercises. Paper prepared for the STRATA ETAN Expert Group action on Mobilising the Regional foresight Potential for an Enlarged European union. Giversen, J. 2003. The world's first ethical accounting statement. In Corporate values and responsibility the case of Denmark, ed. M. Morsing and C. Thyssen, 1st ed.,33 41. Denmark: Samfundslitteratur, Narayana Press. Haig, A.,Jr. 1984. Caveat: realism, reagan and foreign policy. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. Hardis, J. 2003. Social multipartite partnerships. In Corporate values and responsibility the case of Denmark, ed. M. Morsing and C. Thyssen, 1st ed.,199 210. Denmark: Samfundslitteratur, Narayana Press. Hock, D. 1999. Birth of the chaordic age. San francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Hoffman, N. P. 2000. Anexamination of the‘sustainable competitive advantage'concept: Past, present, and future. Academy of Marketing Science Review 2000, no. 4: 1 16. Holliday, C. O.,Jr, S. Schmidheiny, and P. Watts. 2002. Walking the talk: The business case for sustainable development. San francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. ISO. 2012. International organisation for Standardisation. http://www. iso. org/iso/iso catalogue. htm (accessed June 2012. Katzenbach, J. R, . and D. K. Smith. 1993. The wisdom of teams: Creating the high performance organization. Newyork: Harper Business. Könnölä, T.,A. Salo, C. Cagnin, V. Carabias, and E. Vilkkumaa. 2012. Facing the future: Scanning, synthesizing and sense-making in horizon scanning. Science and Public policy 39, no. 2: 222 31. Kwak, Y. H, . and C. W. Ibbs. 2002. Project management process maturity (PM) 2 model. Journal of Management in Engineering, 18, no. 3: 150 5. Larsen, A. H. 2003. Finding and re-finding transparency at Aarstiderne. In Corporate values and responsibility the case of Denmark, ed. M. Morsing and C. Thyssen, 1st ed.,155 62. Denmark: Samfundslitteratur, Narayana Press. Losada, M. 1999. The complex dynamics of high performance teams. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 30, no. 9: 179 92. Losada, M. 2001. The art of business coaching. Second general conference of the specialization course, Brasilia. Losada, M. and E. Heaphy. 2004. The role of positivity and connectivity in the performance of business teams: A nonlinear dynamics model. American Behavioral Scientist 47, no. 6: 740 65. Loveridge, D. 1999. On sustainability. http://phps. portals. mbs. ac. uk/Denisloveridge (accessed June 2012, go to personal page). Lund, J. E. 2003. Partnerships in practice. In Corporate values and responsibility the case of Denmark, ed. M. Morsing and C. Thyssen, 1st ed.,179 91. Samfundslitteratur, Narayana Press. Maimon, D. 1999. ISO 14011 Passo a Passo da Implantação nas Pequenas e Médias Empresas. Rio de janeiro: Qualitymark ed. Ltda. Maturama, H r. 1998. Da Biologia à Psicologia. 3a ed.,Porto Alegre: Editora Artes Médicas. Maturana, H r, . and F. J. G. Varela. 1997. De máquinas e Seres Vivos Autopoiese: a Organização do Vivo. 3a ed.,Porto Alegre: Editora Artes Médicas. Maturana, H r, . and F. Varela. 1980. Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel. Mcstravic, S. 1999. The value marketing chain in health care: The value marketing chain concept finds a place in the health care environment. Marketing Health Services 19, no. 1: 14 19. Olsen, L. H. 2003. Corporate accountability the case of Denmark. In Corporate values and responsibility the case of Denmark, ed. M. Morsing and C. Thyssen, 1st ed.,229 39. Denmark: Samfundslitteratur, Narayana Press. O'sullivan, L, . and J. M. Geringer. 1993. Harnessing the power of your value chain. Long Range Planning 26, no. 2: 59 68. Perlman, D, . and G. J. Takacs. 1990. The ten stages of change. Nursing Management 21, no. 4: 33 38. Porter, M. E. 1980. Competitive strategy: Techniques for analysing industries and competitors. Newyork: Free Press. Porter, M. E. 1985a. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. Newyork: Free Press. Porter, M. E. 1985b. Technology and competitive advantage. The Journal of Business strategy 5, no. 3: 60 78. Porter, M. E. 1991. Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic management Journal 12 (S2), 95 117. Porter, M. E. 1997. What is strategy? Harvard Business Review, 61 78. Rocha, I. 2003. Gestão de Organizações: Pensamento Científico, Inovação, Ciência e Tecnologia, Auto-Organização, Complexidade e Caos, Ética e Dimensão Humana. São paulo: Editora Atlas S. A. Rosenberg, R. 2003. Match your change strategy to your organization's maturity. Nonprofit World 21, no. 5: 19 20. Saritas, O. 2006. Systems thinking for foresight. Phd thesis, Manchester Institute of Innovation research. Shelton, C. 1997. Quantum leaps. Butterworth-Heinemann. SIGMA. 2001. The SIGMA project sustainability in practice. The SIGMA guidelines: Pilot Draft, SIGMA Project Management Team. http://www. projectsigma. co. uk/Guidelines/default. asp (accessed January 2004) Tuomi, I. 2011. Foresight in an unpredictable world. Proceedings of the fourth international Seville conference on futureorieente technology analysis, Seville, Spain. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 815 Verweire, K, . and L. V. Berghe. 2003. Integrated performance management: Adding a new dimension. Management Decision 41, no. 8: 782 90. von Zedtwitz, M. 2002. Organizational learning through post-project reviews in R&d. R&d Management 32, no. 3: 255 68. Zohar, D. 1990. O Ser Quântico: Uma Visão Revolucionária da Naureza Humana e da Consciência Baseada na Nova Física. São paulo: Editora Best sellers. Appendix 1. Research overall strategy Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 816 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 817 Appendix 2. Existing business sustainability tools and research outcomesdimensions of sustainability Institutional-Business activities Economic Environmental Social Political Spatial Cultural Strategy Principles and Values Visions Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Business Business Business Business Business Business Sustainability Sustainability Sustainability Sustain. Sustain. Sustain. Concept Concept Concept Concept Concept Concept AGENDA 21 AGENDA 21 AGENDA 21 AGENDA 21 AGENDA 21 AGENDA 21 OECD guide OECD guide OECD guide OECD guide OECD guide CRT OECD CSR OECD CSR OECD CSR Lisbon CRT UNGC Lisbon Lisbon Strategy ILO Strategy UNGC KCGCB Strategy CRT Lisbon Strategy CRT KCGCB CRT UNGC CRT UNGC GSPSR UNGC NS UNGC KCGCB NS GSPSR NS GSPSR GSPSR KCGCB GSPSR KCGCB SIGMA KCGCB SIGMA SRI SIGMA SRI SRI Vision Actions Behaviours Proposed management (mgmt) framework Operations Management tools/Systems/Frameworks Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Management Management Management Mgmt Mgmt Mgmt Behaviours/Actions Operations Model Model Model Framework Framework Framework SIGMA SIGMA SIGMA LCA LCA LCA NS NS NS ISO 14000 ENAS SA800 CP AA1000 MOED GH EM Operations Measure Performance GRI GRI GRI Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 818 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Appendix 3. Network value activities Value activities Main characteristics Partnerships It is in the core of CSR and essential to achieve a cooperative and systematic network Strategy It is the business commitment with a set of principles, values and policies which will guide the organisation in the long run to achieve its desired vision of sustainable development and gain sustainable competitive advantages Communication The ability to document and demonstrate in deeds through specific communication channels how intentions are put into practice, together with an ongoing continuous dialogue, builds mutual trust and transparency. The ability to communicate with different audiences (all stakeholders) and in diverse specific languages becomes critical in this context Competencies There is a latent importance of building an organisational culture that stimulates knowledge generation and sharing through the network to achieve a dynamic process of innovation, learning and continuous improvement Motivation Making available the necessary tools and an environmental where collaborators share responsibility and ownership for achievements is critical to enable everybody to change their individual ideas and build a common set of values Technology An effective integration of social and environmental strategies can be supported strongly by theuse of IT. Hence, technology (i e. IT and IS) plays a critical role in building and enabling an infrastructure to collect, filter, analyse, share and disseminate the business values and indicators along the network and thus create individual and cooperative competitive advantages Operation The business principles and values throughout the network are expressed through its operations. The business values reflected in its operations are what demonstrate the firm's ability to act responsbility and ethically. Hence, values are seen as a strategic tool to align all activities along the network and to give the direction as to where the firm will go with whom and how Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 A framework, with embedded FTA, to enable business networks 819 Appendix 4. Business broad management system Stages PDCA Cycle Meaning Stakeholders Participation Based on Inclusive Dialogue and Continuous learning through FTA Decide to be in business It is the stage of thinking and reviewing past and present decisions and performance to decide whether or not to be in business (changes needed) according to competitive and environmental changes and the range of feedback the firm is able to build. Furthermore it is time to define a vision for sustainable development to be pursued in alignment with the seven dimensions of sustainability, which should be agreed commonly with the business network partners. Design the business P It is the process of planning how the business must be shaped in roder to achieve the vision of sustainability via the definition of a strategy and necessary targets to be met. It aims to build the expected future by designing how the business strategy will be implemented. Run the business D It is to implement the defined strategy and its designed plan every day. It becomes essential to compare the actual results (the way it is now as it is) with the expected ones (the way the organisation wishes to be as it ought to be), through a feedback process, in order to shape sustainability and learning along the process. Monitor the business C It is to monitor all necessary information of how the business is running and evaluate the obtained results based on developed indicators. This will enable the organisation to make an assessment about whether what it had hoped originally to accomplish was achieved actually (gap analysis) so it can establish future capability of analysis and decision making processes. Sustain the business A It is developed a process by every day activities. It depends of being able to meet everything that was defined in the earlier plan stage based on universal principles, cooperation, innovation and continuous learning, but also based on the diverse range of feedback and partnership the company is able to build. From the single individual, passing through the organisation and its relationships, seeking to consider the overall society. In the end, it is about improving economic, social and environmental integrated performance, knowing that one depends and leverage on the other. Understand‘yesterday'tuned and looking for‘tomorrow'to maintain balance between past and future, between what is known and what is new (something unpredictable) is the requirement to success. It is thus a reflection about what has worked actually and not worked, and then to adjust the organisational thinking and actions for the future. This phase is where sustainability performance evolutionary leaps can occur bringing, as a consequence, processes of innovation and the changes needed for survival and to sustain competitive responsible advantages in the future. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014 820 C. Cagnin and D. Loveridge Appendix 5. Management framework in context Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:04 03 december 2014

< Back - Next >

Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011