Resources Process Values Framework – Definition

Cite this article as:"Resources Process Values Framework – Definition," in The Business Professor, updated April 15, 2019, last accessed June 5, 2020, https://thebusinessprofessor.com/lesson/resources-process-values-framework/.

Back to: OPERATIONS, LOGISTICS, & SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT

Resources Processes Values Framework Definition

The Resources Processes Values Framework is utilized to sufficiently allocate employees to certain tasks or responsibilities. Three sets of factors have an effect on what an organization is capable of doing and what it is not: its processes, its resources, and its values. Managers can learn tons of things about capabilities by grouping their answers into the aforementioned categories whenever they are asked for the type of innovations used by their organizations and those they would be unable to implement successfully.

A Little More on What is the Resources Processes Values Framework

Resources are the most evident factors that greatly contribute to what an organization is capable of doing and things it is can’t do. These resources include equipment, people, product designs, technology, information, cash, brands, and relationships with suppliers, customers, and distributors. Usually, resources refer to assets or things. They can be bought and sold, hired and fired, and also depreciated or appreciated.

They are not just valuable, but they are also flexible. For instance, an engineer who is a productive worker at Dow Chemical can be just as productive in a start-up company. A software which functions to manage the logistics system of a UPS can also be effective at Amazon.com. Technology which is valuable in mainframe computers can also be utilized in telecommunications switches. A consummately flexible resource is cash.

Managers most instinctively identify resources when analyzing if their organizations can successfully make changes confronting them. On the contrary, resource analysis doesn’t accurately show capabilities.

What organizations do is to create value just as employees function to convert resource inputs into products and services of higher value. The way of interaction, communication, decision making, and coordination through which they achieve these transformations are referred to as processes. Processes comprise not only manufacturing processes but those through which market research, procurement, product development, employee development, employee compensation, budgeting and allocation of resources are accomplished.

Processes evolve de facto or are defined in a bid to address certain tasks. This implies that when managers utilize a process in the execution of tasks for which it was created, it would most likely function effectively. But in a situation where the same efficient process is used to tackle an entirely different task, it would most likely prove bureaucratic, slow, and ineffective. Contrary to resource flexibility, processes are inherently inflexible. Hence, a process which defines its ability in carrying out a specific task concurrently defines its inabilities in carrying out other tasks.

An organization shows inefficient, slow and bureaucratic behavior when managers adopt processes created to tackle a problem to solve different problems.

One of the management dilemmas is that by their own nature, processes are created in order for employees to continuous tasks continuously, over and over again, In order to ensure consistency, processes should not be changed. In cases where they do, they should change through strictly controlled procedures. The idea behind good managers striving to focus in their organizations is for tasks and processes to be readily aligned. The alignment of certain tasks with the processes which were designed to tackle those tasks is, in fact, the real definition of an organization that is focused. By the time managers start adopting processes designed to tackle one problem to solve a number of various tasks that an organization shows inefficient, slow, and bureaucratic behavior.

An organization’s values are the third class of factors which affect what an organization can accomplish and the things it cannot. Values, by definition, has an ethical in-depth meaning similar to those that which guide decisions in order to ensure patient well-being at Johnson and Johnson or which guide decisions concerning the safety of plants at Alcoa. Values, in this framework, have a broader meaning. The values of an organization are the prerequisites through which employees prioritize decision making. They use it to determine if an order is attractive or unattractive, if a concept for a new product is marginal or attractive, if a customer is of major importance or not, and much more. Employees at all levels make decisions concerning priorities. At the executive level, they often decide whether to invest or not in new products processes, products, and services. Among salespersons, they comprise the day-to-day decisions about the exact customers to call on and those to ignore, the products to exhibit and those to play down.

The bigger and more complicated a company becomes, the more pertinent it is for senior managers to teach employees at all levels to make individual decisions concerning priorities which are consistent, having the strategic direction, as well as, the company’s business model. A major metric of good management is whether these precise and consistent values have penetrated the organization.

On the contrary, precise, consistent, and widely understood values also define the things an organization is unable to do. By necessity, a company’s values must reflect its business model and cost structure, because they state the rules its employees must abide by for the company to succeed. If, for instance, a company’s overhead cost structure demands for it to accomplish 40% gross profit margins, a strong value or decision rule would have evolved which supports middle managers to discourage ideas that promise gross margins lower than 40%. This implies that such an organization will be unable to successfully commercialize projects focusing on low margin markets even when a different organization’s values, driven by another cost structure, may enable the success of that same project.

The values of profitable firms likely evolve in a predictable manner on a minimum of two dimensions. The first dimension is related to acceptable gross margins. Companies usually add overhead cost just as they include features, as well as, functionality to their products and services in a bid to get more attractive customers. As a result of this, gross margins which at a point were absolutely attractive, eventually become unattractive at a later stage. Their values alter or change.

The next dimension within which values change relates to how large a market or customer has to be so as to be interesting. Most managers usually feel forced not only to maintain their growth but to also maintain a consistent growth rate simply because the stock price of a company typifies the discounted current value of its displayed earnings stream. In order for a $40 million company to achieve a growth of 25%, it would need to discover $10 billion in an entirely new business the following year. The market opportunity size which would solve the need of each company for growth varies. An opportunity which thrills a small organization would not measure up to what would excite a very large organization. A bittersweet benefit of success is that by the time companies grow large, they would basically lose the ability of entering today’s small and emerging markets which would transform into the large markets of tomorrow. This disability is not as a result of a change in available resources in the companies, their resources, usually, are vast. But this is because their values change.

People who plan mega-mergers among already large companies to accomplish cost savings, for instance, need to consider the effect of these actions on the values of the resultant companies. Even though their fused research organizations may have more resources to direct at innovation problems, they have loss of appetite for all with the exception of the biggest market opportunities. This establishes an extremely real weakness in managing innovation.

References for Resources/Processes/Values Framework

Academic Research on Resources/Processes/Values Framework

A quarter century of Culture’s Consequences: a review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede’s cultural values framework, Kirkman, B. L., Lowe, K. B., & Gibson, C. B. (2006). Journal of international business studies, 37(3), 285-320. This research work analyzes Geert Hofstede’s cultural values framework which has been used by many researchers in various empirical studies. This paper reviews 180 works published in 40 psychology and business journal and 2 international annual editions from 1980 to June 2002 in order to strengthen what is empirically confirmable concerning Hofstede’s cultural values framework. The limitations in his research are discussed and recommendations are made for researchers who would use his theory in the future.

A values framework for measuring the impact of workplace spirituality on organizational performance, Jurkiewicz, C. L., & Giacalone, R. A. (2004). Journal of business ethics, 49(2), 129-142. This paper focuses on how organizational performance is affected by workplace spirituality. Workplace spirituality has been discovered to bring about new paradigm development in organizational science. Assumptions from theories show how workplace spirituality may improve organizational performance, most assuming an evident positive effect. This body of research is reviewed, as well as, analyzed and a values framework based on workplace spirituality is introduced. This framework provides the foundation for empirical testing. Factors and assumptions needed for future research are discussed.

The competing values framework: Understanding the impact of organizational culture on the quality of work life, Goodman, E. A., Zammuto, R. F., & Gifford, B. D. (2001). Organization Development Journal, 19(3), 58. This article explicates how organizational culture affects work-life quality. The competing values framework is used in this article In order to examine the relationships between organizational culture and some important job-based variables. The findings show that group cultural values have a positive relationship with job involvement, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and empowerment, and they have negative relations with intent to turnover. Hence, hierarchical cultural values have a negative relationship with organizational commitment, and job involvement, empowerment, and also job satisfaction have a positive relationship with intent to turnover.

A competing values framework for analyzing presentational communication in management contexts, Quinn, R. E., Hildebrandt, H. W., Rogers, P. S., & Thompson, M. P. (1991). The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 28(3), 213-232. For a long time, communication experts have been keen on analyzing messages. Of recent, they have emphasized the need for evaluative tools which account for constraints and situational expectations. In this research work, an empirical model that can be applied to presentational communication was created based on an inference from the literature on organizational and managerial effectiveness. About 100 communication professors examined how relevant descriptors are based on six various types of business presentations. Three were oral while the other three were written. Similarity scores were created based on their judgments and these were released for multidimensional scaling.

Using the competing values framework to investigate the culture of Qatar industries, Al-Khalifa, K. N., & Aspinwall, E. M. (2001). Total Quality Management, 12(4), 417-428. This research paper examines the culture of Qatar industries with a focus on the competing values framework. The past decade witnessed a tremendous rise in awareness, as well as, the implementation incidents of total quality management (TQM). But, not every application has been a success. Amongst the numerous reasons given for its failures, the literature frequently lays emphasis on the major barrier being the limiting effect of an organization’s culture. This paper examines how compatible the culture that exists in Qatar industries is and which needed the implementation of TQM. The results showed that many organizations in Qatar did not have only one cultural type but a blend of two. This mix didn’t match the cultural profile features supporting TQM.

The integrated competing values framework: Its spatial configuration, Vilkinas, T., & Cartan, G. (2006). Journal of Management Development, 25(6), 505-521. This article identifies the spaced relationships between the managerial positions in the ICVF, known as the integrated competing values framework. Furthermore, this study attempts to identify the major role which the integrator performs with its functions critical learning function.

Strategic human resource management and its effects on firm performance: an implementation of the competing values framework, Panayotopoulou, L., Bourantas, D., & Papalexandris, N. (2003). International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(4), 680-699. A new HRM model is developed in this paper using the competing values framework. The work attempts to clarify the exact type of HRM that is linked with different parts of a firm’s performance. In a bid to get a better understanding of this researched area, three extra factors which influence this relationship have been included in the equation. They include external environment, competitive strategy, and size of the organization. This research was carried out among a sample of exactly 104 organizations and the location was Greece. It is discovered that HRM control negatively affects market performance while its flexibility positively influences market performance.

Implications of the competing values framework for management information systems, Cooper, R. B., & Quinn, R. E. (1993). Human Resource Management, 32(1), 175-201. The lack of a management information system (MIS) effectiveness theory is the resultant effect of the problems with evaluating MIS effectiveness. Drawing from the Competing Values Framework in order to develop the MIS effectiveness theory which is based on both MIS and organizational literature. This framework is used to guide the evaluation of MIS effectiveness.

Measuring leadership in self‐managed teams using the competing values framework, Zafft, C. R., Adams, S. G., & Matkin, G. S. (2009). Journal of Engineering Education, 98(3), 273-282. This study shows how the Competing Values Framework (CVF) is applied to self-managed teams (SMTs) and how this application helps engineering educators to comprehend how to quantify leadership in this context and bring about an increased consciousness of the students in the team, which would result in increased effectiveness. Behavioral complexity ascertains the ability of the team to use many leadership roles and also subsequent effectiveness. The discovery shows that behavioral complexity has a major impact on performance but its effect is not significant on team members’ attitudes. When the relationship between leadership in self-managed teams and effectiveness is explored, educators, as well as, industry can better comprehend the leadership role types needed for achieving a highly efficient team.

Using the competing values framework to assess corporate ethical codes, Stevens, B. (1996). The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 33(1), 71-84. Ethical codes refer to written documents that presume to state the organization’s main philosophical principle and to also express its beliefs and values. The current study makes use of a competing values framework in order to describe the ethical code dimensions, explaining how instructional, change-oriented and instructional, relational, and informational they are in their communication and also as representatives of the organizational culture.

 

Was this article helpful?