Agility evaluation in fuzzy context: influence of decision-makers’ risk bearing attitude

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of decision-makers' (DM) risk bearing attitudes and the effect of the decision-making environment on estimating the overall degree of agility of an organization. The present study explores an extended agility model in a specific organization's hierarchy and reflects how decision-making attitudes alter an organizational agility scenario. Design/methodology/approach -The concept of fuzzy logic has been explored in this paper. Based on DMs' linguistic judgments, a fuzzy appropriateness rating as well as fuzzy priority weights have been determined for different levels of agile system hierarchy. Using a multi-grade fuzzy approach the overall agility index has been determined. The concept of fuzzy numbers ranking has been explored to show the effect of decision-making attitudes on agility estimations. Findings -Decision-making attributes, e.g. the category of DM (neutral, risk-averse and risk-taking), affect the quantitative evaluation of the overall agility degree, which is correlated with a predefined agility measurement scale. Research limitations/implications -This study explores a triangular fuzzy membership function to express DMs' linguistic judgments as fuzzy representations. Apart from triangular fuzzy numbers, trapezoidal and Gaussian fuzzy numbers may also be used for agility evaluation. The model may be used in other agile industries for benchmarking and selection of the best approach. Practical implications -Selecting the right decision-making group to compute and analyze the agility level for a particular organization is an important managerial decision. In the case of benchmarking of various agile enterprises the decision-making group bearing the same attitude should be utilized. Originality/value -Agile system modeling and development of agility appraisement platforms have been attempted by previous researchers while the influence of DMs' risk bearing attitudes, and the effect of the decision-making environment on estimating the overall degree of agility, have rarely been studied. In this context, the authors explore an exhaustive agility model for implementing in a case study and reveal how decision-m...

Organizational agility: ill-defined and somewhat confusing? A systematic literature review and conceptualization

“…Agile organizations strive for maintenance and enhancement of their competitive position (Bottani 2009;Gunasekaran et al 2018) by rapid and efficient production of high-quality products and reduced costs (Bottani 2009;Cheng et al 2000; Lin et al 2006;Mishra et al 2014), customer satisfaction (Cao and Dowlatshahi 2005;Lin et al 2006;Mishra et al 2014), employee satisfaction (Lin et al 2006), improved velocity in the introduction of new products (Sharifi and Zhang 2001), and the elimination of non-value-adding processes (Lin et al 2006;Mishra et al 2014). Additional frequently mentioned aims of OA are increased performance (Narasimhan et al 2006;Wang et al 2014), profitability (Chakravarty et al 2013), and an increase in market share (Lin et al 2006;Mishra et al 2014). Vázquez-Bustelo et al (2007) added environmental objectives.…”

“…Most researchers have confined agility drivers to the external environment. External changes occur continuously and unpredictably (Sharifi and Zhang 1999;Lu and Ramamurthy 2011) and lead to a highly competitive environment (Gunasekaran 1998) at a high frequency (Cao and Dowlatshahi 2005;Giachetti et al 2003;Gunasekaran 1998;Mishra et al 2014;Zhang and Sharifi 2000). Market changes, technology changes, and globalization are agility drivers that exemplify the external environment (Aravindraj et al 2013;Cheng et al 2000;Feng and Zhang 1998;Ganguly et al 2009;Gunasekaran 1998;Gunasekaran et al 2018;Quintana 1998).…”

Zwinność strategiczna przedsiębiorstw

“…Jak zaważają S. Mishra, S.S. Mahapatra i S. Datta (2014), zwinność od początku była związana z adaptacją poprzez rekonfigurację zasobów przedsiębiorstwa. Wśród najczęściej wyróżnianych elementów zwinności autorzy na pierwszym miejscu wskazują na zdolność do szybkiej i skutecznej reakcji na zmiany otoczenia (rozwoju technologicznego, rosnących wymagań klientów, strategii konkurowania) (Gunasekaran, 1998;Yusuf i in., 1999;Zhang i Sharifi, 2001;Kassim i Zain, 2004;Lin, Chiu i Chu, 2006;Charbonnier-Voirin, 2011).…”

Does organizational agility affect organizational learning capability? Evidence from commercial banking

“…The risk-taking attitude of decision makers affects the overall level of OA (Mishra et al, 2014). Agile organizations look up to tolerate high risks; they must bear high risks in order to be agile (Lyytinen & Rose, 2006).…”