Implementation of Management 3.0: its consistency and conditional factors

Abstract

PurposeRapid changes in the business environment and the accelerating dynamics and increasing complexity shaping the functioning of organizations have given rise to modern concepts of people management. The Management 3.0 (M3.0) concept was developed based on agile project management concept; however, it can be implemented not only in projects, but also in the entire organization. It consists of six pillars such as: energizing people, empowering teams, aligning constraints, developing competencies, growing structure, and improving everything. The paper aims to present the relationships between the level of implementation of the above-presented pillars and such variables as the scope of use of agile project management methodologies, and project managers' (PMs) as well as HR practitioners' knowledge in this area.Design/methodology/approachMembers of PMI and IPMA representing 34 companies located in Poland took part in the research which was based on a CAWI method.FindingsResearch shows that the level of M3.0 implementation – in terms of its six pillars – is internally consistent but mostly on a “defined” level. No correlation was observed between the implementation of M3.0 and the frequency with which agile project management methodology is applied. On the other hand, there is a strong correlation between the level of PMs' knowledge and the implementation of some of the M3.0 pillars. HR specialists' knowledge in the field of M3.0 is not associated with organizational advances in the implementation of M3.0.Originality/valueAs the first research project in the area of M3.0, this study proposes practical implications as well as topics which require further empirical exploration.

The dark side of AI-enabled HRM on employees based on AI algorithmic features

“…A mature organizational system also establishes solid accountability (Al-Khouri, 2012). Additionally, while Sinha and Jain (2021) emphasize the importance of HR managers' analytical skills, Piwowar-Sulej et al. (2022, p. 541) argue that “HR specialists' knowledge in the field of M3.0 is not associated with organizational advances in the implementation.” Future studies could focus on developing intervention frameworks that empower HR practitioners to proactively address the adverse effects of AI algorithms.…”

Neuromanagement: implementación alternativa en la gestión organizacional

“…Este modelo de gestión de visión holística no lineal plantea cambios radicales respecto a los modelos anteriores. Entre los cambios más evidentes se encuentra la reinterpretación de la fuerza laboral, pues, mientras en el modelo 1.0 se percibía al trabajador como una «máquina», y en el modelo 2.0 comienza a manifestarse el reconocimiento de la importancia del trabajador en la empresa y, asimismo, a humanizar su participación (Piwowar-Sulej et al, 2022), en el modelo 3.0 ya se confía en la capacidad de autogestión del colaborador, y de ello depende la efectividad de la comunidad laboral, entendida por Appelo como «redes sociales complejas», quien también manifiesta que: las personas son individuos únicos en lugar de recursos reemplazables y su mayor valor no está en sus cabezas sino en sus interacciones y colaboración.…”

A Systematic Review: How Does Organisational Learning Enable ESG Performance (from 2001 to 2021)?

“…Particularly, some scholars have highlighted the trend of green and sustainable human resource management, which shall be taken into consideration in future ESG strategies [16]. Therefore, it is urgent to design ESG training programs for practitioners in the human resource department [17]. As a result, the future landscape of companies can barely be accomplished without disclosing ESG information, which includes various dimensions related to the environment, society, and government [3].…”