Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
NOS 1 2009

NOS 1 2009

Ratings: (0)|Views: 278 |Likes:
Published by api-26697485

More info:

Published by: api-26697485 on Jun 25, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/28/2013

pdf

text

original

Scandinavian
Journal
o\ue000 organiz ational psychology
Volume 1, Issue 1
V\u00e5ren 2009
Utgitt av NOS. Norsk organisasjonspsykologisk selskap.
2Kj\u00e6re leser

Da var det endelig klart \ue001or et nytt nummer av
Scandinavian Journal o\ue001 Organizational Psychology
(SJOP). Det er n\u00e5 ca.3 \u00e5r siden sist nummer ble utgitt,
og siden den tid har mye skjedd med b\u00e5de tidsskri\ue001tet
og Norsk Organisasjonspsykologisk Selskap (NOS).
Lenge har det der\ue001or v\u00e6rt et sterkt \u00f8nske om \u00e5 \ue001\u00e5 dette
tidsskri\ue001tet opp og g\u00e5 igjen \u2013 det er jo tross alt det
eneste tidsskri\ue001tet i Skandinavia som er tilegnet \ue001eltet
organisasjonspsykologi.

Nye\ue000krefter

Tidsskri\ue001tet har n\u00e5 \ue001\u00e5tt6 nye par ben \u00e5 st\u00e5 p\u00e5, og
best\u00e5r av \ue001\u00f8lgende personer: Vilde Bernstr\u00f8m, Anette
Kristin B\u00f8 Andreassen, Helene Tronstad Moe, Kim
Rand-Hendriksen, Rol\ue001 Marvin B\u00f8e Lindgren og
Kjartan Thormods\u00e6ter. Sammen skal vi gj\u00f8re v\u00e5rt
ytterste \ue001or \u00e5 drive dette tidsskri\ue001tet videre, med det
m\u00e5l \u00e5 holde v\u00e5re lesere oppdatert p\u00e5 hva som skjer
innen\ue001or \ue001ag\ue001eltet organisasjonspsykologi.

Hva\ue000er\ue000nytt?

Tidsskri\ue001tet har som m\u00e5l \u00e5 v\u00e6re et \ue001orum \ue001or
problemstillinger innen \ue001orskning og praksis, men \ue001or
\u00e5 gj\u00f8re oss mer attraktive har vi gjort noen vesentlige
endringer:

1.Den st\u00f8rste endringen er at tidsskri\ue001tet n\u00e5 har et
\ue001ag\ue001ellepanel! Dette var et viktig l\u00f8\ue001t, og vi er n\u00e5 i
en prosess med \u00e5 \ue001\u00e5 tidsskri\ue001tet godkjent som niv\u00e5
1
2.En annen endring er at tidsskri\ue001tet n\u00e5 utkommer

i elektronisk \ue001orm. Det gj\u00f8r tidsskri\ue001tet lettere
tilgjengelig, samt mye rimeligere \u00e5 produsere. Det
er ikke dermed sagt at en papirutgave er utenkelig,
men ikke med det \ue001\u00f8rste. N\u00e5 \u00f8nsker vi \ue001\u00f8rst og
\ue001remst et stabilt tidsskri\ue001t

3.Vi tar sikte p\u00e5 to utgivelser i \u00e5ret. En rett \ue001\u00f8r
sommeren og en rett \ue001\u00f8r jul
4.Tidsskri\ue001tet opererer med en \u00ablett\u00bb og en \u00abtung\u00bb

del. I den lette omtales alt \ue001ra korte innlegg,
bokanmeldelser til aktuelle hendelser, mens i den
tunge delen \ue000nner du vitenskapelige artikler som

er \ue001ag\ue001ellevurdert
Vi \u00f8nsker at SJOP skal ha en bred pro\ue000l og s\u00f8ker
artikler som tar opp aktuelle tema innen\ue001or
alle psykologiske aspekter relatert til arbeid og
organisasjoner.

God lesing!
Mvh
Kjartan Thormods\u00e6ter, Redakt\u00f8r.

Scandinavian Journal O\ue001
Organizational Psychology is a
peer-reviewed Open Acces Journal.

E-mail: sjop@sjop.no

Publisher: Norsk
Organisasjonspsykologisk Selskap,
http.//www.psykol.org/

3
On the Validity o\ue000 M-SWOT \ue000or
Innovation Climate Development

Thomas Hoff1, Ellen Flakke2, Anne-Karin Larsen3,
Jon Anders Lone1, Cato A. Bj\u00f8rkli1 and Roald A.
Bj\u00f8rklund1

Abstract
The idea behind M-SWOT is to assess the o\ue002\ufffdani\ue003a-

assess the o\ue002\ufffdani\ue003a-
tion by way o\ue001 mappin\ufffd the pa\ue002ticipants\u2019 \ue002esponses
to open and \ufffdene\ue002al questions onto speci\ue000c, \ue002esea\ue002ch
based models in a pa\ue002ticula\ue002 domain; in this case
innovation climate. The p\ue002esent a\ue002ticle attempts to
conceptually validate SWOT by way o\ue001 p\ue002ovidin\ufffd a
link to the O\ue002\ufffdani\ue003ational Climate Measu\ue002e (OCM),
and to demonst\ue002ate disc\ue002iminato\ue002y validity o\ue001 SWOT
towa\ue002ds othe\ue002 \ue002elated, but unspeci\ue000c models (the
Job Cha\ue002acte\ue002istics Model (JCM)), based on SWOT
inte\ue002views with 15 mana\ufffde\ue002s in two hi\ufffdhly innova-
tive No\ue002we\ufffdian companies. The hypotheses a\ue002e that
the\ue002e will be a positive co\ue002\ue002elation between the OCM
dimensions and the SWOT statements; that the \ue001ou\ue002
quad\ue002ants o\ue001 OCM will cove\ue002 the SWOT statements
in a pa\ue002ticula\ue002 o\ue002de\ue002, and that mo\ue002e SWOT statements
will be ali\ufffdned with OCM than JCM. All hypotheses
we\ue002e con\ue000\ue002med. The \ue002esults indicate that an M-SWOT
app\ue002oach to innovation climate development is viable
with \ue002espect to the type o\ue001 content that the SWOT
inte\ue002views elicit.

Introduction

The Model Driven SWOT (M-SWOT) has been put
\ue001orth as a generic tool \ue001or organizational development
(Ho\ue001\ue001,2009). The idea behind M-SWOT is to assess
the organization by way o\ue001 mapping the participants\u2019
responses to open and general questions (the
SWOT \ue001ramework; Chermack,2007) onto speci\ue000c,
research based models (the \u2018M\u2019 o\ue001 M-SWOT) in a
particular domain, such as e.g. organizational change,
sa\ue001ety climate, psychosocial work environment, or
innovation climate. The speci\ue000c procedure is to ask
respondents \ue001our open ended questions about their
conception o\ue001 the topic at hand (e.g. team climate)
in their organization: \u2018What are the strengths
[weaknesses] [opportunities] [threats] regarding
the innovation climate [sa\ue001ety culture] [work
environment] [diagnostic communication] [team
work] in your organization?\u2019. Meaning\ue001ul statements

are then extracted \ue001rom the
transcriptions o\ue001 the interviews
and classi\ue000ed according to
established, research based
models o\ue001 the domain. This
provides a diagnostic tool
that in\ue001orms the researcher or
consultant about the relation
between the actual descriptive
refections o\ue001 the employees
o\ue001 the organization on the
one hand, and the normative
content o\ue001 the research based
model on the other.

The classical approach o\ue001
researchers or consultants
would be to use a survey
intended to capture the
dimensions o\ue001 a model. The
downside o\ue001 this approach
is that the items o\ue001 the
survey act as a cue to the
dimensions that it measures
(i.e\ue002eco\ufffdnition as opposed to

\ue002ecollection), and that it only

measures pre-speci\ue000ed categories that might or might
not be relevant to the context that is being studied.
The \ue001undamental di\ue001\ue001erence between M-SWOT and
the classical approach is that the \ue001ormer is based on
un-assisted refection (no content related cues are
given to the subject \u2013 only broad, generic questions
that is designed to keep the conversation between
the interviewer and interviewee fowing), and that
it does not presuppose any dimensions up \ue001ront. In
an organization development process, the M-SWOT
might give the client an opportunity to refect on
why only a proportion o\ue001 the statements in the
organization \ue000t established models. For example,
why do the employees in a particular sa\ue001ety intensive
organization refect a lot about e.g.t\ue002ust, but \ue001ails
to talk about e.g. closed loop communication? And
\ue001urthermore, why do the employees talk about issues
that are outside o\ue001 research based models? Are there
particular issues to the particular domain that are
important \ue001or the particular organization, but that are
outside the scope o\ue001 the general model? What are the
implications o\ue001 this \ue001or the organization at hand?

Whether the M-SWOT is really a \u2018generic\u2019 tool

\ue001or organizational development, is an empirical
question. For each domain, one needs to establish a
correspondence between the SWOT interviews and

1 Department o\ue001 Psychology, University o\ue001 Oslo
2 Department o\ue001 Leadership and Strategy, University o\ue001
Southern Denmark
3 Mercuri Urval, Norway
Thomas Ho\ue001\ue001
Anne-Karin Larsen

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->