Mechanisms of resilient organizations: an explanatory case study of the family business in Thailand
| dc.contributor.advisor | Sombat Kusumavalee | th |
| dc.contributor.author | Chayanoot Pungcharoenpong | th |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-04-19T08:43:52Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-04-19T08:43:52Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020 | th |
| dc.date.issuedBE | 2563 | th |
| dc.description | Thesis (Ph.D. (Human Resource and Organization Development))--National Institute of Development Administration, 2020 | th |
| dc.description.abstract | The main objective of this study was to advance the knowledge explaining why organizations are resilient by following Swanson and Chermack’s (2013) theory development in applied disciplines. The study covered only three phases: The conceptualization phase, the operationalization phase, and the confirmation phase. Based on the conceptualization and operationalization phase, nine propositions were identified before data collection based on literature review that explains the concept of resilient organization, such as a successful outcome of crisis management, positive organizational adjustment, and adaptability. Qualitative research design was employed in this study. In this regard, Yin’s (2014) explanatory case study and pattern matching method was employed in order to confirm the propositions and advance the knowledge explaining why organizations are resilient. The context of family business in Thailand was used as the context of study because of two reasons: a) family business has a stake in the Thai economy (Suehiro, 1997); and b) family business was consistently found that it is more resilient than other types of business, and it demonstrates stronger resilience despite an economic crisis (Amann & Jaussaud, 2012; Chrisman et al., 2011; Gupta & Levenburg, 2010; Kachaner et al., 2012; van Essen et al., 2015).The findings were based on the fifteen individual cases of organizations, that showed a resilient pattern and were family businesses in Thailand. According to the cross-case analysis, resilient organizations were created by factors occurred in three time periods. They are 1) before the crisis; 2) being aware of the crisis; and 3) managing the crisis that occurred. This applied to all types of resilient organizations (i.e. recovery resilience; resistant resilience; transformation resilience). Many cases consistently demonstrated that the period before the crisis was a substantial period as it buffered the consequences of crisis and supported the organizations after their crisis. The evidence from the cross-case analysis, in addition, suggested that the organizations in the period before the crisis emphasized on manpower strategies (i.e. building affective feelings and relationships among people in the organizations; developing tonic virtuousness) and management strategies (i.e. strengthening internal organizational operations; knowledge acquisition and past experience). In the face of a crisis, the organizations responded to the crisis by focusing on monetary strategies (i.e. financial saving; low cost operation; handling financial problems), manpower strategies (i.e. staff collaboration; organizational commitment; phasic virtuousness; leadership; attention to and assistance for staff affected by the crisis), management strategies (i.e. property loss mitigation; communication; organizational support; systems improvement; diversified business). Despite the organizational actions before the crisis and in the face of the crisis, resilient organizations also showed mindfulness/being aware of crisis. This was a crucial factor that prompted the organizations to be ready to cope with the crisis. With respect to the discussion of the cross-case findings, many theoretical propositions were confirmed and further indicated a degree of transferability. The analysis showed a degree of transferability of these factors. They are organizational mitigation in the face of a crisis, an appropriate business model generation, sufficiency thinking, tonic and phasic virtuousness, financial reserve, attention to a context, and human resources. The analysis also introduced new findings of this study, which were specifically related to the context of the family business in Thailand. They include the three period factors contributing to resilience development, sufficiency thinking, roles of leaders, organizational support, attention of executives given to their employees, knowledge and past experience, staff collaboration, organizational commitment, communication, virtuousness, quality of products and services, diversified business, and financial handling. | th |
| dc.format.extent | 1085 leaves | th |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | th |
| dc.identifier.other | b212155 | th |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://repository.nida.ac.th/handle/662723737/6831 | th |
| dc.language.iso | eng | th |
| dc.publisher | National Institute of Development Administration | th |
| dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | th |
| dc.subject.other | Organization | th |
| dc.subject.other | Family-owned business enterprises | th |
| dc.title | Mechanisms of resilient organizations: an explanatory case study of the family business in Thailand | th |
| dc.type | text::thesis::doctoral thesis | th |
| mods.genre | Dissertation | th |
| mods.physicalLocation | National Institute of Development Administration. Library and Information Center | th |
| thesis.degree.department | Graduate School of Human Resource Development | th |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Human Resource and Organization Development | th |
| thesis.degree.grantor | National Institute of Development Administration | th |
| thesis.degree.level | Doctoral | th |
| thesis.degree.name | Doctor of Philosophy | th |