Employees as ``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a transformation

concept

Rolf Wunderer
Institute for Leadership and HR Management, University of St Gallen, Switzerland

Keywords In this context, our approach for describing

Co-operation, Problem solving, Introduction and explaining co-intrapreneurship offers a
Leadership
The increasing pressure to compete, the comprehensive and integrated framework for
Abstract globalization of the economy as well as the situational applications.
The article offers a systemic transition of an industrial economy to a In this article a framework is presented
framework and transformational
``knowledge-based'' service economy all lead which outlines the basic elements of a
concept of ``co-intrapreneurship'',
to a higher demand for employees to increase transformative process towards
which is defined as the efficient
support of the enterprise strategy their level of performance. co-intrapreneurship. These elements refer
by problem-solving, socially In the modern context of a post-industrial to the goals, context, key competencies,
competent and implementation-
economy, the work force can no longer be motivation and identification, co-ordination
oriented thinking, and the acting and leadership and specific target-oriented
of as large a number of employees understood only as a factor of production, but
as possible at all hierarchies and has become a strategic determinant of policies. The results of empirical
functional areas with a high success (e.g. Blyton and Turnbull, 1992; investigations are integrated to support our
degree of self-initiative and sense
Jackson and Schuler, 1999). Human resources approach and to refer to its practical
of responsibility. The classical relevance.
leadership model of hierarchy and in particular are not primarily to be seen or
bureaucracy is questioned and treated as a ``cost component'', but as a
internal market control and co- potential source for added value and long-
operative social networks are
term investment. Furthermore, the Co-intrapreneurship ± a need of
offered as alternative systems of
transition in basic values favors a corporate practice
co-ordination. A particular
emphasis is placed on a specific combination of independence and creative Changes in the business environment and
leadership and typology approach teamwork as well as service and result- management philosophy have led to an
for selection and assessing co-
oriented activity (Ulrich, 1997; Ulrich et al., increasing number of companies demanding
intrapreneurial potential, key
competencies and motivation, 1999). internal entrepreneurship, not only from
which also serve as target- Seeking alternatives to command-and- their managers, but from all employees. To
oriented strategy for developing control, new post-bureaucratic models of quote a few examples ± mostly from corporate
``co-intrapreneurship''. In addition visions or management principles:
organizations, based on co-ordination,
to presenting illustrative figures
emphasize the need for decentralizing Everyone behaves in an intrapreneurial, non-
and referring to various empirical
authority and development of team-oriented bureaucratic and productive manner (IBM).
studies and surveys, the article
concludes with some practical designs. Decision-making processes and We ask our employees to be ``entrepreneurs''
guiding principles for the
entrepreneurial activities need to be in their own affairs, to recognize the precise
advancement of effective strengths and competitive advantages of their
``co-intrapreneurship''. conveyed to the level of each individual in
business, to believe in themselves and in
the organization in order to tap their specific
success (Siemens).
competencies and knowledge for the future
We build on independence; i.e. we pre-
success of the company.
determine a framework . . . We promote and
Accordingly, management practice reward intrapreneurial behaviour and the
and leadership theory have developed willingness to take a risk (Ciba).
concepts which recognize aspects of
Received: August 1999 We think, decide, and behave in an
Revised/accepted: ``internal entrepreneurship'', sometimes intrapreneurial way (UBS ± Swiss Bank
April 2001 under a different name. Entrepreneurship Corporation).
in organisations serves as a strategic Outstanding and innovative products and
core competency which opens non-copyable services will be the focus and essential
competition advantages on middle components of value-driven management.
Leadership & Organization view. This requires a management philosophy
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211
The research register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
# MCB University Press
[ISSN 0143-7739] http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers http://www.emerald-library.com/ft

[ 193 ]
Rolf Wunderer which is based on intrapreneurial thought effective and processes that support all
Employees as and behaviour (DaimlerChrysler). members of an organization and their co-
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a operating interaction. Co-intrapreneurial
transformation concept These statements of leading companies
orientation unites a responsibility for the
Leadership & Organization manifest the contemporary requirement of
Development Journal whole and at the same time enables teams to
an internal entrepreneurship within
22/5 [2001] 193±211 practice their own local flexibility and
corporate practice. Ideas relating to
freedom. In this way, a co-intrapreneurial
entrepreneurship were primarily introduced
organization is able to integrate the result
in Germany by independent pioneer-
and efficiency orientation with
entrepreneurs, who not only preached
commitment, openness, and trust in
``corporate social partnership'' but also
voluntary learning organizational
practiced and implemented it. However, once
networks.
they had retired, their model was often not
continued or abandoned. A further feature of
these historical initiatives was an
orientation towards financial models of Elements of the transformation
participation and co-determination. What process
was primarily discussed and recognized as a The essential elements are illustratively
normative concept of social small and systematized in Figure 1, and will be
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the 1950s discussed subsequently.
and 1960s is now developing as a
management concept for global players. Goals
Today, economic and socio-ethical themes P1: Added value for the company and the
such as co-determination or shared creation of benefits for the central
ownership are no longer the focus of stakeholder groups are ranked higher
attention. They have been replaced by than maximizing benefit for one
demands on contemporary and efficient stakeholder group.
(knowledge) management (Krogh et al., 2000)
Argument 1
± particularly by large enterprises striving
The main objective is to safeguard or
for cultural, organizational and strategic
increase the ``company value'' in the long
change.
term with and by creating benefit for all
central stakeholder groups. This does not
support an unbalanced orientation towards
Definition and objectives of just one group of stakeholders. The so-called
co-intrapreneurship stakeholder approach has been discussed in
Entrepreneurship can be defined as the management theory since the 1960s (Cleland
process of eliciting or evoking value from and Bruno, 1996; Freeman, 1984; Rappaport,
new and unique combinations or re- 1997). In accordance with this approach, it is
arrangements of resources in an uncertain management's duty to record, assess and,
and ambiguous environment. Consequently, where possible, satisfy the needs and
internal entrepreneurs can then be demands of the central stakeholders and
understood as co-operating organization thereby increase the company's value. The
members, which innovate, identify and key stakeholders include: customers,
create business opportunities, assemble and suppliers, shareholders and, last but not
co-ordinate new combinations or least, all employees. In countries which lack
arrangements of resources so as to yield or raw materials and in our service and
enhance value. They initiate actions to fill knowledge-based post-industrial society, the
currently unsatisfied needs and claims or to latter are the most important source of added
do more efficiently what is already being value (Baumol, 1959; Clarkson, 1995).
done. Therefore, the objective of Companies which want to recruit and
intrapreneurial activities is to safeguard promote employees as co-intrapreneurs in
and to increase the corporate value in the the long term must recognize them as
long term by optimizing the benefits for the partners and refrain from using them as
central stakeholders. Even more than the stakeholders' investment goods. This
marketing or person-oriented (Foxall and requires an appropriate understanding ±
Minkes, 1996) or conventional approach of especially from the management of large
``intrapreneurship'' (Pinchot, 1985), a ``co- joint-stock companies ± which is expressed in
(operative) intrapreneurship'' combines the both corporate principles and everyday
organization-internal competition with a behaviour. The same also means that co-
long-term, win-win-oriented co-operation. intrapreneurs are entitled to a tangible
Consequently, co-intrapreneurial benefit of the added value which is co-created
development can be understood as socially by them (Beam and McFadden, 1998).
[ 194 ]
Rolf Wunderer Figure 1
Employees as From employees to co-intrapreneurs ± a framework for transformation
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a
transformation concept
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211

However, our co-intrapreneurial approach is Argument 1

a concept of intrinsic motivation and The macro and micro context. The macro
behaviour, which should not be distracted by context concern the surrounding field of the
extrinsic incentives (e.g. payment) that may company; e.g. politics, law, economic,
undermine or drive away the inherent societal and technological environment.
motivation (Frey, 1997; Deci and Ryan, 1985; Current contextual changes ± like increasing
Ryan and Deci, 2000). Finally, concerning competition and globalization as well as
behavioural objectives, co-intrapreneurship cultural value shifts ± require engaged co-
strives for realizing processes connected intrapreneurial employers on a broad base.
with mutual sympathy, shared knowledge, The fundamental conditions of the internal
communal thinking, common performance, company form the micro context. We can
conjoint responsibility; co-development and differentiate between cultural, strategic, and
fair profit sharing. organizational realms to be further
discussed.. The arrangement of these
Conclusion 1 dimensions determines to what extent
Until now, a generally theoretical and co-intrapreneurship will be promoted or
practical solution for simultaneously and restrained.
optimally satisfying all central stakeholder Stakeholder. Since enterprises live in
groups has not been found. Foremost, it is exchange with their environment, the
the duty of management to increase the interests and needs of their stakeholders ± in
company's value. As this will be not particular capitals owner, customers,
possible without conflicts, handling this employees, suppliers, society and the
challenge will always be a non-conferable environment ± determine to a considerable
task of top management. For this, degree both the possibility and the necessity
situation-adapted solutions need to be for a ``lived co-intrapreneurship''. In times of
found in order to satisfy equally the claims homogeneous products, a co-intrapreneurial
of all central stakeholders including the approach, supporting pace, reliability,
employees. quality, or friendliness can facilitate the
focus towards customers and service. This
Context sustains and increases the enterprise value
P2: The macro and micro conditions, as well in addition to contributing to broader
as the resources, are the basic conditions societal interests, e.g. an increase of the gross
for the co-intrapreneurial transformation national product or a lowering of
process. unemployment.
[ 195 ]
Rolf Wunderer Resources. To what extent creative talents should focus on achieving
Employees as co-intrapreneurship will be successfully strategic corporate goals. He considers the
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a implemented further depends on the
transformation concept central criteria for his entrepreneurial
availability of personnel, financial, concept to be the ability and motivation to
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal informational, natural and technical implement by persuading and enforce new
22/5 [2001] 193±211 resources. Thus, the generation and solutions to problems. It is essential that
realization of new ideas presupposes not only these competencies be used efficiently, i.e.
a sufficient stock of information, but often that they meet all objectives, satisfy all needs,
also financial and technical means as well as and create benefits within the given
energetic support by the surrounding social timeframe. It is common knowledge, in
and economic field. theory and in practice, that the problematic
Conclusion 2 nature of implementation is often critical to
Whether or not ``internal entrepreneurship'' the success of transformation processes. For
will thrive can be affected by human resources this reason, it is often embarked upon
in the external and internal job market. In reluctantly. Concerning social competencies
``entrepreneurial countries'', like the USA, this for entrepreneurial behaviour, only a limited
is much easier to implement than in amount of material in the literature was
developing or transforming countries with found. Either mere features are named,
authoritarian or bureaucratic structures. which lead to competent self-assertion or a
``diplomatic'' pursuit of interests, etc. or
Potential definitions focus on altruistic patterns of
P3: Selection and advancement concentrates behaviour. We refer to a basic definition by
on a few key co-intrapreneurial Preiser (1978), who describes social
competencies rather than a catalogue of competency as a successful combination of
general, technical or job-specific autonomy and co-operation (see Figure 3).
characteristics This ability and the motivation to behave
accordingly can be characterized as
Argument 3
Personnel management still prefers concepts ``co-operative self-organization''. This implies
stemming from its bureaucratic- that to act as socially competent means to be
administrative history (Wunderer, 1995; able to deal with one self and others
Ulrich, 1997). This explains why appraisal constructively.
instruments rarely comprise less than 15-20 We are convinced that a concept of co-
criteria. The estimation of potential is driven intrapreneurship can only be successfully
by an assessment of employees' professional implemented and further developed if
and behavioural characteristics, with special essential social competencies are guaranteed
criteria added for managers. The classical and practiced within a team and in cross-
performance appraisal is based on a job functional co-operation. An entrepreneur
description and concentrates on criteria may be successful if, in accordance with the
specific to the job. Years of research into this homo-oeconomicus concept, he or she behaves
area have lead us to the conclusion that this in an egoistic and individualistic manner in
approach to appraisal contributes very little anonymous markets. According to Pinchot,
to the strategic control of behaviour. an intrapreneur can also achieve short-term
Conversely, applications of the ``key success in internal markets with a masterly
qualification concept'' appear to be more application of micro tactics or politics aÁ la
appropriate for promoting internal Machiavelli (1950).
enterprise, by concentrating on a few extra- Pinchot's ten commandments (Pinchot,
functional competencies. In our own 1985) manifest some of these:
approach only three key competencies were 1 Come to work each day willing to be fired.
selected; namely: conceptualization 2 Circumvent any orders aimed at stopping
competencies (creative problem solving for your dream.
retructuring and continuous improvement), 3 Do any job needed to make your project
implementation competencies (effective work, regardless of your job description.
persuasiveness and enforcement) and 4 Network with good people to assist you.
co-operative self-organization (social 5 Build a spirited team: choose, and work,
competencies) (see Figure 2). only with the best.
Conceptual and implemenation-oriented 6 Work underground as long as you can ±
competencies have been selected from the publicity triggers the corporate immune
area of intellectual competencies. mechanism.
Schumpeter (1912, 1934) emphasizes that 7 Be loyal and truthful to your sponsors.
creativity alone could easily end in 8 Remember it is easier to ask forgiveness
daydreaming. In order to avoid this, all than for permission.
[ 196 ]
Rolf Wunderer Figure 2
Employees as Co-intrapreneurial key competencies
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a
transformation concept
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211

9 Be true to your goals, but be realistic found in our empirical studies, the results
about the ways to achieve them. shown in Figure 4.
10 Keep the vision strong.
Conclusion 3
However, co-intrapreneurship requires long- In socially stable organizations, which are
term, mutual and trust-based co-operation based on the division of labor and operate for
within a social network (Axelrod, 1984), the long term, close internal co-operation in
conjunction with the ability and willingness
which Pinchot has integrated in his recent
of employees to work in a team within a
modification of the commandments (Pinchot
social network are essential for an efficient
and Pellmann, 1999). This distinguishes
co-intrapreneurial practice. In addition to
co-intrapreneurship from the classical these indispensable social competencies,
definition of an individualistic there are two further key qualifications for
entrepreneur's and the conventional co-intrapreneurial behaviour: creative
intrapreneur's role in a fundamental way. problem solving and the operative ability to
Concerning the dissemination of the implement and accomplish. All of these
co-intrapreneurial key competencies we should become part of the company's

Figure 3
Social competencies

[ 197 ]
Rolf Wunderer Figure 4
Employees as Dissemination of co-intrapreneurial capacities and motivation
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a
transformation concept
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211

structural conditions and consequently objective. During a survey (Wunderer, 1999,

increase its value. p. 47) HRM managers from large companies
P4: Co-intrapreneurial motivation and were asked to respond to the question
identification are first analyzed ``Which instruments could be used to support
separately from relevant competencies co-intrapreneurial behaviour?''. They ranked
and promoted in a targeted manner. the instruments in the following order:
. management by objectives;
Argument 4 . individual area of responsibility;
Our research into the nature and the . targeted selection of personnel;
distinctive features of the three selected key . participative/delegative leadership;
co-intrapreneurial competencies has lead us . personnel training and development;
to elevate the identification and motivation of . personnel appraisal/employee
employees in addition to the development of
conversation;
competencies. After all, a competency . demanding tasks;
approach does not automatically guarantee . performance-related pay;
that the potential identified by a company will . internal/external customer surveys;
also be appointed in that company ± not even . design of a corporate culture;
to support issues that have been strategically . profit sharing;
selected. Many academics who support the . shares for employees; and
statement that key abilities can easily be . fringe benefits.
elevated are probably referring above all to
employees' motivation to practice them. Bass Objective- and performance-oriented
(1985) even defines leadership as ``the change motivation. The aforementioned responses
of motives or habits''. In the context of the particularly favor transactional, i.e.
shift of employees' values towards post- objective-oriented and performance-oriented
materialistic and leisure-oriented structures management (Bass, 1985). In contrast,
(Inglehart, 1989), managers are faced with concepts for monetary benefit sharing were
specific tasks. Above all, this concerns the considered to be less important. Third, it is
significance of an employee's own tasks as a important to know the extent to which
central source of identification as well as the employees assume that their commitment
decline in importance of financial incentives. will bring them success. This assessment of
According to the process-driven motivation the probability of success will be
theory (Lawler, 1991, 1994; Vroom, 1964), the considerably influenced by the degree to
primary role of leadership is to influence the which one, as an employee but also as a
assessment (valence) of strategic goals and manager, attributes success or failure to
methods; here we are referring to the oneself or to others (attribution theory of
previously discussed transformational motivation (Weiner, 1990)). These three
leadership. central components of motivation should be
Second, it states that management involves influenced in a targeted manner through
promoting and evaluating the suitability of structural management and interactive
measures that are appointed to achieve an leadership.
[ 198 ]
Rolf Wunderer Finally, management is associated with the than situationally dependent motivation.
Employees as extent to which individual aspects of This latter attaches a lot of importance to
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a motivation contribute to the tasks personnel selection and an appropriate
transformation concept
performed. With reference to Maslow's (1987) appointment.
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal and Herzberg et al.'s (1973) classical concepts, In contrast to extra-functional co-
22/5 [2001] 193±211 it is important to support individual intrapreneurial competencies, a reliable
employees as they strive for more ``growth assessment of motivation and identification
motives'' (e.g. responsibility, team is difficult because they are part of the
motivation, challenging tasks) or ``hygiene ``black-box'' of the personality and may vary
factors'', such as the condition of one's according to the situation. Even for two key
workplace or material incentives. With this qualifications such as implementation and
coincides the need to reduce motivational social competencies, statements conveying
barriers, as entrepreneurially oriented potential are of limited significance on their
employees are already motivated, but can own. Greater significance must therefore be
become demotivated. A demotivated attached to the application of (self)
workforce represents a serious challenge for motivation ± which changes according to the
an organization. Trying to meet and/or situation ± than to the ability to be motivated.
exceed performance goals with a demotivated In comparison with competencies,
workforce is frustrating at best and motivational behaviour is also
disastrous at worst, as an unmotivated comparatively easier to alter. Amazingly,
workforce produces inferior results and can (self) motivation has neither been addressed
suffocate nearly any attempt at as a theme in (neo) classical economics, nor
organizational improvement (Longenecker in discussions about knowledge
et al., 1999). A climate of demotivation and management. Impressive examples in
negativity stifles organizational change, practice are employees who, for example,
risk-taking, and proactive behaviour, while continue to operate a business at their own
increasing stress and communication risk in the form of a ``spin off'' or set one up
breakdowns (Meyer, 1978; Spitzer, 1997). on their own. However, transfers of
Therefore, as part of a proactive responsibility for results to leaders of profit
co-intrapreneurial approach, structural centers can affect a similar ``change in
and interactive strategies as well as values''. Affected parties are themselves often
measurements for preventing and surprised to learn what has resulted from
overcoming demotivation and work their co-intrapreneurial behaviour.
alienation will be essential (Spitzer, 1997).
Conclusion 4
Identification patterns as person-related
Motivation and identification are, at first, to
co-intrapreneurial basic motivation. The
be analyzed separately from relevant
identification patterns of individual
competencies and promoted in a targeted
employees are less dependent upon the
manner. This reduces over-generalized
situation because they are specific to the
results for both areas. Values, which
person and they are constant but growing
constitute a corporate culture, should
(Ackermann, 2000; Wunderer and Mittmann,
correspond with employees' individual
1995). It is crucial to know the following:
values and motives or at least be compatible
whether or not employees see their
with them. Selection and advancement
customers and products or services above all
should occur in accordance with a few key
as objects of identification; to what extent do
co-intrapreneurial competencies instead of a
they demonstrate voluntary commitment or
wide catalogue of general, technical or
take on extra-functional roles; how efficiently
job-specific characteristics.
do they implement what they know; how
much is it part of their personality to seize
Co-ordination and leadership
opportunities or to be motivated by co-
P5: A configuration of market and social
operation; and finally how strong is their
network as systems of co-ordination
commitment and loyalty to their own
modify and substitute the classical
organization, in the sense of ``organizational
leadership model of hierarchy and
citizenship'' (Moorman, 1991; Smith et al.,
bureaucracy.
1983).
Organizational citizenship supports Argument 5
co-operation and co-intrapreneurship by The definition of internal entrepreneurship
preventing problems, creating general ± which should not be forgotten ± is closely
``sportsmanship'' and taking on extra connected to market-oriented concepts of
responsibilities (Bovens, 1998). Such basic control/command. The concept of ordo-
and relatively stable attitudes are more liberalism (Koslowski, 2000) is particularly
important for co-intrapreneurial behaviour important for structural control concepts. In
[ 199 ]
Rolf Wunderer accordance with this, a structural policy and an effective short-term fairness of
Employees as appropriate global control of the economy distribution (e.g. performance in exchange
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a should support the promotion of for money equivalents). In comparison,
transformation concept
entrepreneurship. Direct political or social transaction is distinguished by mutual
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal administrative interventions are only trust in long-term, non-specified, or non-
22/5 [2001] 193±211 accepted in exceptional cases (``management specifiable returns for actual performance,
by exception''). Schumpeter's personage and the hope of long-term fairness and
evolutionary-dynamic approach considered commitment, as well as stakeholder
structural conditions more as constraints, orientation (Berthoin et al., 1994; Clarkson,
which the typical entrepreneur avoids, break 1995; Lamb, 1994). Human or, to be precise,
through, or redesigns (Schumpeter, 1912/ social capital has recently been defined as the
1934, 1942, p. 84). We can distinguish between totality of all relations in a network, which is
four concepts for internal control, which tend itself considered to be an accelerator of
to be used simultaneously, but with differing change (Nohria and Ghoshal, 1997; Sachwald,
importance. They are hierarchy, 1998) referring to the meaning of mutual
bureaucracy, internal market, and social values and concepts (Witt, 1998).
network, as illustrated in Table I with its Generally, social networks produce a
essential criteria. stronger and more long-term effect due to the
Prominent features of the internal social emotionally sound relationships between the
network ± also occasionally referred to as a participants in the internal market, as
clan or ``corporate family'' (Ouchi, 1981; opposed to professional relationships in a
Wilkins and Ouchi, 1983) ± include: mutual bureaucracy. Furthermore, in comparison to
co-operation, human relations and emotional a hierarchy, a social network and internal
exchange of ``homo socialis'', but also markets are less instruction-driven and less
sustainable fostering of useful ``homo organized by others, but more proactive and
oeconomicus'' relations. In this primarily more lateral. Networking occurs in a
social transaction, it is not cash value that is functional and emotional ``exchange market''
created and measured by output results, but based on mutual reliance, whereby the focus
(expected) motives and intentions are equally is on the achievement of synergy, win-win
valued. Trust is the prevalent base and co-operation and voluntary commitment.
medium of coordination (Parson, 1951). The Internal market control is subject to specific
difference between economic exchange and conditions, especially compared with the
social transaction can be described as (neo)classical model of external control via
follows. Economic exchange is characterized anonymous markets and short-term
by a calculated orientation, and focuses on orientation. These include the long-term
payment of cash in return for services. formation of personal social connections in
Effective exchange ratios dominate as well as accordance with the concept of infinite

Table I
Systems of co-ordination
Bureaucracy/ Internal social
Concept Hierarchy technocracy network Internal market
Basis of Power Professionalism Co-operation Competition
legitimization Decisions/ Rules/regulations Trust Performance
instructions Obligation Results
Management Instruction-related Professional Relationship- Profit-oriented
philosophy oriented
Emphasis of role Subordinate Expert Colleague/ Intrapreneur
co-worker
Prevailing Satisfaction of Loyalty to the Satisfaction of Customer
orientation towards managers system managers/ satisfaction
reference groups Personal colleagues and (internally as well
satisfaction employees as externally)
Specific indicators Ability and Competence Ability to establish Ability to be
of competencies/ willingness to adapt Experience relations innovative
qualifications Reliability Reliability Fundamental beliefs Willingness to take
(selection) Operative ability Rule-orientation Understanding a risk
and willingness to Justice Individual and Ability to implement
implement mutual support and enforce
Mutual trust Opportunity and
profit orientation

[ 200 ]
Rolf Wunderer games (Axelrod, 1984). Internal market Co-ordination and leadership
Employees as control has been increasingly practiced P6: Structural-systemic management and
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a
transformation concept and since the 1990s. It has also been used development define the conditions, which
for internal service providers, such as promote interactive and
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal HRM departments. A co-intrapreneurial transformational management that is
22/5 [2001] 193±211 organization can be approached appropriate to both the situation and
through internal markets organised by employees.
decentralized profit centers or ``value-added
Argument 6
centers''.
As previously indicated, guiding
Both systems of co-ordination lead to a new
entrepreneurial values can only guarantee
and specific cultural and organisational mix
success if the business environment provides
between market and social exchange that can
supporting conditions. Bill Hewlett once said:
be characterized as an ``internal social
``I am convinced that men and women want to
market economy'' in which its players are
produce good and creative work and that
viewed as ``co-intrapreneurs''. ``Social'' refers
they will achieve this once they have the
to the original meaning of the word, implying
appropriate environment!'' This is confirmed
``relating to'' and ``supporting the
by economic studies, which were unable to
community''. In this combination of co-
prove a significant connection between
operation and competition we, and the
extrinsic incentives or profit sharing and the
majority of practitioners we have
motivation to succeed (Frey, 1997). With this
interviewed (see Figure 5), envision a
in mind, the aforementioned Ordo-
desired, and effective system of co-ordination
Liberalism approach would be ideal for
for co-intrapreneuship. Hierarchy and
controlling the economy as a whole. It
bureaucratic control still apply, but have and
involves the adoption of structural measures
will become less important.
to create the desired context, i.e. a
Conclusion 5 work situation, which promotes
As a priority, co-intrapreneurship should be co-intrapreneurship. Structural management
promoted by (internal) market control and can be accomplished by adopting four
co-operative social networks, as a way of fair approaches (see Figure 6). Co-intrapreneurial
``co-opetition''. culture, strategy, (self) organization, and

Figure 5
Systems of co-ordination today and 2010

[ 201 ]
Rolf Wunderer Figure 6
Employees as
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a Dimensions and levels of structural leadership
transformation concept
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211

personnel structure. These are integrated They should then evaluate the extent to
correspondingly into four levels (person, which these are compatible with values
department, company, and society). The already practiced by their employees.
influence of one, for example,. corporate Finally, the ability to convert the actual
culture alone is insufficient, as it only culture of the company to the envisioned
constitutes one of the 16 fields of influence co-intrapreneurial culture is critical for
and design. success. It is important that in their role as
A weakness of many business and promoter, senior managers set an example by
management theories is that they only demonstrating an emphatic commitment.
discuss culture, strategy, and organization Only then can culture be understood as an
with regard to the company, though all four arrangement of values, which are commonly
levels and fields of design need to be shared and practiced. However, the final
considered in a co-ordinated manner. responsibility remains with all persons
Culture. The transformation from concerned.
bureaucracy towards a co-intrapreneurial Strategy. Strategy connects valuable
culture can be illustrated by the shifts shown objectives with appropriate measures. Here,
in Table II. customer-driven strategic orientation will be
First, these shifts involve the development particularly important because employees
of corporate and management culture by are also focused on the internal market.
adopting management values, which promote Equally significant is the use of supportive
co-intrapreneuship. Such values include management instruments such as
(self-)initiative, support of personal concerns ``management by objectives'' or ``by
and ideas, as well as service oriented and pro- exception'', because they are the center of
social behaviour. We recommend that these transactional leadership (Bass, 1985). In
are recorded and anchored in corporate and addition to this result-oriented approach,
management principles, in order to co-intrapreneuship can be deployed
encourage and support entrepreneurial effectively by co-operative management
collaboration. Furthermore, our approach to styles. They are based on delegation of
co-intrapreneurship also considers the internal control prices as well as profit
ongoing societal transitions of basic values sharing, which depends on the performance
and the increasing need for leisure time. of either individuals, teams, departments, or
Companies of tomorrow will constructively the entire company. However, it must be
integrate central values and key features of noted that the mere announcement of new
the private world into the working context. organizational structures does not
[ 202 ]
Rolf Wunderer Table II
Employees as Elements of a culture supporting co-intrapreneurship
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a
transformation concept Instructions and regulations => Meaning through vision
Leadership & Organization Change as a threat => Change as an opportunity
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211 Fear of mistakes => Willingness to make mistakes and learn
Questioning of new ideas => Committed support of ideas
Big-bang-innovation => Continuous improvement
Short-term self-interest => Long-term co-operative orientation
Monitoring and control => Mutual trust and freedom
Internal self-orientation => Customer orientation

Note: Compare also Bitzer (1991)

correspondingly change the conventional 1 Formulate an inspiring vision and

ideas of employees. demand respect, trust, and loyalty.
Organization and personnel structure. 2 Introduce new ideas and improve
Finally, the design of the qualitative employees' understanding, as well as their
personnel structure is important, whereby perception of and ability to solve
the focus is on co-intrapreneurial problems.
competencies and motives. These 3 Increase motivation and self-confidence in
characterize the personnel prerequisites and personal abilities, and achieve this by
chances for the transformation process individually supporting the employees.
towards co-intrapreneurship. As social
In our own surveys regarding the preferred
competencies are only changeable on a long-
manager type, it was evident that those
term basis, there is a particular need for a
interviewed (students and managers)
befitting and potential oriented recruiting
significantly preferred transformational
and selection.
managers in contrast to gripping,
The status of interactive leadership.
enthusiastic, charismatic managers, because
Interactive leadership remains significantly they encourage self-control and self-
important. Every company can consider itself development. The roles of coach and
fortunate if it has charismatic leaders motivator were identified as being
(Conger, 1989) at all levels, who can particularly important. Also significant,
successfully implement previously developed more managers can accomplish this profile of
entrepreneurial structures with their requirement.
employees'. However, one must not be under
any illusions that their numbers approach a Conclusion 6
normal distribution; charismatic people are Structural-systemic management and
rare. Therefore, a general management model interactive leadership must be consistent
should not be based on these exceptional with each other. Demanding structural
cases. ``There is nothing wonderful about control requires appropriate interpretation,
being an effective manager . . . If it were motivation, preventing or overcoming
necessary for saints, poets, or top class demotivation and situational
scholars to fill their intellectual position, implementation, which are part of the
organization on a grand scale would simply be manager's responsibility. For qualified and
absurd and impossible'' (Drucker, 1993). committed employees who acknowledge
According to Drucker (1993) in his statement responsibility for their own actions, focus
regarding ``ideal managers'', the needs of large can be placed on structural management
organizations must be satisfied by ordinary measures, in which culture is again of
people who can achieve exceptional primary importance. Transformational
performance. With charismatic management, management forms or those which involve a
there is a danger that employees will become delegation of values are easier to achieve and
infantile, particularly if those affected cease to less problematic than seducing, charismatic
reflect upon their influence process (Manz managers.
P7: Proactive self-control and self-
and Sims, 1991). Bass's (1985) concept of
organization in the context of
transformational management, based on the
structural management reduces
transactional approach, appears to be more
Tayloristic control by others.
suitable for our specific theme than the
charismatic ``hero approach''. With the help of Argument 7
the following three managerial tasks, F.W. Taylor's maxim is well known:
employees can develop more demanding ``Workers have no need to think because
values and objectives: managers do that for them''. Recently, this
[ 203 ]
Rolf Wunderer principle has regained its importance in it is recommended that employees be divided
Employees as practice. The ``shepherd'' philosophy of into teams based on their co-intrapreneurial
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a management, which states that success is abilities and attitudes to avoid the utopian
transformation concept
due to the ``boss'' alone, has certainly played idea that one may win all employees over. In
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal a part in this. However much it is essential this context, a co-intrapreneurial typology is
22/5 [2001] 193±211 that managers remain responsible for more appropriate. First, it differentiates
stimulus, co-ordination, situational among employees according to their co-
interpretation and final decisions, the focus intrapreneurial capabilities and motivation.
for co-intrapreneurial orientation is In a second step, distinguished measures for
different. Appropriate leadership and a selection and advancement and their
supporting context of structural management situational implementation can be developed.
by culture, strategy and organization should In our typology we attempt to make a
center on promoting competent and distinction between employees according to
motivated employees. However, the their co-intrapreneurial competencies and
foundation for employees' attention, motivation. Initial self-assessments and self-
reflexivity, participation in decision making, appraisals as well as assessments by direct
involvement in negotiations, and sharing of managers are of particular interest. Our own
responsibilities lies in their ability and surveys of three studies with Swiss and
motivation to be voluntarily committed German companies with four typology
(Yoon et al., 1994; Walton, 1987) and to be groups ± described in Figure 7 ± are
proactive via manager control and coached particularly relevant here.
self-control (Manz and Sims, 1987). Generally, Such analyses still have to be conducted in
according to the subsidiarity principle, the more detail; but the initial results point out
manager should only intervene if a the extent to which one could or must
particular employee is overburdened by the promote these co-intrapreneurial groups
tasks in a particular situation. After using different HR policies. This segmenting
appropriate personnel selection and training, approach is a central component of the
this should be an exceptional rule for special necessary HR development of target groups,
cases (management by exception). as in a sequential way it is possible to assess
Management principles based on the and promote key capabilities and
``systems approach'' (Drucker, 1993; Stacey, qualifications more specifically.
1992, 1999; Stacey et al., 2000) also consider
Conclusion 8
the self-control concept to be a functional
Realistic models for the advancement and
prerequisite for success in terms of the
development of co-intrapreneurship demand
design, development and control of
a rejection of exclusive approaches (e.g. only
organizations.
for senior management) or of over-
Conclusion 7 generalized ideas focussing on collective
Co-intrapreneurship can be promoted changes in behaviour for all employees.
effectively by combining self-responsibility Employees should be managed, developed
and self-organization with transformational and promoted according to their individual
leadership. The structural management of or potential degree of co-intrapreneurial
culture, organization, strategy and personnel behaviour. Our typology enables a
selection must support this. The fact that self- differentiating analysis and strategy
control cannot be expected and demanded according to the category of behaviour, key
from all employees in the same way will be capabilities, phases of development and
discussed in more detail later. single components. In this way it
avoids utopian demands of ``perfect''
Policies (selection development and co-intrapreneurial behaviour from all
advancement) employees and promotes purposeful and
P8: Differentiated (self) selection, placement differentiated team building.
and development in accordance with a P9: Target-group-development complete
specific typology approach prevent team-related and individualized
demands for exclusive or utopian- employee development.
collective behaviour.
Argument 9
Argument 8 A target-focused orientation allows specific
Classical personnel management is still ± treatment of different levels of employees.
under bureaucratic as well as under legal According to their level of problem-solving
postulates ± distinctly shaped by collective competencies and social competencies, we
personnel strategies. However, these are distinguish employees who withdraw
insufficient for successfully promoting internally, employees with little
internal entrepreneurship. As an alternative, co-intrapreneurial competencies,
[ 204 ]
Rolf Wunderer Figure 7
Employees as
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a Typology for analyzing entrepreneurship (3 studies, n = 240, 1998-99)
transformation concept
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211

co-intrapreneurially motivated employees appropriately ± is an excellent instrument for

and co-intrapreneurs. Furthermore we add appraising one's own and others' individual
sub-employers who are relatively and team objects and performance. It also
autonomous (e.g. managers of profit centers). encourages all participants to propose and
With this typolology, each target group introduce subsequent HR development
can receive appropriate support and measures, which suit their individual needs
development. Figure 8 illustrates a simplified and demands, allowing an appropriate
model based on this typology. monitoring of success in the forthcoming
In the context of promoting target groups, period.
team development plays an important role,
Conclusion 9
particularly because it can provide
We consider the typology approach, which
employees ± with different levels of maturity
shows similarities to an portfolio analysis, to
(Hersey and Blanchard, 1987) ± with
be the central solution for developing,
important balances and opportunities to
leading and integrating employees, who
socialize This has been confirmed by
possess different co-intrapreneurial
investigations on project groups, quality
competencies and levels of motivation into
circles and especially within semi-
social network, developing them and
autonomous group works (Adam, 1991;
increasing their capacity for self-
Collins, 1995; Ehlan, 1994; Teare et al., 1997).
organization and development. However,
Even less-competent employees can be
individual and mutual support within the
purposefully included into group tasks in a
management dyad remains a central function
co-intrapreneurial manner. Furthermore, the
for line managers and their employees.
team is able to provide a good contribution to
P10: Self-development and on-the-job
peer group development. The promotion of
development conducted by managers
teams and target groups should, therefore,
are ranked higher than central
take priority over collective personnel
personnel development and off-the-job
policies, which concentrate on general
advancement.
programs. Moreover, the team can suitably
distribute different role requirements to Argument 10
individual members (Margerison and Ultimately the development of co-
McCann, 1985). Managers have the specific intrapreneurial potential is a task which
task of individual support of the team ± must be performed primarily by the
particularly in assisting them to help employees themselves in the context of their
themselves. individuation process (Jung et al., 1972). Self-
An individualized employee appraisal ± development engages employees in a
when prepared and implemented particular way as they are at the same time
[ 205 ]
Rolf Wunderer Figure 8
Employees as
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a Typology for differentiated support of co-intrapreneurship
transformation concept
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211

personally concerned and can act transformation concept in the context of

accordingly. change mangement. Additionally, to enhance
Advantages of the co-operative self- the co-intrapreneurial abilities of existing
development process are that it: members it will be important to design
. corresponds to aspirations for direct specific corporate training and development
self-responsibility; activities.
. enables situation/need-specific solutions;
. ensures higher level of acceptance and a Conclusion 10
sustainability of commitment; and The first and last responsibility for
. offers alleviation and relief for managers. developing co-intrapreneurial competencies
and values lies within the employee him or
However, unqualified employees should not herself ± also in the context of employability,
be overtaxed with demands of self- which is the employee's responsibility too.
development, which they are unable or However, managers can and must provide
unwilling to fulfill. Here, the priority should fundamental support in necessary cases.
be to focus on the distribution of tasks Both senior management and the HR
according to the aforementioned typology department are responsible for ensuring that
approach as well as measures for selection self and on-the-job developments support the
and appointment. It is important that line co-intrapreneurial process.
managers assess the extent to which
objectives can be achieved by employees and
that they provide the necessary coaching or
motivation for increasing the capacity for
Guiding principles for employees,
self-organization and development. The
executives and HRM professionals
manager is also mainly involved in on-the-job
replace principles for classical
intrapreneurship
development. According to our own surveys
with 41 HR directors of well-known Swiss Promoting principles for employees
global players (Wunderer and Dick, 2000), Observation 1
this includes, above all, participation in The following principles for promoting
projects, empowerment through more co-intrapreneurship for employees are
important and varied tasks, leadership by derived from the aforementioned
delegation, job rotation, more responsibility transformation maxims. They have been
for special tasks, and coaching or mentoring. deliberately formulated to be analogous to
Furthermore, the survey confirmed the the ten principles for intrapreneurs by
increasingly decisive role of HR and the Pinchot in order to emphasize the difference.
[ 206 ]
Rolf Wunderer 1 Over the long term, work only on tasks, in Concentrate first on the motivation for
Employees as organizations, and with people with dismantling de-motivating and impeding
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a which and with whom you can (still) working conditions and encumbering
transformation concept
identify. processes. Support this by building up
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal 2 Arrive at work every day with the general action and responsibility competencies,
22/5 [2001] 193±211 willingness be voluntarily committed. followed by a constructive interpretation
3 Reduce motivational barriers and and shaping of the working situation that
demotivating practices as far as this can gives it meaning and encourages learning.
be done by you on a self-organized basis. Reduce motivational barriers and
4 Consider problems as a challenge and not demotivating practices (e.g. by removing
as a threat. unnecessary controls or providing needed
5 Attempt to develop better solutions to resources).
problems in your everyday work. Analyze 4 Support adequate systems of co-ordination.
your own focus and improve your key Demand internal and external market
intrapreneurial capabilities and those of thinking and organize accordingly.
others. Promote also a long-term, co-operative,
6 Concentrate on results instead of input. social network with relevant reference
Pay particular attention to factors, which groups. Organize by combining structures
benefit your stakeholder groups (e.g. and culture of internal market and social
customers). networks, as realization of competition
7 Reach your objectives ± within your given and co-operation.
scope for action ± preferably 5 Manage with structural and interactive
independently and with self- leadership dimensions. Concentrate first of
responsibility, but in accordance with a all on providing supportive conditions
strategy and as part of a team. such as entrepreneurial management of
8 Work by co-operating over the long term infrastructure (predominantly by
with others. Treat others as you wish to be determining corporate culture, strategy
treated yourself. and organization). Foster mutual trust
9 Contribute to an organizational climate and loyalty, as well as new ways of
and corporate culture of trust and support approaching problem solving by adopting
team-building activities. an interactive and transformational style
10 Participate in shaping the of leadership of meaning.
co-intrapreneurial vision. Work with 6 Apply a more targeted and individualized
what this vision means in your work- style of leadership and development.
place area. Promote co-intrapreneurship through
self-development, qualification-specific
Principles for executives and HRM and differentiated and typology-related
professionals leadership. With regard to qualifications,
Observation 2 concentrate on co-intrapreneurial core
In addition to the principles for competencies.
co-intrapreneurial employees, the following . Promote co-intrapreneurs by
guidelines refer to executives and HRM encouraging, stimulating the work
professionals to support and promote situation and by preventing or
co-intrapreneurship. They are ordered reducing motivational barriers and
according to our model of co-intrapreneurial demotivating factors.
transformation (compare Figure 1). . Train those who are open-minded
1 Enhance the company value by orienting towards co-intrapreneurship by
towards the needs of central stakeholders. concentrating on their less developed
Take social, environmental and ethical core competencies. Prevent their
responsibilities into account and express demotivation and appoint them to the
the same in a written commitment. appropriate teams.
2 Focus on co-intrapreneurial key . Lead those employees who lack co-
qualifications. Define, operationalize, and intrapreneurial drive by training and
communicate the key-qualifications motivating them gradually and
needed for co-intrapreneurship. Put them continuously without over-taxing
into appraisals and use them for them.
development, career planing, and reward . Assist employees who suffer from
systems). inner withdrawal, who are overtaxed,
3 Enable identification, motivation and or act as ``brakes'' on the system by
re-motivation. Take care with the targeted placement, re-assignment, and
identification of your team, i.e. central re-training programs for qualification
values, scripts and working relationships. or, if necessary, by outplacement.
[ 207 ]
Rolf Wunderer 7 Attach more importance to targeted 2 Limitation of interactive leadership:
Employees as selecting and development of employees. . insufficient qualification, motivation
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a or lack of time of executives;
transformation concept Focus on the employment of qualified and
motivated employees, and a well-founded . deficiency of basic requirements
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal analysis of their potential. Then lead, (e.g. motivation or qualification of
22/5 [2001] 193±211 place and promote the employees employees, inappropriate style of
according to their typology-specific leadership).
co-intrapreneurial abilities and interests. 3 Limitations of selection and development
Encourage learning and experimenting (personnel structure):
for developing and implementing . immature diagnosis for occupational
new ideas, simultaneously tolerate aptitude of key competencies;
mistakes and failures. Support also . limited potential of intrapreneurial
co-intrapreneurial team building and give qualified and motivated persons;
teams more control and freedom over how . insufficient requirements for
their work gets done in a self-organized intrapreneurial organisation and
way. personnel development (e.g. capacity
8 Reward effective and successful readiness, learning culture).
co-intrapreneurial engagement and 4 Mis-interpretation or misuse of the concept:
performance (e.g. with financial or non- . confusion with mere financial
monetary reward systems appropriate to incentive concepts (e.g. profit or equity
co-intrapreneurs). Be aware about the participation);
threat of undermining intrinsic . danger of manipulation and
motivation by using extrinsic incentive exploitation of employees;
and rewards tools. . taking personal advantage of given
9 Accept contradictory requirements freedom by employees;
and develop the capacity to manage . misuse as marketing or PR concept for
paradoxes. Observe that leadership self-presentation.
demands contradictory requirements 5 Mistakes and shortcomings during
from management and employees implementation of the concept:
(e.g. risk taking and reliable planning, . overstraining employees ``all work
distance and closeness, trust and entrepreneurial'';
control or equal and special . reduction of well-sounding, isolated
treatment). Consider this in the guiding principles;
written policies of leadership principles . trendy, straw-straw fire actions;
and the formation of working . missing integration with other HR
relationships. instruments;
10 Walk your co-intrapreneurial talk. Act . one-sided orientation towards top
as a co-intrapreneur yourself, set management and executives;
examples, learn and adjust, by being
. underestimating of required operating
responsive, co-operative and service expenditure and time input;
oriented.
. one-sided demand for changes in
qualification and/or motivation;
. disregard for structural obstacles and
Limitation and problems of the demotivation;
transformation process
. non-systematic, non-targeted or
non-differentiated approach.
Besides the outlined opportunities, the
concept of co-intrapreneurship entails also
limitations and threats (Kuhn, 2000). The
Conclusion
following summarise the main limitations
and problems: The paper has presented an integrated
1 Limitations of structural leadership: framework of co-intrapreneurship. This
. changes in the organisational culture approach corresponds to an increasing
and values are circumscribed and number of companies demanding internal
possible only in the long run entrepreneurship as a needed requirement of
(otherwise by replacement of corporate practice. The advancement of
personnel); internal entrepreneurship poses
. too decentralised organisation without extraordinary challenges for management.
networks triggers the danger of ``self- According to our surveys in 1997 and 1999
inc.''; (Wunderer, 1999), HR managers believe that
. target strategies do not correspond to they should play a more active role in
real ones. implementing and practicing
[ 208 ]
Rolf Wunderer co-intrapreneurship. In this respect, they Bovens, M.A.P. (1998), The Quest for
Employees as have special responsibility and are necessary Responsibility: Accountability and Citizenship
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a determinants for ensuring that the co- in Complex Organisations Cambridge,
transformation concept
intrapreneurial transformation process will Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Leadership & Organization Clarkson, M.B.E. (1995), ``A stakeholder
Development Journal be successful.
22/5 [2001] 193±211 If employed appropriately, co- framework for analyzing and evaluating
intrapreneurship can put efficient corporate social performance'', Academy of
collaboration and consensus into practice. In Management Review, Vol. 20, pp. 92-117.
Cleland, A.S. and Bruno, A.V. (1996), The Market
this way, members of the organization can
Value Process: Bridging Customer and
experience a sense of fulfillment and
Shareholder Value, Jossey Bass, New York,
enhancement, in that their work provides
NY.
different entrepreneurial challenges and that
Collins, M.E. (1995), ``High-performance teams
they have sufficient autonomy and a social and their impact on organizations'', Journal
network to face and reconcile them. for Quality and Participation, December,
The co-intrapreneurial transformation pp. 24-7.
process can by no means be achieved Conger, J.A. (1989), The Charismatic Leader,
overnight. The principle should be Jossey Bass, San Francisco, CA.
incremental ± co-intrapreneurship by means Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985), Intrinsic
of continuous improvement. The Motivation and Self Determination in Human
transformation from an envisioned ideal Behavior, Plenum, New York, NY.
culture to one of practiced culture of Drucker, P.F. (1993), Managing for the Future,
co-intrapreneurship, has been introduced. Heinemann, Oxford.
Increasingly, companies have taken the Ehlan, D. (1994), ``Supporting high performance
initial steps by altering their corporate teams'', Manager, November, pp. 32-4.
vision accordingly. Its extensive Foxall, G.R. and Minkes, A.L. (1996), ``Beyond
implementation will require further marketing: the diffusion of entrepreneurship
theoretical and practical efforts, which will in the modern corporation'', Journal of
also help to improve the recognition and the Strategic Marketing, June, Vol. 4 No. 2,
pp. 71-93.
handling of problems and the
Freemann, R.E. (1984), Strategic Management ± a
aforementioned inherent limitations and
Stakeholder Approach, Pitman, London.
problems of the concept.
Frey, B.S. (1997), Not Just for the Money. An
However, all in all we can let ourselves be
Economic Theory of Personal Motivation,
guided by the maxims of P.H. Kotler: ``There Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham.
are three types of companies: those who Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1987),
make things happen, those who watch things ``Management of organizational behaviour'',
happen and those who wonder what Utilizing Human Resources, Prentice Hall,
happened!'' Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. and Snyderman, B.
(1973), Motivation to Work, Transaction
References Publishers, New York, NY.
Ackerman, L.D. (2000), Identity is Destiny: Inglehart, R. (1989), Culture Shift in Advanced
Leadership and the Roots of Value Creation, Industrial Society, Princeton University
Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA. Press, Princeton, NJ.
Adam, E. (1991), ``Quality circle performance'', Jackson, S.E. and Schuler, R.S. (1999), Managing
Journal of Management, March, p. 25. Human Resources ± A Partner Perspective,
Axelrod, R. (1984), The Evolution of Cooperation, South Western College Publishing,
Basic Books, New York, NY. New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance Jung, C.G., Fordham, M. and Read, H. (Eds) (1972),
Beyond Expectations, Academic Press, The Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Princeton
New York, NY. University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Baumol, W.J. (1959), Business Behaviour, Value Koslowski, P. (Ed.) (2000), The Theory of
and Growth, Macmillan, New York, NY. Capitalism in the German Economic
Beam, B.T. and McFadden, J.J. (1998), Employee Tradition: Historism, Ordo-Liberalism,
Benefits, Tearborn, New York, NY. Critical Theory, Solidarism (Studies in
Berthoin, A.A., Dierkes, M. and HaÈhner, K. Economic Ethics and Philosophy), Springer,
(1994), ``German corporate responsibilities: Berlin and New York, NY.
statements of principle'', Journal of General Krogh, G.v., Ichijo, K. and Nonaka, I. (2000),
Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 24-40. Enabling Knowledge Creation: How to Unlock
Bitzer, M. (1991), Intrapreneurship ± the Mystery of Tacit Knowledge and Release
Unternehmertum in der Unternehmung, the Power of Innovation, Oxford University
SchaÈffer, ZuÈrich and Stuttgart. Press, Oxford.
Blyton, P. and Turnbull, P. (1992), Reassessing Kuhn, T. (2000), Internes Unternehmertum.
HRM, Sage, London. BegruÈndung und Bedingungen einer

[ 209 ]
Rolf Wunderer ``kollektiven Kehrtwendung'', Vahlen, Rappaport, A. (1997), Creating Shareholder Value:
Employees as MuÈnchen. A Guide for Managers and Investors, Free
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a Lamb, W.B. (1994), ``Measuring corporate social Press, New York, NY.
transformation concept
performance: a stakeholder approach'', Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), ``Self-
Leadership & Organization determination theory and the facilitation of
Development Journal International Association for Business and
22/5 [2001] 193±211 Society Proceedings, pp. 247-52. intrinsic motivation, social development, and
Lawler, E. III (1991), High-involvement well-being'', American Psychologist, Vol. 55,
Management: Participative Strategies for pp. 68-78.
Improving Organizational Performance, Sachwald, F. (1998), ``Cooperative agreements and
Jossey-Bass, New York, NY. the theory of the firm: focusing on barriers to
Lawler, E. III (1994), Motivation in Work change'', Journal of Economic Behavior &
Organizations, The Jossey-Bass Management Organization, Vol. 35, pp. 203-25.
Schumpeter, J. (1912/1934), The Theory of
Series, New York, NY.
Economic Development, Harvard University
Longenecker, C.O., Simonetti, J.L. and Sharkey,
Press, Cambridge, MA.
T.W. (1999), ``Why organizations fail: the view
Schumpeter, J.A. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism,
from the front-line'', Management Decision,
and Democracy, Harper, New York, NY.
Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 503-13.
Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W. and Near, J.P. (1983),
Machiavelli, N. (1950), The Prince and the
``Organizational citizenship behaviour'',
Discourses (translation by Luigi Ricci, revised
Journal of Aplied Psychology, pp. 653-63.
by E.R.P.Vincent), Random, Random House, Spitzer, R. (1997), ``The seven deadly
New York, NY. demotivators'', Management Development
Manz, C.C. and Sims, H.P. (1987), ``Leading Review, Vol. 10 Nos. 1-2-3, pp. 50-2.
workers to lead themselves: the external Stacey, R.D. (1992), Managing the Unknowable:
leadership of self-managing work-teams'', Strategic Boundaries between Order and
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 32 Chaos, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
No. 1, pp. 106-28. Stacey, R.D. (1999), Strategic Management and
Manz, C.C. and Sims, H.P. (1991), Organisational Dynamics, Financial Times,
``Superleadership'', Organizational Prentice Hall, London.
Dynamics, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 18-35. Stacey, R.D., Griffin, D. and Shaw, P. (2000),
Margerison, C. and McCann, D. (1985), How to Complexity and Management, Routledge,
Lead a Winning Team, TMS, Bradford. London.
Maslow, A.H. (1987), Motivation and Personality, Teare, R., Scheuing, E. and Atkinson, C. (1997),
Harper Collins, New York, NY. Team-working and Quality Improvement:
Meyer, M.C. (1978), ``Demotivation its cause Lessons from British and North American
and cure'', Personnel Journal, May, Organizations, Cassell, London.
pp. 260-6. Ulrich, D. (1997), Human Resource Champions:
Moorman, R. (1991), ``The relationship between The Next Agenda for Adding Value and
organizational justice and organizational Delivering Results, Harvard Business School
citizenship behaviours: do fairness Press, Boston, MA.
perceptions influence employee citizenship?'', Ulrich, D., Zenger, J. and Smallwood, N. (1999),
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 76, Results-based Leadership, Harvard Business
pp. 845-95. School Press, Boston, MA.
Nohria, N. and Ghoshal, S. (1997), The Vroom, P. (1964), Work and Motivation,
John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Differentiated Network. Organizing
Walton, R.E. (1987), ``From control to commitment
Multinational Corporations for Value
in the workplace'', in Steers, R.M. and Porter,
Creation, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
L.W. (1987), Motivation and Work Behaviour,
Ouchi, W.G. (1981), Theory Z. How American
New York, NY, pp. 516-28.
Business can Meet the Japanese Challenge,
Weiner, B. (1990), Human Motivation, Lawrence
Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Erlbaum Associates, New York, NY.
Parson, T. (1951), The Social System, Free Press,
Wilkins, A. and Ouchi, W.G. (1983), ``Efficient
Glencoe, IL.
cultures: exploring the relationship between
Pinchot, G. (1985), Intrapreneuring, Harper &
culture and organizational performance'',
Row, New York, NY. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 28,
Pinchot, G. and Pellmann, R. (1999), pp. 468-81.
Intrapreneuring in Action. A Handbook for Witt, U. (1998), ``Imagination and leadership. The
Business Innovation, Berret Koehler, neglected dimension of an evolutionary
San Francisco, CA. theory of the firm'', Journal of Economic
Preiser, S. (1978), ``Sozialisationsbedingungen Behaviour and Organization, Vol. 35,
sozialen und politischen Handelns'', pp. 161-77.
Landeszentrale fuÈr politische Bildung (Hrsg.). Wunderer, R. (Ed.) (1999), Mitarbeiter als
Selbstverwirklichung und Verantwortung in Mitunternehmer. Grundlagen ±
einer demokratischen Gesellschaft. 2. Aufl., FoÈrderinstrumente ± Praxisbeispiele.
Mainz, pp. 126-35. Luchterhand, Neuwied.

[ 210 ]
Rolf Wunderer Wunderer, R. (1995), Innovatives WertschoÈpfungsprozeû, Poeschel,
Employees as Personalmanagement. Theorie und Praxis Stuttgart.
``co-intrapreneurs'' ± a unternehmerischer Personalarbeit, Yoon, J., Baker, M.R. and Ko, J.W. (1994),
transformation concept
Luchterhand, Neuwied. ``Interpersonal attachment and
Leadership & Organization Wunderer, R. and Dick, P. (2000), organizational commitment: subgroup
Development Journal
22/5 [2001] 193±211 Personalmanangement ± Quo Vadis? Analysen hypothesis revisited'', HR, pp. 329-52.
und Prognosen zu Entwicklungstrends bis
2010, Luchterhand, Neuwied. Further reading
Wunderer, R. and Bruch, H. (2000), Bass, B.M. (1960), Leadership by Psychology
Unternehmerische Umsetzungskompetenz. and Organizational Behaviour,
Diagnose und FoÈrderung in Theorie und New York, NY.
Praxis, Vahlen, MuÈnchen. Green, P. (1999), Building Robust Competencies:
Wunderer, R. and Mittmann, J. (1995), Linking Human Resource Systems to
Identifikationspolitik. Einbindung des Organizational Strategies, Jossey Bass,
Mitarbeiters in den unternehmerischen New York, NY.

[ 211 ]