(a) List the various types of conceptual blocks that come in the way of thinking creatively. What is the process of innovation…

(a) Conceptual blocks and the innovation process

Conceptual blocks are mental obstacles that stop people from defining problems or generating ideas. Four types (Whetten and Cameron): constancy, where one sticks to one way of seeing, with stereotyped thinking and a single language of analysis; commitment, where one is bound to the first idea or past decisions, and rushes to conclusions; compression, where one narrows the problem too much and misses wider connections; and complacency, where one does not question the usual or fears to ask. Other classifications add perceptual, emotional, cultural, environmental, intellectual and expressive blocks.

The innovation process firms should follow: first, scan for opportunities and generate ideas from customers, employees, R&D and competitors; second, screen and evaluate ideas for fit, feasibility and value; third, develop prototypes and test them with users in a limited trial; fourth, commercialise by production, marketing and launch; and finally, diffuse, learn from feedback and improve. A stage-gate review at each step controls cost and risk, and a culture that tolerates failure and rewards experiment supports the process.

(b) Culture and Hofstede's classification

Culture is the shared values, beliefs, norms and customs that guide behaviour in a group or society. Hofstede, from IBM surveys in over 50 countries, identified dimensions: power distance, the acceptance of unequal power; individualism versus collectivism; masculinity versus femininity, the stress on achievement versus care; uncertainty avoidance, the discomfort with ambiguity; long-term versus short-term orientation, added later; and indulgence versus restraint, added in 2010.

India, for instance, scores high on power distance, medium to high on collectivism, and moderate on uncertainty avoidance, with a long-term outlook.

Implications for managing under cultural diversity: in high power-distance cultures, a directive style and clear hierarchy work, while in low ones, participation and delegation fit. Collectivist cultures suit team rewards, individualist ones personal incentives. High uncertainty avoidance needs rules and clear roles. Motivation, leadership, negotiation, communication and HR practices must be adapted rather than imported.

Limitations: the data came from one firm and an old period, it treats the nation as a unit of culture, and cultures change. The dimensions should be a guide, not a stereotype.

(c) Dunlop's systems model of industrial relations and Bomers' extension

Dunlop (1958) viewed industrial relations as a subsystem of society with: three sets of actors, namely workers and their organisations, managers and their organisations, and government agencies; the context, comprising technology, market or budget constraints, and distribution of power in the wider society; a shared ideology that holds the system together; and the output, a web of rules governing the workplace, which can be procedural or substantive.

Bomers extended the model to the international level for multinational enterprises. He broadened the actors to include multinational companies, international union federations and international bodies such as the ILO; the context to include global markets, technology and political relations among nations; and the rules to include international codes of conduct, framework agreements and treaty instruments, so that IR in a multinational reflects both home and host-country systems.