Most executives spend a reasonable amount of time thinking about the business model for their organization. But how much time do they spend considering the company’s management model? In his book “Reinventing Management,” Julian Birkinshaw urges businesspeople to give more thought to management models. In a Q&A, Birkinshaw explains why management has been “corrupted” over the last 100 years, and what should change.

Large companies that invest in trendy IT innovations may see their reputations — and CEO compensation — increase the next year.

In theory, IT innovation is important — except it’s often not a priority in company budgets.

Companies often approach the process of developing a global culture as a one-way process dominated by corporate headquarters, exemplified by common terms such as “cultural transfer” “and “culture dissemination.” Also, core values often originate at corporate headquarters and fail to reflect and incorporate diverse cultural influences. This approach breeds skepticism about global culture among overseas employees, who may perceive headquarters’ core values as ethnocentric and parochial.

MIT’s Andrew McAfee, author of Enterprise 2.0, says that evolving technology and the data deluge can enable companies not only to be smarter, but to act smarter, too.

Many managers think they’ve committed their organizations to evidence-based decision making — but have instead, without realizing it, committed to decision-based evidence making. Is that all bad? What can be done to fix it?

Fighting against a disruptive business model by rolling out a second business model is one option for companies to consider. But to make that work, you need to avoid the trap of getting stuck in the middle.

Universities can be major resources in a company’s innovation strategy. But to extract the most business value from research, companies need to follow seven rules.

Innovators tend to think that information technology systems are too orderly and controlling even to cope with the messy process of innovation — much less enable it. But as some leading companies show, smart managers bring the whole IT menu to the challenge.

The editors of the MIT Sloan Management Review are pleased to announce the winners of this year’s Richard Beckhard Memorial Prize, awarded to the authors of the most outstanding SMR article on planned change and organizational development published from fall 2008 to summer 2009.

Most executives naturally gravitate toward one of these two approaches. The challenge is that companies need both.

When bad things happen, companies need the right strategy for talking their way out of a mess and avoiding a calamitous pummeling of their corporate image. Choosing the best response can spell the difference between a brand’s survival — even enhancement — and its irreversible tarnishing.

Sustainability initiatives can’t be driven through an organization the way other changes can. The authors’ research indicates that successful sustainability initiatives tend to evolve through three distinct phases. Phase 1 involves making the case for change, Phase 2 entails translating vision into action and Phase 3 is about expanding boundaries. Each stage requires different organizational capabilities and leadership competencies.

When companies collaborate, low trust is detrimental to innovation. But so is very high trust. The optimal level, yielding maximum impact, lies in between.