Design thinking aplicado al conflicto en el negocio familiar peruano
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26439/pjm2025.n002.7443Palabras clave:
design thinking, empresas familiares, negociación, innovación, diseño colaborativo, resolución de conflictosResumen
Objetivo: determinar la eficacia del design thinking (DT) como metodología para la negociación y resolución de conflictos en empresas familiares, aplicándolo a un caso específico y comparando los resultados con aquellos obtenidos mediante enfoques tradicionales sin una metodología estructurada. Metodología: desde un enfoque cualitativo, el estudio se llevó a cabo con dos grupos de estudiantes de posgrado de la Universidad de Lima (Perú). En una primera etapa, ambos grupos abordaron simultáneamente un caso de conflicto organizacional, sin emplear una metodología estructurada ni una guía de análisis. Posteriormente, recibieron una inducción en la metodología de DT, en la que se delimitaron los objetivos de la resolución del conflicto, y se les solicitó resolver nuevamente el mismo caso aplicando dicha metodología, con el propósito de alcanzar acuerdos negociados. Resultados: los resultados obtenidos fueron significativos en el contexto de las empresas familiares. Se evidenció que la aplicación del DT facilitó un proceso de negociación más estructurado, colaborativo y orientado a la consecución de acuerdos efectivos, en contraste con el abordaje inicial sin metodología. Conclusión: se confirmó que el DT es una herramienta válida y eficaz para abordar conflictos en contextos de empresa familiar. Los grupos que participaron en condiciones simultáneas y con el mismo caso concluyeron que el DT facilitó un análisis estructurado del conflicto y promovió soluciones colaborativas más efectivas que las derivadas de los enfoques tradicionales. Originalidad/valor: este estudio aporta evidencia sobre el uso del DT como una metodología útil para la preparación de negociaciones en entornos familiares y empresariales. Asimismo, abre una línea de investigación prometedora en el ámbito académico orientada a la formación de capacidades para la resolución estructurada de conflictos mediante herramientas innovadoras.
Descargas
Referencias
Alderfer, C. P., & Smith, K. K. (1982). Studying intergroup relations embedded in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(1), 35-65. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392545
Bagno, R. B., Salerno, M. S., & Da Silva, D. O. (2017). Models with graphical representation for innovation management: A literature review. R&D Management, 47(4), 637-653. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12254
Barter, C., & Renold, E. (2000). “I wanna tell you a story”: Exploring the application of vignettes in qualitative research with children and young people. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(4), 307-323. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570050178594
Beckman, S. L., & Barry, M. (2007). Innovation as a learning process: Embedding design thinking. California Management Review, 50(1), 25-56. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166415
Behrens, J., & Patzelt, H. (2018). Incentives, resources and combinations of innovation radicalness and innovation speed. British Journal of Management, 29(4), 691-711. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12265
Beverland, M. B., Wilner, S. J., & Micheli, P. (2015). Reconciling the tension between consistency and relevance: Design thinking as a mechanism for brand ambidexterity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 589-609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0443-8
Bouncken, R. B., Fredrich, V., Ritala, P., & Kraus, S. (2018). Coopetition in new product development alliances: Advantages and tensions for incremental and radical innovation. British Journal of Management, 29(3), 391-410. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12213
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84-92. https://hbr.org/2008/06/design-thinking
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking creates new alternatives for business and society. Harvard Business Press.
Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2015). Design thinking for social innovation. Annual Review of Policy Design, 3(1), 1-10. https://ojs.unbc.ca/index.php/design/article/view/1272
Caputo, A, Marzi, G., Pellegrini, M. M., & Rialti, R. (2018). Conflict management in family businesses: A bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review. International Journal of Conflict Management, 29(4), 519-542. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-02-2018-0027
Carella, G., Cautela, C., Melazzini, M., Pei, X., & Schmittinger, F. (2023). Design thinking for entrepreneurship: An explorative inquiry into its practical contributions. The Design Journal, 26(1), 7-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2022.2144565
Carlgren, L. Elmquist, M., & Rauth, I. (2014). Exploring the use of design thinking in large organizations: Towards a research agenda. Swedish Design Research Journal, 11(1), 55-63. https://doi.org/10.3384/svid.2000-964x.14155
Carlgren, L., Elmquist, M., & Rauth, I. (2016). The challenges of using design thinking in industry-experience from five large firms. Creativity and Innovation Management, 25(3), 344-362. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12176
Castellion, G. & Markham, S. K. (2013): Perspective: New product failure rates: Influence of Argumentum ad Populum and self-interest. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5), 976-979. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.01009.x
Cooperrider, D. (2010). Managing-as-designing in an era of massive innovation: A call for design-inspired corporate citizenship. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, (37), 24-33. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jcorpciti.37.24
Cousins, B. (2018). Design thinking: Organizational learning in VUCA environments. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 1-18. https://www.abacademies.org/articles/design-thinking-organizational-learning-in-vuca-environments-7117.html
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3.a ed.). SAGE Publications.
Chang Ching, L. E. (2014). Behavioural dynamic model of top management teams: Consensus, cohesion, conflict and potency in Peruvian textile and apparel sector. Maastricht School of Management.
Davis, P. S., & Harveston, P. D. (1998). The influence of family on the family business succession process: A multigenerational perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 22(3),
31-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879802200302
Davis, P. S., & Harveston, P. D. (2001). The phenomenon of substantive conflict in the family firm: A cross-generational study. Journal of Small Business Management, 39(1), 14-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/0447-2778.00003
Davis, J. A., & Tagiuri, R. (1989). The influence of life stage on father-son work relationships in family companies. Family Business Review, 2(1), 47-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6248.1989.00047.x
De Dreu, C., & Van Vianen, A. (2001). Managing relationship conflict and the effectiveness of organizational teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(3), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.71
Eddington, S. M., Corple, D., Buzzanell, P. M., Zoltowski, C., & Brightman, A. (2020). Addressing organizational cultural conflicts in engineering with design thinking. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 13(3), 263-284. https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12191
Bürgel, T., & Hiebl, M. (2024). Conflict management strategies and the digitalization of family firms: The moderating role of generational ownership dispersion. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 9555-9574. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3293855
Elsbach, K. D., & Stigliani, I. (2018). Design thinking and organizational culture: A review and framework for future research. Journal of Management, 44(6), 2274-2306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317744252
Ensley, M. D., & Pearson, A. W. (2005). An exploratory comparison of the behavioral dynamics of top management teams in family and nonfamily new ventures: cohesion, conflict, potency, and consensus. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 267-284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00082.x
Forrest-Lawrence, P. (2018). Case study research. En P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in health social sciences (pp. 1-16). Springer.
Frow, P., Nenonen, S., Payne, A., & Storbacka, K. (2015). Managing co‐creation design: A strategic approach to innovation. British Journal of Management, 26(3), 463-483. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12087
Gerring, J. (2017). Case study research: Principles and practices (2.a ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316848593
Gruber, M., De León, N., George, G., & Thompson, P. (2015). Managing by design. Academy of Management Journal, 8(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.4001
Handler, W. C. (1990). Succession in family firms: a mutual role adjustment between entrepreneur and next-generation family members. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 15(1), 37-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879001500105
Handler, W. C. (1992). The succession experience of the next Generation. Family Business Review, 5(3), 283-307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6248.1992.00283.x
Handler, W. C. (1994). Succession in family business: a review of the research. Family Business Review, 7(2), 133-157. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6248.1994.00133.x
Harvey, M., & Evans, R. E. (1994). Family business and multiple levels of conflict. Family Business Review, 7(4), 331-348. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6248.1994.00331.x
Hermann, F., Kessler, A., Nosé, L., & Suchy, D. (2011). Conflicts in family firms: state of the art and perspectives for future research. Journal of Family Business Management, 1(2), 130-153. https://doi.org/10.1108/20436231111167219
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. SAGE Publications.
Huang, Y., & Hands, D. (2022). Design thinking for new business contexts. A critical analysis though theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-94206-9
Jehn, K. (1992). The impact of intragroup conflict on effectiveness: A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of conflict [Disertación doctoral inédita, Northwestern University]. ProQuest.
Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 256-282. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393638
Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2004). Feuding families: when conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(3), 209-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00040.x
Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2006). Corporate entrepreneurship in family firms: A family perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 809-830. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00153.x
Kelley, T., & Kelley, T. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within us all. Crown Business.
Kelly, S., & Chicksand, D. (2024). A critical exploration of bargaining in purchasing and supply management: a systematic literature review. Group Decision and Negotiation, 33(3),
617-646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-024-09879-9
König, A., Kammerlander, N., & Enders, A. (2013). The family innovator’s dilemma: how family influence affects the adoption of discontinuous technologies by incumbent firms. Academy of Management Review, 38(3), 418-441. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0162
Lansberg, I. (1983). Managing human resources in family firms: The problem of institutional overlap. Organizational Dynamics, 12(1), 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(83)90025-6
Lansberg, I. (1989). Why conflict in family firms is inevitable: The players have different positions and goals. Business Week Newsletter for Family Business, 1(4).
Lansberg, I. (1999). Succeeding generations: Realizing the dream of families in business. Harvard Business School Press.
Levinson, H. (1971). Conflicts that plague family businesses. Harvard Business Review, 49(2), 90-98.
Liedtka, J. (2015). Perspective: Linking design thinking with innovation outcomes through cognitive bias reduction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(6), 925-938. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12163
Mazzola, P., Marchisio, G., & Astrachan, J. (2008). Strategic planning in family business: A powerful developmental tool for the next generation. Family Business Review, 21(3),
239-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865080210030106
Martin, R. (2009). The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Harvard Business Press.
Micheli, P., Wilner, S. J., Bhatti, S. H., Mura, M., & Beverland, M. B. (2019). Doing design thinking: Conceptual review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 36(2), 124-148. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12466
Morgan, T., Obal, M., & Anokhin, S. (2018). Customer participation and new product performance: Towards the understanding of the mechanisms and key contingencies. Research Policy, 47(2), 498-510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.01.005
Morris, M. H., Williams, R. O., Allen, J. A., & Avila, R. A. (1997). Correlates of success in family business transitions. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(5), 385-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(97)00010-4
Nordqvist, M. (2005). Familiness in top management teams: Commentary on Ensley and Pearson’s. An exploratory comparison of the behavioral dynamics of top management teams in family and nonfamily new ventures: Cohesion, conflict, potency, and consensus. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 285-291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00083.x
Parvaneh, A., & Akbari, V. (2022). Negotiation processes: Tactics of preparing a successful negotiation. International Journal of Innovation in Marketing Elements, 2(1), 51-58. https://doi.org/10.59615/ijime.2.1.51
Pedersen, S. (2020). Staging negotiation spaces: A co-design framework. Design Studies, 68, 58-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.02.002
Pieper, T. M., Astrachan, J. H., & Manners, G. E. (2013). Conflict in family business: Common metaphors and suggestions for intervention. Family Relations, 62(3), 490-500. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12011
Sharma, P. (2004). An overview of the field of family business studies: Current status and directions for the future. Family Business Review, 17(1), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6248.2004.00001
Shepherd, D. A., & Zacharakis, A. (2000). Structuring family business succession: An analysis of the future leader’s decision making. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(4), 25-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225870002400402
Simons, T. L., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 102-111. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.102
Swagger, G. (1991). Assessing the successor generation in family businesses. Family Business Review, 4(4), 397-411. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6248.1991.00397.x
Tagiuri, R., & Davis, J. (1996). Bivalent attributes of the family firm. Family Business Review, 9(2), 199-208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6248.1996.00199.x
Thomke, S. H. (1998). Managing experimentation in the design of new products. Management Science, 44(6), 743-762. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.6.743
Verbeke, A., & Kano, L. (2012). The transaction cost economics theory of the family firm: Family-based human asset specificity and the bifurcation bias. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1183-1205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00545.x
Zheng, D. L. (2018). Design thinking is ambidextrous. Management Decision, 56(4), 736-756. https://doi.org/10.1108/md-04-2017-0295
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Peruvian Journal of Management (PJM)
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Todos los trabajos publicados están sujetos a una licencia Creative Commons BY 4.0. Esta licencia permite compartir el material en cualquier medio o formato, así como adaptar, transformar y construir a partir del material para cualquier propósito. Ambas posibilidades sólo están permitidas en la medida en que se cumpla la condición de atribución. Esta condición requiere dar crédito adecuado tanto al autor como a la revista, proporcionando un enlace a la licencia e indicando los cambios realizados en caso de haberlos. Esto puede hacerse en cualquier forma razonable, pero no debe sugerir que el licenciante promueva a usted o su uso del material.
La licencia Creative Commons BY 4.0 permite a los autores mantener los derechos patrimoniales de su obra sin restricciones. Si algún trabajo publicado por la revista PJM fuera distribuido, difundido o cualquier otra acción contemplada en la licencia, se deberá mencionar de manera visible y explícita al autor o autores y a la revista.
(2)_.png)
.png)
