HOW ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE and CHANGE ARE EMBEDDED in an ORGANIZATION's INTRANET by ELISABETH ELEANOR BENNETT (Under the Dire
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Examining the Influence of Organizational Culture on Employees' Ethical Behavior in Public Sector Organizations Richard H
University of Texas at Tyler Scholar Works at UT Tyler Human Resource Development Theses and Human Resource Development Dissertations Fall 11-1-2015 Examining the Influence of Organizational Culture on Employees' Ethical Behavior in Public Sector Organizations Richard H. Afedzie Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uttyler.edu/hrd_grad Part of the Human Resources Management Commons Recommended Citation Afedzie, Richard H., "Examining the Influence of Organizational Culture on Employees' Ethical Behavior in Public Sector Organizations" (2015). Human Resource Development Theses and Dissertations. Paper 8. http://hdl.handle.net/10950/301 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Human Resource Development at Scholar Works at UT Tyler. It has been accepted for inclusion in Human Resource Development Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Works at UT Tyler. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXAMINING THE INFLUENCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ON EMPLOYEES’ ETHICAL BEHAVIOR IN PUBLIC SECTOR ORGANIZATIONS by RICHARD H. AFEDZIE A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Human Resource Development and Technology Jerry W. Gilley, Ed.D., Committee Co-Chair Judy Y. Sun, Ph.D., Committee Co-Chair College of Business and Technology The University of Texas at Tyler November 2015 © Copyright by Richard H. Afedzie 2015 All rights reserved Dedication I dedicate this work to the two special people in my life, who supported and pushed me through the long arduous days and nights, Freda and Andrew Afedzie. Your fervent belief in me and constant encouragement will forever be remembered. -
Strong Cultures and Subcultures in Dynamic Organizations
02-091 The Role of Subcultures in Agile Organizations Alicia Boisnier Jennifer A. Chatman1 1 The second author wrote this paper while a Marvin Bower Fellow at the Harvard Business School and is grateful for their support. We also thank Elizabeth Mannix, Rita McGrath, and an anonymous reviewer for their insightful suggestions. Copyright © 2002 by Alicia Boisnier and Jennifer A. Chatman Working papers are in draft form. This working paper is distributed for purposes of comment and discussion only. It may not be reproduced without permission of the copyright holder. Copies of working papers are available from the author. The Role of Subcultures in Agile Organizations Alicia Boisnier and Jennifer A. Chatman1 Haas School of Business University of California, Berkeley May 24, 2002 To appear in, R. Petersen and E. Mannix, Leading and managing people in dynamic organizations. Forthcoming, 2002. 1 The second author wrote this paper while a Marvin Bower Fellow at the Harvard Business School and is grateful for their support. We also thank Elizabeth Mannix, Rita McGrath, and an anonymous reviewer for their insightful suggestions. 2 Organizations face increasingly dynamic environments characterized by substantial, and often unpredictable technological, political, and economic change. How can organizations respond rapidly to such changes or become more agile? Organizational agility, according to Lee Dyer, “requires a judicious mix of stability and reconfigurability” (2001: 4). We consider an unlikely source of agility: organizational culture. This may seem like an odd juxtaposition since strong unitary cultures exert a stabilizing force on organizations by encouraging cohesion, organizational commitment, and desirable work behaviors among members (e.g., Deal & Kennedy, 1982; Nemeth & Staw, 1989; O'Reilly & Chatman, 1986). -
18 the Concept of Organizational Culture
1 THE CONCEPT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE: WHY BOTHER? Culture is an abstraction, yet the forces that are created in social and organizational situations deriving from culture are powerful. If we don’t understand the operation of these forces, we become victim to them. Cultural forces are powerful because they operate outside of our awareness. We need to understand them not only because of their power but also because they help to explain many of our puzzling and frustrating experiences in social and organizational life. Most importantly, understanding cultural forces enables us to understand ourselves better. What Needs to Be Explained? Most of us in our roles as students, employees, managers, researchers, or consultants work in and have to deal with groups and organizations of all kinds. Yet we continue to find it amazingly difficult to understand and justify much of what we observe and experience in our organizational life. Too much seems to be “bureaucratic,” “political,” or just plain “irrational.” People in positions of authority, especially our immediate bosses, often frustrate us or act incomprehensibly, and those we consider the “leaders” of our organizations often disappoint us. When we get into arguments or negotiations with others, we often cannot understand how our opponents could take such “ridiculous” positions. When we observe other organizations, we often find it incomprehensible that “smart people could do such dumb things.” We recognize cultural differences at the ethnic or national level but find them puzzling at the group, organizational, or occupational level. Gladwell (2008) in his popular book Outliers provides some vivid examples of how both ethnic and organizational cultures explain such anomalies as airline crashes and the success of some law firms. -
Su Ppo R T D O Cu M En T
v T Structures and cultures: A review of the literature Support document 2 EN BERWYN CLAYTON M VICTORIA UNIVERSITY THEA FISHER CANBERRA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROGER HARRIS CU UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA ANDREA BATEMAN BATEMAN & GILES PTY LTD O MIKE BROWN UNIVERSITY OF BALLARAT D This document was produced by the author(s) based on their research for the report A study in difference: Structures and cultures in registered training organisations, and is an added resource for T further information. The report is available on NCVER’s website: <http://www.ncver.edu.au> R O The views and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Government, state and territory governments or NCVER. Any errors and omissions are the responsibility of the P author(s). © Australian Government, 2008 P This work has been produced by the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) on behalf of the Australian Government and state and territory governments U with funding provided through the Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Apart from any use permitted under the CopyrightAct 1968, no S part of this publication may be reproduced by any process without written permission. Requests should be made to NCVER. Contents Contents 2 Tables and figures 3 A review of the literature 4 Section 1: Organisational structure 4 Section 2: Organisational culture 21 Section 3: Structures and cultures – a relationship 38 References 41 Appendix 1: Transmission -
Organizational Culture and Cultural Diversity Strategy (CDS) Is Explored
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/2049-8799.htm International Organizational culture and cultural skilled diversity: an explorative study of migrants international skilled migrants in Swedish firms 289 Ali Farashah Received 5 November 2020 € Revised 26 February 2021 School of Business, Society and Engineering, Malardalen University, Accepted 26 February 2021 V€asteras, Sweden, and Tomas Blomqusit Umea School of Business, Economics and Statistics, Umea University, Umea, Sweden Abstract Purpose – This paper empirically explores the types and extent of cultural diversity strategies in Sweden, a developed economy with many migrant workers. The role of organizational culture as the context and the association with diversity strategy and the selection of international skilled migrant workers are examined. Design/methodology/approach – Empirical data are collected by surveying 249 Swedish large or medium- sized firms. Cluster analysis is used to explore the configuration of organizational culture, cultural diversity strategy (CDS) and selection and development criteria. Findings – The authors identify five clusters of organizations. Organizational culture is the main contextual factor that influences the CDS and human resource (HR) approaches for selecting skilled migrant workers. The profile of the clusters including organizational culture, diversity strategies, the selection criteria and firm demographics is presented. The empirical results indicate that organizational culture and demographics are associated with the choice of diversity strategy and, consequently, HR processes. Originality/value – This study’s main focus is on international skilled migrants, which is among empirically less-studied areas in global mobility literature. Furthermore, until now more attention has been directed toward studying the consequences of diversity than toward understanding the factors that influence choice of diversity strategies and practices. -
Durkheim and Organizational Culture
IRLE IRLE WORKING PAPER #108-04 June 2004 Durkheim and Organizational Culture James R. Lincoln and Didier Guillot Cite as: James R. Lincoln and Didier Guillot. (2004). “Durkheim and Organizational Culture.” IRLE Working Paper No. 108-04. http://irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/108-04.pdf irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers Durkheim and Organizational Culture James R. Lincoln Walter A. Haas School of Business University of California Berkeley, CA 94720 Didier Guillot INSEAD Singapore June , 2004 Prepared for inclusion in Marek Kocsynski, Randy Hodson, and Paul Edwards (editors): Social Theory at Work . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Durkheim and Organizational Culture “The degree of consensus over, and intensity of, cognitive orientations and regulative cultural codes among the members of a population is an inv erse function of the degree of structural differentiation among actors in this population and a positive, multiplicative function of their (a) rate of interpersonal interaction, (b) level of emotional arousal, and (c) rate of ritual performance. ” Durkheim’ s theory of culture as rendered axiomatically by Jonathan Turner (1990) Introduction This paper examines the significance of Emile Durkheim’s thought for organization theory , particular attention being given to the concept of organizational culture. We ar e not the first to take the project on —a number of scholars have usefully addressed the extent and relevance of this giant of Western social science for the study of organization and work. Even so, there is no denying that Durkheim’s name appears with vast ly less frequency in the literature on these topics than is true of Marx and W eber, sociology’ s other founding fathers . -
Organizational Culture Model
A MODEL of ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE By Don Arendt – Dec. 2008 In discussions on the subjects of system safety and safety management, we hear a lot about “safety culture,” but less is said about how these concepts relate to things we can observe, test, and manage. The model in the diagram below can be used to illustrate components of the system, psychological elements of the people in the system and their individual and collective behaviors in terms of system performance. This model is based on work started by Stanford psychologist Albert Bandura in the 1970’s. It’s also featured in E. Scott Geller’s text, The Psychology of Safety Handbook. Bandura called the interaction between these elements “reciprocal determinism.” We don’t need to know that but it basically means that the elements in the system can cause each other. One element can affect the others or be affected by the others. System and Environment The first element we should consider is the system/environment element. This is where the processes of the SMS “live.” This is also the most tangible of the elements and the one that can be most directly affected by management actions. The organization’s policy, organizational structure, accountability frameworks, procedures, controls, facilities, equipment, and software that make up the workplace conditions under which employees work all reside in this element. Elements of the operational environment such as markets, industry standards, legal and regulatory frameworks, and business relations such as contracts and alliances also affect the make up part of the system’s environment. These elements together form the vital underpinnings of this thing we call “culture.” Psychology The next element, the psychological element, concerns how the people in the organization think and feel about various aspects of organizational performance, including safety. -
Breaking Down Silos Or Stovepipes in Organizations Understanding Organizational Barriers
Breaking Down Silos or Stovepipes in Organizations Understanding Organizational Barriers Restructuring initiatives have become common rather than exceptional occurrences. Some are successful, others not. Once new organizational structures are in place, they typically have their limitations. Virtually every organizational chart or model, in medium to large sized companies, divides employees into business units and/or departments. This is necessary to focus skills and pool common interests and resources to achieve specific company objectives. There is however, a downside that is often not catered for – a silo effect. In this paper, the silo effect will be defined, the dangers presented by silos will be briefly outlined, and an approach to eliminating silos will be presented with further suggestions on silo elimination. The Silo Effect Defined Silos may be defined as groups of employees that tend to work as autonomous units within an organization. They show a reluctance to integrate their efforts with employees in other functions of the organization. The effect has the propensity to exist throughout a Company, or between subsidiaries within a wider corporation, resulting in division and fragmentation of work responsibilities within the organization. Departments and business units can fragment into even smaller silos based on strong personal bonds, and areas of commonality that differentiate groups of employees from the rest of their department. Silos are a common occurrence, as they exist to a greater or lesser extent in most companies. The area of an organization in which silos exist will be termed “the division” or “area’ for the purposes of this paper irrespective of whether it takes the form of a department, business unit or any other structure, purely for reading comfort. -
Duality in Diversity: How Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Cultural Heterogeneity Relate to Firm Performance∗
Duality in Diversity: How Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Cultural Heterogeneity Relate to Firm Performance∗ Matthew Corritore1, Amir Goldberg2, and Sameer B. Srivastava3 1Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University 2Stanford Graduate School of Business 3Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley Forthcoming, Administrative Science Quarterly February, 2019 Abstract How does cultural heterogeneity in an organization relate to its underlying capacity for execution and innovation? Existing literature often understands cultural diversity as presenting a trade- off between task coordination and creative problem-solving. This work assumes that diversity arises primarily through cultural differences between individuals. In contrast, we propose that diversity can also exist within persons such that cultural heterogeneity can be unpacked into two distinct forms: interpersonal and intrapersonal. We argue that the former tends to undermine coordination and portends worsening firm profitability, while the latter facilitates creativity and supports greater patenting success and more positive market valuations. To evaluate these propositions, we use unsupervised learning to identify cultural content in employee reviews of nearly 500 publicly traded firms on a leading company review website and then develop novel, time-varying measures of cultural heterogeneity. Our empirical results lend support for our two core propositions, demonstrating that a diversity of cultural beliefs in an organization does not necessarily impose a trade-off -
Business English (3) Corporate Structure
Business English (3) Corporate Structure Lesson 7 Vocabulary Now look up the meaning of the words below before we begin: Hierarchy: an organization or structure in which the staff are organized in levels and the people at one level have authority over those below them. Investment: the use of money to get a profit or to make a business activity successful, or the money that is used Structure: the way in which the parts of something are connected with each other and form a whole Task: a piece of work that must be done System: a group of related parts that work together as a whole for a particular purpose Share (N.): one of the parts into which ownership of a company is divided Long-term: relating to what will happen in the distant future Understanding Corporate Structure Corporate structure or organizational structure: Is a system in which tasks are assigned and divided within a company. It’s usually a system of hierarchy in which the CEO (Chief executive officer) is the person who has highest authority. Corporate structure will differ from one company to another and from one country to another and even from one culture to another. Corporate structure will also differ based on the company’s objectives and goals. The Main Officers in Corporate Structure The Tasks and titles each member of a company has are different and they can be divided as follows in this example: The CEO: Is the person responsible for a company’s long-term goals and strategies. CEO The COO (chief operation officer): Is the person responsible for daily tasks such as production, marketing and sales. -
Vodacom and GSN Digital: Two Companies, Two Continents, and Two Managers in the Technology Industry
MGMT-E-4100 Team 5 Vodacom and GSN Digital Vodacom and GSN Digital: Two Companies, Two Continents, and Two Managers in the Technology Industry By: Thembani C. Nkomo Harvard University This paper will compare and contrast Vodacom and GSN Digital through the eyes of their middle management. It will examine the company structures, values, and cultures and analyze each manager’s values and management approach. Focusing on the individual managerial styles, this paper will look at the effect on their teams and working environment, and how their styles support the company’s business needs. [Type text] [Type text] [Type text] `Vodacom and GSN Digital: Two Companies, Two Continents, and Two Managers in the Technology Industry by Thembani Nkomo VODACOM AND GSN DIGITAL: TWO COMPANIES, TWO CONTINENTS, AND TWO MANAGERS IN THE TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 2 COMPANIES AND INDUSTRY ............................................................................ 1 2.1 VODACOM ........................................................................................................... 1 2.1.1 Telecom Industry Overview .......................................................................... 1 2.1.2 Vodacom as a Company ............................................................................... 2 2.1.3 Vodacom Organizational Structure .............................................................. 2 2.1.4 Company Values ......................................................................................... -
What Is Corporate Law?
ISSN 1936-5349 (print) ISSN 1936-5357 (online) HARVARD JOHN M. OLIN CENTER FOR LAW, ECONOMICS, AND BUSINESS THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF CORPORATE LAW: WHAT IS CORPORATE LAW? John Armour, Henry Hansmann, Reinier Kraakman Discussion Paper No. 643 7/2009 Harvard Law School Cambridge, MA 02138 This paper can be downloaded without charge from: The Harvard John M. Olin Discussion Paper Series: http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_center/ The Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection: http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract_id=####### This paper is also a discussion paper of the John M. Olin Center’s Program on Corporate Governance. The Essential Elements of Corporate Law What is Corporate Law? John Armour University of Oxford - Faculty of Law; Oxford-Man Institute of Quantitative Finance; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) Henry Hansmann Yale Law School; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) Reinier Kraakman Harvard Law School; John M. Olin Center for Law; European Corporate Governance Institute Abstract: This article is the first chapter of the second edition of The Anatomy of Corporate Law: A Comparative and Functional Approach, by Reinier Kraakman, John Armour, Paul Davies, Luca Enriques, Henry Hansmann, Gerard Hertig, Klaus Hopt, Hideki Kanda and Edward Rock (Oxford University Press, 2009). The book as a whole provides a functional analysis of corporate (or company) law in Europe, the U.S., and Japan. Its organization reflects the structure of corporate law across all jurisdictions, while individual chapters explore the diversity of jurisdictional approaches to the common problems of corporate law. In its second edition, the book has been significantly revised and expanded.