CORPORATE CULTURE



CORPORATE CULTURE

(

Introduction

Corporate culture, at times called organizational culture, refers to the shared values, attitudes, standards, codes, and behaviours of a company's management and employees. Corporate culture extends to the broader circle of relationships a business maintains, such as with customers, vendors, strategic partners, and so forth. Corporate culture is rooted in an organization's goals, strategies, structure, and approaches to business activities.

Organizations' cultures, emanate largely from the mix of individuals—especially leaders—who are or were part of the organization and from the diverse personal histories and experiences they bring. A simplistic example, a business led for years by an impersonal, hierarchy-oriented owner or chief executive would be expected to have a different culture than one led by a very informal, nontraditional leader. Corporate cultures are also influenced by organizational history and the processes, market conditions, and other business factors specific to the company. Thus, a relatively new company that has fought bitterly for its slim share of the market would be expected to possess a culture unlike that of its well-established, industry-leading competitor. Finally, when considering multinational enterprises, corporate culture is also dictated in part by the broader values and customs of the country or region in which it is located.

The dictionary defines culture as "the act of developing intellectual and moral faculties, especially through education." This writing will use a slightly different definition of culture: "the moral, social, and behavioural norms of an organization based on the beliefs, attitudes, and priorities of its members."

Every organization has its own unique culture or value set. Most organizations don't consciously try to create a certain culture. The culture of the organization is typically created unconsciously, based on the values of the top management or the founders of an organization.

The House of Tata had progressive and nationalistic outlook right from the very beginning. Jamsetji Tata, the founder of House of Tata wrote in 1902, five years before the site of the Steel Plant was selected to his son Dorabji Tata :

“Be sure to lay wide streets planted with shady trees, every other of a quick-growing variety. Be sure that there is plenty of space for lawns and gardens. Reserve large area for football, hockey and parks. Earmark area for Hindu temples, Mohammedan mosques and Christian churches……”

“We do not claim to be more unselfish, more generous or more philanthropic than other people. But we think, we started on sound and generous business principles considering the interest of the shareholders as our own and the health and welfare of the employees, the sure foundation of our prosperity.”

Dorabji Tata, who brought his father’s dream to fruition, said in 1917-

“The welfare of the labouring classes must be one of the first cares of every employer. Any betterment of their conditions must proceed more from employers downwards rather than be forced up by demands from below, since labour contented, well housed, well fed, well brought up and generally well-looked after, is not only an asset and advantage to the employer, but it also serves to raise the standard of industry and labour in the country. In looking after the labour of today. We are securing a supply of healthy and intelligent labour for the future.”

The statement of objectives of Tata Steel sets out the parameters and guidelines in the following words : “the fundamental objective of steel company is to strengthen India’s industrial base through increased productivity, effective utilization of material & manpower resources, continuing application of scientific and managerial method, and through systematic growth in keeping with national aspirations.”

“Infosys” was the first Indian IT Company to establish a company office to manage and drive all company initiatives dealing with diversity and inclusion. Today, they have employees from over 70 countries. Woman constitute more than 32% of the workforce. They are proactively developing human capital with the aim of lifting people out of poverty, increase employability through the transfer of skill. The Infosys Leadership Institute is the hub of Infosy’s talent development programmes. The institute trains new recruits and grooms the next generation irrespective of their age or work experience.

Hewlett-Packard is a company that has, for a long time, been conscious of its culture (The HP Way) and has worked hard to maintain it over the years. Hewlett-Packard's corporate culture is based on 1) respect for others, 2) a sense of community, and 3) plain hard work (Fortune Magazine, May 15, 1995). It has been developed and maintained through extensive training of managers and employees. HP's growth and success over the years has been basically due to its culture.

In the aforesaid examples, the top management of companies were vigilant to maintain their cultures. The behaviour, rules and boundries are relatively clear and communicated often. However, this is not typical. Most organizations operate with diversity of cultures. This is specially true considering the increasing worldwide mobility of people, cultures and value.

A popular trend for companies is to "reengineer" themselves, which involves an attempt to change their culture, usually to a team orientation. As reported in the ACA News (September 1995), studies indicate that the following are necessary for a company to change to a "team culture:"

• Common and consistent goals

• Organizational commitment

• Role clarity among team members

• Team leadership

• Mutual accountability with the team

• Complementary knowledge and skills

• Reinforcement of required behavioural competencies

• Power (real and perceived)

• Shared rewards

Applying the term culture to organizations is rather new; most people think of it as a characteristic of ethnic or national populations. However, a number of theorists have defined and applied it more specifically to organizations as:

• "patterned communication" (Hall, 1959)

• "a common frame of reference for interpreting and acting toward one another and the world in which they live" (Bormann, Howell, Nichols, & Shapiro, 1982)

• "a pattern of basic assumptions—invented, discovered or developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration—that has worked well enough to be considered valid, and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to those problems" (Schein 1985)

• "the way we do things around here" (Burke and Litwin, 1989)

In many ways, culture is an organization’s "look and feel", to borrow a term from the software industry. Today, when employees consider prospective employers, they look not only at salary, benefits, and location, but at the organization’s total work environment and philosophy. A large part of the culture is communication; it is not just what the organization communicates, but how it does so.

A common culture makes it easier to communicate. One of the ways in which many new quality initiatives within organizations strive to improve functionality is providing various departments with a common "language" or set of terms with which to share their ideas and request information.

Many aspects of an organization need to be examined and brought into consistency if a strong, identifiable culture is to be created. These include:

• socialization (recruiting, orienting, and mentoring employees)

• the physical setting (what the environment says about the company’s values and the role of people within it)

• graphic identity (the look of the logo, print materials, etc.)

• communication channels (how people can communicate with each other including aspects of formality and accessibility)

As work life becomes increasingly symbolic, and as reality is indeed being constructed within people’s minds, the ability of trainers and performance consultants to shape an organization through communicating the right messages through the right channels has never been needed more.

STUDIES OF CORPORATE CULTURE

An early and well-known examination of corporate culture was offered in William Hollingsworth Whyte's 1956 book The Organization Man. Its contribution was in taking a close look at how individuals shape and are shaped by the companies they work for. The book chronicled the lives of suburban middleclass employees—all men—of large corporations. The book was a ambivalent documentary about individuals who based a significant part of their identity on the companies they worked for and the surrounding social milieu. Perhaps with a hint of irony, Whyte labelled himself an organization man, too.

In the wake of The Organization Man, business scholars and social scientists alike have focused their attention on the nature and problems of corporate culture. There is general agreement that -

• corporate culture helps determine an organization's effectiveness from a business stand-point

• employees may be alternately motivated or disillusioned depending on the prevailing corporate culture

• organizational cultures change over time and in response to various events

• general patterns of power structure, interpersonal relations, and human-centred processes can be observed in different types of corporate cultures

Many of the writings on corporate culture have searched for a system that explains the main variations between different corporate cultures. As a result, numerous typologies or schemes of "culture types" exist, identifying several broad categories into which the different cultures fit. Although all of these classification schemes are open to interpretation and none may be considered comprehensive, they can provide a useful framework for understanding corporate culture.

Classifying Organisational Culture

Several methods have been used to classify organisational culture. Some are described below:

Hofstede

Hofstede identified four characteristics of culture in his study of national influences:

• Power Distance - The degree to which a society expects there to be differences in the levels of power. A high score suggests that there is an expectation that some individuals wield larger amounts of power than others. A low score reflects the view that all people should have equal rights.

• Uncertainty Avoidance reflects the extent to which a society accepts uncertainty and risk.

• individualism vs collectivism - individualism is contrasted with collectivism, and refers to the extent to which people are expected to stand up for themselves, or alternatively act predominantly as a member of the group or organisation.

• masculinity vs femininity - refers to the value placed on traditionally male or female values. Male values for example include competitiveness, assertiveness, ambition, and the accumulation of wealth and material possessions.

• Long vs short term orientation

Deal and Kennedy

Deal and Kennedy defined organisational culture as the way things get done around here. They measured organisations in respect of:

• Feedback - quick feedback means an instant response. This could be in monetary terms, but could also be seen in other ways, such as the impact of a great save in a soccer match.

• Risk - represents the degree of uncertainty in the organisation's activities.

Using these parameters, they were able to suggest four classifications of organisational culture:

The Tough Guy Macho Culture. Feedback is quick and the rewards are high. This often applies to fast moving financial activities such as brokerage, but could also apply to policemen or women, or athletes competing in team sports. This can be a very stressful culture in which to operate.

The Work Hard/Play Hard Culture is characterised by few risks being taken, all with rapid feedback. This is typical in large organisations which strive for high quality customer service. They are often characterised by team meetings, jargon and buzzwords.

The Bet your Company Culture, where big stakes decisions are taken, but it may be years before the results are known. Typically, these might involve development or exploration projects, which take years to come to fruition, such as oil exploration or aviation.

The Process Culture occurs in organisations where there is little or no feedback. People become bogged down with how things are done not with what is to be achieved. This is often associated with bureaucracies. Whilst it is easy to criticise these cultures for being over cautious or bogged down in red tape, they do produce consistent results, which is ideal in public services.

Charles Handy

Handy (1985) popularised a method of looking at culture which some scholars have used to link organizational structure to Organizational Culture. He describes:

• a Power Culture which concentrates power in a few pairs of hands. Control radiates from the centre like a web. Power Cultures have few rules and little bureaucracy; swift decisions can ensue.

• In a Role Culture, people have clearly delegated authorities within a highly defined structure. Typically, these organisations form hierarchical bureaucracies. Power derives from a person's position and little scope exists for expert power.

• By contrast, in a Task Culture, teams form to solve particular problems. Power derives from expertise so long as a team requires expertise. These cultures often feature the multiple reporting lines of a matrix structure.

• A Person Culture exists where all individuals believe themselves superior to the organisation. Survival can become difficult for such organisations, since the concept of an organisation suggests that a group of like-minded individuals pursue the organisational goals. Some professional partnerships can operate as person cultures, because each partner brings a peculiar expertise and clientele to the firm.

Elements of Culture

Johnson (1988) described a cultural web, identifying a number of elements that can be used to describe or influence Organisational Culture:

• The Paradigm: What the organisation is about; what it does; its mission; its values.

• Control Systems: The processes in place to monitor what is going on. Role cultures would have vast rule books. There would be more reliance on individualism in a power culture.

• Organisational Structures: Reporting lines, hierarchies, and the way that work flows through the business.

• Power Structures: Who makes the decisions, how widely spread is power, and on what is power based?

• Symbols: These include the logos and designs, but would extend to symbols of power, such as car parking spaces and executive washrooms.

• Rituals and Routines: Management meetings, board reports and so on may become more habitual than necessary.

• Stories and Myths: build up about people and events, and convey a message about what is valued within the organisation.

These elements may overlap. Power structures may depend on control systems, which may exploit the very rituals that generate stories.

SIX DIMENSIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

Geert Hofstede, a Dutch organizational studies professor, published with three of his colleagues an important analysis of organizational practices. First published in 1990, the work focused on what the authors called the six dimensions that separate and define organizational culture:

1. Process oriented versus results oriented. Process cultures emphasize low risk and repeating known methods, whereas results orientations place a premium on taking risks and finding new methods.

2. Employee oriented versus job oriented. This is the personal/impersonal workplace distinction. Employee cultures make members of the organization feel personally valued, but job cultures are more concerned with simply having an effective person to do the necessary work.

3. Parochial versus professional. In parochial cultures, employees identify strongly with their company as the basis for their employment and perhaps even social status. Participants in professional cultures identify with their skill-set and occupation more so than with the particular company they exercise those skills at.

4. Open system versus closed system. This dimension considers communication and seniority-based favouritism. In an open system, new employees are acclimated quickly into the communications and social fabric of the company. However, in closed systems, there is greater secrecy and exclusion of certain members of the organization, particularly newcomers.

5. Loose versus tight control. Loose control cultures are informal ones in which employees and management tend to be laid back about the work, scheduling, and even costs. Tightly controlled cultures emphasize formality, adherence to standards, punctuality, and so on.

6. Normative versus pragmatic. Finally, normative cultures are concerned with doing things properly from an ethical or procedural perspective, while pragmatic cultures are more competitive, market-driven, and results-oriented, e.g., making the sale even when it requires bending the rules. The key difference between the process/results dimension and the normative/pragmatic dimension lies in that the latter is meant to specifically describe the customer or market orientation of the business, rather than general internal processes that may not impact the customer.

By mixing and matching different combinations of the Hofstede dimensions, one can obtain reasonably detailed and specific profiles of corporate cultures. The recurring theme in this scheme, as in many others, is separating authoritarian and formal practices from democratic and informal ones. The essential issues are how the organization handles interpersonal relations and power. A secondary theme, also the focus of many other writings, is whether an organization's policies and practices are static or dynamic; that is, how easily is the corporate paradigm shifted or modified? This aspect affects everything from work procedures and processes to marketing strategy and new product conception.

SUB-CULTURES

Needless to say, not every individual in an organization shares the dominant values. According to Edgar H. Schein, an oft-cited management professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, three core subcultures can be identified in most business organization. They are: (I) an operator culture, which is concerned with practical know-how and getting the work done effectively; (2) an engineer culture, which is a sort of technocratic approach to work emphasizing technical solutions and innovations to optimize the work process; and (3) an executive culture, which takes a financial and public relations approach to problems. One can easily surmise that other kinds of subcultures, either more specific or more general than these, also exist. Schein argues that his three subcultures could clash and lead to severe consequences for the business, and this is particularly likely to occur when a business's technology or other process factors are in transition.

CORPORATE CULTURE AND CHANGE

Many executives seek to change their corporate cultures for various reasons. Most obviously, this occurs when the management perceives the present culture to be interfering with business functions. They may also wish to do so based on personal beliefs and leadership philosophy. Other times, such as with mergers and acquisitions, management must reconcile the different cultures of the organizations being joined.

These tasks are not easily accomplished, as research by Sue Cartwright and Cary L. Cooper suggests. They found evidence that many mergers and acquisitions are failures in practice specifically because the combined organizations don't work together as smoothly as the merger's architects had planned. This occurs because cultural compatibility is usually not a primary consideration—if any consideration at all—when executives agree to merge their businesses. Furthermore, some merged companies do little to integrate the cultures of the former segments even after the merger transaction is completed. This area represents one of the very practical needs for understanding corporate culture; if the cultures of the merged companies aren't compatible, some would argue, on purely economic grounds the merger shouldn't take place.

But perhaps the most common concern business leaders have about changing organizational culture is regarding whether and how the existing corporate culture might be modified to improve the bellwether emblems of business success—profitability, quality, customer satisfaction, and the like. To this end, a host of books and articles and consulting services have offered solutions for troubled or merely lackluster organizational climates. Some of these possess serious and enduring value, but many fall into the category of management fad.

Tom Peters and Robert Waterman's In Search of Excellence (1982), which by all accounts was not simply a fad, defined many traits of business culture that are still highly valued today. Because these ideas have received extensive coverage in the business literature, most are familiar, some even cliche. They include: encouraging entrepreneurship within the organization; fostering close customer relationships; recognizing and treating employees as important assets; leading by doing and by embodying corporate values; maintaining loose control (democratic and informal) at the work team level but tight control over corporate values like quality and customer service. Additional widely prized attributes of corporate culture include high rates of innovation, employee motivation, open communication, and rapid decision-making, among others.

Once management recognizes the existing culture in its organization and identifies areas it would like to modify, it is still a major undertaking to successfully nurture a different corporate culture. Doing so requires serious commitment from all levels of the organization, but especially all of the senior management. The management must accept that some employees will resist change and should be prepared to gain their cooperation rather than attempting to enforce it. Executives must understand that it takes time and consistency to establish a positive organizational culture.

Impact of Good Communication and Training on Organizations

Chris Argyris, in a 1994 Harvard Business Review article, states that organizations will find it difficult to survive unless they get better work from their employees, and this "better work" means employees "who’ve learned to take active responsibility for their own behaviour, develop and share first-rate information about their jobs, and make good use of genuine empowerment to shape lasting solutions to fundamental problems". He claims that many practices, considered "good" communication and training, actually impede learning by following the assumption that management is responsible for keeping employees happy and well-informed, and that employees have little responsibility for making changes themselves. Examples of this are when employees are given the opportunity to make suggestions or question management, and then executives are expected to be responsive and provide a rapid response to their complaints. It’s also commonly considered good practice for managers to share whatever information they have in a top-down or "cascade" approach. This often leads to information overload and also impedes more informal conversations among employee groups.

New Approaches to Learning and Culture?

Organizations need to "re-wire" their approaches to communication, collaboration, information, and learning. Rather than looking to other organizations as models by using popular techniques such as "benchmarking", organizations instead should look inward. What are the values, history, rites and rituals, and support systems that make the enterprise unique and attractive? And how can those attributes be infused into the environment?

The first step in implementing a strategy to promote a strong culture and an effective communication and learning system is to assess the current status. We often use a version of this form when we are engaged by clients to perform a communication and learning system assessment.

  Check off the statements that describe your organization’s situation.

 

|x  |Common Traits |How this affects the organization’s performance |

|  |Culture and training aren’t currently part of the organization’s |  |

| |strategic plan or executive conversations | |

|  |People complain of "information overload" because there’s so much |  |

| |news and training to communicate | |

|  |We don’t have a good way of identifying in-house expertise or |  |

| |"capturing" knowledge | |

|  |People don’t act like learning and teaching and new employee is part|  |

| |of everybody’s job  | |

|  |There are few organizational legends and stories that most people |  |

| |know and often use as examples to explain their decisions and | |

| |experiences in work life | |

|  |Training, technical publications, employee communications, |  |

| |information systems, and external communication do not work together| |

| |regularly to focus and integrate core messages | |

|  |Employees with a long tenure in the company are discouraged by the |  |

| |way it has changed | |

|  |More and more policies and training are being generated to engineer |  |

| |the behaviour that’s desired among employees | |

|  |Our organization is losing good employees to the competition for |  |

| |reasons other than salary | |

|  |We frequently use training and communication materials provided by |  |

| |outside vendors that may also be used by our competition | |

|  |Most employees can’t name a corporate "hero" |  |

Finally, here’s an action plan template that will guide a project, to "re-wire" your learning and communication system to help promote and preserve a strong culture. 

|Action Item |Who will do it |When |

|Conduct a short ethnographic study to uncover your organization’s "true" culture; |  |  |

|compare that to the organization’s stated beliefs and values, and make a reconciling to| | |

|find out any differences | | |

|Write a one-page white paper identifying key performance gaps caused by having an |  |  |

|unclear or weak corporate culture and by outmoded learning and communication systems | | |

|Get input from and support of at least three internal colleagues - at least two of whom |  |  |

|are in different departments | | |

|Get endorsement of your ideas and coaching from at least three outside "experts"—can be |  |  |

|peers in other companies, books or briefings or outside audits by respected authors and | | |

|researchers, etc. | | |

|Influence at least one key executive to "buy into" exploring new approaches to learning |  |  |

|and communication | | |

|Form an inter-departmental study group or strategic planning committee |  |  |

|Identify colleagues for key executives who are at their level in other organizations and|  |  |

|who are also exploring new ideas regarding learning and communication | | |

|Develop descriptors of the corporate culture, and of an "ideal" communication and |  |  |

|learning infrastructure that would make that culture apparent to internal and external | | |

|audiences | | |

|Select a prototype project: design and develop it using "re-wired" philosophies and |  |  |

|technologies; assess its impact  | | |

|Hold a conference, open house, celebration, or "learning day" to share your experiences |  |  |

|Get approval and resources necessary to develop a set of materials that will guide |  |  |

|communication and learning practices within the organization that will promote its | | |

|culture | | |

CONCLUSION

▪ The rapid pace of globalization of markets is compelling management researchers to explore solutions to economic problems with universal applicability. However, despite global production, global markets and global communications, the global culture is still an elusive concept.

▪ The importance of corporate culture is growing as a result of several recent developments. Companies are encouraging employees to be more responsible and act and think like owners. In exchange for more flexible work schedules, employees are expected to always be "on-call." Companies are encouraging teamwork and formation of teams. Therefore, organizational leaders shouldn't ignore corporate culture. Rather, it should be addressed in the organization's mission, vision, and goal statements, and emphasized in company sponsored training and company communication.

▪ National culture has a powerful influence on almost all aspects of work and organization, such as strategy, goals, communication, negotiation, conflict resolution, structure, leadership, time orientation, social and interpersonal practices, decision making style and managing people. For example, the contract-oriented style of the west clashes with the contract or relationship-oriented style of the east and requires Western managers to show patience, perseverance and long-term orientation in doing business with Asian partners. The Eastern ethic has a strong sense of duty-consciousness as against the rights-consciousness of the Western ethic. This realization has compelled MNEs to adopt ‘Globalization’, that is, to think globally, but act locally.

▪ Companies operating in different countries have to synthesise their management style to suit culture of the concerned country. Samsung, the South Korean conglomerate runs business across Europe, from Hungary where TVs are produced, to Portugal where microchips are made to Germany where cameras are produced. There are operations in the U.K. and Slovakia. How can a Korean company be successful in these vastly different cultural climates?

▪ Samsung has developed a synthesis of management styles taking the best from the European and Korean approaches. For example, in Germany, the emphasis is given to individual workers as the company recognizes that individual ability is high. In South Korea, on the other hand, emphasis is placed on team work. A further difference appears when structural design is adopted by the company. A bureaucratic approach is followed in its home country, something that would not find favour in Europe. Hence, in U.K. and other European countries, the company’s structure is flat and authority devolved. Creating an indigenous management style is also part of the company’s strategy to make its European operations self-sufficient, based on the need to have fast response time market changes.

▪ One of the major routes to successful organizational change is by achieving a cultural transformation at all levels of the organization. The organization needs to create an atmosphere that stimulates innovation and encourages learning. According to Gresov (1984), organizations that are characterized as loosely structured, ‘organic’, decentralized, and/or heterogeneous tend to be more sensitive to the possibility of innovation and generate more innovations. On the other hand, organizations that are ‘mechanistic’, tightly structured, centralized, highly formalized, and highly differentiated and homogenous are shown to generate innovations and less sensitive to their existence.

▪ Scholars and practitioners recognize that one of the most difficult barriers to organizational change is the prevailing culture and mindset of the organization. Every organization has a dominant culture, which expresses the core values shared by majority of its members. It is this dominant culture which makes interpersonal and inter-group communication effective in organizations. An organization’s culture can be seen as the cementing force binding its members.

▪ Research suggests that cultural incompatibility is one of the main reasons for the high rate of failure in international mergers and acquisitions. The influence of national culture plays an important role, particularly when a company from a high-cultural context merges with or is acquired by a company from a low-cultural context or vise-versa. In such situations, the corporate strategy and people managers at the headquarters need to centralize only essential operations and policies and decentralize the rest to provide maximum operational flexibility. For example, American subsidiaries of Japanese companies typically follow compensation norms in the US and make no attempt to replicate the Japanese tradition of seniority wage or promotion system.

▪ The evidence that cultural differences can influence work values, motivation and job attitude is now so irrefutable that no management theory can ignore the role played by culture as an important variable and no MNE can underplay its importance in corporate decision making.

▪ Those who tend to believe that globalization of economies would ultimately lead to convergence of different cultures, ignore the deep impact of culture, particularly in High-Context Societies. An important lesson from Eastern culture is the need to maintain harmony between family and work life since both are inseparable.

▪ An individualistic culture may produce dramatic, short-term results but eventually upset the balance in family, society and environment. However, the experience of Western countries proves that low power distance, freedom to think and act independently and the ability to explore uncertainty with confidence lead to economic success.

▪ While wholesale import of work values and practices of another culture is bound to fail, a balanced approach calls for understanding and appreciating different cultures and deriving the best from all within the tolerable limits of one’s own culture.

▪ Today, management of diversity is one of the most important challenges of the 21st century. At the root of any complex, potentially volatile issue, we are likely to find communication failures and cultural misunderstandings that prevent the parties from tackling the problem in a common way and make it impossible to deal with the problem constructively. In an international context, global managers need to develop a deep and genuine belief in understanding and empathizing with cultural difference and consciously attempt not to let their managerial decisions be influenced by stereotypes, prejudices and ethnocentric attitude. Success in building cross-border networks of relationships which are the core veins of effective global organizations is dependent on understanding and valuing cultural diversity.

References

Argyris, C. (1994, July-August). Good communication that blocks learning. Harvard Business Review 72 (4). 77-85.

Bormann, E.G., Howell, W.S., Nichols, R.G. & Shapiro, G.L. (1982) Interpersonal communication in the modern organization (2nd edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Burke, W.W. and Litwin, G. (1989). A causal model of organizational performance. Pfeiffer, J.W. (ed). The 1989 annual: developing human resources. San Diego: University Associates.

Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., 1996. Goffee, Rob, and Gareth Jones. "What Holds the Modem Company Together?" Harvard Business Review, November-December 1996.

Cartwright, Sue, and Cary L. Cooper. Managing Mergers, Acquisitions, and Strategic Alliances: Integrating People and Cultures. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK:

Deal T. E. and Kennedy, A. A. (1982) Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life, Harmondsworth, Penguin Books.

Hall, E.T. (1959). The silent language. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.

Handy, C.B. (1985) Understanding Organisations, 3rd Edn, Harmondsworth, Penguin Books

Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, Beverley Hills, CA, Sage Publications

Hofstede, Geert, et al. "Measuring Organizational Cultures." Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (1990), 286-316.

Johnson, G. (1988) "Rethinking Incrementalism", Strategic Management Journal Vol 9

Kotter, John. 1992 Corporate Culture and Performance, Free Press; (April 7, 1992) ISBN: 0029184673

Rao P.L. Dr. (2008), International Human Resource Management, Excel Books, New Delhi.

Schein, Edgar H. "Three Cultures of Management: The Key to Organizational Learning." Sloan Management Review, fall 1996.

Schein, W.H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership: a dynamic view. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Thite Mohan (2004), Managing People in the New Economy, Sage Publications, New Delhi.

…………….

( A product of XLRI, former Divisional Manager (Pers) of Tata Steel, Vice President (P & A) of Satna Cement, Advisor (Pers & I.R.) of Manikgarh Cement, Mr B D Pande is currently Advisor (Pers & I.R.), Century Cement (a division of Century Textiles & Ind. Ltd.), Baikunth – 493 116, Dist: Raipur, Chhattisgarh, email – personnel@webmail.centurycement.co.in and Editor-in-Chief, PERSONNEL TODAY.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download