發(fā)布時間：2016-04-25 07:54

Introduction 介紹

組織文化已經(jīng)成為一種探索組織內部世界的最普遍的方式之一。此外，它也成為一個組織的獨特的脫氧核糖核酸的一部分，從其他組織分化。隨著學術研究組織文化的發(fā)展，它不僅關注概念界定的淺層次，而且深入到組織文化在許多方面的應用，如對企業(yè)績效的影響和業(yè)務流程再造。此外，一些學者已經(jīng)開始討論改變現(xiàn)有的組織文化的切實可行的方法。本報告旨在探討組織文化的概念和關系。當組織的研究，深入探討從文化角度看，組織文化的概念已經(jīng)通過幾個短語自上世紀80年代初。然而，，目前還沒有共識，是組織文化的各種定義之間。組織文化的本質可以主要分為基本假設、共同價值觀、信念和行為規(guī)范和其他主張，在文學評論的基礎上，總結了過去的大量文獻。當小組成員的形狀的習慣，使用共享的假設處理組的問題，如適應外部環(huán)境和整合內部資源，這些共同的假設，保持工作以及足夠的思想作為有效的，并作為一個結果，被教導新成員作為有效的方式來理解，認為和解決這些問題。在構思最有代表性的觀點是，組織文化是指這些共同的假設，上述模式（崔小明和胡俊，2012）。其他文獻也為豐富的定義作出貢獻。Organizational culture has become one of the most common ways of exploring the internal world of an organization. Besides, it also becomes part of a unique DNA of an organization differentiating itself from other organizations. With the development of academic research on organizational culture, it not only focuses on the superficial level of concept definition, but also goes deeply into the possible applications of organizational culture in many aspects, such as the influence of it towards corporation performance and business process reengineering. In addition, several scholars have begun to discuss the practical ways to change the existing organizational culture. This report aims to discuss organizational culture both in concept and relationship.  When the organizational studies were delved into from a culture perspective, the concepts of organizational culture have developed through several phrases since the early 1980s. However, there is still no common consent that has been made among the various definition of organizational culture. The essence of organizational culture can be mainly classified into basic assumptions, shared values, beliefs and norms of behaviour and other claims based on the literature review of Cui and Hu, in which they summarized large sums of literature in the past. When members of the group shape the habit of using shared assumptions to deal with the group’s problems such as adapting to external environment and integrating internal resources, these shared assumptions keep working well enough to be thought as valid and, as a result, to be taught to new members as effective ways to understand, think and tackle with regarding to those problems. The most representative opinion in conceptualizing is that organizational culture refers to the pattern of these shared assumptions that mentioned above (Cui Xiaoming & Hu Junchen, 2012). Other literature also makes contributions to enrich the definition. When Whyte analyzed the social structure of a restaurant, he found that organization could be a set of interactive  

patterns among various position, gender and professional groupings. These analyses demonstrate organizational cultures as the combination of professional cultures that give definition to the nature of personal meaning and practice at work(Daniel.R,Denison,1996). In all, organizational culture can be defined as shared and stable values, beliefs and norms of behaviours thatcan contribute to building the unique competitive advantages created in the company all over the time (Cui Xiaoming & Hu Junchen, 2012). Apart from the basic definition and assumption related to organizational culture, there are also some scholars who associate organizational culture with corporate performance. Theoretical study, field study and empirical study have applied in this area to figure out the possible relationship between organizational culture and corporate performance. Among these studies, the finding of Kotter and Heskett in which can be grouped into a contingency model and a universal model is the most worth discussing. In contingency model, when some shared values contained in the culture help the organization to continually adapt to the environmental change and fit the organization environment in the long term, the organization with strong cultures will have better performance. In the universal model, it indicated that an organization with good performance should have a culture put emphasis on care and concern for customers, employees and stockholders.  When it comes to business process reengineering (BPR), on one hand, the outcome of BPR can change the culture and characteristics of an organization. Sometimes organizational culture can also be an inhibitor and an internal variable which affected by results coming from changing behaviours (Deepak Kumar & Anita Bhatia, 2012). On the other hand, organizational culture and change management have exerted a vital influence in the acceptance of BPR in various countries. The factors that will affect the implementation results of BPR can be classified as the following two types: national and environmental factors including variables such as economic growth and facilities development; organizational and internal factors including firm detailed aspects. According to Larry Mallak, an organization should spot the underlying value and then change them while keeping the ritual in order to rebuild its stronger and better-fit culture (Larry Mallak, 2001)  
 Under charismatic culture, the leaders in the organization are usually dramatic people who feel great desire to attract attention from and to make great impression on others. They are such kind of person who own a sense of entitlement and may have a character of warm and charming. Therefore, subordinates worked under this kind of culture tend to idealize their charming leader so as to ignore his/her faults and to amplify his/her strengths. They tend to depend on the leader and have strong implication to support and satisfy him/her so that they are easy to control and manipulate. Simple-minded persons who can implement the central goal delivered by top executives seem to easily survive while independent-minded mangers cannot stay long in this culture. The structure of the organization under this culture tend to develops far more slowly than the new market expansion grows since top executives prefer unbridled andfast growth. The problems of this kind of culture that brought to the organization are discussed as follows: Firstly, top executives have concentrated too much power and even get involved in the routine operation. Secondly, since top executives pay too much attention to almost all aspects of the company operation, it makes him/her have little time to scan business environment thoroughly so that he /she tend to act on intuition instead of logical thinking and analysis based on facts. Last but not the least, the strong dominance of leader set obstacles in effective internal communication because usually all the information is from top down. (Manfred F.R.Kets De Vries &Danny Miller, 1986)  Salon which used to be the most powerful broker on Wall Street set a good example of how unethical organizational culture leads to unethical conducts of employees thus making the whole company collapse. After the outburst of Salon brothers’ scandal, Warren Buffett took over the company and took several measures to change the original organizational culture, which contributed to the reputation and brand image recovery of this prominent financial company. The difference between these two kinds of leadership can be summarized into the following steps. Firstly, Buffett made effort to improve the moral environment of the firm in contrast to the previous focusing on recent bottom line profits and ignoring long-term implication of employees’ actions. Secondly, under new  

culture, rewards were allocated based on the performance of employees and employees who lack of commitment to ethical principles would not be promoted. Thirdly, employees who proclaimed their commitment to ethical principles were brought in while all the old employees associated with unethical conducts were fired. However, in the past the vague ethical policies confused employees. In addition, the focus on instant profit and pressure from wining the internal Salomon competition forced employees to conduct unethical behaviours in order to fulfil the allocated tasks. The vague policies and wrong leadership contained in the organizational culture eventually leads to the failure of Salomon Brothers (Sims, Ronald R, 2000)  

Conclusion 總結

Organizational culture is comprehensive concept which consists of shared values, beliefs and norms of behaviours. When it comes to the field of culture studies, it often is associated with sociology, psychology and organizational behaviours. Based on the previous and current literature review, organizational culture has close relationship with corporate performance and business performance reengineering. Several cases have indicated that unsuitable organizational culture will lead to great troubles in corporate management. Though no agreement has been made in several academic research areas relative to organizational culture, all these literatures shed some lights to the future of further study and widely-applied of these theories.   

Reference List: 


1. Cui Xiaoming & Hu Junchen (2012). A Literature Review on Organization Culture and Corporate Performance. International Journal of Business Administration. Vol.3 (2), p.28-37
 2. Larry Mallak (2001).Understanding and Changing Your Organization’s Culture. Industrial Management, Vol.1, p.18-24 
3. Deepak Kumar & Anita Bhatia (2012). BPR- Organization Culture, Best Practices and Future Trends. International Journal of Computer Applications, Vol.44 (23), p.1-5 
4. Sims, Ronald R (2000). Changing an organization's culture under new leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.25, p.65-78 
5. Manfred F.R.Kets De Vries &Danny Miller (1986).Personality, Culture and Organization. Academy of Management Review, Vol.11 (2), p.266-279

本文編號：40533