Brands and Reputation Management
BRANDS AND REPUTATION MANAGEMENT
Organisational culture targets the design of imparted fundamental presumptions that might have been discovered by a group concerning illustration of issues illuminated about internal and outer adjustment What is more, internal coordination needs proper functioning to be acknowledged substantially (Alvesson & Berg, 2007). Therefore, for organisational culture to be taught efficiently, leaders of an organisation should choose the right by perceiving and thinking. In addition, it is appropriate to feel the connection with issues that individuals face (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). This definition applies for associations of essentially any kind, including families, social clubs, fill in groups, companies, governments, and countries (Dwivedi, 2006). Over time, each such aggregation develops a set claiming implied and express understandings, beliefs, and activities. It may not make not be difficult to demonstrate precisely the thing that the social aspects of a specific gathering are, but constantly on its parts to adjust instinctively to its desires (Gherardi, 2010).
An ever-increasing number of administrators would utilise dialect about organisational culture and corporate society, although it is not challenging to envision the reason. Many people need to realise how these issues come to impart perceptions, interpretations, attitudes, and how work environment imagery shape approaches feeling and demonstration (Harrison & Stokes, 2010). The objective might not present an opportunity for congruity for every individual, as there would endless profits should scholarly qualities prevail. Nonetheless, there may be a broad conviction that specific sorts of scholarly shared characteristic might diminish ineffective conflict, enhance collaboration, and adjust worth of effort towards an absolute purpose—all without the need for oppressive supervision (Hamada & Sibley, 2011). There is additionally something concerning social pride that could lift the morale of individuals and motivate their psyche to better serve in an organisation (ElHag, 2009).
Organisational culture serves as a key driving force in an enterprise, although the possibility is generally hidden. This is mostly because of the non-instrumental nature of a society. It is not possible to manipulate organisational culture directly, as an administrator may dispense assets alternately to direct strategy. Society may be impacted in a reverse manner the same time it evolves inconsistently with its goals (Xenikou & Furnham, 2012). The plan concerning a society obliges a complex repertory of initiative aptitudes and a sharp sense to socio-psychological progress. Organisational culture also changes constantly due to its multidimensional nature (Woodside, 2010). While talking about culture, we would really be alluding whether a few unique things, including the imparted principles individuals embrace of the open insider facts, people’s lack of awareness from flighty fads, designs to persisting taboos, norms, and burdensome rites for section of the status images from claiming power. It is also appropriate to consider the rundown issues prevalent. This unpredictability is not possible distinguish (Witte & Muijen, 2000). Thus, regardless of four decades of grant looking into organisational culture, the term can be utilised incalculable ways, generally without exact intentions (Sergiovanni & Corbally, 2008). In the workplace, wherever applied laxity and void buzzwords reign, keeping in touch with them demands clear one to clear his or her reasoning. In addition, criticism would indeed prevail, as much needs to be carried out to restore the idea for full utilisation of the concept (Black, 2013).
Understanding Organisational Culture
Though one might solicit a test by claiming something that they surmise towards organisational culture, two ordinary reactions will develop. To start with is the reaction towards a society bound together socially and introduction to ideological boundary (Dwivedi, 2006). For example, managers might portray an organisation as hosting a “bureaucratic culture” or “entrepreneurial society (Flamholtz & Randle, 2011).” Here, they need aid talking metaphorically over an association concerning illustration by encompassing attitude, disposition, as well as personality. The society might also be depicted as strong or weak, particularly when these issues are coherent, evident, and variable. Other than that, whatever particular liable would be depicted as vague and impressionistic (Schultz, 2009). A second reaction may be one concerning illustration of a social milieu or environmental. This could incorporate whatever perspective of the social or physical connection that influences those that lifestyles individuals exercise as well as contemplate them in their work environment. The organisation might also be depicted as far general or in other natural metaphors that might be present. These would push people into specific directions or alternately lead them to imagine specific routes (Teegarden, et al., 2010). Supervisors might additionally talk around those aesthetics, acoustics, and frenetics surrounding an organisation.
Nonetheless, both notions of organisational culture need analogues inside the expositive expression of the administration. Many management and administration books that deliver authoritative society will describe it as a bound together or alternately free from claiming “oneness” (collective personality and social cohesion) (Schein, 2010). These written works were developed for the organisations that prevailed in the 1980s. In spite of these, an insightful variant dates back to the late 1960s. By contrast, that authoritative literature might have been propelled in the late 1930s. Historically, this writing should be more extensive, meaning additional research is needed into the field (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Today, those notions claiming authoritative atmosphere and organisational culture should be utilised interchangeably with administration parlance. The expression is often conjured by writers looking particularly toward working environment characterised by social threats, such that a “climate about dread and intimidation” and “climate for unfriendliness and bigotry are handled effectively (Schabracq, 2009).” These descriptions of organisational culture need consideration for a few reasons. A large portion clears issues blending from metaphors, a sign of the absence of hypothetical clarity (Parker, 2000). The greater issue may be the overwhelming dependence looking into a purely figurative characterisation in the initial put. Assuming that organisations need societies for a vague, figurative sense, then it may be troublesome to settle on exact cases over those of imagery and importance attributed to the working environment (Inceoglu, 2002). Yet organisations, like different sorts of long-standing social organisations, could bring societies in the strict sense. At resorting to metaphor, it will be additionally troublesome to focus on the place authoritative society starts and ends (Dwivedi, 2006). A large number researchers as well as professionals need to approach organisations conceivably. Any idea that implies anything is not exactly helpful given a similar idea (Gherardi, 2010).
A large number of organisations fail to incorporate social structures, although they may be around for long. They acquire psychological viewpoints of the work environment to draw from an accepted sociological qualification the middle of social structures and faith systems. A society does not have a chance to be imparted, creating a need to investigate workers (Keyton, 2011). Indeed, a large number workplaces hold dissimilar subcultures inside inner assemblies and on extraordinary cases, these might really contradict the prevailing society (Sergiovanni & Corbally, 2008). Not each association will have a fully-fledged society. At some point, they might encounter situations in the recent past society as well as merge with other firms (Keyton, 2011).
These components of organisational culture need to be linked under three categories, including ideas, attitudes, and behaviours. These considerations for raise questions of whether a chance emerge for them to be viewed as dubious. Although no doubt is alluded here, however, socially constructed recognitions of the physical worth of effort may dominate (Msoroka, 2013). For example, the course of action of the physical fill in earth under cubicles and business settings will be not an angle of culture. It will be a plan of choice that is regularly impacted by organisational culture (Dwivedi, 2006). Contrary, there may be an economic wellbeing connected with a hosting and office and a higher status connected with desired office space. This social status, alongside other broadly perceived implications of workspaces, may reflect an angle from a claiming society (Msoroka, 2013).
Consider organisational culture as an icy mass lettuce claiming it unseen as it sits underneath the surface of the water (Alvesson & Berg, 2007). The noticeable part—the crest sticking out of the water—includes language, fashion, lore, vision, and routines. The part around the waterline that takes exertion will be seen, regardless of noticeable spirits, desires, stable opinions, and inclination (Schabracq, 2009). Whatever remains composes the biggest bit of the iceberg, for the profound focus of lightness particularly the values, assumptions, principles, and mental models in an organisation. The unobservable components are the vast troublesome majority that are easy to recognise. They also progress in a way they would be practically and determinedly grasped (Flamholtz & Randle, 2011). Their impact is supposedly clinched alongside approaches that are not dependably cognisant and direct. Identifying them might require aggregate reflection of direct activities, including probative questioning, in spite of the fact that those analytically insightful basic separations might have the capacity to gather their substance after cautious pondering (Kono & Clegg, 2003).
This portrayal stipulates that organisational culture could straightforwardly eliminate instrumental moulding style. An organisation could be transformed fast and decisively, insofar as any perspective from claiming an association could make a short request. For example, a single organisation claiming for trust structure following an in length track record of honesty, openness, consistency, shared consideration, correspondence would be effective (Markovic, 2012). Yet these bonds could be broken by a fast progression of betrayals. Likewise, economy intercessions that prompt many workers to claim turnover might be a foundation of a society that will indeed be detached profoundly based on the held qualities as well as standards for a moderately short duration in the long run (Markovic, 2012). Large portions of supporters and demonstrators for centre qualities might escape from their preferred qualities supplanted by the individuals or newcomers. This is a circumstances that regularly appears throughout mergers or other real reorganisations. The manager’s initial leasing to authoritative society would do no harm, particularly when directors starting by focusing on issues outside of the organisation (Mawhinney, 2013).
How can an administrator create the “antenna” needed on diagnose the state of an organisation’s culture? It begins from a dynamic vicinity in the work environment as well as a promise with sincere conversational trade with others (Alvesson & Berg, 2007). Many supervisors remain reserved this way because of the absence of an essential situational consciousness and right signs. Situational mindfulness incorporates thoughtfulness regarding socio-psychological points (related to interpersonal and assembly dynamics), including those nuances and subtleties from claiming correspondence and consideration (Miroshnik, 2013). This may be aided significantly by perusing speculation as far as the components of society are out- lined here. Many of them will consider each component and the initiative intercessions that are valuable. To the moment, it may be vital to recognise the symptomatic complexities present (Gherardi, 2010).
Similarly, as the idea from claiming authoritative society might be, it will be regularly done plainly by employing recognisable proof aspects. These might include:
An imparted comprehension of the organisation’s mission: This might make apparent over such things as a formal contract or mission statement, unequivocal strategies, objectives, principles, disappointments and outrage on his/her staff convictions, and presumptions around the reason why the association does what it does (Harrison & Stokes, 2010).
Qualities that aide choice making: Additional movements in the least levels in the association. For instance, it might be obvious in the organisation’s policies, state funded statements, and exercises that it values. They incorporate safety (the physical wellbeing from claiming staff and the public) and security (the insurance about data and different assets). They also target integument (the notoriety of the association for honesty, secondary moral standards, dependable outputs, and immaculate methodologies), nonstop change (with mistakes seen concerning illustration in opportunities), and constant absorption (the making for rich chances to staff on addition of new information and skills) (Gherardi, 2010).
Targeting management style of senior officers: This may be frequently about all the obvious proclamations that senior directors make around authoritative priorities, the economy style that they grasp (for example Top-down? Consultative?), and more disappointments and outrage on staff recognitions such as senior management’s primary preoccupations and duty to “walking the talk” (Hamada & Sibley, 2011).
How workers consider their connections with management, one-another, accomplice organisations, and customers. Here, the key issues to address is whether the connections are predominantly adversarial, competitive, distrustful, collegial, and commonly strong “around others? How an organisation handles normal benefits of the business. Most of them make discoveries like those in a society, eventually taking a gander at such things, as its schedule procedures. Does it routinely review transform effectiveness; how would choices be made; what amount of obligation is provided for every layer / staff part in the organisation; and, how adaptable the association is done managing errands that would crazy of the conventional). The point when you place these things together, a unique authoritative “personality” might become clear (Markovic, 2012). Organisations create reputations for being bureaucratic or entrepreneurial, inventive or convention bound, concentrated or diffuse in their interests, transparent or secretive, answerable and dependable or dauntless and unsafe (Miroshnik, 2013).
Certain components about an organisation might not be promptly apparent, including beliefs, values, attitudes, and presumptions. In the recent past, embarking once on a significant progress initiative was considered paramount to identify the parts of society affecting an organisation and evaluation exercises (Msoroka, 2013). Many issues claiming viable devices have been produced for this reason. Claiming from an organisation’s perspective, there are often a number of different sub-cultures, as well as expert disciplines, unit functions, geological locations, or representative period and experience (ElHag, 2009). Progress activity will be guided principally should one such unit alternately sub- group. As such, it would be vital to get its exceptional social qualities (Parker, 2000).
Cultural Issues in an Organisation
As different management scholars bring organisational culture, there may be an abstraction, impacting on the way associations think and carry on. Indeed, hosting “the good sort of culture” – a society that is fit to endeavour over which an association is captivated – it may be generally recognized as being around paramount determinants concerning how successful or great those association will be (Hamada & Sibley, 2011). Culture is imperative in light of how it shapes different things. The thing that an organisation recognizes will be a chance to make right decisions and what its representatives think as of proper practices and entryway for cooperation with one another inside the company (Dwivedi, 2006). They also target how individuals, fill in bunches and how the organisation manages of effort allocated to them, the velocity, and effectiveness for which things get done. The organisations ability for openness to change and the attitudes from claiming outside stakeholders of the association are also effective in a firm’s operations (Markovic, 2012). In short, an organisation’s culture should be steady and embark on new activities to accomplish its objectives.
Why Cultural Change is Necessary
The point when an association will be confronted by an evolving commercial centre or administrative environment, it needs to recognize the necessity for a shift clinched alongside key direction, execution of a new technology, or presentation from claiming new courses created by culture (Teegarden, et al., 2010). For that reason, the triumph about real organisational change activities are generally subject to inner social transformation. The things that are of fundamental importance in an organisation include thinking of embarking on social progress activities (Xenikou & Furnham, 2012). Those reasons may include:
Condition changes. These include those association figures that it will be encountered at the tip of the iceberg or inadequate declarations that oblige an alternate disposition.
Stakeholder desires’ change: For instance, an organisation encounters more excellent suspicions like its conclusions, requiring a culture that puts considerable excellent stress on the personal satisfaction of its procedures same time permitting additional transparency over how it performs its operations.
The demographics of organisational change: For instance, the extent about youngsters’ worth of effort to compel grows. Alternately a bigger rate of new representatives arrive for restricted foundation requiring new methodologies of learning exchange.
The organisation’s targets change: Requiring new skills, courses and attitudes to help the firm to reach its destinations.
New advances would be deployed: Requiring new social attitudes to understand reductions in a firm (Gherardi, 2010).
Instilled attitudes to transform negative outcomes: “What a given division does to be of benefit to the business – Ensure different divisions get respect to do their business”; “It may be exceptional to crowd data over stake”; “performance is not rewarded.” Attitudes for example, are demonstrative of a culture meant for progress. In particular circumstances for example, such that the individuals recognized above, a formal progress management procedure might help on expanding the likelihood of claiming success, boost workers and key stakeholders morale in the organisation. These would transform competencies in the organisation (Black, 2013).
The thing that may be included over evolving organisational culture is to ensure that the culture is improved from time to time. At the present, a number of organisations do not adopt culture. A well established organisation needs long term strategies to implement a culture that will streamline its operations and flourish. It takes considerable effort to build a culture, meaning that overnight measures would not be effective in transforming a firm’s practices (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Thus, concerning illustration of representatives in a firm, they should be informed and prepared to handle tasks in an organisation in completely different ways for an organisation to progress in its operations and realise its anticipated goals in future.
With respect to the transformation of the management team in an organisation to cope with the culture of the organisation, a firm should embark in interchanges that strengthen the key stakeholders of the firm while providing them with additional skills. These would help them cope with the operations of the organisation regardless of whether it is experiencing turbulent times in period of culture change (Cameron & Quinn, 2011).
Issues in Transforming Organisational Culture
Overseeing progress of organisational culture in a firm entails planning, implementing, checking, and reporting impact once an arrangement of assignments as well as the required strategies help to reach certain set change targets. Sensitive authoritative transformation aims at aligning the impetuses that lie outside the organisation’s control including new legislation, moving political direction, and fundamental occasions “among others (Woodside, 2010). Progress of this form must regularly putting into consideration deliberate arranging and execution. Proactive authoritative progress should be arranged and figured out from inside frameworks and methodologies. The objective from claiming these activities may be aimed actualising all the new benefits of the business forms and frameworks to move beyond authoritative execution (Witte & Muijen, 2000). Nonetheless, the degree and timing of the change may be inside the organisation’s control.
An organisation’s senior administration normally propels proactive change management, with support starting from advisors who have specific skills in that area, especially in management methodologies and frameworks. Compelling authoritative change is not “one approach fits all” undertaking (Sergiovanni & Corbally, 2008). The full duty of a pioneering organisation that needs aid is broadly regarded inside the organisation as he or she is able to see organisation’s purpose and goals. The process of overseeing business projects is fundamental and should be effective in facilitating authoritative change. Change authority help at various levels inside the organisation to actualise all the authoritative and particular progress relevant to the organisation (Kono & Clegg, 2003).
Management consultants whose practice are connected to behavioural science regularly gather as well as give support the operations of a firm and its assets. They also apply models, routines, techniques, tools, skills, and different manifestations from claiming information to help associations execute their change strategy (Flamholtz & Randle, 2011). They draw the experience required, on managing of assets over fields, for example, psychology, sociology, business administration, economics, streamlined engineering, frameworks engineering, and the examine from human and hierarchical perspective (Mawhinney, 2013). Together, these assets back progress activity toward creating the necessary strategies, methodologies and usage frameworks for driving organisational culture to the next level.
Developing Change Strategy
Figure 1 illustrates the vital steps to consider when considering changing the culture of an organisation effectively to rhyme with the overall goals and objectives of a company.
Figure 1: Change Framing Framework
Organisational Culture as Organisational Memory Indicator
Clinched alongside a society, culture lets organisations to develop fundamental plans that allow them to move the culture of their firm to the next level. Organisational culture plays a key role for the existence of organisational remembrance. Authoritative society will be a roll-up of the experiences, observations, developmental events, preferences, and lessons about whether these practices influence the operations of a firm (Harrison & Stokes, 2010). The individual things that do not match those bigger numbers or move people to positions of power are normally separated considered unfit to run a firms operations (Woodside, 2010). Ultimately, those pieces that remain need aid moulded under something sound so that a large number of issues can be identified either consciously or unconsciously. This rationality needs identity, with the goal of meeting new encounters and lessons which would be compared and judged as stated by the preceding issues (Keyton, 2011). Culture may be an existing memory. Yet, this portrayal implies, this memory is not actually created for learning (defined as semantic seeing), majority of the data (declarative statements), and “wisdom” (axiomatic statements). This means that a part from claiming authoritative society, it creates room for intriguing with learning supervisors who need aid concentrated on culture. Things such as tastes, preferences, and gathering securities do not encompass all things needed to learn about an organisation (Schein, 2010).
Organisational memory installed alongside society will be not so much exact provided for that the sifting transform is exceedingly unsteady. Organisational cultures that liberally suit dissimilar plans or put a put quality around a variety of cultures are considered grim (Markovic, 2012). However, alongside organisational cultures, important learning will be prone to separation where it will be considered as being ahead of its time, from the point it starts claiming doubtful worth, contrarian, and eccentricity among other issues (Mawhinney, 2013). These labels are regularly joined will things that do not fit in with profoundly held assumptions, values, principles, and mental models (the social core) (Gherardi, 2010). Indeed, societal cultures have in history propelled and regulated safety with the assistance of imaginative artists, discoverers, and scholars who were afterward constrained with work done unless they were fortunate enough to discover a capable supporters and champions in their field (Msoroka, 2013). At taking a gander at those persisting lessons witnessed previously, oral histories, for instance, the revisions, omissions, erosions ought to be taken under cautious attention (Parker, 2000).
An organisation’s memory may be associated with knowledge, information, and encounters that would be bear with the present situations, in spite of the fact that utilisation might not fundamentally achieve each change. An uncritical over-reliance around secret word learning might make it troublesome for associations to adjust with evolving condition (Schabracq, 2009). For example, organisational memories might be inappropriate, particularly when they lead towards inclination against important change, conventionalist tendencies, a bad obsession around secret word mistakes, and a hesitance when thinking about advantageous plans that would be realised elsewhere (ElHag, 2009). ” Organisational memory may not serve as a substitute for discernment action, but it may just serve as a canny speculation. A hearty organisational memory will be one, which was previously associated with helpful information as is reflected for a number inputs around an organisation (Inceoglu, 2002). If any information about learning may be lost because, for instance, an archive is destroyed, afterward it even now exists elsewhere in the organisation archive administration framework will help recover it with moderately little complain. If social information is shared so much, it is reflected many of people inside an organisation, making it an especially tough type for memory (ElHag, 2009). Thus, in spite of the fact that culture will be a fractional and exceptionally unsteady structure from claiming authoritative memory, an individual’s point of view will be solidness. This sturdiness might just be measurable in the sense that if an authoritative society erodes fundamentally following a few real downsizing or worker defections, an important learning should be pieced together to facilitate in heading towards the goal of the organisation in the coming years and boost the productivity of a firm considerably (Miroshnik, 2013).
A structure of an organisation concerns triage and recovery. As such, questions arise as to what components are appropriate to claim an organisational culture that is suitable for facilitating learning in an organisation (Schultz, 2009). The key areas of concern is basic knowledge or semantic seeing as well as the manner in which understanding can be imparted towards a broad range dominated by representatives targeting ideas, objects, and insights, and the ways in which they work (Parker, 2000). Furthermore, comprehending the way things can be accomplished, particularly through feelings, skills, and obvious interpretations play a key role in guiding the future or organisational culture ( Sergiovanni & Corbally, 2008).In addition, focusing on regular information would facilitate in bringing suitability based on the project being embarked on at a given instant. This regular information is essential in terms of helping to imbed it to the culture of an organisation (Witte & Muijen, 2000). This is because it is possible to actively pass culture in an organisation to additional employees for formal education, including mentorship relations, introduction sessions, work training, and imparting of spontaneous information (Mawhinney, 2013). This form of learning plays a vital role in learning about the tricks in an organisation, which can in turn improve the manner in which individuals interact in a firm.
Future of Organisational Culture
Based on the practices that firms embark on, and the issues facing them in the current society, it is vital to consider what the future might bring for them. For instance, socioeconomic progressions are being witnessed in different democracies from diverse parts of the world. These are coupled with evolving norms in the work environment, making it challenging for stakeholders of companies to encounter challenges when coping with the issue of organisational culture. Organisations need assistance to get social order, particularly in those environments that are characterized by populaces that are intellectual in different ways (Alvesson & Berg, 2007). In this case, it will be understandable to exaggerate the propensity of claiming the need for young generations, who will exercise innovation in their places of work. Based on the level of disobedience associated with young generations, organisations will need to focus on ways they can allow the young populations to progress their skills and cope with the evolving changes being witnessed in the workplace (Gherardi, 2010). Presently, organisational culture will need to emphasize on standardising young specialists in ways they can cope with future operations of these firms. Yet, organisations will be forced to cope with the progresses being witnessed in the business world and ensure that their employees adapt them to keep the operations of the firms running (Hamada & Sibley, 2011). Various firms are embarking on social contracts, which they aim target different scholarly qualities, which will facilitate self-governance as well as avail sources of improvement among the stakeholders of an organisation. These will create room for strengthening of social rationality, which will help to absorb the social transmission into the cultures that organisations exercise (Markovic, 2012).
Organisational culture assumes a key part in a firm. Based on these issues, there are certain measures that would help to improve the state of organisational culture in a company. These incorporate official briefings on the initiatives, progress availability assessment, transform heading plans, correspondence plans, introduction session for task group members, preparation arrangement for group members, progress training, cooperation sessions, heading alignments, and innovativeness workshops. Nonetheless, certain times, transformation of cultural initiatives may came to a halt. The truth is that a large number organisational culture progress activities neglect their target accomplishments. This is particularly the case because of the inalienable safety concerning organisational culture. There are certain reasons as to why organisations fail to transform their organisational culture appropriately. They deem it fit to stick to the workable approaches they have implemented and they may encounter challenges when developing a real change that is appropriate or the organisation. Others consider themselves as unique and that younger generations would follow the same footsteps. Nonetheless, various disappointments result from claiming that organisational culture can transform the activities of an enterprise. These contain of contending transform activities, such as many numbers covering change initiatives, absence of management proprietorship, and managers failure to implement vigorous. Other issues to consider include doubtful initiatives, disappointments from established transformation initiatives, and failure to communicate in an effective manner, disappointing the overall progress of enforcing change towards organisational culture. Other firms also fail to ensure appropriate remuneration strategies for advancing change.
Clearly, it is vital for organisational culture leaders to employ well-reasoned, energetic change, and deliberately planned measures to ensure that culture within it rhymes with its operations and need for productivity and profitability. These can be realised through specifying change, demonstrating solid transformation, actualising a project, enforcing proprietorship. Although embarking on these measures would be challenging, a company would realise improved performance, allowing it to realise a considerable competitive advantage in the marketplace.
Alvesson, M & Berg, PO 2007, Corporate Culture and Organisational Symbolism: An Overview, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
Black, RJ 2013, Organisational Culture: Creating the Influence Needed for Strategic Success, Universal Publishers, New York.
Cameron, KS & Quinn, RE 2011, Diagnosing and Changing Organisational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Dwivedi, RK 2006, Organisational Culture and Performance, M.D. Publications, Boston.
ElHag, FL 2009, Impact of Organisational Culture on Success of Mergers and Acquisitions: An Analytical Study, ProQuest, Louisville.
Flamholtz, E & Randle, Y 2011, Corporate Culture: The Ultimate Strategic Asset, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Gherardi, S 2010, Gender, Symbolism and Organisational Cultures, SAGE, London.
Hamada, T & Sibley, WE 2011, Anthropological perspectives on organisational culture, University Press of America, New York.
Harrison, R & Stokes, H 2010, Diagnosing organisational culture, Pfeiffer & Co, Indiana.
Inceoglu, I 2002, Organisational Culture, Team Climate, Workplace Bullying and Team Effectiveness: An Empirical Study on Their Relationship, Herbert Utz Verlag, Paris.
Keyton, J 2011, Communication and Organisational Culture: A Key to Understanding Work Experiences, SAGE, London.
Kono, T & Clegg, S 2003, Transformations of Corporate Culture: Experiences of Japanese Enterprises, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
Markovic, RM 2012, Impact of Globalization on Organisational Culture, Behavior and Gender Role. SAGE, New York.
Mawhinney, TC 2013, Organisational Culture, Rule-Governed Behavior and Organisational Behavior Management: Theoretical Foundations and Implications for Research and Practice, Routledge, London.
Miroshnik, V 2013, Organisational Culture and Commitment: Transmission in Multinationals, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Msoroka, M 2013, Organisational Culture: Its Implications to Educational Institutions, GRIN Verlag, Boston.
Parker, M 2000, Organisational Culture and Identity: Unity and Division at Work, SAGE, London.
Schabracq, MJ 2009, Changing Organisational Culture: The Change Agent’s Guidebook, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Schein, EH 2010, Organisational Culture and Leadership, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Schultz, M 2009, On Studying Organisational Cultures: Diagnosis and Understanding, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
Sergiovanni, TJ & Corbally, JE 2008, Leadership and Organisational Culture: New Perspectives on Administrative Theory and Practice, University of Illinois Press, Illinois.
Teegarden, PH, Hinden, DR & Sturm, P 2010, The Nonprofit Organisational Culture Guide: Revealing the Hidden Truths That Impact Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Witte, KP & Muijen, JV 2000, Organisational Culture, Psychology Press, Paris.
Woodside, AG 2010, Organisational Culture, Business-to-Business Relationships, and Interfirm Networks, Emerald Group Publishing, London.
Xenikou, A & Furnham, A 2012, Group Dynamics and Organisational Culture: Effective Work Groups and Organisations, Palgrave Macmillan, London.