Heterogeneity of Corporate Culture: How Corporate Culture is Managed in German Organisations and what Could be Done Better
GRIN Verlag, 2006 - 188 pages
Master's Thesis from the year 2004 in the subject Business economics - Business Management, Corporate Governance, University of Teesside, 54 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: Corporate culture has gained importance in the business world in the last two decades. The consideration of corporate culture, nevertheless, differs significantly in organisations. Some organisations have taken their corporate culture into account for strategic decisions (e.g. cultural fit during Mergers & Acquisitions) but other organisations have tended to neglect this issue at all. Deal and Kenndy (1999) consider corporate culture as a hidden success factor of organisation which ensures commitment of the employees. According to them (1999), organisations with a 'strong' corporate culture outperform "run-of-the-mills companies by a massive margin". Corporate culture, nevertheless, has been a controversially discussed topic in the literature on which different general 'best practices' had been suggested by academics. However, it can be argued that the few empirical studies of corporate culture, notably Kotter and Heskett's (1992) quantitative survey, have been methodologically limited (Alvesson, 2002), e.g. to few senior managers of the examined organisations. Therefore, this project employs, besides interviews with senior managers of the three examined German organisations, a survey which is focused on employees of different hierarchical and divisional levels in one organisation. The findings of the research clearly show that corporate culture is a far more heterogeneous phenomenon than many academics suggest. In this research, corporate culture appears as a network of interrelating cultural patterns which is unique to different organisations due to different organisational and environmental challenges. The survey also identified that the perceptions of corporate culture differ between senior management and the employees. Therefore, the employees' perception of the
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Guideline for InDepth Interviews English 112 B Guideline for Focus Group Interview English 113 C Questionnaire for Survey at Centrotherm Germ...
Other editions - View all
100.0 Valid Cumulative 100.0 Valid Total 95 percent confidence Alvesson Analysis of Survey artefacts behaviour beliefs and attitudes Brown centralisation Centrotherm commitment computing the test Confidence Interval corporate culture corporate heroes cultural patterns Cumulative Percent Valid Deal and Kennedy df Mean Square differences between groups divisional employees focus group interview formalisation Frequency Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Hampden-Turner hence Hofstede homogeneity of variance ignored in computing interrelationship Kotter and Heskett Levene Statistic df1 logos Mean Square F Missing mission statements Neitheragreenordisagree Oneway ANOVA perceived percent confidence level Percent Cumulative Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Strongly perception distributed homogeneously perception of corporate Photovoltaics Qualität qualitative qualitative research questionnaire relationship responses Saunders senior management significant differences Squares df Mean Statistic df1 df2 strategic structure subcultures test of homogeneity tobs Total 70 Unternehmen Valid Percent Cumulative Valid Total 67 Zikmund