Search results

This chapter defines culture and explains the different conceptual models developed by critical researchers in the field. First, the authors explain why it is essential for us to learn to see our cultures. Next, the chapter breaks the conceptual model of culture into its essential elements, including assumptions, beliefs, values, behaviors, and artifacts. The authors explain why and how each organization’s culture is unique – and walk through the factors that influence our organizational cultures. Finally, the chapter reminds us that it is hard to deliberately change an organization’s culture, because it is inherently dynamic. Instead, each organization should strive to understand how these factors affect our organizations.

While there is research that has explored how institutions have responded to various crises, these are usually locally or regionally situated. However, no event has impacted higher education globally like COVID-19 and it will certainly alter the way top administrators lead and how institutions move forward. Thus, this chapter will explore how to better understand how presidents and top administrators navigate the (inter)national geopolitics as they move the institution forward. In addition, clear and up-to-date communication has proven to be important in battling this crisis. Thus, how presidents at national universities have communicated with students, faculty, staff, and various off-campus communities members regarding COVID-19 and how they have achieved is important to explore. Our findings suggest that presidents and top administrators need to build support to help them navigate the political roadblocks they may encounter. Findings also suggest that communication is the main role they play as leaders on their campus. On/off-campus community members see the presidents as the face of the university and key communicator as relates to communicating what the institutions is doing and how they are addressing the crisis. This chapter helps in better understanding the roles presidents and top administrators play during a global crisis.

This chapter focuses on corporate cultures as critical focus points for the knowledge economy. The authors explain how culture is a crucial intangible asset in the hyperdynamic knowledge economy. The de facto business cultures in every organization – visible or invisible – are also discussed. The authors describe the four common types of business cultures – bureaucracy, market, clan, and fief. Finally, the importance of aligning culture and strategy is explained. In the event of culture, this chapter explains why culture will always prevail in any strategy-culture conflict. The chapter is supported by practical use cases.

Nursing homes experience high nursing staff turnover. Nursing staff in nursing homes is comprised of gray and blue collar workers that include registered nurses (RNs), licensed practical nurses (LPNs), and certified nurse assistants (CNAs). The relationship between human resource management (HRM)practices, organizational culture, and nursing staff turnover is examined in underresourced (high Medicaid) nursing homes. Survey data from 348 nursing home administrators (NHAs) of USA high Medicaid (85% or higher) facilities were merged with secondary data sources for 2017–2018. The dependent variables (nursing staff turnover rates) consisted of the percentages of RNs, LPNs, and CNAs that had voluntarily quit the organization during the past year. The independent variables were: (1) HRM practices (employee-centered and high involvement practices); and (2) organizational culture: clan, market, hierarchical, and non-dominant. Organizational and market variables were controlled for. Data were modeled using Poisson log-linear regression, and propensity score weights were used to adjust for potential survey non-response bias. Results show high involvement HRM practices and having a clan culture are associated with lower RN, LPN, and CNA staffing turnover. Study findings suggest that organizational culture and HRM practices may be instrumental in reducing nursing turnover in underresourced nursing homes.

Spirituality refers to the relationship that individuals have with something greater than themselves. It is an inner experience that includes a sense of transcendence, a connection to a higher power, or a sense of purpose or meaning. Nonprofit organizations can be defined as a unique category of organizations whose primary goal is not to make a profit. They represent a wide range of collective action and have long been collaborators with public governance systems in both developed and developing economies.

In the current socioeconomic structure, nonprofit organizations have become prominent policy actors, responsible for producing and distributing goods and services. To fulfill their responsibilities, these organizations rely on spirituality as a means of obtaining resources.

While contemporary nonprofit organizations have evolved from religious charities of the past, it would be incorrect to suggest that religious influences have disappeared completely. In fact, today's nonprofit organizations and charity sector exist on a spectrum that can be defined along a religious – secular axis, under the influence at different levels.

As modern nonprofit organizations are directly affected by contemporary organizational processes and principles, it is essential to examine spirituality in such organizations, regardless of whether they are religiously affiliated or not. This chapter examines the relationship between spirituality and nonprofit organizations, while also assessing their organizational effectiveness, career opportunities, leadership approaches, teamwork, job satisfaction and job dedication, in terms of spirituality and spiritual intelligence not only from a religious and cultural perspective, but also from an organizational one.

This chapter aims to consider workplace spirituality from a cross-cultural perspective. The terms workplace spirituality and culture are so intangible, and both start with the attitude and behavior of humans but are meaningful in a community. Because of the constraint of understanding these abstract settings, it is necessary to define and specify the dimensions of both concepts to achieve the aim of this chapter. In this regard, the section starts with the conceptuality of workplace spirituality and the dimensions of the term, which cumulate at individual, group, and organizational levels. It goes with the part of cultural dimensions in the light of Hofstede's (2001) direction, Chhokar, Brodbeck, and House's (2007) extension, and Sharma's (2010) derivation of cultural dimensions for national, organizational, and individual levels, respectively. After joining the dots, the chapter focuses on one of the most sacred research areas for academic literature, cross-cultural differences, and workplace spirituality. The last part of the chapter is the conclusion to point to final notes about the concepts and help guide future studies.

Innovation ecosystems consist of independent and yet interdependent enterprises and actors. This constitutes a challenge for innovation leadership to set the direction to pursue UN SDGs. Enhanced insights and understandings of how collaborative innovation leadership can be conducted in practice are revealed in two cases conducted using a participatory action research approach. Hereby theory and practice are linked by the ecosystem participant actions to reach competitiveness of the offshore wind energy ecosystem compared to traditional/other renewable energy sources pursuing UN SDG number 7 of ‘affordable and clean energy’. The two cases are situated in ports in offshore wind energy innovation ecosystems, respectively in the Baltic Sea and in the North Sea. The first case contains complementary ecosystem participants with both leadership and expert positions. The second case contains both complementary and competitive ecosystem participants with leadership positions. The findings note that both cases can use collaborative innovation leadership through the point of origin in the guiding star of the value proposition at ecosystem level to go beyond their own enterprise self-interest. Next, collaborative innovation leadership is based in heterogeneities of both knowledge domains and individual and organisational behaviours for the innovative imagination of future needed initiatives for collaborative design-based sensemaking. A short-term challenge is present from reduced revenue in own enterprise from future needed initiatives. This short-term impact needs to be addressed for enhanced long-term robustness. The findings are summarised in a model for dissemination of collaborative innovation leadership in ecosystems to pursue UN SDGs in practice.