Search results

Enron, Parmalat, BP, Wal-Mart, Monsanto, Halliburton, Nike, Merck, Google,…the list goes on and on. It is widely acknowledged that business organizations are among the most important drivers of the quality of life that our society enjoys in our day, but the well-publicized samples of dishonest behavior by high-profile organizations around the world create no small amount of skepticism and cynicism.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationships between collectivistic attitudes and organisational culture (OC) perception among Russian‐speaking employees in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, and to explain the findings from the national identity perspective.

The study applies a survey method and uses the original scales developed at the University of Tartu. Collectivistic attitudes of individuals are grouped according to three levels of relationships, namely, relationships with family, peers (including co‐workers), or society. Collectivistic attitudes are measured on five‐point Likert‐type scale. Perceptions of OC are measured alongside the task and relationship orientations on ten‐point Likert‐type scale.

Collectivistic attitudes towards one's nation are found to be related to the perception of one's OC on both orientations. It was found that differences in the strength of these relationships in the Latvian sample are associated with the self‐reported nationality of the respondents and suggest similar tendencies in the Lithuanian sample. The authors propose that collectivistic attitudes of respondents basing the construction of their national identity on ethnic and linguistic grounds could have stronger positive connections with OC than those of respondents whose national identity formation was based on citizenship and assimilation.

Positive emotional connection with society and nation provides ground for supporting organisational tasks and relationships. National identity construction can further influence these relations. Limitations: the proposed relationships are hypothetical and are limited to the Latvian sample.

In organisations, human resource strategies should be formulated that support developing or retaining one's sense of national or within‐group identity, which will facilitate maintaining strong ties with the organisation.

This paper provides insight for managers, academics and students on the role of identity construction in revealing employee attachment to their organisation.

The aim of this paper is to analyse the factors associated with the perception of the value honesty among Russian organisational members from selected former Soviet countries: Russia, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Using the Rokeach Value Survey, the respondents were asked to rank their own values and to speculate on how their co‐workers would rank the same values. The following analysis focused on the importance of honesty, its concurrence with speculations about co‐workers, the impact of other personal values and socio‐demographic characteristics.

One of the most important findings of this study is that value honesty is amongst the most important values for Russians, while the importance of this value was not similar for Russians living in Russia and the Baltic States. Value consensus tells us the most about how important honesty is for the focal person. Results also reveal that other personal values, namely, family security, comfortable life, imaginative, capable and broad minded help to predict the assessment of honesty.

The results of the study imply that societal influence prevails over cultural influence when the importance honesty is assessed among Russians. Also, we show that individually, value honesty is socially construed and can therefore be manipulated via changing his/her perception of social consensus rather than directly.

The originality of the paper lies in the focusing on the Russians living in different countries of former Soviet Union by analysing the importance of value honesty which plays a role in business and societal culture.

The aim of this paper is explore how organizational culture is influenced by collectivism in Russia and draw some recommendations from human resources perspective because Russia differs from most Western countries in several ways, one of the key ones being a much higher tendency to collectivism.

The survey questionnaires were used in order to discover interrelations between characteristically collectivism and organizational culture. Organizational culture was turned into the task and relationship orientations approach and three levels of collectivism were distinguished. A total of 586 employees working for various organizations in Russia participated in this study.

First, it was discovered that Russians hold collectivistic attitudes (familism and patriotism) showing correlation with both orientations (task and relationships) of organizational culture. The results show that familism is negatively correlated with task orientation, while Patriotism is positively correlated with task and relationship orientations. These findings make it possible to develop recommendations for human resources management (HRM).

The limitations of the study are related to organizational culture approach and the Russians' multifaceted ethnic and cultural background. Nevertheless, this study illuminates various issues that may influence HRM practices in Russia.

The Russian organizations have some specific characteristics and this paper explains how those might be better managed. Special attention is paid on the HRM strategy and policy in the Russian context.

The main value of the paper is related to the contribution to the understanding which cultural factors may influence the HRM practices in Russia.

Isaac O. Amoako is a researcher at the Centre for Enterprise and Economic Development Research (CEEDR) and lecturer in enterprise and small business at the Department of International Management and Innovation, all at Middlesex University Business School, UK. He completed his Ph.D. in 2012 in the same university and his paper on “alternative institutions” used by exporting SMEs in Ghana has been accepted and forthcoming in International Small Business Journal (ISBJ). His research interests include enterprise and small business start-up and management, interorganizational trust, culture and organizations, and international business management. Prior to his academic career he was an entrepreneur starting and managing his own businesses for over 20 years.

This chapter offers a dynamic model of authentic leadership that links authentic leadership to situational leadership theory and shows how dynamics in the academic environment, one of the most difficult settings that leaders face, can be addressed. Kindsiko and Vadi detail the concept of situational authenticity, which reveals how authentic leadership takes place via forms of sensing – sense-giving, sense-making, sense-breaking and sense-keeping – in work-related situations. The authors highlight questions for future research: Is sensing the key to success? Are situational ethics valid if they adapt to evolving circumstances? Are situational ethics, in effect, just another way of expressing relativism? If so, can that be reconciled with authentic leadership theory?