Search results

This paper has two objectives. The first is to see whether “shared values” is an important intermediary, or part of the “black box” (along with organisational commitment and job satisfaction), between HRM practices and firm performance. The second is to assess whether the use of multiple levels of respondents produces different results compared with the usual practice of using senior HRM managers or, in lieu, another senior manager.

A survey methodology is used to obtain perceptual data on HRM practices and a variety of work‐related attitudes. The sample comprises managers, supervisors and workers from 27 New Zealand firms. Statistical analysis, using SPSS, was performed at the firm and individual level.

At group‐level there are wide differences in attitudes towards HRM activities. The desirability of using as many respondents as possible, and also respondents from different levels within organisations, was confirmed. “Shared values” is also deemed worthy of inclusion in the “black box” as it relates significantly to perceptions of HRM practices. However, organisational commitment and job satisfaction appear to have a stronger role.

Current writings suggest that certain HRM practices can foster a system of shared values amongst the workforce. The study finds this indeed to be the case at the individual level. However, the supposition that a shared value system significantly contributes to the promotion of other desirable attitudinal outcomes has not been supported by the study's findings. A limitation of the study is that it did not explore the HRM‐firm performance relationship in its entirety. Further research exploring all linkages in this relationship is now required.

The paper concludes that practitioners should be wary of pursuing an agenda that sees the development of a shared value system as the key to superior firm performance. Instead, it is suggested that the values of the organisation should be considered as the foundation from which a set of mutually reinforcing and supportive HRM practices is developed.

The paper provides much needed empirical data on shared values and their role in the HRM‐performance relationship.

The aim of this paper is to explore the stakeholder exclusion practices of responsible leaders.

An interpretive multiple case analyses of seven responsibly led organisations was employed. Twenty-two qualitative interviews were undertaken to investigate and understand perceptions and practice of responsible leaders and their approach to stakeholder inclusion and exclusion.

The findings revealed new and surprising insights where responsible leaders compromised their espoused values of inclusivity through the application of a personal bias, resulting in the exclusion of certain stakeholders. This exclusivity practice focused on the informal evaluation of potential stakeholders’ values, and where they did not align with those of the responsible leader, these stakeholders were excluded from participation with the organisation. This resulted in the creation and continuity of a culture of shared moral purpose across the organisation.

This study focussed on responsible leader-led organisations, so the next stage of the research will include mainstream organisations (i.e. without explicit responsible leadership) to examine how personal values bias affects stakeholder selection in a wider setting.

The findings suggest that reflexive practice and critically appraising management methods in normative leadership approaches may lead to improvements in diversity management.

This paper presents original empirical data challenging current perceptions of responsible leader inclusivity practices and indicates areas of leadership development that may need to be addressed.

This paper aims to address the complex nature of social performance (CSP/CSR) in building a trust-based consumer relationship. The relative and aggregate influence of corporate functional performance, corporate social performance (CSP) and shared values within a trust-based customer–brand relationship and their impact on behavioral loyalty in the forms of retention, referral and ease of voice are empirically tested.

Respondents were recruited to participate in a study on ice cream shop preferences. Structural equation modeling was used to simultaneously test the effects of independent variables on dependent variables.

Shared values mediate the effect that CSP has on trust and all loyalty behaviors. Trust has a significant influence on one behavior:retention.

The findings may be specific by industry, product type or consumer involvement. Further tests should be performed with varying levels of each.

Millennial consumers expect organizations/brands to engage in CSR activities, and, because of increased CSP reporting, are aware of an organization’s CSR efforts. If the CSP does not reflect the customer’s value system (shared values), the long-term relationship can be impacted negatively. Firms must strategically consider the values communicated by their CSR activities to build and care for long-term relationships with their target consumer.

This research is the first to integrate and test a comprehensive consumer relationship model of CSP.

Interpersonal trust is central to sustaining team effectiveness. Whilst leaders play the primary role in establishing and developing trust, little research has examined the specific leadership practices which engender trust toward team leaders. This study investigated the relationship between a set of leadership practices (transformational, transactional, and consultative) and members' trust in their leader, in research and development (R&D) teams. Usable questionnaires were completed by 83 team members drawn from 33 R&D project teams. Three factors together predicted 67 per cent of the variance in team members' trust towards leaders, namely: consulting team members when making decisions, communicating a collective vision, and sharing common values with the leader. Trust in the leader was also strongly associated with the leader's effectiveness. The implications of these findings for leadership development, team building and future research are discussed.

An overview of all the elements that go into formulating a business strategy – including received wisdom from the gurus, vision and values, ideas on growth, forecasting, information, objectives, audits, customers, markets, competition, finances, structure, training – with the focus on how to make it happen. Directed at practising managers whose task this is. Making strategic plans is the easy bit; enacting them requires changing things, getting things done through people. Discusses learning, training and development, culture, quality, with the emphasis on real people in real businesses. Underpinned by the philosophy of “action learning”.

This paper aims to highlight dysfunctional multi-stakeholder relations and negative business outcomes, evidenced in lose/lose results, exacerbated by failure to acknowledge strategic business focus as a means to redress problematic business thinking and practice amongst key leadership teams associated with achieving balance between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility.

The reframed strategic business focus has been developed using Eastern philosophy and Western organization theory and refers to four case examples of dysfunctional business thinking and practice.

Strategic business focus results from an interdependent and complementary positive mediating relationship between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility, which is moderated by organization culture (organization core values, including shared value) and strategic human resource management (talent and mindset).

Strategic business focus as proposed has not been empirically tested but seeks to address a conceptualization that competing business and stakeholder agendas are interdependent and complementary.

Strategic business focus seeks to redress traditional win/lose and lose/lose business outcomes, by supporting win/win results, represented by shared value amongst multi-stakeholders.

Strategic business focus seeks to provide a means whereby corporate social responsibility, particularly the social contract, plays a key role in the decisions and practices of key leadership teams and the behaviour of corporate staff in host environments when seeking competitive advantage.

Eastern thinking and behaviour are usually undervalued in the western business literature, particularly in western business practice. Joint attention, however, may improve competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility agendas in support of diverse management practices, including shared value.

The debate on corporate social responsibility (CSR) as shared value creation is trapped between management scholars and business ethics scholars, focusing merely on the distribution of values from an outcome-oriented perspective. The result is a juxtaposition of shared value from either a corporate or a societal perspective, providing only little attention to the actual communication processes supporting the creation of shared value. The purpose of this paper is to re-conceptualize shared value creation from a communicative approach as an alternative to the current situation caught between the management and societal perspectives.

Building upon recent constitutive models of CSR communication, this conceptual paper explores the potentials and implications of re-conceptualizing shared value creation as an alternative approach that recognizes the tensional interaction processes related to shared value creation.

The paper suggests a new conceptualization of shared value creation, which is sensitive to and able to advance the understanding of the tensional and conflictual interaction processes in which the continuous negotiation of corporate and stakeholder interests, values and agendas may facilitate a new understanding of shared value creation.

In order to succeed with the shared purpose of creating shared value (CSV), the company and the multiple stakeholders should neither disregard nor idealize the interaction processes related to shared value creation; rather, they should acknowledge that processes filled with tensions and conflicts are prerequisites for CSV.

A re-conceptualization of shared value creation that provides an alternative approach that is sensitive toward the tensions and conflicts occurring between corporate voice and multiple stakeholder voices.

“Shared purpose,” understood as a widely shared commitment to the organization’s fundamental raison d’être, can be a powerful driver of organizational performance by providing both motivation and direction for members’ joint problem-solving efforts. So far, however, we understand little about the organization design that can support shared purpose in the context of large, complex business enterprises. Building on the work of Selznick and Weber, we argue that such contexts require a new organizational form, one that we call collaborative. The collaborative organizational form is grounded in Weber’s value-rational type of social action, but overcomes the scale limitations of the collegial form of organization that is conventionally associated with value-rational action. We identify four organizational principles that characterize this collaborative form and a range of managerial policies that can implement those principles.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the factors that influence knowledge processes and by extension organisational knowledge culture (KC).

Using a systematic model development approach based on an extensive literature review, the authors explore the notion of organisational KC and conceptualise a model that addresses the following research question: what factors affect employees’ values and beliefs about knowledge processes and by extension organisational KC?

This paper proposes that knowledge processes are interrelated and mutually enforcing activities, and that employee perceptions of various individual, group and organisational factors underpin employee values and beliefs about knowledge processes and help shape an organisation’s KC.

The findings extend the understanding of the concept of KC and may point the way towards a unifying theory of knowledge management (KM) that can better account for the complexity and multi-dimensionality of knowledge processes and KC.

The paper provides important practical implications by explicitly accounting for the cultural aspects of the inextricably interrelated nature of the most common knowledge processes in KM initiatives.

KM research has examined a long and varied list of knowledge processes. This has arguably resulted in KM theorizing being fragmented or disintegrated. Whilst it is evident that organisational culture affects persons’ behaviour in the organisation, the impact of persons’ values and beliefs on knowledge processes as a whole remain understudied. This study provides a model of KC. Moreover, the paper offers a novel systematic approach to developing conceptual and theoretical models.

The aim of this chapter is to: (1) model culture as a configuration of multiple values, (2) identify different culture archetypes across the globe, and (3) empirically demonstrate heterogeneity in culture archetypes within and across 52 countries. We use Schwartz values from the World Values Survey (WVS) and the archetypal analysis (AA) method to identify diverse culture archetypes within and across countries. We find significant heterogeneity in culture values archetypes within countries and homogeneity across countries, calling into question the assumption of uniform national culture values in economics and other fields. We show how the heterogeneity in culture values across the globe can be represented with a small number of distinctive archetypes. The study could be extended to include a larger set of countries, and/or cover a broader range of theoretically grounded values than those available in the Schwartz values model in the WVS. Research and practice often assume cultural homogeneity within nations and cultural diversity across nations. Our finding of different culture archetypes within countries and similar archetypes across countries demonstrates the important role of culture sharing and exchange as a source of reducing cultural conflicts between nations and enhancing creativity and innovation through interaction and integration in novel ways. We examine culture as a configuration of multiple values, and use a novel AA method to capture heterogeneity in culture values within and across countries.