Search results

Individual interactions between partners are recognized today as playing a central role in the evolution of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Most theoretical treatments of interactions have been made at a macro-level, with reference to constructs such as trust, outcome expectations, process and outcome discrepancies, and communication. Relationships are analyzed at the level of organizations seen as collective actors, and their international aspects are reduced to the comparative analysis of macro-level dimensions of culture. In the past two decades, research in social science has progressively revealed the complex and multiple natures of culture and identity in organizations. Surprisingly, the monolithic vision of organizational and national cultures is still dominant in the strategy field and has tended to use organization-wide or nationwide classifications (one organization – one culture/one country – one culture) and seeing top managers as the most reliable source of information on the topic. The paper suggests substantial modifications in our approach to culture and argues that the mapping and codifying of different management styles and cultural dimensions may not be enough to understand the dynamics of international business encounters. The main issue is not the existence of differences per se, but rather the way behavioral differences are perceived and interpreted by members of other managerial/organizational/national cultures, and particularly how the interactions – the “contact” across these cultures – are socially constructed and managed. We propose a research agenda putting perceptions and communication processes at center stage and introduce the concepts of Communication and Cultural Dissonance – rooted in the field of cross-cultural management and intercultural communication – as an important factor in the development of cooperative processes. Perceptions of cultural differences and problematic behaviors are grounded in the different cultural interpretations of a proper way to communicate intent, relations and business strategies to be implemented. These respective and often divergent interpretations will be fundamental in the way individuals assess the quality of the cooperation process, the reliability of their partners and of the knowledge they want to transfer and the trustworthiness of the partner. We use data from a longitudinal study of several post-merger integration processes to illustrate some of our theoretical conjectures.

The interrelationship between organizational learning (OL) and organizational culture (OC) is often assumed at an abstract theoretical level, but there is yet no systematization of scholarly knowledge allowing to conceptualize and understand its precise nature. In this article, we therefore ask “How can we, based on the insights from the dispersed research studying OC and OL, conceptualize the interrelationship between the two concepts?” Our purpose is to create an overview on the past development path and the current status of research interrelating OL and OC, to use it as basis for the conceptualization of this interrelationship and to identify avenues for future research.

This article utilized a systematic literature review methodology by combining bibliometric and content analysis using relevant articles identified from the Scopus database. A two-stage literature review research approach was employed: (1) Bibliometric analysis was used to identify 416 relevant contributions and to present a comprehensive contextual picture of the interrelations between OL and OC research by analyzing the 162 most relevant articles. (2) A subsequent qualitative content analysis of the 45 most relevant academic contributions detailed and solidified the insights.

We identify four weakly linked thematic clusters on the interrelationship of OC and OL. Based on that, our analysis confirms the theorized bidirectional relationship between OC and OL: OC acts as antecedent, driver and result of OL processes, and OL processes are constrained by and alter OC. We moreover develop three propositions that put knowledge at the center of scholarly attention for understanding this interrelationship in more depth and develop avenues for future research.

Our research has important implications for managers as it shows that mastering leadership challenges is central for the success of OL processes and OC change. We moreover specify the leadership challenges that relate to particular types of OL processes. Managers need to take this interrelationship into account when setting out for OL or OC change processes, and carefully reflect on whether or not the decided OL measures fit the given OC, and the other way round.

Our contribution to existing research is threefold: It first lies in analytically mapping out the research field, second in conceptualizing the interrelationship between OC and OL and third in identifying open research questions and topics.

Prior to Brown v. Board of Education 1954, Black female educators played a significant and vital role in segregated schools. Despite Black female teachers’ historic presence in the field of education, presently Black female teachers are disproportionately under-represented in the US teacher workforce. Acknowledging the shortage of Black female teachers in K-12 classrooms, the purpose of this qualitative study is to explore why Black female educators teach in under-resourced, urban schools. By examining Black female educators’ initial draw to urban schools in what we conceptualized as the urban factor, we hope to reframe the implicit biases surrounding under-resourced, urban schools as less desirable workplaces and unearth reasons why those Black female teachers who enter teaching gravitate more toward urban schools. Three themes emerged about Black female teachers’ thoughts on and preference for urban schools with an unexpected finding about Black female teachers’ perceptions of student behavior. Concluding, recommendations are offered for policy and practice.