Changes in the espoused values of Australian organizations 1986—1990

Abstract

SummaryWe compared the frequency with which 85 Australian organizations espoused nine values (authority, leadership, teamwork, commitment, rewards, normative, participation, performance and affiliation) in 19861988 and 1989-1990 through a content analysis of annual reports, internal magazines, and mission statements. We studied value changes both by comparing the frequency of references to single values in the two periods and the frequency with which four, distinctly different value structures (Elite, Leadership, Meritocratic, and Collegial) occurred among organizations in each period. Univariate comparisons over the whole sample revealed only one significant difference-an increase in Commitment references over time. Comparisons based on groups of organizations with different value structures indicated both a preponderance of organizations with Elite values at time one, and that initially Elite organizations showed most evidence of value change. The findings are discussed in terms of the way univariate comparisons of mean shifts in values can mask the presence of significant differences in patterns of value change between organizations, and the utility of content analysis for measuring organizational values unobtrusively. Possible explanations for some of the changes observed are considered.

A cross‐cultural comparison of organizational culture: evidence from universities in the Arab world and Japan

“…Remuneration at Waseda mirrors the Japanese norm of seniority-biased rewards that, in conjunction with the prevalence of the tenure system, suggests that performance rewards is another discouraged value. Thus, characterized by decentralized power and relatively egalitarian reward norms (typically, the older the faculty, the higher the rank and salary), Waseda is a "collegial" organization in Kabanoff's and Holt's (1996) typology of organizational values; this is consistent with the partly clan culture of the university as discussed previously.…”

“…With decentralized power and an egalitarian, seniority-based, reward system, Waseda and Asia are, in Kabanoff's and Holt's (1996) typology, "collegial" organizations that stress team orientation, participation, commitment, and constructive interpersonal relationships while discouraging authority and performance rewards; this is consistent with the "clan" type of culture (Hooijberg and Petrock, 1993) whereby members exchange their loyalty for the organization's security. With the seniority system and life-time employment in place, Waseda and Asia can be considered the embodiment of a "Japanese" organization.…”

“…As a "leadership" organization (Kabanoff and Holt, 1996) characterized by centralized power and valuing authority, commitment, team orientation, and affiliation while discounting participation, KFUPM may be considered an "Arab" university reflecting broader societal values such as respect for authority and hierarchical relationships, obedience, loyalty and compliance, but also the affiliation-oriented nature of Arab culture, and concern for strong interpersonal relationships. Reflecting its origins, established by American missionaries, and explicitly stated objective of basing its educational perspective, methods, and academic organization on the American model of higher education, AUB, an "elite" institution (Kabanoff and Holt, 1996) valuing authority and performance rewards while discouraging commitment, affiliation, and team orientation, is less of an "Arab" organization compared to KFUPM and closer to a hybrid of Lebanese and American cultures. This may be attributed not only to the university's origins and educational orientation but also to the receptiveness and flexibility Lebanese society exhibits with respect to accommodating values from other cultures.…”

An exploration of trust and shared values in UK defence supply networks

“…This was confirmed using the methodology of Boris Kabanoff and his colleagues who have conducted a number of studies in the area of organisational values. Thus, Kabanoff et al(1995), Kabanoff and Holt (1996), and Kabanoff and Daly (2002) all suggest that there is considerable congruency in the views from across many fields of the study of organisations that supports the existence of a typology of four ideal types of organisations. These represent a differentiation between those organisations in which equity (in other words task, technical or production orientation) is predominant, and those equality-based organisations in which personal (or social/employee-orientated) issues hold sway.…”

Situational leadership preferences in Australia: congruity, flexibility and effectiveness

“…The focus on supportive styles may also reflect an overall shift in organizational values, particularly for those large numbers of organizations moving from authoritarian attitudes with unequal power, to more empowered environments based on commitment (Kabanoff and Holt, 1996). Favouring supportive styles would be consistent with attempts to manage the change, and support the new values in many organizations.…”