Suchergebnisse

"Kultur umfasst alles, worauf sich ein System 'zu pflegen' verständigt hat. War in der Vergangenheit Kultur noch relativ stabil, so sieht sich vor allem die Unternehmenskultur einer zunehmenden Veränderungsdynamik ausgesetzt. Kultur basiert auf der Vergangenheit, aber die Strategie der Organisation richtet sich an die Zukunft. Wie kann in diesem Gegensatz überhaupt gehandelt und Kultur gestaltet werden? In dem vorliegenden Band diskutieren verschiedene Autorinnen und Autoren diesen Problembereich." (Autorenreferat). Inhaltsverzeichnis: Klaus Götz: Cultural Change - eine Einführung (11-14); Sonja Sackmann: Cultural Change - eigentlich wär's ja ganz einfach, wenn da nicht die Menschen wären (15-38); Michael Bangem: Was kann der Daimler von der Kirche lernen? (39-60); Elisabeth Rohr: Cultural Change - und wie Frauen und Männer darauf reagieren (61-86); Rajan R. Malaviya: Achtung vor dem Fremden (87-90); Jürg Schrödl: BRD - DDR: nine years after (91-102); Reinhold Würth: Kunst, Kultur und Unternehmen - das Beispiel Würth (103-118).

Recent conceptual work suggests that the sense of identity that employees develop vis-a-vis their organization goes beyond the traditional notion of organizational identification and can also involve conflicting impulses represented by ambivalent identification. In this study, we seek to advance this perspective on identification by proposing and empirically examining important antecedents and consequences. In line with our hypotheses, an experimental study ( N = 199 employees) shows that organizational identification and ambivalent identification interactively influence employees' willingness to engage in organizational citizenship behavior. The effect of organizational identification on organizational citizenship behavior is significantly reduced when employees experience ambivalent identification. A field study involving employees from a broad spectrum of organizations and industries ( N = 564) replicated these findings. Moreover, results show that employees' promotion and prevention focus form differential relationships with organizational identification and ambivalent identification, providing first evidence for a link between employees' regulatory focus and the dynamics of identification. Implications for the expanded model of organizational identification and the understanding of ambivalence in organizations are discussed.

This research was supported by a grant from the German Research Foundation awarded to RvD, NMJ and JAH (DI 848/15-1 and HA 6455/4-1). ; Objectives : To investigate whether citizens' adherence to health-protective non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) during the COVID-19 pandemic is predicted by identity leadership, wherein leaders are perceived to create a sense of shared national identity. Design : Observational two-wave study. Hypotheses testing was conducted with structural equation modelling. Setting : Data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic in China, Germany, Israel and the USA in April/May 2020 and four weeks later. Participants : Adults in China (n=548, 66.6% women), Germany (n=182, 78% women), Israel (n=198, 51.0% women) and the USA (n=108, 58.3% women). Measures : Identity leadership (assessed by the four-item Identity Leadership Inventory Short-Form) at Time 1, perceived shared national identification (PSNI; assessed with four items) and adherence to health-protective NPIs (assessed with 10 items that describe different health-protective interventions; for example, wearing face masks) at Time 2. Results : Identity leadership was positively associated with PSNI (95% CI 0.11 to 0.30, p<0.001) in all countries. This, in turn, was related to more adherence to health-protective NPIs in all countries (95% CI 0.03 to 0.36, 0.001≤p≤0.017) except Israel (95% CI −0.03 to 0.27, p=0.119). In Germany, the more people saw Chancellor Merkel as engaging in identity leadership, the more they adhered to health-protective NPIs (95% CI 0.04 to 0.18, p=0.002). In the USA, in contrast, the more people perceived President Trump as engaging in identity leadership, the less they adhered to health-protective NPIs (95% CI −0.17 to −0.04, p=0.002). Conclusions : National leaders can make a difference by promoting a sense of shared identity among their citizens because people are more inclined to follow health-protective NPIs to the extent that they feel part of a united 'us'. However, the content of identity leadership ...