英语论文网

r /> 2.2.3 The Competing Values Approach
The Competing Values approach assesses an organization's culture in terms of how it resolves a set of value dilemmas. It suggests that an organization's culture can be understood in terms of four important 'value pairs'; each pair consists of contradictory values placed at opposite ends of a continuum. The four value pairs are internal focus versus external focus, organic processes versus mechanistic processes, innovation versus stability, and people orientation versus task orientation. Organizations are faced with these competing values of internal versus external focus and must choose between attending to internal operations or their external environment for continued survival. Too much emphasis on either can result in missing important changes in the competitive environment. As our study is identify organizational culture in which people have more job satisfaction and for the identification of organizational culture we will use competing values frame work. Therefore Competing Values Approach will be explained briefly here so that we can understand that how this approach will be used in our research method.

2.3 Measuring Organizational Culture through Competing Values
Through decades of empirical research, scholars have established abundant links between organizational culture and organizational performance. While previously businesses were either unaware of culture's importance or believed it too difficult to manage, today they recognize that it can be used for competitive advantage. This is something that Apple Computer gets. By leveraging their culture of innovation toward product as well as internal processes, they have been able to survive despite incredible competition as well as venture into new and profitable markets. But in order to use culture strategically, a company first needs to understand its culture. Culture is defined as complex issue that essentially includes all of a group's shared values, attitudes, beliefs, assumptions, artifacts, and behaviors. Culture is broad encompassing all aspects of its internal and external relationships and culture is deep in that it guides individual actions even to the extent that members are not even aware they are influenced by it. Scholars tend to agree that the root of any organization's culture is grounded in a rich set of assumptions about the nature of the world and human relationships. For example, the underlying belief that people are selfish and only out for themselves might unwittingly influence a company's attitudes and behaviors toward outside salespeople, vendors, and consultants. This is profound stuff that is largely invisible, unspoken, and unknown to an organization's members. So is it possible to really know a company's culture? While admittedly it would be very difficult (and some might claim impossible) task to fully account for all components of a company's culture, the dominant attributes can generally be identified. In focusing on 'effective organizations', research has uncovered many critical dimensions. John Campbell (1974) and his fellow researchers identified thirty-nine important indicators. While such a list is helpful, it is still impractical for organizations to account for so many dimensions to identify their own culture. Realizing this, Robert Quinn and John Rohrbaugh (1983) reviewed the results of many studies on this topic and determined that two major dimensions could account for