3y ago
2.31 MB
103 Pages
Last View : 13d ago
Last Download : 6m ago
Upload by : Joanna Keil


Amity Global HRM ReviewPatronDr. Ashok K. ChauhanFounder President, Amity InstitutionsAdvisorDr. Sanjay Srivastava, Dean FMSEditor-In-ChiefProf. (Dr.) Arun SacherAddl. Director, Amity International Business SchoolEditorMs. Chitra & Dr. Shruti TripathiAsst. Professor, Amity International Business SchoolCo-EditorMs. Chitra BajpaiAsst. Professor, Amity International Business SchoolEDITORIAL BOARDAli SanayeiAnn O’ SullivanBen L. KediaDawna L. RhoadesDavid MorrisFrancisco José Del Campo GomisGabriel OgunmokunH.S. KehalJaved HussainProf. Martin ReynoldsKofi AmoatengLouis W. GoodmanM Sadiq Sohail King FahdMaktoba Omar NapierMohamed ElhagMuddathir Ali AhmedPeter CunninghamPrem SikkaRamesh C GargRoubina T D JuwaheerRoy LeitchSam N. BasuSonny NwankwoUniversity of Isfahan, IranCoventry University, UKThe University of Memphis, USAEmbry-Riddle Aeronautical University, USACoventry University, UKPolytechnical University of Valencia, SpainUniversity of Southern Queensland, AustraliaUniversity of Western Sydney, AustraliaUniversity of Central England Business School, UKAnglia Ruskin University, UKNorth Carolina Central University, North CarolinaAmerican University, USAUniversity of Petroleum & Minerals, Saudi ArebiaUniversity Business School, ScotlandElectronic Publisher, UKUniversity of Gezira, SudanNelson Mandela Metropolitan University, South AfricaUniversity of Essex, UKEastern Michigan University, USAUniversity of Mauritius, MauritiusInteractive University, UKCalifornia State University, USAUniversity of East London, UK

AmityGlobal HRM ReviewCopyright 2012 Amity University PressAll Rights ReservedAmity University Press holds the copyright to all articles contributed to its publications.No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic ormechanical including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without anyprior written permission ofAmity International Business School, Amity University.The views expressed in the articles are the personal views of the authors and do not represent thoseof the Amity International Business School, Amity UniversityAmity University PressAmity University Campus, E-2 BlockSector-125, NOIDA-201 303Tel: 91-120-4392592 - 97, Fax: 91-120-4392591Email:

From the Desk of the Editor-in-ChiefIn today’s era of globalization corporate world around us continues to thrive on change management andseeks to raise the bar for HR professionals. Constant change is the only constant happening in businessas well as in professionalism. Further the dominant demographic events of the past century, the babyboom’s entry into the labour market, preceded what became a long period of stagnation and slow growthin economy. It was hard for many workers to find jobs in this period and unemployment rates remainedrelatively high amongst the global world.In this context of rapidly changing business world and organisations, human resources need to be in drivingposition. Thus, there is a strong need of ‘doing of HR’ instead of just ‘being of HR’. A new revolutionaryconcept of HR Paradigms is the need of the hour in present changing times. There is a growing need toview top HR executives as an organisation effectiveness officers (OEO) which encompasses today’s top HRjob to include followings: Enabling capable and courageous leadership Building a very strong and adaptive organizational culture Strengthening organizational productivity and performance Fostering creative innovation, products and solutions Building Exceptionally high customer loyaltyIn our 9th Global HR Summit & Research Conference 2012, we are deliberating further on this issue andhave hence kept a theme of this conference as “Building Bridges between the Current Industrial Scenario& HR Challenges”As a part of this conference, we are also releasing our prestigious Referred Research Journal - Amity GlobalHRM Review.As an offshoot of our keen enthusiasm on presenting commendable and authentic research, Amity GlobalHRM Review is conceived as a compilation of articles contributed by eminent research scholars, academiciansand industry professionals from India and abroad. The main contributors in this issue of AGHRM areleading academicians and researchers from institutes like Greensboro College USA, IIT Roorkee, MzumbeUniversity Tanzania, A.M.U Aligarh, KCA University Nairobi, Kenya, AXIS Bank, University BusinessSchool, Punjab University, University of Mumbai, N.I.T Silchar, Assam, and Central University of Rajasthan,ONGC, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies.The creative and intellectual impulses of authors are vividly expressed in the following articles which,we are sure, you will also find to be of contemporary relevance. The articles cover a bouquet of conceptsfrom the area of HR. Some of the main concepts covered include Organisation Culture, Work Values,Organizational justice, Chang management, current industrial scenario and HR challenges, InnovativePractices in leadership and corporate social responsibility.We hope that the issue will immensely benefit the members of academia, managers, strategists, policymakers and the vibrant students who are the bedrock of present day intelligentsia.We eagerly look forward to enriching this journal with enlightened critique and feedback as we endeavorto encapsulate even better ideas in the most creative expression for the perpetual intellectual delight of ourreaders.Prof (Dr.) Arun SacherEditor-In-ChiefAmity Global HRM Review

CONTENTSPagesOrganization Culture as Indicator of Organization’s Citizenship Behavior09Lata Singh, Inmantec & Michael A. Dutch, Professor of Business Administration,Greensboro College, NC, USAWork Values and Organizational Justice as Predictors of Managerial EffectivenessGeeta Rana & Alok Goel, Department of Management Studies, I.I.T. Roorkee15Assessing Team-Culture Dynamics in a Tanzanian Hospital: A Pilot Study in a Selected Multi-SpecialtyHospital in Dar Es SalaamMecklaud Edson, Shiv K. Tripathi and Lusekelo Kasongwa, Mzumbe University Dar Es Salaam Campus,Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania22Impact of Employee Stress on the frequent regulatory framework of the Insurance Business with SpecialReference to LICShazia Tabassum, Department of Commerce, A.M.U, Aligarh29Management of Human Resource among the Private Retail Banking Sector in LucknowGaurav Singh, Garima Raghuwanshi, SCM & Ajai Prakash, KCA University, Nairobi, Kenya40Building bridges between the current banking industry scenario and HR ChallengesNarinder Kumar Bhasin, VP & Branch Head, AXIS Bank Limited, New Delhi48Impact of Emotional Labor on Work-Family Outcomes In Indian Information Technology SectorMonica Bedi, University Business School, Punjab University, Chandigarh & Kirandeep Bedi, DravidianUniversity58Change: An Expectation from WorkforceAruna Deshpande, University of Mumbai’s ADMI64Innovative Practices in Leadership Challenges in the Global EraGeeta Kumari, GCE & K.M. Pandey, N.I.T Silchar, Assam70Creativity, Innovation & Leadership in Global EraTulsee Giri Goswami, Central University of Rajasthan77The New CSR Paradigm - From Philanthropy to Stakeholder Participation (A Case Study of Oil andNatural Gas Corporation)P R K Raju, D G M (HR), ONGC, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh84Case Study on Enhancing Brand Image through Corporate Social Responsibility ActivityHiranmoy Roy & Dr. Arvind Kumar Jain, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies93An International Research Journal ofAmity International Business School

8Amity Global HRM ReviewSeptember

20129Organization Culture as Indicator of Organization’sCitizenship BehaviorLata Singh & Michael A. DutchThe contemporary corporate, unlike the traditional organizations is less structured, less bureaucratic,flatter and more employee focused. Employee effectiveness may be the single largest differentiatorbetween the ‘best’ and ‘not so best’ organizations. Owing to this phenomenon employers have startedto observe and perhaps even expect certain optional behaviors out of their employees which fall beyondthe purview of specific job requirements and reward systems. These extra role behaviors tend to promotelong service periods and those who perform them are known as good “organizational citizens.” Sincethe liberalization in 1991 in India, the industries have gone through a monumental change. The workculture and the mindset of people have also drastically changed over the past two decades.The present paper is an attempt to examine and investigate the impact of Organizational Culture onCitizenship Behaviors of the employees in an Organization in different sectors of the economy. Specificallythe paper explores the extent of Impact that individual components of Organizational Culture have onCitizenship Behaviors in different cultural settings.Keywords: Organizational Culture, Organizational Citizenship BehaviorIntroductionCulture is a multifaceted issue that essentiallyincludes a group’s shared values, attitudes, beliefs,assumptions, artifacts, and behaviors. Culture is sodeep in that it guides individual actions even tothe level that members are not even aware they areinfluenced by it. Scholars tend to agree that the rootof any organization’s culture is based on a rich setof assumptions about the nature of the world andhuman relationships.Originally an anthropological term, culture refersto the underlying values, beliefs and codes ofpractice that makes a community what it is. Thecustoms of society, the self – image of its members,the things that make it different from other societiesare its culture. Culture is powerfully subjective andreflects the meanings and understandings that wetypically attribute to situations, the solutions thatwe apply to common problems. The idea of acommon national culture suggests there are limitsto the influence of organizational culture as theymust exist in the context of industry and nationalcultures. Nonetheless, research has established thepresence of distinct organizational culture and thatthese distinctions may impact competitiveness.Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCBs)are discretionary behaviors on the part of theworker, which are neither expected nor required,and therefore not typically formally rewardedor punished for the presence of lack or, by theorganization. In other words, OrganizationalCitizenship Behaviors are set of behaviors that arenot captured within traditional role definitionsor job descriptions. They represent ‘extra effort’by employees that is nonetheless essential for theeffectiveness of the organization, especially whereorganizational performance is dependent on theinterconnectedness and social networks of its people.Though they is not formally recognized by the rewardsystem of an organization, OCBs are assumed tohave the potential to contribute towards improvingefficiency and effectiveness of an organization leadingto increased competitive advantage.The paper is structured as follows: Firstly, we reviewthe theoretical literature on Organizational Cultureand Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Followingthe literature review, we assume a hypothesis. Later,we show an empirical analysis of data gathered from380 employees of three Organizations viz., Banking,Information Technology and Manufacturing. Theresearch sample, the conceptual model and datacollection methods are then discussed, followed bya presentation of the research results. The paperends by indicating its principal conclusions anddiscussions.Literature Review:Since the 1980s organizational culture has becomevery visible in organizational research. The mostrecent focus on the subject came about in an effortto explain why U.S. firms were having difficulties in

10Amity Global HRM Reviewcompeting with organizations from countries withvery different cultures, particularly Japan. (Schein,1990; Trice & Beyer, 1993). From this line of study itwas determined that national culture cannot explainall the differences. Instead researchers determined theneed to differentiate between organizations withina society, especially in relation to organizationalperformance and effectiveness (Ouchi, 1983).Desjardin and Fitzgerald (2004) state that anorganization’s culture influences all aspects oforganizational life and can give direction toemployees about “the way things are done aroundhere.” Culture reinforces continuity and consistencyin the organization through adherence to a clear setof consensual values. Culture includes core values(Cameron and Quinn, 2006). Trice and Beyer (1993)describe culture as “collective, emotionally charged,historically based, inherently symbolic, dynamic andinherently fuzzy.” The “fuzzy” nature and a lack ofprecise and consistent measures make the study oforganizational culture and its impacts rsexamining the employee performance domain havestarted to recognize the importance of a number ofcompetencies and behaviors such as interpersonalcooperation and innovation that go beyond theconfines of the formal job description requirements(Goleman, 1998; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff &MacKenzie, 1997; Van Scotter & Motowidlo, 1996).For instance, Goleman (1998) emphasized theimportance of a range of competencies above andthe beyond technical expertise that contribute toemployee effectiveness through the performanceof behaviors such as cooperation. Individualknowledge a decade ago seemed to have beensufficient for job performance; relying on thegroup mind for information, however, has alreadybecome a norm in many jobs at present (Goleman,1998). Collaboration and cooperation, thus, havebecome essential performance indicators. Muchof the prior research assumes that this behavioris motivated by intrinsically motivation. As maybe expectedempirical studies have found supportthat intrinsic motivation is positively related toOrganizational Citizenship Behavior (Piccolo &Colquitt, 2006; Tang & Ibrahim, 1998).Perhaps due to the association they have withemployee performance,organizations that employindividuals who exhibit organizational citizenshipbehaviors are more likely to have effective workSeptembergroups within the organization (Podsakoff,Ahearne, & Mackenzie, 1997). Empirical studieson organizational citizenship behaviors havebeen conducted in various industries, includingsales (Mackenzie, Podsakoff, and Fetter, 1993;Podsakoff & Mackenzie, 1994), education (Somech& Zahavy, 2004) & communications, (Organ 1990).Organizational citizenship behavior research hasalso expanded across the globe, with studies beingconducted in organizations in countries otherthan the United States. Organizational CitizenshipBehaviors have been studied in organizations inCanada (Latham & Skarlicki, 1996), Taiwan (Farh,et al. 1990; Chen, et al., 2004), China (Farh, Zhong, &Organ, 2004), and Israel (Somech & Drach-Zahavy,2004). Chhokar, Zhuplev, Fok and Hartman (2004)conducted a study on organizational citizenshipbehavior that expanded across the boundaries of fivedifferent countries. They examined organizationalcitizenship behavior in France, Britain, India, Russia,and the United States and found that in all therehas been an impact on organizational outcomes.Organ (1988) defined organizational citizenshipbehavior as “individual behavior that is discretionary,not directly or explicitly recognized by the formalreward system, and that in the aggregate promotesthe effective functioning of the organization thebehavior is not an enforceable requirement ofthe role or the job description its omission is notgenerally understood as punishable”. As discussedby Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach(2000), constructs similar to organizationalcitizenship behaviors include extra-role behavior,prosocial organizational behavior, organizationalspontaneity, and contextual performance. Thesebehaviors can be contrasted with job behaviorswhich are a formal part of an individual’sjob description, explicitly rewarded by thecompensation system, and the omission of whichmight be punishable. Such behaviors are frequentlytermed task behaviors, in-role behaviors, or simplyjob performance behaviors.The VariablesOrganizational Culture: Belief & Norms Individual Autonomy Individual Responsibility Conflict Tolerance Structure Risk Tolerance SupportTable 1

Lata Singh & Michael A. Dutch2012Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Altruism Conscientiousness Sportsmanship Courtesy Civic VirtueThe ModelThe figure above is the conceptual model onwhich the study is based. The model assumesand hypothesizes that all dimensions consideredfor analysis in Organizational Culture andOrganizational Citizenship Behavior will impacteach other i.e. each variable will have some impacton the other variable/variables.HypothesisThe individual factors of organizational culture ofbelief and norms, individual autonomy, individualresponsibility, conflict tolerance, structure, risktolerance, support and influence the presence ofthe organizational citizenship behaviors: altruism,conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy andcivic virtue.ResultsIn this hypothesis it is assumed that factors oforganizational culture would impact the factorsof organizational citizenship behavior withinan organization. For this purpose ANOVA wasconducted to establish the divergence in variablesof organizational culture and organizational11Above mentioned table represents variables consideredfor analyzing the impact of Organizational Culture onOrganizational Citizenship Behavior. OrganizationalCulture variables are the independent variables whileOrganizational Citizenship variables are the dependentvariables. In this study organizational culture andorganizational citizenship behavior are looked at thecomponent level.Figure 1citizenship behavior. In general it was observed thatthe degree of divergence across the organizationswas insignificant or very moderate.It was established from the analysis that forBelief & Norms, the distinction, among differentOrganizations is very insignificant, also there isvery insignificant distinction when compared withthe total scores at (Banking: Mean - 14.13, SD - 2.43,IT: Mean – 14.82, SD – 2.38, Manufacturing: Mean –14.72, SD – 2.76, Total: Mean - 14.65, SD – 2.62), forIndividual Responsibility also the difference is quiteinsignificant, also a very little difference is observedwhen compared with the total scores at (Banking:Mean – 11.43, SD – 1.64, IT: Mean – 11.89, SD –1.67, Manufacturing: Mean – 11.99, SD – 2.17, Total:Mean – 11.88, SD – 1.98), similarly in Structure thedistinction is very negligible among the Organizationsand also very insignificant when compared withthe total scores at (Banking: Mean –4.72, SD – 1.42,IT: Mean – 5.08, SD – 1.06, Manufacturing: Mean –4.53, SD – 1.53, Total: Mean – 4.70, SD – 1.42), againfor Individual autonomy the distinction is very

12Amity Global HRM Reviewnegligible among the Organizations and also veryinsignificant when compared with the total scoresat (Banking: Mean – 5.33, SD – .84, IT: Mean – 5.17,SD – .92, Manufacturing: Mean – 5.28, SD – 1.02,Total: Mean – 5.26, SD – .97), on inference it wasobserved that for Conflict Tolerance there was verylittle distinction among different Organizationsand also very insignificant when compared to thetotal scores at (Banking: Mean –6.80, SD – 1.31,IT: Mean – 6.92, SD – 1.21, Manufacturing: Mean– 7.15, SD – 1.49, Total: Mean – 7.04, SD – 1.40),when analyzed for Support it was inferred that thedistinction between the Organizations was verylittle and also insignificant, when compared withthe total scores at (Banking: Mean – 10.98 , SD –2.24, IT: Mean – 11.20 SD – 1.67, Manufacturing:Mean – 11.41, SD – 2.42, Total: Mean – 11.29, SD– 2.22), regarding Risk Tolerance it was observedthat there was no significant distinction amongdifferent Organizations and also the differencewhen compared with the total scores was found tobe insignificant at (Banking: Mean – 6.56, SD – 1.38,IT: Mean – 6.47, SD

of the Amity International Business School, Amity University Amity University Press Amity University Campus, E-2 Block Sector-125, NOIDA-201 303 Tel: 91-120-4392592 - 97, Fax: 91-120-4392591 .

Related Documents:

Amity International Business School, Amity University. Amity Global Business Review The views expressed in the articles are the personal views of the authors and do not represent those of the Amity International Business School, Amity University Amity University Press Amity University Campus, E-2 Block Sector-125, NOIDA-201 303 Tel: 91-120 .

Amity University, Noida-125 Uttar Pradesh (INDIA) Email: 3. Sonal Chauhan Amity Center for Radiation Biology Amity University, Noida-125 Uttar Pradesh (INDIA) Email: s Address for correspondence: Harish Chandra Goel Amity Center for Radiation Biology Amity University, Noida-125

Amity University, Kolkata, India (Dr.) Rajib Kumar Sanyal, PhD Associate Professor Economics Amity University, Kolkata, India 3. Venezuela is dealing with inflation close to 100% . Venezuela’s economy, which the IMF expects to have shrunk by 10% in 2015, is currently .

Unit - 1 : Introduction to Human Resource Management Structure of Unit: 1.0 Objectives 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Opening Case 1.3 What is Human Resource Management? 1.4 Nature of HRM 1.5 Scope of HRM 1.6 Objectives of HRM 1.7 Functions of HRM 1.8 Role of HRM 1.9 HRM in the New Millennium 1.10 Summary 1.11 Self Assessment Questions 1.12 Reference .


ISO/TS 30411:2018 HRM –Quality of Hire Metric ISO/TS 30414:2018 HRM –Guidelines for Internal & External Human Capital Reporting ISO TS 24179:2020 HRM -Occupational Health and Safety Metrics ISO/TS 30401:2018 HRM –Knowledge Management Systems ISO/TS 30406:2017 HRM –Sustainable Employability Management for Organizations ISO/TS 30400:2016

all the human resource management (HRM) theory, but rather to provide a framework for better understanding the differences between corporate HRM and military HRM. Furthermore, it will try to answer the question if there should be a difference between conventional force HRM and SOF HRM. 2.1. Defi ning human resource management

Brain anatomy, physiology, Stroke & Neurological Assessment Stephanie Drysdale. Stephanie Drysdale. Functions of the Brain FRONTAL PARIETAL OCCIPITAL Personality/Behaviour Planning Decision making Concentration Voluntary motor functions Primary motor cortex (precentral gyrus) Comprehension and language Sensory functions (pain, heat and other sensations .