Organizational culture dons the mantle of militarism

Garsombke, Diane J.

doi:10.1016/0090-2616(88)90029-0

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to literature in social cognition, gender is highly salient in these contexts, and this salience is likely to lead to the activation of gender-related schemas (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). It seems likely that this gender salience effect would be amplified in the military, given its overwhelming focus on men and "masculine" pursuits (Addelston & Stirratt, 1996;Dunivin, 1994;Garsombke, 1988). Thus, we hypothesized that victims would be most likely to label when their gender was salient and their experiences occurred at work.…”

Section: Job-gender Contextmentioning

confidence: 92%

Self-Labeling Sexual Harassment

Magley

Shupe

2005

Sex Roles

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to examine personal, stimulus, and organizational factors that predict the self-labeling of sexual harassment. Hypotheses were developed based on the social cognitive schema framework, which suggests that the activation of a victim's schema of sexual harassment influences self-labeling incidents as sexual harassment. Results of a secondary analysis of the 1995 Department of Defense Gender Issues dataset generally supported the hypotheses in that self-labeling is a multi-faceted process. Several findings were in the opposite direction from that predicted (e.g., perceptions that the military was implementing sexual harassment policies were negatively associated with self-labeling). Alternative explanations for the complexity of the self-labeling process were also examined.

show abstract

Section: Job-gender Contextmentioning

confidence: 92%

Self-Labeling Sexual Harassment

Magley

Shupe

2005

Sex Roles

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, despite the wealth of literature on team composition (Fiedler, 1966;Fiedler, Meuwese, & Oonk, 196 1 ;O'Reilly, Caldwell, & Barnett, 1989;Tziner & Eden, 1985), performance (Hackman, 1987;Hackman & Morris, 1975;Hackman & Oldham, 1980;Harris, Rogelberg, & Stanton, 1993), and training (Dyer, 1984), very little material addresses the issue of teamwork and its measurement. This is especially curious in light of the welldocumented positive impact of teamwork on team performance (Ancona & Caldwell, 1992;Bassin, 1988;Fedrau & Balfe, 1986;Garfield, 1987;Garsombke, 1988;George, 1987;Hirschhorn, 199 1 ;Krueger, 1990;Larson & LaFasto, 1989;Mathias, 1986;Muthny, 1989;Oldfield & Ayers, 1986;Savage, 1991;Thomas & Olson, 1988;Tjosvold, Dann, & Wong, 1992). Notable and timely exceptions to this paucity of teamwork evaluation are efforts by Stevens and Campion (1 994) regarding knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) requisite for teamwork, and by Dickinson and colleagues (cf.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Components of Teamwork: Impact on Evaluations of Contributions to Work Team Effectiveness¹

Harris

Barnes-Farrell

1997

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the relationship between Dickinson's (1993) components of teamwork and ratings of team members' contributions to team success. Undergraduate students (n = 179) each viewed 1 of 8 videotapes depicting a team interacting to solve the Winter Survival Problem. Participants then completed a 52-item questionnaire assessing the connection between teamwork components and perceptions of contributions to team productivity, team viability, teamwork, and overall team performance. With 1 exception, all of the teamwork components manipulated in the study significantly affected appraisals of several aspects of worker effectiveness. Furthermore, raters considered teamwork behaviors that provided direct assistance or direction to team members as being especially critical.

show abstract

“…This could once again be a result of the high degree of power distance which does not allow the effective transmission of knowledge, mistaken beliefs or the need to project a more positive image of the organization. The top‐down communication inherent in military organizations may demoralize members and cause inflexibility and authoritarianism in the structure (Garsombke, 1988). This fact is reiterated, albeit in a milder form, in the present study through the lower mean values for the lower ranks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning organization dimensions of the Sri Lanka Army

Dahanayake

Gamlath

2013

The Learning Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study intends to investigate the extent to which the Sri Lanka Army can be described as a learning organization.Design/methodology/approachThe main tool of analysis used was the Dimensions of the Learning Organization Questionnaire (DLOQ) developed by Marsick and Watkins, with the exclusion of the sections on financial and knowledge performance.FindingsUsing the DLOQ, the research found that the dimensions of a learning organization proposed by Marsick and Watkins are present in the Sri Lanka Army, although with some aberrations between different ranks.Research limitations/implicationsThe study was conducted without a directly connected dependent variable.Practical implicationsThis study shows how even a non‐profit‐oriented organization like the Sri Lanka Army can be informed from a concept like the learning organization, and indeed emphasizes the overarching need for a military organization to operate as a learning organization. Therefore, this research has reiterated the fact that the learning organization is a prescription that all organizations, even not‐for‐profit ones, should ardently pursue. The research also offers recommendations for improvements in the performance of the Sri Lanka Army by identifying certain weaknesses.Originality/valueBy initiating the use of the DLOQ in the Sri Lankan as well as a military context, the study has opened the doors for administering the DLOQ and similar tools for measuring the extent of organizational learning and the presence and strength of learning organizational characteristics in Sri Lanka.

show abstract

Organizational culture dons the mantle of militarism

Cited by 15 publications

References 8 publications

Self-Labeling Sexual Harassment

Self-Labeling Sexual Harassment

Components of Teamwork: Impact on Evaluations of Contributions to Work Team Effectiveness¹

Learning organization dimensions of the Sri Lanka Army

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Organizational culture dons the mantle of militarism

Cited by 15 publications

References 8 publications

Self-Labeling Sexual Harassment

Self-Labeling Sexual Harassment

Components of Teamwork: Impact on Evaluations of Contributions to Work Team Effectiveness1

Learning organization dimensions of the Sri Lanka Army

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Components of Teamwork: Impact on Evaluations of Contributions to Work Team Effectiveness¹