Organizational behavior and human resource management are extremely important in the contemporary business environment. However, many organizations face considerable problems, especially, when they attempt to develop their project management, because they fail to reach positive outcomes in this regard, organizations should pay a particular attention to their structure and culture as well as to the cultural background of employees to create healthy organizational culture and to improve their performance consistently. Therefore, organizations should focus on their structure and culture to maintain their positive performance and ambiance within the organization.
On analyzing, the performance of contemporary organizations, it is possible to refer to recent studies in the field of organizational behavior, management, and human resource management. One of such studies is the study conducted by Muge Ozman, “The Knowledge Base of Products: Implications for Organizational Structure”, where the author explores the dependence of organizational structure on their products and knowledge. In fact, the author of the article argues that organizational structure is closely intertwined with organizational knowledge. At the same time, the author distinguishes two types of knowledge. First, Oxman distinguishes knowledge breadth, which measures the complexity of the product. The complexity of the product is very important and can influence the organizational structure because more complex products imply the more complex organizational structure. Second, Ozman distinguishes the knowledge depth, which measures the extent to which the knowledge embedded in the product can be used in different contexts. In this regard, it is possible to distinguish knowledge-based industries and organizations, where knowledge plays the determinant part in the organizational performance. On conducting the study, the author eventually arrives to the conclusion that multi-product companies emerge, when products are complex and knowledge is highly reusable in different contexts. This means that organizations may have complex structure, if they have multiple or complex products and implement knowledge abundantly. In such a way, organizations develop complex organizational structure in response to the growing complexity of products and knowledge accumulated within organizations. At this point, it is worth mentioning the fact that complex products and extensive knowledge naturally increase the complexity of organizational structure because organizations need different units and departments to manufacture complex products and to process information effectively.
At the same time, D.C. Thomas and other researchers, “Psychological Contracts across Cultures”, focus on the close relationship between cultural background of employees and its impact on individual psychological contracts. The researchers argue that national culture influences individual’s psychological contracts. They point out that national culture of employees is extremely important in regard to their performance and management style employees are accustomed to. In addition, the national culture contributes to the formation of individual psychological contracts. The researchers argue that culture manifests itself through cognitive and motivation mechanisms. This means that individuals perceive cultural norms and traditions, which affect their behavior and self-perception. At the same time, culture can affect motivation mechanisms of employees because they may have different motivators depending on their cultural background.
Furthermore, the study revealed the fact that representatives of different cultures describe their psychological contracts in different ways. This means that the cultural background shapes individual psychological contracts because interpersonal relationships, management style and needs and motivators of individuals depend on their cultural background.
Along with the cultural environment and organizational knowledge, organizational memory is another important factor that influences consistently the performance of organizations and their structure. In this regard, it is possible to refer to the study conducted by M. Fiedler and I. Welpe, “How Do Organizations Remember? The Influence of Organizational Structure on Organizational Memory”, where the authors focus on organizational memory and they attempt to reveal its dependence on the organizational structure. The authors reveal the fact that the organizational structure has a considerable impact on organizational memory. Structural organizational factors, such as specialization and standardization, and organizational processes, such as codification and personalization of information and electronic communication influence organizational memory.
The codification of information mediates relationships between standardization and organizational memory. In such a way, the information accumulated within organizations is codified and, on the ground of norms codified within the organization, the organization sets standards, which are retained in the organizational memory. At the same time, electronic communication partially mediates the relationships between specialization and organizational memory. Therefore, electronic communication influences specialization and organizational memory. This means that electronic communication influences the specialization of the organization, which is retained in the organizational memory. The process of codification of information and electronic communication are conductive for formation of organizational memory. The authors conclude that organizational memory depends on the organizational structure factors.
Thus, organizational structure and organizational performance depend consistently on the cultural environment, in which organizations operate, organizational knowledge and memory as well as human resources and their cultural background. In such a way, contemporary organizations should pay a particular attention to their cultural environment and cultural background of employees, because it defines individual psychological contracts and, therefore, relationships within the organization. In addition, the complexity of organizational products and knowledge define the complexity of organizational structure.
Barkema, H.G., J.C. Baum and E.A. Mannix. (2002). “Management Challenges in a New Time” Academy of Management Journal, vol. 45, No. 5, 916-930.
Brief, A.P. and H.M. Weiss. (2000). “Organizational Behavior: Affect in the Workplace.” Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 25.
Bovee, C.L. and Thill, J.V. (2005). Excellence in Business Communication. Prentice Hall.
Butterfield, K.D. et al. (2005). “Organizational Punishment from the Manager’s Perspective: An Exploratory Study” Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 17.
Connoly, T., E.J. Conlon and S.J. Deutsch. (1980). “Organizational Effectiveness: A Multiple-Constituency Approach” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 5, No.2, 211-217.
Denison D.R. and A.K. Mishra. (March-April, 1995). “Toward a Theory of Organizational Culture and Effectiveness.” Organization Science, 6:2, 223.
Detert, J.R., R.G. Schroeder, and J.J. Mauriel. (1993). A Framework for Linking Culture and Improvement Initiatives in Organizations. Copenhagen Business School and San Diego State University.
Fiedler, M. and I. Welpe, “How Do Organizations Remember? The Influence of Organizational Structure on Organizational Memory”, Organization Studies, 31(11), pp. 381-407.
Hart, J.L. (2004). “Organizational Communication in an Age of Globalization: Issues, Reflections. Practices”. Business Communication Quarterly, Vol. 67.
Jones, J.R. and J. Schaubroeck. (2004). “Mediators of the Relationship between Race and Organizational Citizenship Behavior.” Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 16.
Kotter, J. (2001). What Leaders Really Do! Harvard Business Review, Boston. Volume 79.
Pandey, S.K. (February 2001). “Leadership and Management Skills”. Black Enterprise, Vol. 31.
Ozman, M. (2010). “The Knowledge Base of Products: Implications for Organizational Structure,” Organization Studies, 31(11), pp. 1129-1154.
Tsoukas, H. and C. Knudsen. (2003). The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory. Oxford University Press.
Thomas, D.C. et al. (2010). “Psychological Contracts across Cultures,” Organization Studies, 31(11), pp. 1437-1458