IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/prp/micp17/61-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

A Comparison of the Organizational Values of the World's Largest Companies with the Organizational Values of Large Croatian Companies: A Balanced Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Ivan Malbasic

    (University of Zagreb, Faculty of Organization and Informatics, Croatia)

  • Nikolina Posaric

    (University of Zagreb, Faculty of Organization and Informatics, Croatia)

Abstract

This research identifies the current practice in managing organizational values in the largest companies at the global level and compares these results with a sample of Croatian companies. In doing so, the key question examined is whether contemporary companies are developing balanced organizational values, meaning that they evenly promote different categories of values aimed at satisfying the interests of different stakeholders at the same time. To answer that question, we considered Schwartz's values model and the Competing Values Framework – two of the most influential approaches that consider balanced values in modern business literature – as well as one of the newest approaches, the Mission-based model of organizational values. Using a sample of Fortune 100 companies, the most relevant list of world's largest companies, the espoused organizational values of these companies were identified using the content analysis method, the most commonly used method for mapping espoused values. The espoused values of Fortune 100 companies were identified, and each specific identified value was then classified into a specific category of values according to the three aforementioned value models. Our findings indicate current trends in the field of managing organizational values from the perspective of different value categories, thus questioning the importance of developing balanced values in contemporary global business environment. At the same time, we conducted a study of 24 large Croatian companies to identify actual (attributed) organizational values of these companies. A total of 813 employees filled out the questionnaire. After identifying specific attributed organizational values in observed Croatian companies, these values were also classified according to the three aforementioned value models. Finally, the paper presents a comparison of the espoused organizational values of world's largest companies with the attributed organizational values of large Croatian companies, all based on three different value models. The results suggest that regardless of the approach used for comparison of the two observed samples, there is a significant difference in the structure of organizational values among them. This distinction suggests that the world's largest companies declaratively promote essentially different business principles than those dominantly present in the largest Croatian companies. Considering the relatively high uncompetitiveness of the Croatian economy in the global environment, perhaps it is finally time to pay more attention to the management of values in Croatian companies. In doing so, the world's largest (and in general most successful) companies could serve as an excellent example.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivan Malbasic & Nikolina Posaric, 2017. "A Comparison of the Organizational Values of the World's Largest Companies with the Organizational Values of Large Croatian Companies: A Balanced Approach," MIC 2017: Managing the Global Economy; Proceedings of the Joint International Conference, Monastier di Treviso, Italy, 24–27 May 2017,, University of Primorska Press.
  • Handle: RePEc:prp:micp17:61-74
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hippocampus.si/ISBN/978-961-7023-71-8/6.pdf
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ivan Malbašić & Carlos Rey & Vojko Potočan, 2015. "Balanced Organizational Values: From Theory to Practice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 437-446, August.
    2. Pablo Cardona & Carlos Rey, 2022. "Management by Missions," Springer Books, Springer, edition 2, number 978-3-030-83780-8, July.
    3. Barry Posner, 2010. "Another Look at the Impact of Personal and Organizational Values Congruency," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(4), pages 535-541, December.
    4. Robert E. Quinn & John Rohrbaugh, 1983. "A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards a Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 363-377, March.
    5. Xiaoxing Zhang & Simon Austin & Jacqueline Glass & Grant Mills, 2008. "Toward collective organizational values: a case study in UK construction," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(10), pages 1009-1028.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ivan Malbašić & Carlos Rey & Vojko Potočan, 2015. "Balanced Organizational Values: From Theory to Practice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 437-446, August.
    2. Mohammad A. Rickaby & Jacqueline Glass & Scott Fernie, 2020. "Conceptualizing the Relationship between Personal Values and Sustainability—A TMO Case Study," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Peter G. Dominick & Dimitra Iordanoglou & Gregory Prastacos & Richard R. Reilly, 2021. "Espoused Values of the “Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For”: Essential Themes and Implementation Practices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 69-88, September.
    4. Ivan Malbasic & Carlos Rey & Nikolina Posaric, 2018. "Congruence Between Personal And Organizational Mission: The Role Of Balanced Organizational Values," Economic Thought and Practice, Department of Economics and Business, University of Dubrovnik, vol. 27(2), pages 545-563, december.
    5. Monique L. Bell, 2023. "Thinking Outside of the Firm: Self-Transcendence Values’ Effects on Corporate Reputation," Corporate Reputation Review, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(2), pages 150-165, May.
    6. Ivan Malbasic & Bruno Beluzic & Nikolina Posaric, 2018. "Organizational Values as the Basis for Business Excellence," Management, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 13(3), pages 265-279.
    7. Rita Klapper & Lindsay Berg & Paul Upham, 2020. "Probing Alignment of Personal and Organisational Values for Sustainability: An Assessment of Barrett’s Organisational Consciousness Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-20, September.
    8. Simanchala Das & Biswajit Acharjya, 2021. "Understanding Organisational Effectiveness Through Sustainable Human Relations Approach: The Role of Empowerment Climate in Selected Industrial Establishments," International Journal of System Dynamics Applications (IJSDA), IGI Global, vol. 10(2), pages 33-52, April.
    9. Treur, Kim A.D. & Van Der Sluis, Lidewey E.C., 2005. "The Benefits of Coaching for Employees and their Organisations," Serie Research Memoranda 0013, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    10. A. Emre Demirci, 2013. "Strategic Representation of an Abstract Reality: Spiraling Relations between Organizational Culture and Innovativeness," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 4(3), pages 39-55, August.
    11. Hock-Doepgen, Marianne & Clauss, Thomas & Kraus, Sascha & Cheng, Cheng-Feng, 2021. "Knowledge management capabilities and organizational risk-taking for business model innovation in SMEs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 683-697.
    12. Julia Naranjo-Valencia & Ricardo Vidal-Patiño & Gregorio Calderón-Hernández, 2019. "Characterization of Innovation Research Published in Latin American Journals Indexed in WoS," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(07), pages 1-38, November.
    13. Dritan Shoraj & Shyqyri Llaci, 2015. "Motivation and Its Impact on Organizational Effectiveness in Albanian Businesses," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(2), pages 21582440155, April.
    14. Gregorio Sánchez-Marín & Gabriel Lozano-Reina & Mané Beglaryan, 2022. "HRM Policies and SMEs Performance: The Moderating Role of CSR Orientation," Central European Business Review, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2022(1), pages 85-110.
    15. Alev Ozer Torgaloz & Mehmet Fatih Acar & Cemil Kuzey, 2023. "The effects of organizational learning culture and decentralization upon supply chain collaboration: analysis of covid-19 period," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 511-530, March.
    16. Hoang Linh VU & Dominique BONET FERNANDEZ, 2014. "Proposition d’un modèle de relations producteur-distributeur : une application à la gestion des conflits en contexte interculturel," Working Papers 2014-231, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    17. Gupta, Manjul & George, Joey F. & Xia, Weidong, 2019. "Relationships between IT department culture and agile software development practices: An empirical investigation," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 13-24.
    18. Maitland, A. & Hills, L.A. & Rhind, D.J., 2015. "Organisational culture in sport – A systematic review," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 501-516.
    19. Rudolf Kampf & Silvia Lorincová & Miloš Hitka & Ondrej Stopka, 2017. "Generational Differences in the Perception of Corporate Culture in European Transport Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-14, September.
    20. Martínez-Caro, Eva & Cegarra-Navarro, Juan Gabriel & Alfonso-Ruiz, Francisco Javier, 2020. "Digital technologies and firm performance: The role of digital organisational culture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prp:micp17:61-74. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alen Jezovnik (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.hippocampus.si .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.