- Term Papers and Free Essays

Literature Review

Essay by 24  •  May 3, 2011  •  909 Words (4 Pages)  •  1,480 Views

Essay Preview: Literature Review

Report this essay
Page 1 of 4

Annotated Bibliography (Synopsis)


Detert, J.R., Schroeder, R.G., & Mauriel, J.J. (2000). A framework for linking culture and improvement initiatives in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 850-863.

Article Overview

This article presented an analysis of the dimensions of organizational culture commonly used in existing research, delineating how these dimensions corresponded with the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM). Researchers, consultants, practitioners, and members of management continue to view culture as essential to the success of organizational transformations. Despite the consensus on the importance of culture, the authors observed that

As the culture concept enters its third decade of active life in the field of organizational studies, debates about epistemology, levels and manifestations of the concept, and appropriate methodology have become 'war games' that threaten the maturity of the concept beyond its preparadigmatic state. (p. 850)

According to the authors, there has been little to no consolidation of the research generated in this area. They express concern that the chaos and conflict in the field may lead to diminished interest in culture as a catalyst for innovation. In order to fill this gap, the authors, through a comprehensive survey of the literature, sought to impose some order on the concept of culture by creating a culture dimension framework.

In creating the culture dimension framework, the authors compared twenty-five cultural models. From this analysis, it was discerned that only thirteen different dimensions formed the basis of these twenty-five models. The authors were able to consolidate further these dimensions by concluding that four of the concepts were sufficiently related, warranting consolidation of these concepts with other dimensions. Additionally, one dimension was struck from the framework because it only appeared in one of the twenty-five models. After taking these actions, only eight dimensions remained to form the general organizational culture dimensions framework. They are as follows:

1. The basis of truth and rationality in the organization.

2. The nature of time and time horizon.

3. Motivation.

4. Stability versus change/innovation/personal growth.

5. Orientation to work, task, and co-workers.

6. Isolation versus collaboration/cooperation.

7. Control, coordination, and responsibility.

8. Orientation and focus - internal and/or external. (p. 854)


Dover, P.A. (2002). Change Agents at work: Lessons from Siemens Nixdorf. Journal of Change Management, 3(3), 243-257.

Article Overview

Dover's article described a change initiative undertaken by Siemens Nixdorf. Before examining the lessons learned from Siemens Nixdorf's change effort, Dover explained the implications of those organizations that fail to rise to the challenges presented by change. Specifically, he acknowledged the passing of corporate giants Digital Prime, Wang, and Polaroid. The author attributed the downfall of these organizations to two shortcomings: an inability to identify the drivers of change coupled with an inability to adjust the corporate culture to meet that change.

In preparing this case study, Dover conducted an expansive review of the literature related to culture change and change management theory. From his research, he detected four truisms of change management:

1. Employee commitment to change at all levels is required.

2. Responsibility for change must be relinquished to employees so that they are empowered to take charge of their own destiny.

3. Culture change occurs by the learning of new conduct and talents.

4. Implementation must



Download as:   txt (6.4 Kb)   pdf (90.1 Kb)   docx (11.2 Kb)  
Continue for 3 more pages »
Only available on
Citation Generator

(2011, 05). Literature Review. Retrieved 05, 2011, from

"Literature Review" 05 2011. 2011. 05 2011 <>.

"Literature Review.", 05 2011. Web. 05 2011. <>.

"Literature Review." 05, 2011. Accessed 05, 2011.