See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281713015

Organizational Culture Dynamics. Factors that influence the Organizational

Culture

Article  in  Quality - Access to Success · June 2015

CITATIONS READS

8 4,113

1 author:

Valentina Mihaela Ghinea

Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies
47 PUBLICATIONS   139 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

International Conference on Economic Sciences and Business Administration www.icesba.eu View project

International Conference on Business Excellence View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Valentina Mihaela Ghinea on 30 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 QUALITY MANAGEMENT

O r ga n i za t i on a l Cul t ur e D yn a mi c s
Fa cto rs tha t influ ence the O rg a niza tio na l C ult ur e

Valentina Mihaela GHINEA*

Abstract
As time passes, a multitude of factors, both internal and external, exert their influence on the company, making it prac-
tically impossible to continuously function without being a subject of change. Seven of these factors are considered by
Brãtianu capable of including the influence generated by two or more factors, and thus creating relevant synergic forces.
These factors, namely technology and its associated processes, management and leadership, vision, mission and organi-
zational culture, have been considered in the literature “integrators” (Brãtianu et al., 2007).
Although the integrator theory is most popular in the issues related to the intellectual capital of the organization, its
broad character can make it applicable in the area of the organizational culture, as well. Given this, the present paper
purpose is to analyze whether these integrators have a relevant influence on the organizational culture.

Keywords: influencing factors, integrators, organizational culture, dynamics.

1. Introduction or power in the system, their combined presence establishes the

Every organization, regardless of its industry, size and unique
characteristics, is influenced by a multitude of factors both inter-
nal (endogenous) and external (exogenous) which can have a
significant impact on the organizations traits.
According to Nãstase, the factors that influence the organiza-
tion and its culture are the following: founder, history of the
company, employees’ expectations, characteristics of the labor
market, IT, technologies and company products, clients, econo-
mic environment, social factors, national culture, globalization,
legislation, company’s resources, and the evaluation and incen-
tives programs (Nãstase, 2004).
Factors such as clients, economic environment, social factors,
national culture, globalization, and legislation can be catego-
rized as external factors, while the influence of the founder, the
incentives and evaluation programs, organization resources,
company’s history, employees’ expectations, characteristics of the
work, IT used, and technologies and products of the company
could be considered internal factors. All these can also be classi-
fied into three broader categories: the managerial and leader-
ship abilities of the upper management (influence of the founder,
the incentives and evaluation programs, the organization re-
sources), related to the actual organizational culture (the com-
pany’s history, employees’ expectations, characteristics of the
work), and the technical and information technology advance-
ments (technologies and products of the company, IT).
While developing a new perspective on the intellectual capi-
tal, Brãtianu has introduced the concept of integrator (Brãtianu,
2008; Brãtianu et al., 2011), which he defined as follows: “a
powerful field of forces capable of interacting on the basis of
interdependence and synergy, and thus becoming a new entity.
(..) These elements can have a physical or virtual nature and
should be capable of interacting in a controlled manner” (Brãtianu
et al., 2011, p. 32).
Robbins and DeCenzo (2005), and Griffin and Moorhead
(2006) consider that, in the case of groups, from an organizational
behavior perspective, the predominant phenomenon is a linear
one, while in the case of teams the tendency is towards nonlinea-
rity (interdependency and synergy, the latter depending on the
intelligent self-management of the team). According to Brãtianu,
both synergy and interdependency are indispensable. Taking into
account that the first determines the interaction of the elements in
the system and the latter leads to the creation of superior energy
———————
* The Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, Romania, E-mail: valentina_ghinea@yahoo.com.
difference between a linear and nonlinear system (Brãtianu,
2007). As a consequence, in Brãtianu’s vision, the integrators are
fields of organizational internal forces which exert their influence
on the employees in different ways, thus generating interdepen-
dency and synergy.
Broadly speaking, integrators can be linear and/or nonlinear.
The linear integrators are the ones specific to sequential mecha-
nical processes characterized by summative aggregation, while
the nonlinear are the ones specific to informational, social and
complex psychological processes. Although in theory they are
valid, in practice they manifest themselves differently depending
on the organization’s characteristics. Thus they can have a
smaller or larger “operational intensity” (Brãtianu et al., 2011).
Within the organization, Brãtianu has identified seven linear
integrators, more precisely: management and leadership, vision
and mission of the company, technology and the associated pro-
cesses, and last but not least the organizational culture itself
(Brãtianu, 2008).
The present paper will focus on these factors and on the
identification of their influence on the organizational culture.
2. The influence of organizational
processes and technologies
on the organizational culture
During the last 200 years, the term technology has signifi-
cantly changed its meaning. Starting from the “description or
study of the useful arts”, its meaning has shifted to the use in
technical studies (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1861),
while gaining momentum in the 20th century after the second
Industrial Revolution (known as the Technological Revolution).
Due to the complex nature of our time, it is necessary to
delimitate five constructive categories of technological elements:
1) tangible elements such as models, sketches, guidebooks and
prototypes; 2) intangible elements – consultancy, methods of
finding solutions and training methods; 3) high tech elements –
intelligent technological elements, totally or partially automated
which manipulate the finest matter and very strong forces; 4) mid
tech elements – partially intelligent and semi-automated which
manipulate refined matter and middle level forces, and 5) low
tech elements – technologies which intensely use the workforce and

QUALITY
access to success Vo l. 16, No . 14 6/Ju ne 20 15 63
 QUALITY MANAGEMENT
manipulates raw materials and weak forces (h http://www.business
dictionary.com/definition/technology.html).
Thus one can confirm that the evolution of information tech-
nology has led to the improvement of the way human and orga-
nizational issues are solved by enabling the design, development
and use of systems and processes which have increased the
efficiency and effectiveness of the informational input in strategic,
tactical and operational situations. It would be ideal if this pro-
gress was attained through the focus on satisfying the need for
information by using electronic communications, hardware and
software systems, as well as the associated processes. Therefore,
information technology completes and enables the development
of traditional engineering through the accent placed on the use
of an informational basis.
Because IT&C plays an important role in the substantiation of
the above mentioned, we choose the focus on this direction.
Therefore, from this study’s perspective, technology as an inte-
grator refers mainly to the consequences that IT&C utilization
has, regardless of its form of manifestation: Internet, intranet or
extranet of an organization.
Thus, the exposure and promotion of individual knowledge
become important as they ease their transformation from tacit
knowledge into explicit organizational knowledge (figure 1).
Figure 1. The action of organizational technology
and business processes
Source: own illustration
Directly or indirectly, most businesses become depend on IT
and its use. Due to the fact that a key factor for the success of
business process management is the amortization of task –
technology, one can conclude that the IT evolution determines a
similar dynamic evolution of the organizational processes (Ohto-
nen ºi Lainema, 2011).
In consequence, taking into consideration that the techno-
logical processes are not the only ones affected by the evolution
of IT, the present analysis is not limited to them. These, inter-
connected and correlated with the work methods, represent the
area of the production process which has as its core the direct
(either quantitative or qualitative), transformation of the activity
object. At the same time, the managerial and support processes
are constantly (re)shaped by the advance in IT&C. These techno-
logical processes are included in the operational ones (ensuring
the standardized approach to all activities), which in return are
governed by the managerial processes. Therefore we shall ex-
tend the associated process integrator conceived by Brãtianu
(2008) to the business processes.
Basically, a business process is a set of company specific
activities which are interrelated both logical and temporal. It
combines information, machines, tools, materials, methods and
human resources with the purpose of achieving a certain goal
(Gronau and Weber, 2004).
As it was seen, the development of technology has been
previously considered as caused by the need to satisfy necessities
(vertical evolution). As they have proven their utility, the qualitative
leaps have been the subject of a continuous diversification pro-
cess, as well (the horizontal evolution). These two factors, ne-
cessity and utility are extrinsic driving factors for the technology.
With the development of the studies related to science and tech-
nology (STS) and the increased interest in the analysis of the
technological change process, it became obvious that there are
also internal factors influencing the technology (for example, the
64
unsolved technical problems or the occurrence of new needs
caused by the qualitative technological advance itself) (figure 2).
Figure 2. Driving factors for the technological progress
Source: own illustration
Thus, the technology dynamics, as a relatively new scientific
area developed, is focused on the analysis of the technological
change process explained by the consideration of both external
and internal factors of influence. Irrespective of the theory repor-
ted to (the social construction of technology theory, the systems
theory, the normalization process theory), experience has shown
that introducing a new technological element (targeting the com-
pany adjustment to the external environment and/or the achie-
vement of a competitive advantage), implies most of the times the
redesign of the organizations activities, thus influencing the orga-
nizational processes, at their turn (Fossas Olalla, 2000) (figure 3).
Figure 3. Inter-influence IT&C – business processes –
organizational culture
Source: own illustration
In addition to its role as a determinant factor of business
processes redesign, IT&C is also an instrument used to achieve
this objective. IT (available computing power, software applica-
tions, and telecommunications) and business process redesign
(the analysis and design of work flows and processes), are con-
sidered the newest tools enabling the organization change (Da-
venport and Short, 1990).
The critical factors determining the success of business pro-
cess management have been identified in the literature and
classified into the following four categories (according to Ohto-
nen and Lainema, 2011):

Management and leadership: a) the extent to which ma-
nagers share the vision and information with their subor-
dinates; b) the extent to which managers create a trustful
atmosphere between superiors and their subordinates; c)
the extent to which managers use in a constructive
manner their subordinates’ ideas; d) the extent to which
the upper management expectations are realistic; e) the
upper management knowledge; f) the communication
patterns of the upper management with respect to their
subordinates and clients; g) the upper management
support in what the processes change are concerned; h)
the founders involvement; i) correlating the business per-
formance with processes and their change; j) empowering
employees in the decision making process;
Vol. 16, No. 146/June 2015 QUALITY
access to success
 QUALITY MANAGEMENT

IT and its structure: a) IT integration into the organization
business plan; b) extensively use of the information system;
c) efficiency of the information transfer channels; d) the IT
systems redesign; e) aligning IT with the organization
strategy of business process management; f) the costs of
gaining a client, his annual value, as well as the cost of
having a unsatisfied customer;

Change management: a) adapting the rewarding pro-
gram to the new needs of the employees; b) continuous
improvement of the employees skills by means of educa-
tional programs; c) being aware and understanding the
concept of business process management; d) choosing an
appropriate plan for processes redesign; e) the employees
desire of improving the current processes;

Collaboration and communication: a) efficient communi-
cation between supervisors and their teams; b) the extent
to which the employees trust each other; c) solving team
issues within; d) mutual recognition of performance; e)
taking into account the customers’ expectations, when de-
bating the future development plans.
Figure 4 concisely illustrates the above listed inter-depen-
dencies in terms of: a) the managerial and/or leadership skills of
the management team; b) correlation of the hierarchical and
functional structures with the newly introduced technological ele-
ments; c) the overcome of the resistance to change exhibited by
the staff, and d) the efficiency of team work, as parts of the inter-
dependency model IT – business processes – organizational cul-
ture (figure 4). Both technological advance and business pro-
cesses influence the human factor (the average employees and
the manager, as well), unleashing a chain reaction which echoes
within the organizational culture.
Figure 4. The IT and business processes dynamic influence
on the organizational culture
Source: own illustration
3. The influence of management
and leadership on the organizational culture
Along the years and particularly in the past decades, the
opinion related to leadership and management has significantly
changed. Thus, during the ‘40s, most of the leadership theories
were focused on the personal traits of leaders (according to this
approach, leadership depends on the personal qualities and
abilities of the leader). Between ‘40s and ‘60s, personal styles of
leadership became even more popular, while in the ‘60-‘80s the
interest of researchers was oriented towards discovering the
matrix of specific features of both leaders and followers (corre-
lating them with the respective situations and circumstances).
Between the ‘80s and ‘90s, the inspirational/transformational
leadership theories were conceived.
While some authors consider management and leadership as
being two different things, others believe that the two are insepa-
rable both on the professional and personal level (Burgoyne, et
al., 2004).
Retrospectively, it can be observed that all societies have crea-
ted myths. According to Paige (1977), their creation has held the
general purpose of explaining in a plausible way the influence of
leaders and the submission of subordinates (Bass and Bass,
2008).
Related to the recent research of the leadership, there are
several key points that could be mentioned: at the beginning of
QUALITY
access to success Vo l. 16, No . 14 6/Ju ne 20 15
the 20th century – Terman and his investigations on the leader-
ship psychology and development, then Freud’s psychoanalysis
of the group (Freud, 1922), and Weber’s charismatic leadership
concept (Bass and Bass, 2008).
According to both Han and Mowday et al., leadership repre-
sents, on the one side, the process of influencing the organization
members, and, on the other side, the ability to determine the
latter to voluntarily cooperate for the achievement of the orga-
nizational success (Kim et al, 2011).
Basing his statements on empirical researches and know-
ledge gathered over the past 30 years, Bass observed that
“leadership could be the critical factor influencing the organi-
zation success” (Bass and Bass, 2008, p.11), not only because of
its direct influence, but also because of its indirectly caused con-
sequences (improving moral by offering incentives, correlating
the reward with the employees performance and their unbiased
and fair treatment) (Avolio et al, 2009).
As further evidence to support the previously established facts,
there are Mintzberg and Waters’ researches (Mintzberg and
Waters, 1982), as well as Thomas’ from the end of the ‘80s,
which state the undeniable impact of the leader on the group/
team, irrespective of the theory used to make the analysis on.
According to them, the impact is not only positive, but also signifi-
cant, the statistic confirming that the exposure to authentic leader-
ship generates chances of over 60% for a positive outcome) (Bass
and Bass, 2008).
On the other hand, there is also Lord and Maher’s perspec-
tive (1991, cited in GLOBE, 1999), that highlights the tendency of
each individual apart to develop personal opinion related to the
nature of leaders and leadership, this being a consequence of
human individuality and diversity. Therefore, there is the possibi-
lity of an individual to be considered a leader by his peers, alt-
hough he lacks leader like characteristics. Exactly this relative
nature of leadership makes it difficult for researchers to evaluate
the level of authentic manifested leadership (GLOBE, 1999).
At its turn, the concept of management has also suffered a
multitude of transformations along the years, mainly due to the
evolution of socio-economical environment. Generally, the con-
cept of management is associated to the planning and organi-
zing activities, together with the coordination of the business acti-
vity, control of available resource, all these with respect to the
company strategies and strategic objectives, as well as the stake-
holders’ (h http://www.businessdictionary.com/).
Although controversial, the origins of modern management
seem to reside in the reflection upon the low productivity and
failure of some organizations, as published by Sir Thomas More
at the beginning of the 16th century in the study called Utopia. His
critique related to the political system, and to the social and
economic environment of his time (unemployment, oligopolies,
the distribution of wealth and poverty, etc.), as well as his solution
concerning the development of an ideal community of nations
have been thoroughly analyzed across the years and have also
been the spark of over four centuries of economic perspectives
(Park, 1971).
However, regardless of the manifested type of management,
some features have proved to be universally accepted as the
quality of management depends on their weight on the overall
behavior of the involved individual. In 1988, Cameron and
Tschirhart have evaluated the most relevant 25 managerial abi-
lities cited in the literature on a sample of over 500 managers
from 150 organizations. The above mentioned abilities were or-
ganized into four groups: a) the one related to the involvement of
the managers and human interactions (for example communi-
cation, team building, etc.); b) the abilities focused on competiti-
veness and control (assertiveness, power, subordinates influence,
etc.); c) the group of abilities focused on innovation and entrepre-
neurship (for example finding creative solutions to certain pro-
blems), and d) the one related to maintaining the order and
rationality (time management, rational decisions, etc.). The result
of the research highlighted a strong correlation between the
managerial performance and the presence of several opposite
and paradoxical abilities such as participative and authoritarian,
parental and concurrent attitudes, flexible and creative as well as
rational and stable behavior (Whetten and Cameron, 2011).
Therefore, there were generated the following conclusions:
65
 QUALITY MANAGEMENT
1. Managerial traits and competences are behavioral, unre-
lated to the trendsetting or the personal attributes of the indi-
viduals in these positions (these traits can be easily identified by
anyone in comparison to the individual attributes which are
purely mental and incorporated in one’s personality);
2. Secondly, the managerial abilities are controllable which
means that they can be demonstrated and acted on consciously,
enhanced and/or decreased by the individual himself;
3. Thirdly, managerial abilities could be subject of further de-
velopment – individuals can improve their performance by consi-
dering their continuous practice and the received feedback;
4. Managerial abilities are interconnected, merging at certain
points, sustaining each other and facilitating the flexibility in
handling certain situations;
5. Lastly, managerial abilities are, at some degree, discrepant
and paradoxical – they are not totally related to social sciences,
nor are they strictly technical or decisional, as all of them are not
oriented towards the development of interpersonal relationship
and teamwork, but rather focusing on individualism.
As a conclusion, the difference between management and
leadership is generally accepted, even if some specialists consi-
der it as being purely conceptual, while others believe it to be
evolutionary.
Comparing the models and the methods proposed for ana-
lysis, there can be clearly seen a convergence of interest towards
the interactions within the organizations that lead to leadership
occurrence and development (dynamics of the phenomenon),
and to the driving factors as well. This is supported by the deve-
lopment of some previously conducted studies correlated with the
outcome of some new empirical researches (transversal and lon-
gitudinal, too), meant to offer a broader picture of the reality.
Thus, according to the GLOBE study (1999), the national/re-
gional culture determines the standards which define an efficient
transactional or transformational leader. Implicitly, it will influence
the behavior itself of that respective individual: while a culture
that supports an authoritarian style might consider the emotional
involvement of the leader as being a weakness (it discourages
such behaviors, according to the behavioral theory), another one,
a more nurturing culture would appreciate this type of involve-
ment and make it a core competence of the effective leadership
(and, according to the same behavioral theory, this culture would
facilitate its growth) (GLOBE, 1999) (figure 5). Similarly, related
to the dimensions of the Hofstede’s cultural profile, Jung et al.
(1995) (cited by GLOBE, 1999) consider that transformational
leadership is more frequently met and even more efficient in
collectivist cultures (Walumbwa and Lawler, 2003), than in indivi-
dualistic ones. Likewise, cultures with a low tolerance of uncer-
tainty (rather enjoying rules and procedures) and the masculine
ones will also encourage transactional leadership (Agle et al.,
2006).
Figure 5. Organizational culture as leadership influencing factor
Source: own illustration
In the attempt to mingle the traditional approach of the
leadership which implies the realized (or not) capability of the
leader to influence the behavior, values, and believes of his
followers, with the modern approach which incorporates leader-
ship into the interaction from within the organizational social
system, there have been developed several models meant to
catch the complexity of the interdependence leadership – organi-
zational culture – other elements of the system.
One of them is that proposed by Yuan and Lee (2011). This
views the leading function as an important attribute of the mana-
gement, essential for obtaining the maximum efficiency and the
achievement of organizational goals. It links together the con-
cepts of leadership performance depending on its type, of orga-
nizational culture and of employees’ performance from within a
system of multiple influences.
Another research concerning the inter-influence a leader has
on the organizational culture (this time, by applying the establi-
66
shed norms), on his team motivation and on his organization
productivity, as well, is the one conducted in 2000 by Masi and
Cooke.
What the two above mentioned models have in common is
the assumption that the leader’s behavior is the key influencing
factor on the organizational culture and the employees’ reaction
to change (Kavanagh and Ashkanasy, 2006; Schein, 1992). Besi-
des, O’Farrell’s study on the public services system in Australia
(2006) confirms Schein’s 2004 and Watsons’ 2006 theories, and
thus sustains the important role plaid by leadership in the orga-
nizational culture parts conversion from theory to practice
(O’Donnell and Boyle, 2008).
Regardless of the influence displayed, be it direct or indirect,
there is a widespread acknowledgement of the irregular
organizational culture dynamics (Weick and Quinn, 1999) (figure
6). The direct influence is proclaimed by Mumford et al., 2003,
who believed that organizational culture and environment are
social collective constructions on which leaders exert control and
a significant influence, as well, while the indirect influence is
sustained by Amabile (1998) who rather was considering that
leaders can act on the members’ attitude and motivation by
influencing the nature of both the work environment and orga-
nizational culture. Part of the latter category of influence, too, in
1989, Ott (cited by Smit, 1996), pleads for the recognition of the
impact leaders have on the selection, socialization and resigna-
tion processes (Kavanagh and Ashkanasy, 2006).
Figure 6. The leaders influence on the organizational culture
Source: own illustration
In addition to the previously mentioned researches, there are
also Valikangas and Okumura explaining the significant role that
leaders play in the employees’ exhibited resistance to change due
to the (mis)understanding of their appropriate motivational
factors (the grey branch of figure 6). For advocating this, one can
find several analysis conducted on the psychological processes,
mechanisms and terms enabling the leader’s action on his
followers’ motivation and performance (van Knippenberg et al.,
2004; Walumbwa et al., 2007; Kark and Van Dijk, 2007), as well
as studies focused on the active role of followers/subordinates on
the organizational culture (Hatch, 1993).
A significant role plays the respect paid by managers to their
employees (assimilating McGregor’s X or Y theory), to the
recruitment-selection process, a clear and realistic job
description, the used motivational system, the employee
involvement in setting objectives and the decision making
process, the leadership enhancement, as well as to the type of
organizational culture (Landsberg, 2005).
According to Marion et al. (2008), human interaction is the
foundation of creativity, innovation and achieving results. From
this perspective, efficient team work (reinforced by the leader’s
attitude which facilitates environments and structures enabling
the positive evolution of teams), leads to an increased level of
creativity within the organization (Hanson and Marion, 2008)
(figure 7).
Figure 7. Human interaction as foundation of creativity
Source: own illustration
Bass and Goleman also found that, due to the high level of
EQ, a transformational leader will always see his employees as
individuals with personal needs and aspirations necessitating
Vol. 16, No. 146/June 2015 QUALITY
access to success
 QUALITY MANAGEMENT
recognition and support (inspirational motivation) and intellectual
stimulation (Bass, 1999; Goleman, 2004).
Figure 8. Leader’s EQ as foundation of creativity
Source: own illustration
In accordance with Bono and Ilies’ researches (2006), the
transformational leader’s followers/subordinates are more likely
to experience positive affect and emotion thus facilitating creati-
vity, cognitive flexibility, innovative feedback and openness to-
wards information. This has consequences on the decisional
process enabling a broader and more flexible cognition (Isen,
2001; Fredricson, 1998; 2001), as well as on the job perfor-
mance and satisfaction, and employees loyalty (Youssef and
Luthans, 2007) (the green branches in figure 8).
Taking into consideration the fact that leadership is actually a
social interactions process during which leaders influence the
followers by using emotions (Yukl and Michel, 2006; Bass and
Bass, 2008), the influence that organizational culture has on
leaders behavior correlated with the leaders capacity to influence
values, attitudes and individual behaviors of the subordinates sets
out the organizational system as an adaptive social one (figure
9).
Figure 9. Organizational culture as an adaptive social system
Source: own illustration
In order to conclude in a more relaxed manner, we consider
Stephen Covey’s perspective advocating the existence of any con-
stituent in pair, consequently also of management and leader-
ship. An effective management uncorrelated with an effective
leadership is similar to “putting out the sunbeds on the Titanic”.
In other words, no managerial success could compensate the
failure of leadership (Covey, 1989).
4. The influence of vision and mission
on the organizational culture
Although recognized as extremely important concepts in
running the business, vision and mission are rarely appreciated
to their full value. Moreover, they seem to have been lost their
own purpose. As a consequence, there are quite a few compa-
nies with nice stated visions and missions that do not represent
their members and do not raise their enthusiasm for achieving
the business goals.
Beyond this reality lies the assiduous work of researchers
(Darbi, 2012; Campbell and Yeung, 1991; Markides and Papa-
dakis, 1998; Desmidt, 2006) striving to explain how the vision
and mission statements could be used in bounding common
goals shared by all the organization members, this resulting in a
certain guidance and shape of their behavior.
There are specialists stating that vision and mission are ca-
pable of motivating the employees, and making them more
open, implicitly leading to a better performance at the workplace
(Darbi, 2012; Markides and Papadakis, 1998; Bart et al., 2001;
Collins and Poras, 2002).
Thus, vision is a projection of the company into the future ca-
pable to inspire and motivate its members. A more pragmatic de-
finition is “the development of internal resources of the business,
QUALITY
access to success Vo l. 16, No . 14 6/Ju ne 20 15
of its capabilities and core competences, in order to achieve the
organizational goals in the competitive surrounding environment”
(Hitt et al., 1999, p.24).
At its turn, although frequently confused with the vision,
mission is actually the embodiment of the organization perso-
nality, its object of activity, as well as of the way to go for reaching
its strategic objectives. A correctly set mission is an effective one.
It manages to clearly express the uniqueness and individuality of
the organization, to spark interest, to be relevant for all the stake-
holders and last but not least it manages to motivate the em-
ployees.
The theoretical differences between the vision and mission do
not always resonate in practice, thus Campbell and Yeung under-
line their difference of perspectives (vision refers to a future desi-
red state of the company, while the mission relates to present),
and support that the two are not necessarily different. In time,
when a vision is achieved it needs to be changed, while a mission
could remain the same (Campbell and Yeung, 1991).
Despite the different opinions of the researchers, we highlight
the importance of the adequate synchronization of leadership
and management, as well as of the company’s vision and
mission. An organization characterized by real performance
driven attitude is led by righteous mangers with a clear vision of
the organization purpose, capable to focus on opportunities, but
flexible and liable for in facing the change, able to monitor the
essential tasks and to pursue the right steps in order to achieve
the set goals (figure 10).
Figure 10. Leadership-vision – management-mission correlation
Source: own illustration
It is no coincidence that the researchers who have studied
these phenomena are the ones who have spent their lives ana-
lyzing the essence and exhibition of leadership and manage-
ment, most of the time, in pairs: vision – leadership, mission –
management.
If the mission statement creation involves the management
functions, vision is embodied in the leadership and its cognitive
abilities. Because of that, Kouzes and Posner believe that, re-
gardless of the social and organizational status, leadership is
accessible to anyone who is capable of changing the environ-
ment to suit their own vision (Kouzes and Posner, 2010).
But the question of where and how does the leaders vision
appear still lingers. According to Starratt, the ability of developing
a vision is influenced by the parents and other influential peers by
the first stages of childhood, by the educational systems, religious
tradition and social experiences along the years (Starratt, 1993)
(figure 11).
Figure 11. Factors that influence the ability to develop a vision
Source: own illustration
From the psychological perspective, the human mind is a
representative system receiving as stimuli sensorial information
and/or representations of sensorial information, transforming them
in order to have a relevant interpretation (Stieg, 2004). The inter-
67
 QUALITY MANAGEMENT
mediate step is the mental representation which, from a cognitive
perspective, represents the cognitive entity that carries the infor-
mation or its content.
During his existence, the individual comes into contact with
known and predictable stimuli which enable the use of some
answers already gained through education and/or experience,
but also he encounters new and unknown stimuli which contain
vast quantities of information, to which the body has the option
to find a “stereotyped” answer or create a new one. As a conse-
quence, the ability of a person to recognize the world (despite his
neuro-physiological and cognitive limitations) is, at least in theory,
in a continuous development. Therefore, it is a dynamic process
(figure 12).
Figure 12. Factors that influence the accuracy
of mental representation
Source: own illustration
Regardless of its evolution, the mental representation of an
individual can be more or less accurate, helping him integrate
himself easier or harder into society (due to the opinions,
judgments and believes thereby formed), and indirectly influen-
cing his satisfaction, as a result of his activity, the recognition of
his own merit, etc. (Paivio, 1990).
The mechanism on the basis of which this functions is the
following: according to his own mental representation of reality,
the individual assigns the people surrounding him certain mind-
sets (analogous to his own), which he uses in order to explain
and/or predicts their actions. As a consequence, an accurate
mental representation will determine, among others, an enhan-
ced capacity of the individual to develop an attractive vision; on
the contrary, an inaccurate or distorted mental representation will
offer him the possibility of neither a correct positioning, nor a
superior understanding of reality, and, consequently, the result
will have small chances of being perceived as a vision (with all its
required attributes) (figure 12).
Extending the analysis from an individual level to a group
level, the continuous interaction between members, but also with
the environment, leads to the structure of a multivalent system
(Wooldridge, 2002). In the latter, the result of individual behavior
of each agent (person) lies in an interdependent relationship with
other behaviors: each agent’s ability to achieve goals depends
not only on its own action, but also on the action of the other
agents. Therefore, a person’s emotions influence the emotions,
behavior and thoughts of others. The reactions of others can
influence their subsequent interactions with the original holder of
the initial emotion, and, in the same measure, his future emo-
tions and behavior. This display of affection is based on the biolo-
gical structure of an individual, his personality traits, education,
cultural background and experience, thus varying in intensity
and/or shape (figure 13).
Figure 13. The organizational culture dynamics set by vision
and miss ion statements
Sursa: own illustration
The echo of one individual’s feelings appears due to:
68

Mood contagion – the human tendency of automatically
and unconsciously imitating verbal and non-verbal ex-
pression, feelings and emotions (EQ – Goleman, 2004;
Goleman and Boyatzis, 2008; mirror brain cells –
Barsade, 2002; Gazolla et al, 2006; Heyes, 2009;
Keysers and Gazzola, 2010; spindle brain cells – Allman,
1999; Allman et al., 2001; Allman et al., 2002, Wood-
ward and Allman, 2007; Keysers and Gazzola, 2007; Tse
and Dasborough, 2008; Schippers et al., 2010).

Emotion interpretation – the answer of the receptor will be
in accordance with its mental representation (Korzybski,
1933; Bandler and Grinder, 1979; Gardner and Stough,
2002; Mesquita and Walker, 2003; Salzman and Fusi,
2010; Witkowski, 2010; Huemer, 2011).
Exactly because of the influence a vision/mission can have on
the employees psyche there is a great responsibility in the choice
of words and phrasings. Not only do they need to be aligned with
each other, but also with the organizational culture, otherwise
generating cognitive dissonance (state of spirit manifested in case
of discrepant cognition processes, Festinger, 1957). In this case,
the result will not be the expected one, causing confusion and
incongruent behaviors. Generally if the attitude of an individual
and his behavior are opposites (if there is a dissonance between
the two), the person is constrained to create a realignment bet-
ween the two. Usually, at least on the short run, the attitude
changes in order to match the already exhibited behavior (Makin
and Cox, 2004).
As a consequence, the dynamic character imposed by the
vision and mission statements on the organizational culture is
given by their own dynamics and interaction, and also by the
chemistry of the employees with respect to the possibility of chan-
ging their characteristics. This matrix aids the staff in interpreting
the current vision and mission differently and adopting behaviors
in accordance or not with the company’s organizational culture.
5. Conclusions
The current theoretical research underlines the influence of
each integrator apart on the organizational culture and also the
dynamic evolution of the influence in question. The obviously
different aspects are the measurement scales, the historical
changes in the evolution pace, as well as the influence on the
culture regardless of its national, regional or organizational na-
ture.
Related to technological development, Ray Kurzweil highlights
that as life and technology have evolved, the frequency of great
changes increased. During the 19th century, humanity passes
more changes than during the previous other nine. Nowadays,
the change in paradigms takes place periodically once every
couple of years, the rate of change doubling every ten years.
Therefore, the evolution of technological advancement has expe-
rienced an exponential growth, while its accelerating rate evolved
in the same direction. While such a dynamic evolution is easily
identified at a macro economical level, at a micro economical
scale the change in technology has an indirect influence on the
organizational culture (manifested through the particularities
introduced to the business process, but also through the new cha-
racteristics internalized by the workforce) to the extent to which
the organization embraces the change.
Business processes of the organization suffer a delay (com-
pared with the new technologies) which lies in its relationship with
technology. This delay is noticeable only on a small temporal
scale, while on a larger one there are no significant differences
between technology and processes evolution.
The two behavioral versions, as leader and manager, ma-
nifest a bipolar influence on the organizational culture: a direct
influence (through the behavior of the decision-maker and his
influence over his subordinates), and an indirect influence (as a
consequence of decisional power). From an evolutionary stand-
point, the two perspective (both managerial and leadership) have
had more or less popularity, depending on the interest or lack of
interest shown by the general public. For example, in the last 40
Vol. 16, No. 146/June 2015 QUALITY
access to success
 QUALITY MANAGEMENT
to 50 years, they have been popular at least 29 managerial
theories (Daft and Marcic, 2006).
With regard to the vision and mission of the organization, one
can observe that although relatively new in theory, in practice
they have been rapidly accepted, even if not always in the most
appropriate form. At a closer analysis, it becomes obvious that
regardless of the way they were conceived they are undoubtedly
the consequence of the decision-maker capacity to design a
vision/mission (Ortony et al., 1988; Fredrickson, 1998; 2001;
Glenberg and Kaschak, 2002; Havas et al., 2007).
Another conclusion is drawn related to the incorporation of
the vision into the capacity/quality of the leader and of the
mission into that of the manager. To the extent to which the
organizational cultures refers to both facets, the world of heroes
and myths (built on leadership exhibited within the company), as
well as the real world of technology and processes which is
measurable (implemented by means of managerial decisions),
the essential role of the leadership – management pair and the
equilibrium of its structure is emphasized.
As a final conclusion, the nonlinear evolution of each inte-
grator, at both macro and micro scale, becomes undeniable. It is
equally true when referring to their influence on the organiza-
tional culture, mainly given by the intermediaries bonding the
human nature of his behavior and the achieved outcome.
Acknowledgement
This work was co-financed from the European Social Fund
through Sectoral Operational Programme Human Resources
Development 2007-2013, project number POSDRU/159/1.5/S/
142115 „Performance and excellence in doctoral and postdoc-
toral research in Romanian economics science domain”.
Q-as

References
[1] Agle, B.R., Nagarajan, N.J., Sonnenfeld, J.A., Srinivasan, D. (2006), Does CEO charisma matter? An empirical analysis of the relationships
among organizational performance, environmental uncertainty, and top management team perceptions of CEO charisma, Academy of
Management Journal, 49:161-74.
[2] Allman, J.M (1999), Evolving Brains, New York: Scientific American Library.
[3] Allman, J.M., Hakeem, A., Erwin, J.M., Nimchinsky, E., Hof, P. (2001), The Anterior Cingulate Cortex. The Evolution of an Interface between
Emotion and Cognition, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol. 935, pp. 107-117.
[4] Allman, J.M, Hakeem, A., Watson, K. (2002), Two Psylogenetic Specializations in the Human Brain, The Neuroscientist, vol.8, no.4, pp.335-346,
Sage Publications
[5] Avolio, B, Walumbwa, F., Weber, T.J. (2009), Leadership: current theories, research, and future directions, Annual Review of Psychology 60, pp.
421-449.
[6] Bandler, R., Grinder, J. (1979), Frogs into princes. Neuro Linguistic Programming, Real People Press.
[7] Barsade, S.G. (2002), The ripple effect: emotional contagion and its influence on group behaviour, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 47, no.
4, pp. 644-675.
[8] Bart, C.K., Bontis, N., Taggar, S. (2001), A model of the impact of mission statements on firm performance, Management Decision, 39/1, 19-
35, MCB University Press.
[9] Bass, B.M. (1999), Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership, European Journal of Work and Organisational
Psychology, 8(1), 9-32.
[10] Bass, B.M., Bass, R. (2008), The Bass Handbook of leadership. Theory, research & managerial applications, Free Press (a division of Simon &
Schuster, Inc.), New York.
[11] Bono, J.E., Ilies, R. (2006), Charisma, positive emotions and mood contagion, Leadership Quarterly, 17:317-34.
[12] Brãtianu, C. (2007), An integrative perspective on the organizational intellectual capital, Review of Management and Economical Engineering,
vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 107-113.
[13] Brãtianu, C. (2008), A dynamic structure of the organizational intellectual capital, in: Naaranoja, M. (ed.) Knowledge Management in organiza-
tions, pp. 233-243, Vaasan Yliopisto, Vaasa.
[14] Brãtianu, C., Jianu, I., Vasilache, S. (2007), Integrators for organizational intellectual capital, Proceedings of the IC-Congress, INHOLLAND
University of professional education, Haarlem, The Netherlands, 3-4 May 2007.
[15] Brãtianu, C., Vasilache, S., Dima, A.M., Orzea, I. (2011), Nonlinear integrators and intellectual capital dynamics, Ed. Curtea Veche, Bucharest.
[16] Burgoyne, J., Hirsh, W.,Williams, S. (2004), The Development of Management and Leadership Capability and its Contribution to Performance:
The evidence, the prospects and the research need, Research Report no. 560, Lancaster University.
[17] Campbell, A., Yeung, S. (1991), Brief case: mission, vision and strategic intent, Long Range Planning, vol.24, no.4, pp.145, in Smit, J.P., 2006,
Strategic planning, Readings, Juta & Co. Ltd.
[18] Collins, J., Porras, J. (2002), Build to last. Successful habits of visionary companies. Harper Business Essentials: New York.
[19] Covey, S. (1989), The seven habits of highly effective people, Powerful lessons in personal charge, Franklin Covey Co., Free Press.
[20] Daft, R.L., Marcic, D. (2006), Understanding Management, the 5th edition, Thomson Learning, Inc., http://books.google.ro/books?id=nxzN6
Frn1AIC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro#v=onepage&q&f=false, accessed on 24th of April 2015.
[21] Darbi, W.P.K. (2012), Of mission and vision statements and their potential impact on employee behaviour and attitudes: the case of a public but
profit-oriented tertiary institution, International Journal of Business and Social Science, vol. 3, no. 14.
[22] Davenport, Th.H., Short, J.E. (1990), The new industrial engineering. Information technology and business process redesign, Sloan Management
Review, in Operations Management published in 2003 by Routledge, London.
[23] Desmidt, S. (2006), Methodology in mission statement research: where are we, and where should we go? An analysis of 20 years of empirical
research, PhD thesis coordinated by Heene Aime, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Department of Manage-
ment and Entrepreneurship, Belgium.
[24] Festinger, L. (1957), A theory of cognitive dissonance, Stanford University Press, California, USA, http://books.google.ro/books?id=voeQ-
8CASacC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false, accessed on 24th of April 2015.
[25] Fossas Olalla, M. (2000), Information Technology in Business Process Reengineering, International Advances in Economic Research, 6(3), pp.
581-589.
[26] Fredrickson, B.L. (1998), What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, vol. 2, no. 3, 300-319.
[27] Fredrickson, B.L. (2001), The role of positive emotions in positive psychology, The Broaden-and-Build theory of positive emotions, American
Psychologist, vol. 56, no. 3, 218-226.
[28] Freud, S. (1922), Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego; Translated by James Strachey, New York: Boni and Liveright; Bartleby.com,
2010, http://www.bartleby.com/290/ , accessed on 28th of April 2015.
[29] Gardner, L., Stough, C. (2002), Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional intelligence in senior level managers, Leadership
& Organizational Development Journal, 23/2, 68-78, Emerald.
[30] Gazzola, V., Aziz-Zadeh, L., Keysers, C. (2006), Empathy and the Somatotopic Auditoty Mirror System in Humans, Current Biology, 16, 1824-
1829, Elsevier Ltd.
[31] Glenberg, A.M., Kaschak, M.P. (2002), Grounding language in action, Psychonimic Bulletin & Review, 9(3), 558-565, Psychonomic Society, Inc.
[32] GLOBE Research Program (1999), Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: are attributes of charismatic/
transformational leadership universally endorsed? Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219-256, Elsevier Science Inc.
[33] Goleman, D. (2004), What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, January.
[34] Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. (2008), Social intelligence and the biology of leadership, Harvard Business Review, Harvard Business School Publishing
Corporation.
[35] Griffin, R.W., Moorhead, G. (2006), Fundamentals of organizational behavior, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

QUALITY
access to success Vo l. 16, No . 14 6/Ju ne 20 15 69
 QUALITY MANAGEMENT
[36] Gronau, N., Weber, E. (2004), Defining an Infrastructure for Knowledge Intensive Business Processes, Proceedings of I-KNOW ’04, Graz, Austria,
June 30-July 2.
[37] Hanson, W. ºi Marion, R. (2008), Methods of dynamic leadership research: unlocking the power of interaction, UCEA Conferece Proceedings for
Convention, David C. Thompson and Faith E. Crampton, editors.
[38] Hatch, M.J. (1993), The Dynamics of Organisational Culture, the Academy of Management Review, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 657-693.
[39] Havas, D.A., Glenberg, A.M., Rinck, M (2007), Emotion simulation during language comprehension, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14 (3), 436-
441, Psychonomic Society, Inc.
[40] Heyes, C. (2009), Where do mirror neurons come from? Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, doi:10.1016, /j.neubiorev.2009.11.007.
[41] Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., Hoskisson, R.E. (1999), Strategic management. Competitiveness and globalisation, 3rd edition, South-western College
Publishing: Boston.
[42] Huemer, M. (2011), Sense-Data, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Spring Edition, Edward N.Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/
entries/sense-data/, accessed on 14th of May 2015.
[43] Isen, A.M. (2001), An influence of positive affect on decision making in complex situations: theoretical issues with practical implications, Journal
of Consumer Psychology, 11 (2), 75-85, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
[44] Kark, R., van Dijk, D. (2007), Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: the role of the self-regulatory focus in leadership processes, Academy of
Management Review, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 500-528.
[45] Kavanagh, M.H., Ashkanasy, N.M. (2006), The impact of leadership and Change Management Strategy on organizational culture and individual
acceptance of change during a merger, British Journal of Management, 17 (S1), S81-S103.
[46] Keysers, C., Gazzola, V. (2007), Integrating simulation and theory of mind: from self to social cognition, Trends in Cognitive Science, doi:
10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.002, available online.
[47] Keysers, C., Gazzola, V. (2010), Social Neuroscience: Mirror Neurons Recorded in Humans, Current Biology, vol. 20, no. 8.
[48] Kim, J.H., Kim, C.S., Kim, J.M. (2011), Analysis of the effect of leadership and organizational culture on the organizational effectiveness of
radiological technologist’s working environments, Radiography, 17, pp. 201-206, Elsevier.
[49] Korzybski, A. (1933), Science and sanity. An introduction to non-aristotelian systems and general semantics, online book retrieved at http://www.
rodsmith.org.uk/alfred-korzybski/, accessed on 18th of April 2015.
[50] Kouzes, J.M., Posner, B.Z. (2010), The truth about leadership, The no-fads, heart-of-the-matter facts you need to know, Jossey Bass, EBSCO
Publishing Inc.
[51] Kurzweil, R. (2001), The Law of Accelerating Returns, Kurzweil Accelerating Intelligence, http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-
returns, accessed on 3rd of May 2015.
[52] Landsberg, M. (2005), Leadership, ed. Curtea Veche, Bucharest.
[53] Makin, P., Cox, Ch. (2006), Schimbarea în organizaþii. Optimizarea comportamentului angajaþilor, Ed. Polirom, Bucharest.
[54] Markides, C., Papadakis, V.M. (1998), What constitutes an effective mission statement: an empirical investigation, published in Hitt, M.A., Ricart,
J.E., Costa, I., Nixon, R.D. (eds.), New managerial mindsets: organizational transformation and strategy implementation, John Wiley and Sons,
UK, pp. 35-54.
[55] Masi, R.J., Cooke, R.A. (2000), Effects of transformational leadership on subordinate motivation, empowering norms, and organizational
productivity, The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 16-47.
[56] Mesquita, B., Walker, R. (2003), Cultural differences in emotions: a context for interpreting emotional experiences, Behaviour Research and
Therapy, 41, 777-793, Pergamon.
[57] Mintzberg, H., Waters, J.A. (1982), Tracking strategy in an entrepreneurial firm, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 25, no. 3, 465-499, Aca-
demy of Management.
[58] Mumford, M.D., Connelly, S., Gaddis, B. (2003), How creative leaders think: experimental findings and cases, Leadership Quarterly, 14:411-
32.
[59] Nãstase, M. (2004), Cultura organizaþionalã ºi managerialã, editura ASE Bucharest, available at http://www.biblioteca-digitala.ase.ro/
biblioteca/carte2.asp?id=325&idb=, accessed on 29th of April 2015.
[60] O’Donnell, O., Boyle, R. (2008), Understanding and Managing Organisational Culture, CPMR Discussion Paper 40, published by Institute of
Public Administration in association with The Committee for Public Management Research, Dublin, Ireland.
[61] Ohtonen, J., Lainema, T. (2011), Critical success factors in Business Process Management – a literature review, Proceedings of IRIS 2011, Turku
Centre for Computer Science, TUCS Lecture Notes, No 15, October 2011, pp. 572-585.
[62] Ortony, A., Clore, G.L., Collins, A. (1988), The cognitive structure of emotions, Cambridge University Press, New York, USA.
[63] Paivio, A. (1990), Mental representations, A dual coding approach, Oxford University Press, available al http://www.google.ro/books?id=
hLGmKkh_4K8C&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false, accessed on 25th of April 2015.
[64] Park, J.W. (1971), The Utopian Economics of Sir Thomas More, The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 275-288.
[65] Robbins, S., DeCenzo, D. (2005), Fundamentals of Management, Essential Concepts and Applications, Pearson Education Prentice Hall, 5th ed.
[66] Salzman, D.C., Fusi, S. (2010), Emotion, Cognition, and Mental State Representation in Amygdala and Prefrontal Cortex, Annual Review of
Neuroscience, 33:173-202.
[67] Schein, E.H. (1992), Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
[68] Schippers, M.B., Roebroeck, A., Renken, R., Nanetti, L., Keysers, C. (2010), Mapping the information flow from one brain to another during
gestural communication, edited by Riitta Hari, Aalto University School of Science and Technology, Espoo, Finland.
[69] Smit, W.J. (1996), Continuous improvement in the context of organizational culture, dissertation under the guidance John Van Maanen ºi Greg
McRae, MIT Sloan School of Management.
[70] Starratt, R.J. (1993), The drama of leadership, The Falmer Press, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, available at http://books.google.ro/
books?id=4JTzqvR6SacC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=vision&f=false, accessed on 4th
of May 2015.
[71] Stieg, C. (2004), Mental Representation: the New Sense-Data?, department of Philosophy, University of Minnesota, published by Cognitive
Sciences Eprint Archive (COGPRINTS), available at http://cogprints.org/6174/2/Mental_Reps_and_Sense_Data_Cog_P.pdf, accessed on 8th of
May 2015.
[72] Tse, H.H.M., Dasborough, M.T. (2008), A study of exchange and emotions in team member relationship, Group & Organization Management,
vol. 33, no. 2, 194-215, Sage Publications.
[73] Van Knippenberg, D., Van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D., Hogg, M.A. (2004), Leadership, self, and identity: A review and research agenda,
The Leadership Quarterly, 15, pp. 825-856, Elsevier.
[74] Walumbwa, F.O., Lawler, J.J. (2003), Building effective organizations: transformational leadership, collectivist orientation, workrelated attitudes
and withdrawal behaviours in three emerging economies, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14:1083-101.
[75] Walumbwa, F.O., Lawler, J.J., Avolio, B.J. (2007), Leadership, Individual Differences, and Work-related Attitudes: A Cross-Culture Investigation,
Applied Psychology: an International Review, 56(2), pp. 212-230, doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00241.x.
[76] Weick, K.W., Quinn, R.E. (1999), Organizational change and development, Annual Review of Psychology, 30, 361-86.
[77] Whetten, D.A., Cameron, K.S. (2011), Developing management skills, the 8th edition, Prentice Hall.
[78] Witkowski, T. (2010), Thirty-five years of research on neuro-linguistic programming. NLP research data base. State of art or pseudoscientific
decoration? Polish Psychological Bulletin, 41 (2): 58-66.
[79] Woodward, J., Allman, J. (2007), Moral Intuition: Its Neural Substrates and Normative Significance, Journal of Physiology Paris, 101 (4-6), pp.
179-202.
[80] Wooldridge, M. (2002), An introduction to multiagent systems, John Wiley &Sons, Ltd.
[81] Youssef, C.M., Luthans, F. (2007), Positive organisational behaviour in the workplace: the impact of hope, optimism, and resilience, Journal of
Management, 33:5, pp. 774-800, Southern Management Association, Sage Publications.
[82] Yuan, C-K, Lee, C-Y (2011), Exploration of a construct model linking leadership types, organization culture, employees performance and
leadership performance, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 25, 123-136, Elsevier.
[83] Yukl, G., Michel, J.W. (2006), Proactive influence tactics and leader member exchange, in C. A. Schriesheim & L. L. Neider (Eds.), Power and
influence in organizations, Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

70 Vol. 16, No. 146/June 2015 QUALITY

access to success
View publication stats