A firm's ability to shape its policies to meet societal demands depends on how it perceives the opportunities and risks in its environment. The authors hypothesized that corporate culture plays a significant role in shaping organizational percep-tions. This article summarizes the findings of a study on how the organizational culture of a chemical firm headquartered in West Germany affected the evolution of its social and personnel policy from 1950 to 1989 given the changes in its sociopolitical environment during this period. The study shows that the culture of a company, by shaping its perceptions, plays a central role in determining the areas in which the organization is likely to be able to learn easily and those in which it is likely to resist changing its policies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ackerman, R.1973. "How Companies Respond to Social Demands."Harvard Business Review July-August: 88-98.
2.
Adler, N.
, and F. Ghadar. 1990. "Strategic Human Resource Management. AGlobal Perspec-tive." Pp. 235-260 in R. Pieper (ed.), Human Resource Management in International Comparison. Berlin: de Gruyter.
3.
Ansoff, I
. 1980. "Strategic Issue Management."Strategic Management Journal1:183-138.
4.
Argyris, C.
, and D. Schon. 1978. Organizational Learning: A Theory-in-Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
5.
Barzelay, M.1993. "The Single Case Study as Intellectually Ambitious Inquiry."Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory305-318.
6.
Beesley, M.
, and T. Evans. 1978. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Reassessment. London: Croom Helm.
7.
Berthoin Antal, A.1985. "Institutionalizing Corporate Social Responsiveness. Lessons Learned From the Migros Experience." Pp. 229-249 in L. F Preston (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 7. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
8.
Berthoin Antal, A.1991. "Unternehmenskultur: Wenn Management Sinn macht" [Corporate Culture: When Management Makes Sense]. Pp. 9-16 in F Loock (ed.), Kulturmanagement Kein Privileg der Musen. Wiesbaden: Gabler.
9.
Berthoin Antal, A.1992. Corporate Social Perfornance: Rediscovering Actors in Their Organization-al Contexts. Frankfurt am Main and New York: Campus and Westview.
10.
Berthoin Antal, A.
, M. Dierkes, and K. Hahner. 1994a. "German Corporate Responsibilities: Statements of Principles."Journal of General Management19 (4): 24-40.
11.
Berthoin Antal, A.
, M. Dierkes, and K. Hahner. 1994b. "Business in Society: The Role of Perceptions and Principles in Organiza-tional Learning."Journal of General Management20 (2): 1-23.
12.
Carroll, A.
, and F. Hoy. 1984. Issues Management. Origins of the Future. Stamford, CT: Issues Action.
13.
Deal, T.
, and A. Kennedy. 1982. Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
14.
Dierkes, M.1974. Die Sozialbilanz. Ein gesellschaftsbezogenes Informations-und Rechen-system [The Social Report-Business Information on Societal Performance]. Frankfurt/ Main: Herder and Herder.
15.
Dierkes, M.1988. "Unternehmenskultur und Unternehmensfuhrung. Konzeptionelle An-satze und gesicherte Erkenntnisse" [Corporate Culture and Corporate Management-Berthoin Antal et al. / CONTEXTUAL CHANGES 405 Conceptual Approaches and Established Knowledge]. Zeitschriftfuer Betriebswirtschaft58:554-575.
16.
Dierkes, M.
, and A. Berthoin Antal. 1985. "Umweltmanagement konkret: Erfahrungen aus acht Jahren Entwicklung beim Migros-Genossenschaftsbund" [Managing the Business Environment: Experience From Eight Years of Development at the Migros Cooperative]. VDI impuls1:23-35.
17.
Dierkes, M.
, R. Coppock, H. Snowball, and J. Thomas. 1973. Social Pressure and Business Actions. Pp. 57-92 in M. Dierkes and R. A. Bauer (eds.), Corporate Social Accounting. New York: Praeger.
18.
Dierkes, M.
, and K. Hiihner. 1993. "Soziookonomischer Wandel und Unternehmensleitbil-der. Ein Beitrag zur Untersuchung der Wahrnehmungsprozesse und Reaktionsweisen von Unternehmen auf Umfeldanforderungen" [Socioeconomic Change and Corporate Vi-sion: On Studying Perceptual Processes and Responses of Business Organizations to Demands From Their Environments]. Pp. 277-309 in B. Strumpel and M. Dierkes (eds.), Innovation und Beharrung in derArbeitspolitik. Stuttgart: Schaffer Poeschel.
19.
Dierkes, M.
, K. Hihner, and A. Berthoin Antal. 1997. Das Unternehmen und sein Umfeld-Wahrnehmungsprozesse und Unternehmenskultur am Beispiel eines Chemiekonzerns [The Firm and Its Environment: Processes of Perception and Environmental Culture. The Case of a Chemicals Corporation]. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.
20.
Dierkes, M.
, L. v. Rosenstiel, and U. Steger. (eds.). 1993. Unternehmenskultur in Theorie und Praxis-Konzepte aus Okonomie, Psychologie und Ethnologie [Theory and Practice of Corporate Culture Concepts From Economics, Psychology, and Anthropology]. Frankfurt am Main and New York: Campus and Westview.
21.
Dierkes, M.
, and B. Raske. 1994. "Wie Unternehmen lemen-Erfahrungen und Einsichten von Managern."manager magazin July: 142-154.
22.
Dill, P.
, and G. Hugler. 1987. "Unternehmenskultur und Fuhrung betriebswirtschaftlicher Organisationen Ansatzpunkte fur ein kulturbewuBtes Management." Pp. 141-209 in E. Heinen, B. Dietel, C. Breit (eds.), Unternehrnenskultur Perspektiven fir Wissen-schaft und Praxis. Miinchen: R. Oldenburg.
23.
Dutton, J. E
, and J. M. Dukerich. 1991. "Keeping an Eye on the Mirror: Image and Identity in Organizational Adaptation."The Academy of Management Journal34 (3): 517-554.
24.
Dyllick, T.1986. "Die Beziehungen zwischen Untemehmung und Gesellschaft" [Tine Relationships Between Business and Society]Der Betriebswirtschaft46 (3): 373-392.
25.
Dyllick, T.1989. Management der Umweltbeziehungen: Oeffentliche Auseinandersetzungen als Herausforderung [Managing Environmental Relations. Public Conflicts as Chal-lenges]. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
26.
Galbraith, J. R.1973. Designing Complex Organizations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
27.
Greening, D.
, and B. Gray. 1994"Testing a Model of Organizational Response to Social and Political Issues."Academy of Management Journal37 (3): 467-498.
28.
Hatch, M. J.1993. "The Dynamics of Organizational Culture."The Academy of Management Review18 (4): 657-693.
29.
Heinen, E.1987. Untemehmenskultur als Gegenstand der Betriebs wirtschaftslehre." Pp. 1-48 in E. Heinen, B. Dietel, C. Breit (eds.), Unternehmenskultur-Perspektiven fir Wissenschaft und Praxis. Munchen: R. Oldenburg.
30.
Helmers, S.1990. "Theoretische und Methodische Beitrage der Ethnologie zur Un-temehmenskulturforschunq" [Theoretical and Methodological Contributions by Ethnol-ogy to the Study of Corporate Culture] (FS 11 90-106). Publication Series of the Research Unit on Organization and the Inception of Technology, Research Area on Technology, Work, and Environment. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin fur Sozialforschung.
31.
Helmers, S.1993. " 'Wir' und 'die' im Unternehmen-Innerorganisatorische Prozesse bei der Technikentwicklung" ['Us' and 'Them' in the Firm-Intraorganizational Processes in the Development of Technology]. Pp. 195-227 in S. Helmers (ed.), Ethnologie der Arbeitswelt-Beispiele aus den europaischen und au,Jereuropaischen Feldern. Bonn: Holos.
32.
Helmers, S.
, and A. Knie. 1992. "Wie lernen Unternehmen bei der Entwicklung von Techniken?" [How Do Companies Learn When Developing Technologies?]Zeitschrift Fuhrung und Organisation1:367-367.
33.
Isabella, L.1986. "Culture, Key Events and Corporate Social Responsibility." Pp. 175-192 in: J. Post (ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 8. Green-wich, CT: JAI.
34.
Ketteler, H. B. 1993. "Organisationskulturelle Dimensionen des Uberganges von zuschuB-zu auftragsorientierter Forschung und Dienstleistung" [Dimensions of Organizational Culture in the Transition From Subsidized to Commissioned Research and Services]. Ph.D diss., Technical University of Berlin, Institute of Sociology, May.
35.
Martin, J.
, and C. Siehl. 1983/1984. "Organizational Culture and Counterculture, an Uneasy Symbiosis. Organizational Dynamics3:52-64.
36.
Ohmae, K.1990. The Borderless World. London: Fontana.
37.
Plesser, E.1975. Was machen Unternehmer? [What Do Entrepreneurs Do?]. Freiburg: Herder.
38.
Post, J.1978. Corporate Behavior and Social Change. Reston, VA: Reston Publishing.
39.
Schein, E.1984. "Coming to a New Awareness of Organizational Culture."Sloan Manage-ment Review24 (2): 3-16.
40.
Sethi, P.1975. "Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Analytical Framework."California Management Review18 (3): 58-64.
41.
Wartick, S.
, and R. Rude. 1986. "Issues Management: Corporate Fad or Corporate Func-tion?"California Management Review29 (1): 124-140.
42.
Weitzig, J. K.1979. Gesellschaftsorientierte Unternehmenspolitik und Unternehmensver-fassung [Socially Oriented Corporate Policy and Corporate Governance]. Berlin: de Gruyter.
43.
Wood, D.1990. Business and Society. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman/Little Brown.
44.
Wood, D.1991. "Corporate Social Performance Revisited."The Academy of Management Review16 (4): 691-718.
45.
Yin, R.1991. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (8th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
