An important contribution of this research is the testing in international envi
ronments of communication and culture models previously developed within
U.S.A. high-technology organizations. Specifically, this research demonstrates
that relationships among organizational culture themes, employee values,
organizational communication activities, and perceptions of a variety of organi
zational outcomes are similar but not identical for U.S.A. and European high-
technology organizations. Secondly, the research extends previous work by
identifying cultural dimensions that are related to a variety of communication
processes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Agar, M. (1979). Themes revisited: Some problems in cognitive anthropology . Discourse Processes, 2, 11-31.
2.
Cheney, G. (1983). On the various and changing meanings of organizational membership: A field study of organizational identification. Communication Monographs, 50, 342-362.
3.
Cushman, D., King, S., & Smith, T. (1988). The rules perspective on organizational communication research. In G. M. Goldhaber & G. A. Barnett (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication (pp. 55-94). Norwood, NJ: Ablex .
4.
Deetz, S.A. (1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization . Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
5.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. HawthorneNY: Aldine.
6.
Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
7.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind . London: McGraw-Hill.
8.
Morey, N.C., & Luthans, F. (1985). Refining the displacement of culture and the use of scenes and themes in organizational studies. Academy of Management Review, 10, 219-229.
9.
Morley, D.D., & Shockley-Zalabak, P. (1991). Setting the rules: An examination of the influence of organization founders' values. Management Communication Quarterly, 4, 422-449.
10.
Poole, M.S., & McPhee, R.D. (1983). A structural analysis of organizational climate . In L. Putnam & M. Pacanowsky (Eds.), Communication and organizations: An interpretive approach (pp. 195-219). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
11.
Poole, M.S., Seibold, D.R., & McPhee, R.D. (1985). Group decision-making as a structurational process . Quarterly Journal of Speech, 71, 74-102.
12.
Schall, M.S. (1983). A communication-rules approach to organizational culture. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 557-581.
13.
Schein, E.H. (1984). Coming to a new awareness of organizational culture . Sloan Management Review, 25, 3-16.
14.
Shockley-Zalabak, P., & Morley, D.D. (1989). Adhering to organizational culture: What does it mean, why does it matter? Group & Organization Studies , 14, 483-500.
15.
Shockley-Zalabak, P., & Cesaria, R. (1992). Regole di comunicazione. Sviluppo & Organizzazione,134, 93-109.
16.
Shockley-Zalabak, P., & Morley, D.D. (1994). Creating a culture: A longitudinal examination of the influence of management and employee values on communication rule stability and emergence. Human Communication Research, 20, 334-355.
17.
Spradley, J.P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
