Individualist and collectivist behaviour in public and business organisations

• Autorzy: Jendza Dorota

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.29119/1641-3466.2023.169.22

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Purpose: to show differences between public and business organisations within the scope of individualist and collectivist behaviour. Design/Methodology/Approach: the study was carried out among employees of public and business organisations performing various organisational roles. 497 persons participated in the study. It comprised two stages. Stage I was carried out with the use of a structured interview, while in stage II, questionnaire surveys were used. To put the content in order, the semantic field analysis was used, which allowed for separating the main research categories. Individualist and collectivist behaviour is one of many identified organisational types of behaviour. Findings: differences exist between members of public and business organisations as far as behaviour is concerned. In business, individualist behaviour is predominant, while in public organisations – collectivist behaviour. The structure of collectivism is complex and comprises of different types of behavior, i.e.: concordance, conformism and cooperation. In public organisations, concordance is predominant, while in business it is on a lower level. In both types of organisations, cooperation-type behaviour is at a low level. Research Limitations/Implications: inability to fully objectify the research results obtained. Practical Implications: knowledge about the behaviour manifested by the majority of the participants and about the marginalised behaviour allows for a better understanding of the phenomena that take place and in effect conscious management and support for the development of those that an organisation cares about. The structure of behaviour is a carrier of information about motifs guiding the actions of individuals. Separating behaviour that is dominant provides information about the motifs of such behaviour and what affects the behaviour of people – whether it is legitimisation of the value of the organisation and the established standards, or the power of the group. Accurate identification of orientation offers possibilities for predicting behaviour and for more efficient designing and carrying out organisational changes. The third issue is the possibility of using such knowledge during coordination. An organization may influence the behaviour and the engagement of the individual, along with the course and 2 effort put in the performance of processes related to the management of human resources in the 3 organisation. 4 Keywords: individualism, collectivism, public organisation, business organisation where collectivist behaviour is dominant requires different tools for coordination than an organisation where individualist behaviour is dominant. Originality/Value: to supplement theoretical constructs with examples of organisational behaviour manifested in Polish organisations and to show collectivism as a complex dimension as part of which various activities may be performed. Dominance of a specific behaviour shapes the quality of functioning of an individual in an organisation. Whether an individual consciously adopts and accepts organisational norms or acts in line with them under the impact of a group may influence the behaviour and the engagement of the individual, along with the course and effort put in the performance of processes related to the management of human resources in the organisation.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

individualism; collectivism; public organisation; business organization

PL

indywidualizm; kolektywizm; organizacja publiczna; organizacja biznesowa

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej
• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: z. 169
• Strony: 383--400
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 41 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Jendza Dorota

• University of Gdansk, Management Faculty

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2493-1841

Bibliografia

• 1. Abbas, J.A., Mirahmad, A. (2002). The Iranian Manager: Work Values and Orientations. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 133-143.
• 2. Adamska, K., Retowski, S., Konarski, R. (2005). KIRH – kwestionariusz do badania kolektywizmu i indywidualizmu równościowego i hierarchicznego. Czasopismo psychologiczne, Tom 11, nr 2, pp. 180-181.
• 3. Arieli, S., Sagiv, L. (2018). Culture and Problem-Solving: Congruency Between the Cultural Mindset of Individualism Versus Collectivism and Problem Type. Journal of Experimental Psychology, No. 147, pp. 792-810.
• 4. Bobina, M., Sabotinova, D. (2017). Bulgarian management in a cross-cultural space. Journal of East European Management Studies, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 105-127.
• 5. Boski, P. (2010). Kulturowe ramy zachowań społecznych. Warszawa: PWN.
• 6. Brewer, M.B., Chen, Y.R. (2007). Where (who) are collectives in collectivism? Toward conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism. Psychological Review, Vol. 114, pp. 133-151, doi.org/10.1037/ 0033-295X.114.1.133.
• 7. Brown, R. (2006). Procesy grupowe. Dynamika wewnątrzgrupowa i międzygrupowa. Gdańsk, p. 64.
• 8. Chatman, J.A., O’Reillyb, Ch.A. (2016). Paradigm lost: Reinvigorating the study of organizational culture. Research in Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 36, pp. 199-224.
• 9. Chen, F.F., West, S.G. (2008). Measuring individualism and collectivism: The importance of considering differential components, reference groups, and measurement invariance. Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 42, pp. 259-294, doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.05.006.
• 10. Cox, T.H., Lobel, S.A., McLeod, P.L. (1991). Effects of Ethnic Group Cultural Differences on Cooperative and Competitive Behavior on a Group Task. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 827-847.
• 11. Dendura, K. (2018). Osobliwości procesów społecznych. In: M. Kunasz (ed.), Orientacja procesowa w zastosowaniach (pp. 21-38). Szczecin.
• 12. Fiske, A.P. (2002). Using individualism and collectivism to compare cultures: A critique of the validity and measurement of the constructs. Comment on Oyserman et al. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 128, pp. 78-88, doi .org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.78.
• 13. Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 9, pp. 42-43, doi .org/10.1016/0090-2616(80)90013-3.
• 14. Hofstede, G. (2000). Kultury i organizacje. Warszawa: PWE.
• 15. Hwang, A., Francesco, A.M., Kessler, E. (2003). The relationship between individualism – collectivism, face, and feedback and learning processes in Hong Kong, Singapore, and The United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, No. 34, 72-92.
• 16. Krot, K., Lewicka, D. (2014). Zarządzanie zaufaniem – pomiędzy stabilnością a zmiennością organizacyjną. In: P. Wachowiak, S. Winch (eds.), Granice w zarządzaniu kapitałem ludzkim (p. 263). Warszawa.
• 17. Kuo, B.C.H. (2013). Collectivism and coping: Current theories, evidence, and measurements of collective coping. International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 48, pp. 374-388, doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2011.640681.
• 18. Lam, S.S., Hui, C., Law, K.S. (1999). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Comparing Perspectives of Supervisors and Subordinates Across Four International Samples. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 594-601.
• 19. Leirman, W., Vandemeulebroecke, L. (1984). Vormingswerk en vormingswetenschap. Een agologisch handboek. Deel 2. Leuven, p. 95.
• 20. Marcus, J., Le, H. (2013). Interactive effects of levels of individualism– collectivism on cooperation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 34, p. 813-834,doi.org/10.1002/job.1875.
• 21. Markus, H.R., Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, No. 98, 224-253.
• 22. Moorman, R.H., Blakely, G.L. (1995). Individualism-collectivism as an individual difference predictor of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, No. 16, 127-142.
• 23. Nawrat, D. (2014). Wpływ klimatu organizacyjnego na psychologiczne koszty pracy. Problemy Profesjologii, no. 2, pp. 145-159.
• 24. Organ, D.W., Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. (2006). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
• 25. Oyserman, D., Coon, H.M., Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and metaanalyses. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 128, pp. 3-72, doi.org/10.1037/0033- 2909.128.1.3.
• 26. Oyserman, D., Lee, S.W.S. (2008). Does Culture Influence What and How We Think? Effects of Priming Individualism and Collectivism. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 134, No. 2, 311-342.
• 27. Reykowski, J. (1992). Kolektywizm i indywidualizm jako kategorie opisu zmian społecznych i mentalności. Przegląd Psychologiczny, No. 35, 147-170.
• 28. Robert, C., Wasti, S.A. (2002). Organizational Individualism and Collectivism: Theoretical Development and an Empirical Test of a Measure. Journal of Management, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 544-566.
• 29. Schwartz, S.H. (1990). Individualism– collectivism: Critique and proposed refinements. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 21, pp. 139-157, doi.org/10.1177/0022022190212001.
• 30. Shulruf, B., Hattie, J., Dixon, R. (2007). Development of a new measurement tool for individualism and collectivism. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 25, pp. 385-401, doi.org/10.1177/0734282906298992.
• 31. Singelis, T.M., Bond, M.H., Sharkey, W.F., Lai, C.S. (1999). Unpackaging culture’s influence on self-esteem and embarassability. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, No. 30, 315-341.
• 32. Sîrbu, M., Roșca, D., Puiu, C. (2017). The impact of the cultural dimension “individualism/collectivism” on managerial practices in organizations in the north east region. Revista Tinerilor Economiști, 29, pp. 52-61.
• 33. Taejun, Ch., Faerman, S.R. (2010). An Integrative Model of Empowerment and Individuals' In-Role and Extra-Role Performance in the Korean Public Sector: Moderating Effects of Organizational Individualism and Collectivism. International Public Management Journal, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 130-154.
• 34. Taras, V., Sarala, R., Muchinsky, P., Kemmelmeier, M., Singelis, T.M., Avsec, A., Sinclair, H.C. (2014). Opposite ends of the same stick? Multi-method test of the dimensionality of individualism and collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 45, pp. 213-245, doi.org/10 .1177/0022022113509132.
• 35. Triandis, H.C. (1995). New directions in social psychology. Individualism & collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• 36. Triandis, H.C. (2001). Individualism-collectivism and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, No. 69, 907-924.
• 37. Triandis, H.C. (1989). The Self and Social Behavior in Differing Cultural Contexts. Psychological Review, No. 96, 506-520.
• 38. Triguero-Sánchez, R., Peña-Vinces, J. MatosFerreira, J. (2022). The effect of collectivism 28 based organisational culture on employee commitment in public organisations. Socio 29 Economic Planning Sciences, Vol. 83.
• 39. Wagner, J.A. (1995). Studies of individualism-collectivism: Effects on cooperation in groups. The Academy of Management Journal, No. 38, 152-172.
• 40. Wong, Y.J., Wang, S.Y., Klann, E.M. (2018). The Emperor With No Clothes: A Critique of Collectivism and Individualism. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 6, 251-260.
• 41. Yip, J.A., Levine, E.E., Brooks, A.W., Schweitzer, E. (2020). Worry at work: How organizational culture promotes anxiety. Research in Organizational Behaviour, vol. 40, pp. 251-260

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2024).