Organizational Commitment in the Global Environment
In the age of increased globalization (refer to appendix 1.a, pg 12), and as many corporations are becoming international in scope and scale, organizations are faced with making radical restructuring choices in order to remain competitive and flexible in today’s environment. The impact of globalization has altered the manner in which businesses function and conduct their operations, and it has influenced virtually every area of business practice.
Technological advancements such as high speed information transfer and videoconferencing have brought the world within reach while redefining the traditional views of a workplace by allowing employees to perform duties from home, while on an international assignment or on a holiday.
Technology has also enabled consumers from all over the globe to access products and services and in doing so, has stimulated the market into a state of hyper-competition (refer to appendix 1.b, pg 12), where producers from different international locations all participate in the same global market. This state of competition has forced firms to adapt more flexible structures, to reorganize their workforce, to seek out cost efficiencies in other countries and to utilize their workforce diversity to an advantage in an effort to stay globally competitive.
As Maznevski, Stager & Amann (2007, pg 2) have stated;
‘geographic expansion offers the vast potential benefits of a much larger market area, spread risks, scope and scale, and location based cost advantages and exposure to a variety of new products and process ideas’.
The diversification of the product market has changed the nature of employment through operational restructuring, increased efficiency and flexibility, changes in structural and job design and the use of cross functional teams. Traditional hierarchies are disappearing, being replaced by more flexible structures that promote efficiency and communication, resulting in new types of employment relationships.
This paper
Technological advancements such as high speed information transfer and videoconferencing have brought the world within reach while redefining the traditional views of a workplace by allowing employees to perform duties from home, while on an international assignment or on a holiday.
Technology has also enabled consumers from all over the globe to access products and services and in doing so, has stimulated the market into a state of hyper-competition (refer to appendix 1.b, pg 12), where producers from different international locations all participate in the same global market. This state of competition has forced firms to adapt more flexible structures, to reorganize their workforce, to seek out cost efficiencies in other countries and to utilize their workforce diversity to an advantage in an effort to stay globally competitive.
As Maznevski, Stager & Amann (2007, pg 2) have stated;
‘geographic expansion offers the vast potential benefits of a much larger market area, spread risks, scope and scale, and location based cost advantages and exposure to a variety of new products and process ideas’.
The diversification of the product market has changed the nature of employment through operational restructuring, increased efficiency and flexibility, changes in structural and job design and the use of cross functional teams. Traditional hierarchies are disappearing, being replaced by more flexible structures that promote efficiency and communication, resulting in new types of employment relationships.
This paper
References: Brown, B. L. (2003). “Effects of Globalization on Careers; Myths and Realities”. Center of Education and Training for Employment Erickson, R. A. (2007). “Here Today but what about Tomorrow? Reducing Attrition of Downsizing Survivors by Increasing their Organizational Commitment” Forst, J. K. (1996). “Job Insecurity: The Consequence of Organizational Downsizing and the Mediating Effects of Role Ambiguity and Role Overload” Gelade, G. A., Dobson, P., Gilbert, P. (September 2006). “National Differences in Organizational Commitment: Effect of Economy, Product of Personality or Consequence of Culture?” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology Hays, S. W., Plagens, G. K. (2002). “Human Resource Management Best Practices and Globalization; the University of Common Sense” Hopkins, S. M., Weathington, B. K. (2006). “The Relationship between Justice Perceptions, Trust, and Employee Attitudes in a Downsized Organization” Jarvis, A., Mills, S., Desai A., Subramony, M., Sridhar, B. S. (2006). “Employee Reactions to Outsourcing; Development of the Attitudes Towards Outsourcing (ATO) Scale” Junak, J. A. (2007). “Effects of Perceived Organizational Support on Turnover Intention through Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment” Maznevski M., Steger, U., Amann W. (Feb 2007). “Managing Complexity in Global Organizations; Perspectives for Managers” Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., Topolnytsky, L. (1998). “Commitment in a Changing World at Work”. Canadian Psychology Mir, A., Mir, R., Mosca, J. B. (2002). “The New Age Employee: An Exploration of Changing Employee-Organization Relations” Okabe, Y. (September 2005). “Organizational Commitment in the Restructuring Age: a Comparison of British and Japanese Managers in Manufacturing Industries” Pare, G., Tremblay, M., Lalonde, P. (2001). “The Role of Organizational Commitment and Citizenship Behaviors in Understanding Relations between Human Resources Practices and Turnover Intentions of IT Personnel” Sappey, R., Burgess, J., Lyons, M., Buultjens, J. (2006). Industrial Relations in Australia; Work and Workplaces Ugboro, I. O. (2006). “Organizational Commitment, Job Redesign, Employee Empowerment and Intent to Quit Among Survivors of Restructuring and Downsizing” Wheelen, T. L, Hunger, D. J. (2008). Strategic Management and Business Policy. 11th edition. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall Wood, J., Zeffane, R., Fromholtz, M., Fitzgerald, A. (2006). Organizational Concepts and Applications Wright, P. M., Kehoe, R. R. (2007). “Human Resource Practices and Organizational Commitment; a Deeper Examination”