한국의 철강 산업은 우수한 품질 경쟁력으로 세계 철강 산업을 선도하고 있다. 그러나 최근 중국과 일본 등 경쟁국가에서 저렴한 가격과 우수한 품질로 우리 기업을 위협하고 있다. 포스코 ...

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T13394024
서울 : 경희대학교 대학원, 2014
2014
한국어
658.4 판사항(22)
서울
A Study on the Relationship between Organizational Culture and Organizational Efficiency : A Focus on Moderating Effects of Shared Leadership
vii, 118 p. : 삽화 ; 26 cm
지도교수: 장영철
경희대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다.
참고문헌: p. 95-110
0
상세조회0
다운로드한국의 철강 산업은 우수한 품질 경쟁력으로 세계 철강 산업을 선도하고 있다. 그러나 최근 중국과 일본 등 경쟁국가에서 저렴한 가격과 우수한 품질로 우리 기업을 위협하고 있다. 포스코 ...
한국의 철강 산업은 우수한 품질 경쟁력으로 세계 철강 산업을 선도하고 있다. 그러나 최근 중국과 일본 등 경쟁국가에서 저렴한 가격과 우수한 품질로 우리 기업을 위협하고 있다. 포스코 경영연구소의 내부 보고서(2013)에 의하면 앞으로 철강 산업의 침체는 가속화 될 것이라는 전망이다.
이에 따라 우리나라 철강 산업이 경쟁 국가보다 더 진보할 수 있는 경쟁력 확보가 절실한 상황이다. 이를 위해서는 불확실한 경영환경에서 복수의 대안을 설정하는 리얼 옵션(real option) 경영과 기술혁신을 통한 품질경쟁력을 갖추고, 원가를 절감할 수 있는 가격경쟁력을 동시에 확보하는 패러독스(paradox) 경영이 가능한 조직문화의 형성이 필요하다.
본 연구는 우리나라를 대표하는 철강 기업 P사를 대상으로 조직유효성을 도모할 수 있는 요인을 찾고 이를 기업에 접목시켜 지속적인 성장을 이어갈 수 있도록 시사점을 제시하고자 한다.
이를 위해 조직문화 유형은 합의문화, 개발문화, 위계문화, 합리문화로 구분하였고, 조직유효성은 조직몰입과 직무만족을 통하여 살펴보았다. 이러한 조직문화와 조직유효성 간의 관계와 함께 공유리더십의 조절효과에 대해서도 규명하고자 하였다.
연구를 위하여 P사 근로자들을 대상으로 하였고, P사의 핵심 사업지역인 서울, 포항, 광양, 인천지역으로 설정하여 총 441부의 설문지를 분석하였고, 설문문항의 신뢰도 검증을 위해 Cronbach's α계수를 이용하였으며, 타당도 검사를 위하여 요인분석을 실시하여 검증하였다.
본 연구의 가설 검증 분석을 위해 먼저 P사 구성원들이 인식하는 조직문화 유형에 대한 분석을 실시하였다.
P사 근로자들이 인식하는 조직문화 유형을 정리하면 다음과 같이 나타났다. 응답자 441명의 전체 구성원들이 인식하는 P사 조직문화 유형은 합의문화, 합리문화, 위계문화를 동일하게 인식하고 있다는 것이다. 지역별 조직문화 유형에 대한 인식에서 서울지역 근로자들은 위계문화와 합의문화, 합리문화를 거의 동일하게 인식하는 것으로 나타났고, 포항, 광양지역의 근로자들은 합리문화를 높게 인식하는 것으로 나타났다. 직위별 조직문화 유형 인식에 대한 조사결과 사원급, 대리급의 일반사원들은 조직문화를 합리문화라고 인식하는 것으로 나타났고, 반면에 과장급, 차장급, 부장급의 관리직들은 조직문화를 합의문화로 인식하는 것으로 나타났다.
따라서 P사는 전체적으로 조직내에 다양한 조직문화가 존재하는 것으로 이해할 수 있고 지역과 직위 등에 따라 특유의 조직문화를 형성하고 있는 것을 확인할 수 있다.
본 연구의 가설 검증을 위하여 실시한 분석결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다.
첫째, 조직문화 유형 가운데 합의문화와 합리문화가 철강 기업 구성원들의 조직몰입에 정(+)의 영향을 미치는 것을 확인하였다. 그러나 개발문화와 위계문화는 조직몰입에 유의한 영향을 미치지 않았다.
둘째, 조직문화 유형 인식가운데 직무만족에 정(+)의 영향을 미치는 조직문화 유형으로는 합의문화, 합리문화 그리고 개발문화로 나타났다. 조직몰입의 결과와는 다르게 개발문화가 철강 기업 구성원들의 직무만족에 정(+)의 영향을 미치는 것이 특징적이라 할 수 있겠다.
셋째, 공유리더십은 조직몰입과 직무만족에 정(+)의 영향을 미치는 것이 확인되었으나, 조직문화 유형 인식과 조직몰입 간의 관계에서 공유리더십은 이들 관계를 조절하지 않는 것으로 나타났고, 합의문화와 개발문화가 직무만족에 미치는 영향에 있어서 공유리더십은 이들 관계를 정(+)의 방향으로 조절하는 것으로 밝혀졌다. 즉 조직문화 유형 가운데 구성원들 간의 강한 응집력과 신뢰가 형성된 합의문화 및 창의력과 아이디어를 중요하게 생각하여 자율성을 강조하는 개발문화가 형성된 조직에서 공유리더십은 구성원들의 직무만족을 더욱 높여주는 조절역할을 하는 것으로 확인된 것이다. 이는 공유리더십의 특성이 업무 처리 과정이나 직무와 관련된 것에 미치는 영향력이 크다는 것으로 해석할 수 있다.
본 연구를 종합하면, 조직문화는 구성원들의 조직에 대한 태도 형성에 영향을 미치는 중요한 요인임을 확인하였다. 또한 구성원들의 자발적이고 능동적인 태도를 위해 구성원들 간에 상호 리더십을 발휘하는 공유리더십의 역할을 규명하였다. 이러한 결과를 통해 치열한 글로벌 경쟁체제하에 있는 철강 기업뿐만 아니라 제조업 전 산업에 걸쳐 본 연구가 기업의 성과 향상에 기여할 수 있는 또 하나의 지침이 되기를 기대한다.
다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)
Korea’s steel industry is world known for its superior quality and competitiveness. However, several competing nations such as China and Japan have threatened Korea's leading position in the steel industry with competing prices. According to POSCO R...
Korea’s steel industry is world known for its superior quality and competitiveness. However, several competing nations such as China and Japan have threatened Korea's leading position in the steel industry with competing prices. According to POSCO Research Institute’s (POSRI) internal report in 2013, the steel industry’s recession is expected to escalate.
Therefore, Korea is in urgent need of securing competitiveness that can advance Korea ahead of other competing countries. In other words, establishment of an organizational culture that allows real option management that can offer multiple decision alternatives is needed as well as paradox management that will secure both quality and price competitiveness through technology innovation.
This study was intended to identify factors that promote organizational efficiency at Korea’s world leading steel company ‘P’ and apply them to the company to enable continued growth. For this, the types of organizational culture were divided into consensus culture, development culture, hierarchical culture, and rational culture. Organizational efficiency was examined through organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Also, the moderating effects of shared leadership in regard to the relationship between such organizational culture types and organizational efficiency were examined.
The employees of ‘P’ company were chosen for this study, and this study was conducted through a survey of 411 employees from Seoul, Pohang, Gwangyang, and Inchon. Cronbach's alpha was used to verify the survey’s reliability, and factor analysis was performed to verify the survey’s validity.
First, in order to test the hypothesis of this study, ‘P’ company’s awareness of organizational culture types was analyzed. The organizational culture types according to the analysis resulted in the following: all 411 employees recognized the consensus culture, rational culture, and hierarchical culture as the same. According to the awareness of organizational culture types by region, employees from Seoul recognized consensus culture, rational culture, and hierarchical culture as almost the same, and employees from Pohang and Gwangyang recognized the rational culture the most. Also, according to the awareness of organizational culture by office positions, the study revealed that ordinary employees such as general staff and assistant managers were inclined to recognize organizational culture as rational culture. On the other hand, managers, deputy general managers, and general managers had a tendency to recognize their organizational culture as a consensus culture. Therefore, it can be said that various organizational cultures exist within the 'P' company depending on factors such as region or job position.
The analysis can be summarized as follows. First, out of all the organizational culture types, consensus culture and rational culture positively influence the organizational commitment. However, development culture and hierarchical culture do not have similar influence.
Second, consensus culture, rational culture, and development culture positively influence job satisfaction. One distinguishing difference is that development culture also positively influence job satisfaction, whereas it did not influence organizational commitment.
Third, shared leadership positively influence organizational commitment and job satisfaction, but it does not influence the relationship between organizational commitment and awareness of organizational culture types. Shared leadership also positively influence the relationship among consensus culture, development culture, and job satisfaction.
In other words, in an organization with a developed consensus culture with a highly developed sense of fellowship and trust among employees, as well as a development culture that values creativity and ideas, shared leadership is confirmed to have greater positive influence on organizational performance. This demonstrates the great impact shared leadership has over task performance processes or other work-related practices.
To summarize, the study reveals the moderating effects of shared leadership in promoting the employees' voluntary and active participation at work. Also, organizational culture is a highly important factor behind formation of employees' attitudes toward the company. These results should become a guideline for improvement of organizational performance of companies that are in global competition.
목차 (Table of Contents)
참고문헌 (Reference)
1. Paradox, Qu inn, Kimberly, , 1983
2. Organizations, March, James G, Blackwell Business, , 1993
3. 조직행동론, 이학종, 法文社, , 2004
4. Job Satisfaction, Meyer, Tett, , 1993
5. 행정학 사전, 이종연, 행정학사전, , 2009
6. Assessing personal, Stevens, H.M.Trice, Beyer, J.M., , 1978
7. 조직행동연구, 신유근, , 1998
8. Organization theory, Robbins, Stephen P., Prentice-Hall, Inc., , 1984
9. Communication networks, Shaw, , 1964
10. Psychological Bulletin, Zajac, Mathieu, , 1990
1. Paradox, Qu inn, Kimberly, , 1983
2. Organizations, March, James G, Blackwell Business, , 1993
3. 조직행동론, 이학종, 法文社, , 2004
4. Job Satisfaction, Meyer, Tett, , 1993
5. 행정학 사전, 이종연, 행정학사전, , 2009
6. Assessing personal, Stevens, H.M.Trice, Beyer, J.M., , 1978
7. 조직행동연구, 신유근, , 1998
8. Organization theory, Robbins, Stephen P., Prentice-Hall, Inc., , 1984
9. Communication networks, Shaw, , 1964
10. Psychological Bulletin, Zajac, Mathieu, , 1990
11. The Motivation to Work, Herzberg, F., TheMotivation to Work, , 1959
12. 조선일보(2013 11. 9), 김성수, , 2013
13. Leadership, In G. Lindzey, Gibb, "Leadership, , 1954
14. Organizational psychology, Schein, Edgar H, Prentice-Hall, Organizational psychology, , 1965
15. Managing corporate culture, Davis, Stanley M, Ballinger Pub. Co., Managing Corporate Culture, , 1984
16. Nonlinear Statistical Models, Norman.N.J, Hair, , 1998
17. Organizational Effectiveness, Steers, Organizational effectiveness, , 1977
18. OrganizationalBehavior,5thed, Streers, Organizational Behavior 5th ed, , 1994
19. 2040 중국철강산업전망, 김종민, , 2011
20. Macro organizational behavior, Miles, Robert H, Scott, Foresman and Company, Macro organizational behavior, , 1980
21. Industrial Psychology(2nd ed.), Gilmer,B.H., Industrial Psychology 2nd. ed, , 1966
22. Administrative sciencequarterly, Yuchtman, Seashore, , 1967
23. Industrial psychology (7th ed.), McCormick, E. J, , 1980
24. The Arts of Japanese Management, Athos, Pascal, The arts of japanesemanagement, , 1981
25. (세계화시대의)기업문화, 이한검, 형설, , 2000
26. Markets, Bureaucracies, and Clans, Ouichi, "Markets Bureaucracies, , 1980
27. Psychology of industrial behavior, Smith, Henry Clay, McGraw-Hill Kogakusha, , 1972
28. A contingencytheoryofsocialization, Feldman, A contingency theory of socialization, , 1976
29. On Studying Organizational Culture, Pettigrew, , 1979
30. The social construction of reality, Luckmann, Berger, , 1967
31. 현대조직론 : 이론과 설계, 최종태, , 1987
32. Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Meyer, N.J.Allen, , 1997
33. Three tiers for innovation research, Kanter, , 1988
34. Organizational culture and leadership, Schein, Edgar H, Jossey-Bass, Organizational culture and leadership, , 1997
35. Work Groups and Teams inOrganizations, Bell, Kozlowski, Work Groups and Teamsin Organizations, , 2003
36. The framing of organizational cultures, Ebers, , 1995
37. Putting the Service Profit Chain to Work, Heskett, Heskett, J. L., A.Schlesinger, Putting the Service-Profit Chain toWork, , 1994
38. Understanding YourOrganization Character, Harrison, Understanding your organization character, , 1972
39. Job satisfaction organizational commitment, Holt.K, , 1984
40. The effectiveness of research team: a view, Payne, , 1990
41. 공유리더십의 효과에 대한 연구, 차동욱, 방호진, 이정훈, , 2008
42. Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis, Gronn, , 2002
43. The measurement of organizational commitment, 홍후조, 백경선, Themeasurement of organizational commitment, , 1979
44. Bringing Corporate Culture to the Bottom Line, Denison, Bringing corporate culture to the bottomline, , 1984
45. Individuals and Organizations:TheCultureMatch, Wallach, Individuals and Organizations : The CultureMatch, , 1983
46. CentralProblems in the Management ofInnovation, Van de ven, Central problems in the management ofinnovation, , 1986
47. Communication patterns in task oriented groups, Bavelas, , 1960
48. The Characteristics of Effective Organizations, P.E.Mott, , 1972
49. The social psychology of organization(2nd ed.), Katz, Kahn, The Social Psychology ofOrganization(2nd ed.), , 1978
50. Toward a theory oforganizational socialization, Schein, Van Maanen, Toward a theory oforganizational socialization, , 1979
51. Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis, Smirich, Concepts of culture and organizational analysis, , 1983
52. Organizational Commitment Analysis of Antecedents, Luthans, Talor, D.Back, OrganizationalCommitment; Analysis of Antecedents, , 1987
53. Too much of a good thing or the more the merrier?, Neubert, Too much of a good thing or the more themerrier?, , 1999
54. Bass and Stodgill's handbook of leadership :theory, Bass, , 1990
55. Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness, Dension, Corporate culture and organizationaleffectiveness, , 1990
56. Breaking in : Socialization to work. In R. Dubin(Ed), Van Maanen, "Breaking in : Socialization to work, , 1976
57. Psychological and implied contracts in organizations, Rousseau, Psychological and Implied Contracts inOrganizations, , 1989
58. Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Commitment, Steers, Antecedents and outcomes of organizationalcommitment, , 1977
59. The shared leadership process indecision making teams, Bergman, , 2012
60. A social network perspective on humanresources management, Brass, , 1995
61. QuantitativeandQualitativeStudiesof OrganizationalCulture, Zammuto, Krakower, Quantitative and qualitativestudies of organizational culture, , 1991
62. The Nature and Causes Job Satisfaction In M,D, Dunnett(ed), Lock, "The Nature and Causes Job Satisfaction In M, , 1976
63. The Organizational Culture:Implication for Nursing Service, Stumpf, McDanial, The organizational culture :Implication for Nursing Service, , 1993
64. 조직문화와 직무만족의 관련성에 관한 연구, 이종두, 충북대학교 산업경영연구소, 산업과 경영제10권 1호. pp.321-363, , 1997
65. Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life, Dill, A.A.Kennedy, Corporate cultures : The ritesand rituals of corporate life, , 1982
66. Employeeorganization linkages: The psychology of commitment, Steers, Mowday, Employeeorganizationlinkages : The psychology of commitment, , 1982
67. A Three ComponentConceptualization Organizational Commitment, Meyer, Allen, , 1991
68. Shared leadership : reframing the hows and whys of leadership, Pearce, Craig L, Sage Publications, Shared Leadership :Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership, , 2003
69. Social Networks and the Performance of Individuals and Groups, Sparrowe, R.C.Liden, M.L.Kraimer, , 2001
70. Strategic planning openness - The role of top team demography, Bantel, Strategic Planning Openness : The Role ofTop Team Demography, , 1994
71. Empirical Investigation ofTwo-Factor Theory of Job Satisfaction, Smith, Hulin, , 1967
72. Implications for Corporate Culture: A Manager's Guide to Action, Sathe, Implications for corporate culture: A manager'sguide to action, , 1983
73. Identifications and Some conditions of OrganizationalInvolvement, Brown, Identifications and Some Conditions ofOrganizational Involvement, , 1969
74. In search of excellence: Lesson from America'sbest-run companies, Waterman, Peter, In Search of Excellence :Lesson From America's Best-Run Companies, , 1982
75. The active society : a theory of societal and political processes, Etzioni, Amitai, Collier-Macmillan, The active society : a theory of societal andpolitical processes, , 1968
76. 조직문화와 동기부여의 관계에 관한 탐색적 연구, 신철우, 淸州大學校 産業經營硏究所, "한국성인교육학회, , 2002
77. Buildinghighly developed teams: Focusing on shared leadershipprocess, Sivasubramanium, Avolio, Jung, , 1996
78. Organizational culture and performance : Proposing and testing a model, Heck, Marcoulides, , 1993
79. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage, Ghoshal,S., Nahapiet,J., "Social Capital IntellectualCapital, , 1998
80. 핵사곤 리더십이 종업원 인게이지먼트에 미치는 영향, 김진욱, 장영철, 지철규, 한국산학기술학회, , 2013
81. Behavior in Organizations, 8th et., UpperSaddle River, NJ : Prentice-Hall, Greenberg, "Behavior in Organizations, , 2009
82. The transformation oforganizational cultures : A competing value approach, McGrath, Qu inn, , 1985
83. Organizational Culture in the Public Sector: Evidence from Six Organizations, L.Bradly, Parker, Organizational culture in the publicsector : evidence from six organizations, , 2000
84. Charisma and social structure - thesuccessor failure of charismatic leadership, Glassman, , 1986
85. Collective enactment of leadership roles and team effectiveness: A field study, Vance, Day, Hiller, Collective enactmentof Leadership Roles and Team Effectiveness: A Field Study, , 2006
86. Socialization tactics self-efficacy, andnewcomer's adjustment to organizations, Jones, "Socialization tactics self-efficacy, , 1986
87. 한국기업의 경영조직·경영전략·인사관리에 대한 현상분석, 신유근, , 1992
88. 조직문화와 기업전략이 조직유효성에 미친 영향에 대한연구, 김원석, , 1991
89. The relationship of corporate culture to industrysector and corporate performance, Gordon, , 1985
90. A Path AnalysisModeloftheAntecedents and Consequences of Organizational Commitment, Decotis, A path analysis model ofthe antecedents and consequences of organizationalcommitment, , 1987
91. Effects of Goal Setting and Supervision onWorker Behavior in an Industrial Situation, Ronan, , 1973
92. 조직문화, 리더십, 조직효과성의 관계 : 부산광역시를 대상으로, 김호정, 한국행정학회, "조직문화, , 2003
93. Corporations, Culture, and Commitment: Motivation and Social Control in Organizations, O'Reilly, Corporations culture and commitment :Motivation and social control in organizations, , 1989
94. Creating a Culture of Success: Fine-tuning the Heart and Soul of your Organizational;, Dygert, Jacobs, , 2004
95. Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance, Marrone, Carson, Tesluk, , 2007
96. 프로젝트 팀 내 다양성, 공유리더십, 성과 간의관계에 대한 연구, 양동민, 심덕섭, "프로젝트 팀 내 다양성, , 2009
97. Transaction Costs, Property Rights, andOrganizational Culture: An Exchange Perspective, Jones, Transaction costs property rights andorganizational culture: An exchange perspective, , 1983
99. Building organizational commitment : the socialization of managers in workorganizations, Buhanan.B, Building organizational commitment : Thesocialization of managers in work organizations, , 1974
100. When two(ormore) heads are better than one: The promise and pitfallsof shared leadership, Lawler.E.E, Galbraith, O'Toole, , 2002
101. Beyond Rational Management Mastering theParadoxes & Compeying Demands of High Performance, Qu inn, , 1988
102. Using an Ability-based Measure ofEmotional Intelligence to Predict Individual Performance, Day, Carroll, , 2004
103. 중소기업 근로자의 조직학습과 조직문화가 조직몰입에 미치는 영향, 박호득, 안영식, 서희정, , 2012
104. 2014년 국내외 경제·철강시장 전망 - 저수익·저성장시대 극복의 원년, 포스코경영연구소, , 2013
105. Organizational life cycle and shifting criteria of effectiveness: Some preliminary evidence, Qu inn, Quinn, R. E., Cameron, Organizational life cycle andshifting criteria of effectiveness: Some preliminary evidence, , 1983
106. Efficient cultures: Exploring therelationship between culture and organizational performance, Willkins, , 1983
107. Contributions research can make inunderstanding organizational effectiveness in S. L. Spray.ed, Campbell, , 1976
108. 리더십과 조직문화가 조직유효성에 미치는 영향: 국립대학을 대상으로, 김종진, 리더십과 조직문화가 조직유효성에 미치는 영향 : 국립대학을 대상으로, , 2005
109. 조직문화 유형과 리더십 유형이 조직유효성에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구, 구연원, 용인대학교 대학원, 용인대학교 박사학위논문, , 2005
110. Forms of value system: A focus on organizationaleffectiveness and culture change and maintenance, Wiener, , 1988
111. The new silver bullets of leadership: Theimportance of self-and shared leadership in knowledge work, Manz, Pearce, The new silver bullets ofleadership : The Importance of self and shared leadershipin knowledge work, , 2005
112. Newcomers as lay ethnographers ;Acculturation during organizational socialization in B.Schneider(ed), Louis, , 1983
113. People and organizational culture : A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit, Caldwell, O??Reilly Ⅲ, Chatman, , 1991
114. 조직구성원의 심리적 계약위반 지각이 조직유효성에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구, 이정일, , 2002
115. 지식근로자의 직무특성이 조직몰입도에 미치는영향 - 공유리더십을 조절 변수로, 지철규, 장영철, 한국산학기술학회, , 2012
116. Perceptions ofOrganizational Culture, Leadership Effectiveness andPersonal Effectiveness Across Six Countries, Kwantes, Boglarsky, "Perceptions ofOrganizational Culture, , 2007
117. 공유리더십이 종업원 직무태도에 미치는 영향 : 자기효능감의 조절효과를 중심으로, 김진욱, 경희대학교 대학원, , 2013
118. 지식근로자의 직무특성이 조직몰입도에 미치는 영향:공유리더십의역할을 중심으로, 지철규, 경희대학교 대학원, , 2013
119. Regulatory Focus as a Mediator of theInfluence of Initiating Structure and Servant Leadership onEmployee Behavior, Roberts, , 2008
120. The relative influence ofvertical vs shared leadership on the longitudinaleeffectiveness of change management teams, Pearce, Sims.H.P, , 2002
121. 조직문화가 변혁적 리더십과 조직효과성에 미치는 영향 : 성남시 행정기관을 중심으로, 이광수, 경원대학교 일반대학원, , 2012
122. Inside theorganization: culture structure, systems of internalcommunication, gender, and diversity. In Grunig, L.(Ed.), Dozier, Grungig, Grung, "Inside theorganization: culture structure, , 2002
123. Leadership, social work and virtual teams: The relative influence of vertical vs. shared leadership in the nonprofit sector, Alavi, Pearce, Yoo, Leadership social workand virtual teams: The relative influence of vertical vs.shared leadership in the nonprofit sector, , 2004
124. Affective, continuance and normative commitment to organization: a meta analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences, Meyer, Topolnytsky, "Affective, , 2002
125. Studying Culture as anIntegral Aggregate Variable : Organizational Culture andInnovation in a Group of Nonprofit Organizations, Dressler, Jaskyte, , 2004
127. The importance of vertical and shared leadership within new venture top management teams: Implications for the performance of startups, Ensley, Pearce, Hmieleski, Theimportance of vertical and shared leadership within newventure top management teams: Implications for theperformance of startups, , 2006
128. The psychometric of the competing values culture instrument and an analysis of the impact of organizational culture on quality of life, Qu inn, Spreizer, , 1991
129. Organizational Commitment andPsychological Attachment : The Effect of Compliance, Identification, andInternalization on Prosocial Behavior, J.Chatman, O'Reilly, "Organizational commitment andpsychological attachment : The effect of compliance, , 1986
130. 경찰의 조직문화와 리더십이 조직유효성에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구 : 사회적 자본의 매개효과를 중심으로, 이병동, 이병동, 고려대학교 대학원, , 2013