Are there any cases of behaviour of top management affecting the organization culture?
930574
Yes.  Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling put Enron out of business.  Their behavior not only affected Enron's employees but brought about even more scrutiny of large corporations by the SEC.\n\nMartha Stewart's conviction and jail term sent stock in her company way down, but due to her well-timed release and her activities since, the company has made even more money.
635288
You are probably rihgt but I think it the behaviour varies from amongst individuals. I think the best approach is to try to understand the persons background in terms of their socialisation. You may want to look at the individuals family, age, race , schools they attendend and their perception of what the job entails.
423196
You can be assertive and kind at the same time.  You do not have to sacrifice kindness to get things done.  And in fact, from the things I've read, it is my understanding that a nice boss gets more work out of his employees than a mean one.  He has to be firm, but he doesn't have to be mean.
136649
While there are times when this could get annoying. I want to say that there a re a good many times at work, when as Manager I have to make a decision or a statement without having all the facts. It is at these times when I have to sound convincing as all hell and get my team to give their all on an effort. It is vital that I act believable or we are doomed. Often in the business world, the worst thing you can do is nothing
948000
A - True\n\nI totally agree with the article! This is a major issue in the Hospitality Industry! Very difficult to retain staff for the establishment. Most of the time is due to poor management.\n\nThe staff, don't normally understand their importance in the big picture. Therefore they don't feel that the job or the responsibility they hold, no matter how irrelevant it may seems to them can and most of the time may make the biggest difference! If the staff don't feel they are just as special as their guests i.e. poor staff satisfaction, the result will be poor guest satisfaction!\n\nTherefore, proper training at all levels are imperative! Through training, the staff may shown the big picture, what the establishment is trying to achieve and there they fits in! Explaining and show them that without the staff, the establishment will not be able to function properly.\n\nIt is good to let the staff know the significance of their task. Everyone in the establishment is working as a TEAM and this team can only be profitable if everyone works together.\n\nSo, back to the problem. Management need to find and train new talents that is able to deliver this task, because it is so true that poor staff retention is often the result of poor management.\n\nI hope this helps you in some way..
756829
Probably because the standard for "high morale" is always changing.  Managers are often not skilled and trained by the corporation, thus they don't know how to provide a good working environment.  \n\nSetting clearly understood goals, addressing negative issues immediately and recognizing everyone's contributions are 3 easy steps.  \n\nIf your managers don't get it, neither does the corporation.....
694863
If I understand your question, it is about how managing ethical standard in technlogy shapes the work environment or culture.  Well, technolgoy has given us many modes of communication. If one works in an office where "anything goes", there would undoubtedly be pornography and other improper things on the computers, instant messages and e-mails to employees that are unwanted and considered harrassment, etc.  \n\nHigh ethical standards and rules that are enforced keep the work environment comfortable.  It ensures that sexual harrassment and things does not happen.\n\nSue
586659
Mismanagement can destroy a business and the cause of mismanagement is actually the workers under management that destroy the company.  \n\nWorkers are the heart of the company.  If they don't function properly, management is misguided and eventually the domino effect takes place.
79779
I think it happens a lot.  Companies want to reward people for a job well-done, and often the way they do that is by promoting people - and promotions can involve some management responsibility.  But just because people are good at technical tasks doesn't mean they're automatically good managers.  Instead, the companies have rewarded somebody who's good at one thing by asking them to do something completely different.  Doesn't really make a lot of sense, does it?
199633
I think the biggest impact stereotyping has in organizations, is that people don't live up to their potential when you label them and stick them in a box.  They see their role to specifically and don't try to reach above that to see what else they might be able to achieve.  It creates a sort of caste system, making it difficult for people to interact with others above or below them in the system.  It can cause disatisfaction and frustration when others don't recognize the abilities of one stereotyped, outside of the label that has already been given them!
1064759
As much as modern organizations would like to think things have changed, in reality the organizational pyramid is alive and well, with the workers on the bottome, supervisors in the middle, and managers on top.  While there is some cross functional work meaning managers doing tasks(remember the typing pool and "take a letter" days) the vast majority of decision making regarding the goals of the organization, future outlook, rules and regulations, are still done by upper management.  Organizatons tout the idea that "it's their people that make the difference" yet in reality, "their people" are no better than anyone else's people.  For all the hoopla about pushing decision making to the people closet to the work, for cross functional teaming, for empowering the worker, look around and see if that is really occurring where you work.  Modern Times still makes us laugh because not much has changed and the modern worker can relate to it, just as the worker 70 years ago did.
171754
If you define a "discipline" as a field where there are defined best practices, and expected levels of performance, then yes PM is a discipline.\n\nIf PM is not implemented well, or if the project manager is ineffective, then PM becomes a cumbersome overhead activity that provides little value to the organization.
1029066
I don't believe companies learn much from one incident.  If there is only one example, that will not lead to change.  In fact. this type of "lesson" if you want to call it that has always been with in the corporate world.  Only when the desire for material wealth or gain is replaced with the desire to enhance humanity and strive for a higher level of civilization, will the issue be resolved.
354408
I think it depends on what type of manager.  I'm in middle management and feel like I'm basically a glorified babysitter.  I have to make sure my staff is doing their jobs, getting results in a timely manner.  I have to reprimand them when they do wrong and give them kudos when they do good.
538706
yes in some cases.women do have an edge over men if their bosses are men as men tend to have a soft corner for women.but if their bosses are women then their wont be any chance for the women.
792944
No, not unless you already have it in which case it can make it worse...but it will not give you Tourettes.  Most likely your outbursts have been caused by the sheer idiocy of your managements ideas, statements, proposals etc.
95446
I don't have much experience with this, but I have been doing some reading in motivational psychology.\n\nYou might want to do a search on Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y management philosophies.  Basically, Theory X is a "control and command" type of management style and Theory Y is "growth" type of style.  You can also check out Maslow's "Hierarchy of Needs".  Basically, the idea here is that you need to fulfill people's basic needs first: food, security, love/friendship, ego before they can start to think about other things and grow.\n\nAlso check out the Jan 21st issue of "The Economist", which talks about new ways of organizing American businesses.