Page 165 - Crossing Cultural Boundaries - Cees den Teuling
P. 165

“More than ever, today’s managers must see themselves as value creators whose primary responsibility is to turn the resources they manage into measurable results that matter to the people, organisation, and societies they serve”.
Henry Mintzberg
The effects of KT on SVC, Consultant’s results on SVC in financial and organisational terms, the effect in longer term on established “Comparative Advantages” by SVC.
5.1 The effect of Organisational Culture and organisational environment on the knowledge transfer process
Based on the literature review it was argued that several factors, particularly NC in general, organisational environment, management style, organisational learning and absorptive capacity affected the KT process in the Russian organisations. Several types of the organisational environment, i.e. stable, progressive, supportive, disruptive, laisser-faire and chaotic, were studied as the most possible for having an influence on the KT process.
To check whether certain characteristics of the cultural environment of the organisation have statistically significant effect on the acceptance and readiness of implementation for new ideas and innovations one-way between group ANOVA was conducted. The results indicated that “progressive”, “supportive” and “stable” organisational environments were important determining factors with respect to acceptance and readiness of implementation for new ideas and innovations. Namely, positive changes in progressive organisational environment change positively the condition of being totally open for new ideas and innovation from outside sources and constant implementation of new ideas and innovations developed internally (p =.02). The same applies for supportive (p =.012) organisational environment (b-coefficients for progressive and stable organisational environments are equal to -.305 which suggests negative relationship between variables). As for stable organisational environment, it impacts the total acceptance and readiness of implementation for new ideas and innovations in statistically significant (p = .038), in a positive way (b = .222). ANOVA F-ratio for the model is much higher than the significant level (4.452), which means that the variances are not likely to be incidental and the model itself is good enough.
Chapter 5: Results: Knowledge Transfer and Sustainable Value Creation

   163   164   165   166   167