The inferences stated in the context of organizational management research activities are inclined towards understanding the diversity and complexity perceived in organizational culture and climate. While there have been substantial debates regarding the definition of culture and climate in an organization, it is imperative to consider specific insights related to the impact of organizational culture and climate on the effective management of change processes within an organization such as talent recognition and management.
The following report draws conclusions based on the supposition that the differences in organizational culture and organizational climate are based on the disparities in interpretation rather than any subjective differences in the phenomena themselves. The report would assume the case of change management in the context of the existing scenario in international hospitality management. The primary aspects which have to be addressed in the report include a lucid detailing of cultural dynamics and operational setbacks encountered in the management of organizational and occupational commitment within the professional scenario alongside addressing the need for recognition of talent.
The quality of a product is subject to evaluation and regular inspection which enables the management to opt for reasonable actions to address scenarios where the precedent standards are not met appropriately. On the contrary, organizations in the service industry such as tourism and hospitality are subject to the requirements of employees to act as the interface between organization and customer thereby implying their credible responsibilities for improving the quality of service delivered in the organizations. The measures for improving the criterion of staff selection and training could be considered as considerable insights into the improvement of social interaction of employees with customers. However, the impact of the psychosocial environment within the workplace has been identified as a profound influence on the behavior of employees. The understanding of the psychosocial environment has been addressed in research study literature from two noticeable paradigms that include organizational culture and organizational climate. Denison (1996, p.645) distinguishes organization climate and organizational culture as “differences in interpretation rather than differences in the phenomenon” (Denison, 1996). The proliferation of organizational culture was realized on the grounds of the involvement of anthropology and sociology which was dependent on the illustration of specific unique aspects of an organization alongside the development of the history of the organization. The history of the organization’s evolution could be marked by the specific elements of the cultural web of an organization that comprises references to myths, stories, symbols, and rituals within the organization. The references to the field theory presented by Kurt Lewin formed the basis of the concept of organizational climate which is based on the conceptualization of the psychological field of an individual alongside reflecting on the operational aspects of the psychological climate of an individual (Lewin, 2013). The insights from the generalized organizational climate could help present notable aspects related to the psycho-social environment in a workplace and could also be used to describe the unique aspects related to particular domains within the psychosocial environment that leads to the identification of service climate. The significance of employee behavior and the role of employees in serving the interface between the organization and customer within the hospitality industry could be assumed as a functional rationale for defining potential utility measures for drawing the commitment of employees towards occupation as well as organization in the context of talent recognition (Hofstede, 1993). The necessity for talent recognition in a complicated and diverse arena of competitive international hospitality management could be realized only through the references to the distinct interplays between organizational culture, national culture, effective change management, leadership issues, and the implications of trust within the international hospitality management landscape. The anticipation of differences between organizational culture and organizational climate could facilitate credible insights into the realization of opportunities for improving the occupational and organizational commitment of employees.
As per Hofstede, (1993) research on organizational culture is reflective of large-scale emphasis on the evolution of social systems over time while that of organizational climate is dependent on the impact of organizational systems and relevant changes on the individuals and groups within organizations (Hofstede, 1993). The research literature about organizational culture is associated with a comprehensive interpretation of the underlying assumptions, insider’s perspective regarding an organization, and the implications of individual meaning. On the other hand, the observations identified in research on organizational climate are reflective of emphasis on the perception of organizational members regarding the observable practices and procedures followed by categorization of the services on the grounds of their outcomes identified from analytic perspectives. The increasing emphasis on organizational culture as a subject of the main focus in business management invoked notable inferences regarding the formation of organizational climates and the sources for deriving organizational climates. The research on organizational climate is characterized by profound references to the consistent process of ‘attraction-selection-retention’ which reflects on the dynamics of the formation of organizational climate through the interplay between socialization processes and membership changes (Denison, 1996). The formation of organizational climate has also been dictated as an outcome of the social construction approach in which climate is perceived as an extension of the basic value systems evident in an organization.
The differences between organizational culture and climate are based on the description of notable perspectives identified in the literature about the individual elements (Denison, 1996). However, a prominent dilemma faced by organizational management in such cases is related to the consideration of organizational culture and climate as two distinct phenomena while the certain influence of the perspectives could be identified in this outcome. Therefore, the organizational culture and climate could be considered interrelated phenomena that are viewed from different perspectives.
The perspectives assumed for the definition of the individual elements could be considered as the investigation of the internal psychosocial environment of the organization and the interplay between the environment and the individual meaning perceived by the employees and their capabilities for organizational adaptation. Therefore, the individual perspectives reflect the potential for the creation of a shared social context that progresses over time as organizations are continuously facing the implications of individual meaning, social integration, and adaptation.
The understanding of the similarities between organizational culture and climate could be ascertained from the comparison of the dimple definitions of each term (Tichy, 1983). The definition of culture is indicated as the set of basic assumptions formed by employees of the organization while addressing the concerns of external adaptation and integration within the internal contexts that are considered to be effective in addressing the specific scenarios thereby enabling the training of new members for perceiving, thinking and resolving similar problems. The definition of organizational climate refers to the capability of an organization’s environment to influence the behavior of employees and the experience of the workforce in the organization The organizational climate can be described on the grounds of specific attributes within the internal environment of the organization. Therefore organizational climate and organizational culture can be assumed as interrelated entities in the case of service industry organizations and it is imperative to observe the role of employees from distinct perspectives in each. For example, the organizational culture involves the role of employees in the creation of culture while in the case of organizational climate employee perception is taken into account.
The impact of the dependence between organizational culture and climate on the management of international hospitality contexts and related issues such as talent recognition in a competitive environment could be illustrated through the identification of the aspects of diversity, implications of national culture on roles of employees, sociological paradigms involved in a business context, traits of leadership and trust in the contemporary business environment.
It is necessary to apprehend the conceptualization of the organizational commitment to improving the secondary research perspective concerning the objectives of this report. The three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment could help understand the implications of diversity in the context of the distinctions observed between behavioral commitment and attitudinal commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991).
The three major components that have been associated with organizational commitment reflect the possibilities of the profound impact of aspects such as need, aspiration, and obligation for maintaining the commitment of an employee to the organization. The individual components are responsible for inducing distinct behavioral patterns such as the aspiration of an individual employee leads to affective commitment, the necessities of an individual leading to continuance commitment as well as the impact of obligations of an employee to the organization leading to the development of normative commitment.
The major share of the research study literature about organizational commitment reflects the explicit demarcations between behavioral and attitudinal perspectives for organizational commitment. As per Mowday, Steers & Porter (1979), attitudinal commitment is driven by the aspirations of individual employees and is dependent on the approaches followed by an employee for anticipating their relationship with the organization (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979). This nature of commitment is based on the perception of employees regarding the extent to which the personal goals and values of the employee are aligned with that of the organization. However, behavioral commitment is reflective of the process through which individuals are mandatorily associated with a specific organization and the measures implemented by them to address the problems encountered in the professional environment. Another profound highlight that can be perceived from the research study literature on attitudinal and behavioral perspectives for organizational commitment could be identified in the form of the interrelationship between two aspects.
The attitudinal approach could be reflective of behavioral consequenofbout the commitment that can influence the stability and changes in commitment. On the other hand, the behavioral approach leads to outcomes in terms of attitude changes that could impact the expectancy of such behavior in the future (Calori, Baden-Fuller & Hunt, 2000). The primary advantage that could be derived from a reflection on literature and secondary research sources regarding organizational commitment is identified in the form of the antecedents for organizational commitment.
The antecedents of affective commitment are identified in the form of work experience, job-related characteristics, and personal and structural characteristics. Continuance commitment is based on the antecedents that recognize the costs associated with departure from the organization that can be identified in the form of investments, available alternatives, or other side bets. The recognition of antecedents for normative commitment could be based on the assumptions regarding the theoretical nature of research regarding the same. However, the genetic factors that have been associated as antecedents with normative commitment include references towards normative pressures such as organizational and cultural socialization as well as investments of the organization for inducing imbalance in the employee-organization relationship thereby leading to the improvement of organizational commitment. Provision of rewards in advance and investments in job training of employees could develop a feeling of obligation among employees towards the organization.
As per Mowday, Steers & Porter (1979), the secondary research about organizational commitment is also helpful to obtain insights into the measurement of employee commitment to the organization. The necessity of the resources for measuring commitment could be identified in the form of the efficiency of the talent recognition and management programs (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979).
The use of the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) is perceived as a functional resource to measure organizational commitment. The distinct measures for organizational commitment are characterized by diversity like the various definitions associated with organizational commitment. The OCQ however proves to be a viable source for obtaining qualitative as well as quantitative insights into the feelings of an employee towards the organization in which they are currently working.
The questionnaire utilizes a 7-point scale to address the alternatives for individual questions. The questions are related to the willingness of employees to commit additional effort for the organization, communication to others regarding the favourability of the organization, perception of congruency of organizational and personal values and beliefs, and the perceived benefits and losses of staying with the organization. Some of the crucial measures which are implemented for anticipating employee commitment include sources of attachment, motivational forces, job satisfaction, job involvement, and turnover, estimated tenure of employees, intrinsic motivation, and performance behavior rating. However, the evidence regarding the convergent validity in the context of OCQ was identified in the form of the moderate correlations between organizational commitment and the measures of motivational forces as well as the sources of organizational attachment. Another crucial highlight that can be perceived in the case of measurement of organizational commitment is reflective of the gaps in the measurement through the inclusion of a larger scale that would neglect the negatively worded responses which could alternatively be associated with a positive correlation with the measures of organizational commitment.
The particular references towards the possible opportunities for future research could be recognized in the form of identifying the complementary relationship between attitudinal and behavioral perspectives related to organizational commitment. This factor would be explicitly helpful for understanding the interplay between the two perspectives alongside finding appropriate opportunities for developing broader models for understanding the attachment of employees to an organization.
The implications of organizational commitment concerning the objectives of talent recognition and management initiatives in an organization should be reviewed from the perspective of the underlying philosophies about talent management. The requisites of talent management could be identified as foundations for developing sustainable competitive advantage in the volatile and dynamic market environment. As per Al Ariss, Cascio & Paauwe (2014), the efforts of researchers in this context have been largely directed toward the effective management of global talent that is required for the international hospitality sector (Al Ariss, Cascio & Paauwe, 2014). However, the outcomes drawn from the majority of research study literature reflect the significance of the fundamental assumptions of decision-makers in the organizations regarding the value, functionality, and nature of talent. The philosophies that are identified in the context of the HR practices of an organization are directed towards the emphasis placed by the organization on its human resources, contributions of human resources to organizational success, and the approaches for treatment and management of human resources.
According to Cerdin & Brewster (2014), the concerns of talent management philosophies have been drawn from the review of strategic talent management and the ambiguities associated with the recommendations for utilization of talent management practices, theoretical frameworks, and the definitions (Cerdin & Brewster, 2014). The philosophies regarding the talent management practices could be based on the particular scopes of exclusive and inclusive focus alongside the demarcation between developable and stable focus. The organizations could consider the development of talent according to the specific quadrants in which individual employees are identified. Exclusive focus complemented with dependable objectives could be accomplished through developing interactions that are based on nature and nurturing of talent alongside promoting the development of individuals with appropriate potential.
The exclusive focus complemented with stable objectives could be reflective of the competitiveness for the acquisition of talent and implementation of strategic approaches for identification, attraction, and retention of individuals with potential. In terms of inclusive focus, stability can be realized through consideration of the presence of talent in every individual and implementing it effectively in organizational initiatives (Lewin, 2013). The development objectives within the inclusive focus could be associated with the assumption that talent can be developed through the training of every individual thereby implying the positive outcomes of developmental training for every employee in the context of talent management.
The descriptions of culture could be ascertained according to two categories that reflect diversity and complexity. The diversity and complexity of culture could be defined on the grounds of specific classifications such as organizational culture, industry culture, occupational culture, consumer culture, national culture, and corporate culture (Meyer & Allen, 1991). In the internal context of an organization, the cultural web of the enterprise is responsible for describing the complexity of the culture and its implications for international hospitality management. The particular elements of the cultural web in an organization reflect on stories, symbols, organizational structures, power structures, control systems, and the rituals associated with the organizational culture.
The stories in the cultural web of the organizations in international hospitality management comprise the traditions, the initial days of the organization as well as the efficacy of the management in addressing the concerns of different occupations within the organization. The symbols identified in the case of the cultural web reflect the importance of the logo, organization uniform, and dress code. The power structures are also reflective of considerable influence on the behavior of employees and the formation of organizational culture based on the different hierarchical ranks and associated status of people in the hospitality organizations (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979). This is also perceived as a major impact on the anticipation of the organizational climate by the employees and their approaches to working in a bureaucratic framework. The control systems implemented in the case of organizations in the hospitality industry also form a crucial insight for this report as it aims at the coordination of the organizational efforts towards performance management and recognition of talent involving considerable implications for addressing occupational and organizational commitment.
It is imperative to reflect on the concerns of cultural typologies about occupation and organization that could be indicative of the sense-making in the specified social contexts that can also impose a substantial impact on the formation of organizational climate. The expression of concepts of culture to ensure organizational analysis is observed in the form of ideational phenomena that could be similar or different. The social behavior of an individual in the hospitality industry is associated with the realization of in-group and out-group processes that reflect on the concerns of out-group processes with relevance to the chef culture that relate to the practices, norms, and values of the occupation.
The in-group processes are reflected in terms of corporate culture dimensions such as corporate identity and organization culture. Another school of thought that defined organizational and occupational commitment could be found in the socio-cultural system that emphasizes the relationship between society and culture. The paradigm explains that organizations have to assume roles as society members thereby implying the requirements for them to be adaptive and synchronized with the social environment (Calori, Baden-Fuller & Hunt, 2000).
The aspects of labor employment and capital investment could be assumed as notable benefits derived from this approach. The particular implications of the interrelation between culture and climate within an organization could be related to the illustration of diachronic domains which are derived from the historical diffusionist cultural typologies that are associated with the specific information and retrospect in the domains of explicit as well as contact-based cultural precedents. The dilemma about the case of agents of organizational climate is vested in determining which aspects of the history should be accounted for in the definition of functionalism (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979). The examples of following French as the preferred language for the description of the menu in four-star and five-star hotels as well as the classification of the specific aspects of hospitality services such as the mode of technology referred to as ‘a la carte’.
As per Mowday, Steers & Porter (1979), the influence of the interplay between culture and climate could be associated with a profound impact on the framing of the future from the implications of the past. Therefore the significance of culture in determining occupational and organizational commitment to the realization of change management such as in talent recognition could be identified as mandatory in the case of the necessity for discontinuous change (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979). The rapid progress and the drastic shifts in the corporate landscape could be associated with increasing levels of global competition and explicit changes like the workforce that invoke the necessity for addressing the differences between organizational culture and climate to reflect on potential measures that can be implemented for improving business performance.
The two prominent characteristics identified in the contemporary environment in the hospitality industry are reflective of uncertainty and the sense of urgency associated with the necessity for problem-solving. Talent recognition could be considered an inevitable aspect of learning organizations that strive to improve the competencies of their management through learning. The apprehension of the effectiveness of talent recognition could be addressed by considering the impact of knowledge management and a learning organization environment on the drivers of change (Mok, Sparks & Kadampully, 2013).
Talent recognition in the international hospitality management initiatives is directed towards accomplishing competitive advantage that is vested in the support acquired from four basic processes such as training, learning, coaching, and teaching. The implications of a learning-based organization are perceived explicitly in the case of hospitality organizations in Europe as a major human resource obstacle alongside the coordination of work-life balance, talent management, cultural transformation, and change management.
The interpretation of the distinct learning disciplines associated with a learning organization could facilitate productive insights into the identification of reasonable measures for addressing talent recognition. The learning disciplines could be identified in the form of personal mastery, shared vision, team learning, mental models, and systems thinking which help develop organizational commitment (Mok, Sparks & Kadampully, 2013). The personal mastery discipline is reflective of the aspiration of an individual for accomplishment that reflects on the opportunities for developing occupational commitment. The mental models are also capable of providing opportunities for reflection and inquiry that could be supported by the credible references to the prolific refinements in the thinking process alongside ensuring the development of awareness from the learning disciplines.
The shared vision discipline reflects the development of collective commitment of the workforce for accomplishing the changes of talent recognition and management thereby improving the competencies of the human resources to accomplish strategic objectives of the organizations in the hospitality industry. Another aspect of learning discipline identified in the case of a learning organization could be identified in the form of team learning that comprises team interaction thereby leading to inferences in the form of collective action and thinking to accomplish the common objectives.
The systems thinking approach in the learning disciplines of a learning organization could also be implemented in the case of modern hospitality industry management to understand the interdependency among the distinct systems within an organization alongside apprehending the complexities that arise from the same. Therefore, an organization must create a suitable climate that would help address the predefined objectives in the context of talent recognition. Talent recognition could be supported through the creation of a learning environment that should involve explicit references towards the elements of psychological safety, appreciation of differences, time for reflection, and an open attitude toward the perception of new ideas. This would enable the organization to create a suitable environment wherein opportunities for the appreciation of differences can be identified alongside providing employees with the appropriate opportunities to express their ideas effectively alongside obtaining feasible insights into the realizing internal reflection outcomes.
The influence of leadership in the context of reinforcing the learning environment in a hospitality organization could also be observed imperatively with the requirement for addressing the resources, location, and timing needed for recognition of problems with talent management alongside the organizational challenges. The distinct roles of leaders could help address the varying segmentations of culture such as national culture and its implications on international hospitality management.
The effective realization of organizational and occupational commitment in the case of international hospitality organizations could be vested in the role of leaders in anticipating the dynamics of national culture, corporate culture, and change management that can improvise outcomes drawn from talent recognition initiatives. As per Cerdin & Brewster (2014), the distinct elements of national culture could be identified in the form of power distance, masculinity/femininity, uncertainty avoidance, and individualism/collectivism which have to be addressed by the leaders for identifying suitable approaches to tailor the talent and change management implications towards the culture and climate of the organization (Cerdin & Brewster, 2014). The implications of power distance could be reflective of the insecurity of employees to convey their opinions and involve themselves in the decision-making process. Therefore a low power distance index should be favorable for inducing opportunities in talent recognition as well as respect for individuality that leads to productive outcomes.
A collectivist index is perceived as opportunistic for a leader to ensure that the team learning and shared vision disciplines of a learning organization are realized effectively in the context of talent management. As per Mok, Sparks & Kadampully (2013), Managers in the international hospitality management scenario should also emphasize on femininity aspect of national culture to improve the levels of cooperation and environmental awareness thereby leading to the prospects of learning that also imply the consensus among the different members of the workforce. This would improve occupational and organizational commitment to address the change management objectives in the context of talent recognition and management (Mok, Sparks & Kadampully, 2013). Furthermore, the uncertainty avoidance dimension of national culture can be leveraged by leaders in the context of improving organizational and occupational commitment in international management to obtain outcomes such as increased tolerance for innovation and constructive competition within the internal context of the workforce that is responsible for the adaptability of the organization’s culture to ambiguities and risks.
Furthermore, the role of leaders in managing development alongside planning change could be identified in the recognition of the opportunities for change through self-reflection. The understanding of the specific elements of anxiety, happiness, fear, threat, guilt, depression, denial, gradual acceptance, hostility, and moving forward could assist managers in preparing a change management strategy. The objective for talent recognition and management could be associated with specific measures to obtain productive outcomes.
As per Al Ariss, Cascio & Paauwe (2014), the basic elements of the strategic approach that should be followed by leaders include the development of novel capabilities and competencies, acquisition of stakeholders’ support from external sources, redistribution of power structures, tailor the new behaviors desired from the organization and the designing the communication strategy for the change management plan (Al Ariss, Cascio & Paauwe, 2014). The driving forces for change should also be emphasized by organizations in the hospitality industry and should also be taken into concern by leaders to accomplish productive outcomes from the change management process. The drivers include prominent references to external factors such as technology, mergers, economic shocks, and nature of the workforce, international effects, and the social trends evident in the external environment.
The report was reflective of the specific references towards international hospitality management and the interplay between organizational culture and climate as well as leadership issues identified concerning change management. The report assumed a simple precedent related to the similarities between organizational culture and climate on the grounds of creating a learning environment so that the occupational and organizational commitment levels are improved to accomplish effective talent recognition.
Al Ariss, A., Cascio, W. F., & Paauwe, J. (2014). Talent management: Current theories and future research directions. Journal of World Business, 49(2), 173-179.
Cronin, E., & Endersby, F. (2011). In Practice: Change (the only constant) and how to survive it. Perspectives in public health, 131(1), 10-12.
Calori, R., Baden-Fuller, C., & Hunt, B. (2000). Managing change at Novotel: back to the future. Long Range Planning, 33(6), 779-804.
Cerdin, J. L., & Brewster, C. (2014). Talent management and expatriation: Bridging two streams of research and practice. Journal of World Business, 49(2), 245-252.
Denison, D. R. (1996). What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native’s point of view on a decade of paradigm wars. Academy of management review, 21(3), 619-654.
Fisher, J. M. (2005). A time for a change?. Human Resource Development International, 8(2), 257-263.
Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. The Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 81-94.
Lewin, K. (2013). A dynamic theory of personality selected papers. Read Books Ltd.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human resource management review, 1(1), 61-89.
Meyers, M. C., & van Woerkom, M. (2014). The influence of underlying philosophies on talent management: Theory, implications for practice, and research agenda. Journal of World Business, 49(2), 192-203.
Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of vocational behavior, 14(2), 224-247.
Mok, C., Sparks, B., & Kadampully, J. (2013). Service quality management in hospitality, tourism, and leisure. Routledge.Order Now