REVISTA ECONOMIC

Supplement No. 5/2012

Journal of economic-financial theory and practice


CNCSIS reference: B+, Code 478
Frequency: 6 issues/year




Editor
Prof. Dan Popescu, Ph.D., Dr. H.C. of University of Rennes 1, France and Dr.H.C. of Academy of
Economic Studies of Moldova


Deputy Editor
Prof. Liviu Mihescu, Ph.D.


Scientific Committee
Prof. Dan Popescu, Ph.D., Dr.H.C. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Prof. Liviu Mihescu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Prof. Livia Ilie, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Acad. Prof. Iulian Vcrel, Ph.D. Romanian Academy
Prof. LucianLiviu ALBU, Ph.D. Director, Institute of Economic Forecasting of the Romanian
Academy, corresponding member of the Romanian Academy
Prof. Sergiu Chirc, Ph.D., Dr. hab. Academy of Economic Studies of Moldova, Honorary Member
of the Romanian Academy
Prof. Mircea Ciumara, Ph.D. Director, National Institute of Economic Research, Romania
Prof. Viorel Cornescu, Ph.D. The University of Bucharest, Romania
Prof. Francesco d'Esposito, Ph.D. The Gabrielle d'Annunzio University, Pescara, Italy
Prof. Ion Pohoa, Ph.D. Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iai, Romania
Prof. Robert Labb, Ph.D. University of Rennes 1, France
Acad.Prof. Grigore Belostecinic, Ph.D. Dr. hab., Dr.H.C. Academy of Economic Studies of Moldova
Prof. Alexander Kostov, Ph.D. Director, Institute for Balkan Studies, Sofia, Bulgaria
Assoc. Nicolae Petria, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assoc. Razvan erbu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Lect. Bogdan Mrza, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Prof. Carmen Comaniciu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Prof. Emanoil Muscalu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Prof. Ilie Rotariu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assoc. Mihaela Herciu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assoc. Silvia Mrginean, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assoc. Claudia Ogrean, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assoc. Cristina Tnsescu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assoc. Marian Cristescu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Lect. Dan Alexandru Popescu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Lect. Liviu Florea, Ph.D. Washburn University, USA
Prof. Eugen Iordnescu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania



Editorial Board
Prof. Dan Popescu, Ph.D., Dr.H.C. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Prof. Liviu Mihescu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assoc. Nicolae Eanu, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assist. Alin Opreana, Ph.D. student Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assist. Eduard Stoica, Ph.D. Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Assist. Florin Martin, Ph.D. student Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania



Indexed in:
RePeC
Ulrich`s Periodicals Directory
DOAJ - Directory of Open Access Journals



Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu
No.10, Victoriei Bd.
Postal Code 550024, Sibiu, Romania

Center for Economic Research
Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu
No.17, Calea Dumbrvii Street
Postal Code 550324, Sibiu, Romania
Phone/Fax: +40 (269) 23.58.79

G.P.E. Continent
No.2, Dr. Ion Raiu Street
Postal code 550012, Sibiu, Romnia
Phone: 40-269-243 210




Copyright
All the copyright of the present volume belongs to the 19
th
International Economic Conference IECS
2012, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu. All rights reserved.

All the papers of the present volume where peer reviewed by two independent reviewers of The
Scientific Committee of the IECS 2012 Conference. Acceptance was granted when both reviewers
recommendations were positive. All papers were presented at the IECS 2012 Conference. The papers
of this volume are full responsibility of the authors.



Mail: revista.economica@ulbsibiu.ro
Web: http://economice.ulbsibiu.ro/revista.economica



ISSN: 1582-6260

Revista Economic Supplement No. 2/2012
Management: New Coordinates and Challenges

40

A HYBRID MODEL FOR THE ASSEMENT OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AT
COMPANY LEVEL, ADAPTED TO THE ROMANIAN BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT


CERCEL Mihai Ovidiu
Associated Assistant professor/PhD, Faculty of International Business and Economics
The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, email: mihaic9@hotmail.com

Abstract: The study aims to present a hybrid, complex model to assess the organizational culture of a
company, by taking into consideration the influence of societal and organizational values, a tool better adapted
to the Romanian business environment. The assessment instrument has to be able to determine the employees
societal values and the organizational culture of the company providing the link between those behaviours and
attitudes which increase the social and economic performance of the organization. The results have to highlight
how the difference of perception between peoples values and behaviours influences the performance of the
organization.

Keywords: organizational behaviors, organizational culture and climate, societal values, organizational
culture assessment instruments.

JEL classification: A13, D23, M14


1. Introduction
Research conducted worldwide show that there are cultural patterns specific to each nation.
These cultural patterns are determined by history, culture, education, but also by religion or beliefs and
will be reflected in thinking and acting of people, stressing their perceptions on the values of the
society they belong to. (Hofstede, 2001). Gerry Johnson believes that "history, religion and even the
climate can explain these differences" (G. Johnson, 2008, p. 224).
Studies conducted by different worldwide research project highlighted differences of
perception between peoples societal values, regarding the importance that people grants to work,
leisure, family, social status, etc. Some patterns were identified and allow us to define a series of
cultural dimensions that characterize individual companies. These cultural dimensions are related to:
the degree of accepting inequality among people, aversion or tolerance to situations of uncertainty, the
existence of differences between male and female roles in society, role of the individual within the
group where he/she belongs, the degree to which society rewards collective action and reallocation of
resources, the perception of present and future.
Professor Geert Hofstede gives us an explanation in his book "Software of the Mind -
Management of multicultural structures" (1996):"Each individual is the bearer of patterns of thinking,
feelings and actions acquired during his lifetime. Many of them have been acquired during childhood,
when the individual is able to learn and assimilate. [...]Because some thinking pattern were deeply
embedded in a person's mind, learning something different is heavier than their initial learning
"(translation from Romanian edition, Hofstede G. 1996, p. 20).
In this article we intend to present the theoretical framework of a new tool for assessing the
organizational culture of a company, an instrument better adapted to the Romanian business and social
environment, by measuring simultaneously the individual cultural values modeled by the society that
he belongs to and the cultural values modeled by the company where he is working. Such a model will
provide an easy understanding of societal values influence on organizational culture of the company,
and of the discreet way in which organizational culture positively or negatively affects employee
performance and, ultimately, the company itself.








Revista Economic Supplement No. 2/2012
Management: New Coordinates and Challenges

41

2. Characteristics of organizational culture in Romania
2.1. At Society level
The GLOBE research (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) was a
sophisticated project at global scale, which involved considerable human and material forces. The
project lasted 10 years and included 62 companies, aiming to measure the nine so-called fundamental
attributes or dimensions of organizational culture, and then evaluate how they shape the leadership in
analyzed companies (Bibu N., Brancu L., 2008). The results grouped the countries in ten "clusters",
based on cultural proximity. The following clusters were identified: British Europe, Eastern Europe,
German Europe, Latin Europe, Northern Europe, Latin America, Sub -Saharan Africa, Middle East,
South Asia and Confucian Asia (Grove, 2005).
Regarding the space that we are interested of, namely the European continent, GLOBE study
results show that, in terms of organizational culture, Europe can be cut into two areas: the Northern
area, which includes states that are above an imaginary line joining the UK and Austria and Southern
area, which includes the entire South of the continent, from Portugal to Georgia, including Central and
Eastern European countries in this subspace. (House, R. J. and others, 2004)
A significant difference compared to Hofstede model for example, is that each of these
dimensions was measured in two ways: how is the society at a certain moment in time (called "societal
practices" aspect by GLOBE scientists) and how the society wishes to be like (called "societal values"
aspect by GLOBE researchers). Research conducted in different countries showed that the most
difficult to change is societal culture, stressing the obvious differences between the values that society
seeks and the current, real values of society at a certain moment.
Thus, those studies showed that the Romanian society tolerates unequal distribution of power
easily, is rather collectivist, and encourages individualism and aggressive attitude in social
relationships, with male and female values that interpenetrate and with a high level of tolerance
leading to uncertainty, great resistance to change and avoiding risk by non taking responsibilities. In
terms of orientation, the Romanian society is poorly oriented towards future and mainly focused on
present time rather than the future, on short or medium term rather than long term. Regarding
indulgence versus restraint, Romania is characterized by low to medium degree of indulgence, which
shows that Romanians allocated, often constrained by the need to meet security needs, more work and
less time for leisure. As regards the last indicator, Monumentalism, Romania is characterized by
average scores, showing flexibility and a certain inclination towards modesty.
It is also worth noting that significant differences in societal values are found even in different
regions of Romania (Neculesei A. and others, 2008), which can be explained knowing the way in
which the three provinces have developed in time. Also, if we continue segmentation, one can see that
there are differences within the same region between village and city, between individuals with
different degrees of education or training, etc..
This last remark leads us to claim that within each company there is a sui generis mix of individual
organizational culture, influenced blend of education at home and at school, nationality, grade and
type of training, the career paths of each individual.
These differences of organizational culture at society level are translated at the level of organization in
a cultural conditioning of values, attitudes, perceptions, behaviors and rules specific to each
individual. Furthermore, over these societal cultural differences overlap each individual characteristic
values (regional specificities, education, training, experience, etc.) and values and norms imposed to
the organization by its leaders. The result of these interactions is a sui generis mixture, specific to each
organization, of values, beliefs, attitudes, norms and rules, rituals and symbols that form the
organizational culture. Thus we can explain why an organization's culture differs from other similar
culture in terms of industry, ethnic composition of employees, size of turnover, number of employees,
training them, etc..

2.2. At organization level
Each company is a social group by itself, with its own values derived from both the mission
and vision of stakeholders, and the interactions among employees. Thus, each company will have an
organizational culture driven both by leaders and employees. Education at home and at school,
geographic area, urban-rural differences, previous work experience, age, etc., are all factors that
determine individual variations in organizational culture. These differences, sometimes major ones,
other times relatively minor, ultimately modulate the organizational culture of each company. All
Revista Economic Supplement No. 2/2012
Management: New Coordinates and Challenges

42

these values acquired or learned during lifetime, shape the individual behaviors and further the
behaviors of the organization. (Nastase, 2004)
In the international literature, there are described several tools for evaluating organizational
culture, but they are focused on organizational culture at society level (Hofstede, GLOBE, ETC.), or
organizational culture at company level (Human Synergistics OIC, Denison, OCAI, etc.).
According to research conducted by Human Synergistics in Romania, the organizations culture in our
country is dominated by the Aggressive-Defensive styles, mainly Competition and Power.
Regarding secondary dominations, we note the orientation towards Constructive style,
especially, Self-actualizing and Achievement styles, as well as passive defensive styles such as
Dependent and Avoidance orientation.
In our opinion, these results can be explained by the influence of cultural features at society
level on the culture of the organization. We appreciate that high scores for dependent styles found in
many Romanian companies are caused by the influence of high power distance traits, a cultural
dimension specific to Romanian society.
Regarding negative orientations, we note the effects determined by the secondary dominant
orientation such as fight power and internal competition over resources. These traits determine a
hierarchical and non-participating organization and a structure that is influenced by the positions
occupied by employees and their status. In such an organization decisions are taken centrally and the
fight power is a common behavior for achieving higher positions and status. The competitiveness of
the company is negatively affected and employees are determined to do just what they are told and
check every decision with their superiors. The performance is diminished by the lack of individual
initiative, spontaneity, flexibility and taking necessary decisions in due time. These organizations,
while rewarding success (the influence of constructive styles, as well as orientation towards
competitiveness), penalize mistakes more than necessary, which causes employees to transfer their
responsibilities to others. Also, in these organizations employees are rewarded for competition
between themselves. People are working in a "win-lose" environment and consider that in order to be
noticed it is better to work (rather) against their colleagues than together.
We noted that regardless of the size of the organization, its turnover, field of activity, or
human resources capabilities, there is a certain pattern of behavior and attitudes of the organizations
that we find, in varying proportions, within all companies in a given society. Unlike the internationally
ideal culture, where constructive styles are dominant, in the case of Romanian companies the ideal
organizational culture is a balance of constructive and aggressive defensive style (with higher scores
for the opposition, competitive and power orientations) and passive aggressive styles (with higher
scores for dependent orientation). In our opinion, these differences regarding the organizational culture
of Romanian companies determine different behaviors, perceptions and attitudes of the Romanian
employees. These differences can be explained by taking into account the influence of the societal
values in modeling the organization culture at company level.
For this reason, a full analysis of organizational culture at company level must determine all
these influences that shape the organizational culture of each individual, based on the values of the
society in which the respective individual was raised and educated and reaching to the values of the
company where he operates. (Cercel, 2011)
In our opinion, in the case of Romania there are some societal values whose features play an
important role in managing employee performance and building an organizational culture focused on
performance. These are: distance to power, masculine vs. feminine values, degree of individualism
and, respectively, tolerance to uncertainty.
A high index of distance to power determines a poor communication within the organization,
withholding information, finding subterfuge in the procedures.
A high degree of tolerance to uncertainty determines aversion towards the structures, rules,
clear norms and procedures, staff always looking to avoid them. A typical Romanian employee feels
comfortable in situations of uncertainty, "is resourceful," refuses to take responsibility thus not being
sanctioned, formally respects hierarchy, but informally applies the principle "say as the boss says and
do as you like".
Although masculinity index vs. femininity is not directly associated with economic and
financial performance of the organization, there are indirect influences. A high index value for
feminine values contribute to increasing employees satisfaction, by improving the workplace climate
and organizations involvement in CSR projects and therefore a high degree of motivation and loyalty,
Revista Economic Supplement No. 2/2012
Management: New Coordinates and Challenges

43

while a high index of masculinity is associated with rewarding results, recognition of merit, challenge
and competition.
Also, a high degree of collectivism, Romanians strong attachment to the group to which they
belong (family in the broad sense) leads to a weak connection with the organization, lack of loyalty
and responsibility. Experimental studies have shown that rich countries consistently record high values
of individualism index, collectivism being associated with rather low developed states.
We believe that for companies operating in the business environment in Romania, it is
essential to quantitatively diminish the influence of these factors on the organization's culture, to
encourage the establishment of a true dialogue between management and employees, in order to
increase accountability of employees and to foster the development of thinking "outside the box".

3. Proposition of a hybrid model for assessing the Organizational Culture of Romanian
companies
A full analysis of organizational culture at the company level must determine not only the
organization's climate and staff behaviors and attitudes, but must investigate in depth, trying to
highlight the societal values of all members of the organization (especially when we are in a
multicultural environment). In our opinion, a complete analysis at the company level must determine
all influences that shape the organizational culture of each individual, starting with the values of
society in which he was raised and educated up to its companys values. Thus, we used the results
obtained in research to build a hybrid, complex model, able to provide a detailed image of the
organizational culture, adapted to the business environment in Romania. This model brings together
societal values of employees and their organizational values.
The model that we are proposing use a bottom-up approach, respectively from organizational
culture values of individuals to determine organizational culture of the whole, as a result of individual
societal values and organizational behavior existing at the company level.
The model must be able to provide a quantitative assessment (based on survey, by
interviewing a representative population, selected on the basis of probability) of employee perceptions
about societal values of individuals and groups and the organizational culture of the respondents.
To meet these requirements, the model aims to measure separately societal values and
indicators present in the organization culture of the organization.
Thus, the societal values that we believe are relevant for the Romanian business environment
are as follows: distance to power (DIFP), tolerance to uncertainty (TINC), reporting to the
group/family values (RAGP), Masculine vs. feminine values (MAS).
In terms of cultural indices, we consider that the following have the ability to capture those
details relevant to the organizational climate in Romania: Assuming responsibility (ASRE), Flexibility
(FLEX), Empowerment (IMP), Organizational learning (INOG), Customer orientation (FOCL), Team
orientation (ORECH), Skills development (DZC), Participatory Attitude (ATP), Competitiveness
(COMI), and Fundamental values (VAL).
The graphical representation of results can be built as a circumplex in such a way so as to
bring societal values of employees and the climate of the organization under the same picture (Figure
1). Such an image becomes a tool that provides an overview of organizational culture, easily
interpreted by managers, so that they can understand the influences of organizational culture on
performance and quickly discern levers on which action must be taken within a cultural transformation
process.












Revista Economic Supplement No. 2/2012
Management: New Coordinates and Challenges

44

Figure 1: The ECORG circumplex


Within the quantitative and qualitative research we identified a number of societal values that
have a direct influence on organizational culture of the Romanian employees. Although Geert
Hofstede does not recommend his model for characterizing organizational culture at the individual or
organization level, we believe that multiculturalism of organizations and various professional
experiences of employees impose the necessity of analyzing, at this level of company, the societal
values that characterize the individuals from that respective company. Such an analysis allows, in
addition to assessing the culture traits at the organization level, to identify certain specific societal
values that shape behaviors in the whole group.
Taking in consideration all the results above, we proposed a new instrument that we called
ECORG (Evaluation of the Organizational Culture), a hybrid organizational culture assessment model,
which puts together the analysis of societal values and evaluation of the organizational values of
employees.
Thus, the ECORG model attempts, through 14 indexes, to assess the organizational culture of
the respondents by using four indexes to quantify their societal values and ten indexes to quantify their
organizational values. The 14 indexes were inspired from Hofstede model (regarding the societal
values) and partly from Denison and Human Synergistics model (concerning the organizational
values), to which we added our own indexes (Participatory Attitude, Assuming Responsibilities and
Flexibility). Also, following discussions in focus groups we reduced to four the number of statements
which determine each index. Thus, we believe that the indexes proposed by the ECORG model have
borrowed only the name of the above mentioned models the questionnaire, the statements necessary
to determine each index and their numerical formula, are the researchers own contribution.
Regarding research methodology, we chose to test the model via Linkedin web platform. The
online respondents were selected from about 35 000 people across the country, with various age,
gender, education and professional background, and working in organizations of different sizes and
from all sectors. Also, the sample comprises both respondents who are in management positions and
simple employees.
Given the research limitation (sample formed by 66 respondents), we cant define a model
benchmark. For that reason we choose to test the capability of the model to describe the organizational
culture by analysing the data obtained through different segmentations and to compare the results to
the previous studies realized for Romania (Hofstede and GLOBE for societal values and Human
Synergistics for organizational values)
The results are shown in the following graphic representations:






Revista Economic Supplement No. 2/2012
Management: New Coordinates and Challenges

45

Figure 2: The Ecorg results, segmented by gender Figure 3: The Ecorg results, segmented by age

According to figure 2, we can affirm that there are no differences in terms of organizational
culture between men and women. Figure 3 shows that young employees are more willing than the
average to contribute to the common effort of the company. They understand probably better that the
success of their organization means a better future for themselves. Also, they are more willing to work
as a team compared to their older colleagues.
The figure 4 illustrates that the new employees are more enthusiastic to develop new
competencies; they are more inclined to listen the organizations customers and to take into
consideration their comments. The segmentation through the position in the organization (Figure 5)
shows that the managers have a more developed sense of organizations values; they are more inclined
to pay attention to the clients and more interested to develop the team work.

Figure 4: The Ecorg results, segmented by age
within the same organization
Figure 5: The Ecorg results, segmented by position
within the company

Figure 6 points up that the companies which are acting in services industry are more eager to
hear their clients, while this concept is almost unknown for public organizations. Figure 7 shows that
employees from small and medium companies (companies with sales lower than 1.000.000 Euro) are
more flexible that the bigger ones, are more willing to promote the team work and to they are aware
that the good results of their company are directly linked to their own welfare.

Figure 6: The Ecorg results, segmented by activity
sector
Figure 7: The Ecorg results, segmented by annual
sales
Revista Economic Supplement No. 2/2012
Management: New Coordinates and Challenges

46


The results obtained are in line with previous research studies for Romania, mainly Hofstede,
Globe and Human Synergistics. We can conclude that the proposed model is able to seize the intimate
aspects of the organizational culture at company level. Nevertheless, further test should be carried on
larger samples.
For the sample formed by 66 respondents we calculate, only for model illustration, some
percentiles. The percentiles bellows are not relevant because of the size of the sample and its
unprobabilistic selection, but it shows how the model can be used to compare a future assessment
result with the results registered into the existing database.

Table 1: The Ecorg benchmark

DIFP TINC RAGP MAS IMP ASRE INOG FLEX FOCL OECH ATP DZC VAL COMI
Percentile
25% 2,50 2,50 2,50 3,25 2,50 2,50 3,00 2,56 2,75 2,50 2,56 3,00 2,81 2,25
Percentile
50% 3 2,75 3 3,25 3,25 2,75 3,5 3,25 3,75 3,25 3,25 3,25 3,5 2,75
Percentile
75% 3,43 3,19 3,25 3,5 3,75 3 3,75 3,75 4 3,75 3,69 3,94 4 3,19

4. Conclusions
We think that the ECORG tool provides more information to a manager about the
organizational culture of the assessed company, allowing the measurement of employees
organizational values, or otherwise verify the consistency between the vision required by its leaders
and the organizational culture of its employees, and the societal values of individuals in the
organization. This way, the ECORG circumplex allows us to anticipate the influence of societal
values of employees on organizational culture or on a future process of cultural transformation.
In our opinion, the results obtained during the test phase are promising, the tool was able to
capture the societal characteristics of Romanian employees, consistent with the results of scientific
studies conducted using Hofstede and GLOBE models, and characteristics of the culture at
organization level, highlighted within our research using Denison and Human Synergistics models.
To conclude, the test of the ECORG tool on a sample of 66 respondents gave conclusive
results on the evaluation of organizational culture. Given the research limitations (small sample sizes
and non-probabilistic selection of respondents), we cannot state that these results validate the proposed
instrument, however it was a first step, promising for further research by increasing the sample and
ensure its statistical representation across the country. Also, increasing the sample will allow us to
better define the benchmark of the model, which will mainly include Romanian companies.





Revista Economic Supplement No. 2/2012
Management: New Coordinates and Challenges

47

5. References
Alvesson, M. (2002). Understanding the Organizational Culture. Londra: Editura Sage
Publications.
Bibu, N., & Brancu, L. (2008, 02 23). Convergences of the Romanian Societal Culture with
European Culture Clusters in the process of European integration. Retrieved on 08.01.2010,
from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1166343.
Cercel, M. O. (2011). A Study of correlations between Human Synergistics And Denison
Models for evaluating The Organizational Culture. Journal of Management and Governance ,
5.
Cercel, M. O. (2011). The Influence of Societal Values on Organizational Culture at Company
Level the Romanian Case. Review of International Comparative Management , 12 (4), 747-
754.
Denison, D. (1990). Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Denison, D., Janovics, J., Young, J., & Hee, J. (2006). Diagnosing Organizational Cultures:
Validating a Model and Method. Lausanne: International Institute for Management
Development.
Dygert, C., & Jacobs, R. (2006). Managementul culturii organizaionale. Iai: Editura
Polirom.
Grove, N. (2005). Introduction to the GLOBE Research Project on Leadership Worldwide.
Accessed on 29.12.2010, on Grovewell LLC Professional Knowledge Center:
www.grovewell.com
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences - Comparing Values Behaviors, Institutions and
Organizations Across Nations. USA: Sage Publications.
Hofstede, G. (1996). Software-ul gndirii. Managementul structurilor multiculturale.
Bucureti: Editura Economic.
House, R., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., & i alii. (2004). Culture. Leadership and Organizations:
The GLOBE study of 62 Societies. Thousand Oaks: Editura Sage Publications.
Johnson, G., Wittongton, R., & Scholes, K. (2011). Exploring Strategy. Text & Cases (9th
ed.). Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Nastase, M. (2004). Cultura organizaional i managerial. Bucureti: Biblioteca digitala
ASE, accessed on: http://www.biblioteca-digitala.ase.ro/biblioteca/pagina2.asp?id=introd.
Nstase, M., & Cercel, M. O. (2011). The Role Of Success In Modelling The Organizational
Culture. Globalization and Higher Education in Economics and Business Administration
(GEBA 2011). Iai: Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Press.
Neculesei, I., & Ttruanu, M. (2008). Romania - Cultural and Regional differences.
Analele tiinifice ale Universitii A.I. Cuza , LV (tiine Economice).
Payne, R. (2000). Climate and Culture. In N. Ashkanazi, C. Wilderom, & M. Peterson,
Handbook of the Organizational Culture and Climate. Thousand Oaks: Editura Sage
Publications.
Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1984). In search of excellence: lessons from America's best-
run companies. Warner Books.
Schein, E. (2004). Leadership, Organizational culture and Leadership (3rd edition ed.).
Jossey-Bas Publisher.
Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (2008). L'entreprise multiculturelle (a 3-a ed.). Paris:
Editura Maxim - Laurent du Mesnil.
Zait, D. (2002). Management intercultural - valorizarea diferentelor culturale. Bucuresti:
Editura Economic.
*** Human Synergitics Romania. Cultura organizaiilor romneti. Accessed on 05.05.2011,
http://www.humansynergistics.ro/Cultura%20organizaiilor%20romneti-
cercetarea%20nationala-40.html