LITERATURE REVIEW
2. 1. The New Paradigm in Managing Organization
This time companies facing the fastest changing in their environment including internal and external environment, especially the changing on the external environment that can be classified as PETS (political, economic, technology, social and culture) that influencing company strategy, structure and operation, including the human resources decision (Sulaksana, 2004). Companies meet these challenges depends largely on the nature of the business they are in, the dynamic forces of the market in which they operate, and the resources and skills that can be applied to ensure their business objectives are met.
The main streams that focused by management during the 1970s and early 1980s, one of the major features of an industrial economy was the increasing emphasis placed on internal quality of execution, rather than price, as a major competitive tool. During the early 1990s, customer needs became increasingly more sophisticated and complex. This forced companies to focus more on product quality than on the internal company execution efficiencies. In addition to this, many companies are realizing that in order to provide value and win customers they now need to quickly and accurately identify changing customer needs, develop more complex products to satisfy those needs, provide higher levels of customer support and service, and utilize the power of information technology to provide greater functionality and performance (Shepherd and Ahmed, 2000). It means to throw off the shackles of old theories and embrace new paradigms in the name of globalization.
Mitroff and Denton (1999) proposed a new organizational paradigm that (a) embodies concepts such as the existence of a supreme power, (b) pledges responsibility to multiple stakeholders, and (c) paves the path for businesses to take the evolutionary step of changing from values-based companies into spiritually-based organizations. This argue supported by Vail (1984) that in an environment of relentless global competition, the winners will be those organizations best able to harness their emotional and spiritual energy because “Feelings matter”. The changing in paradigm also influencing many streams that focused by marketers, changing from rational, emotional to spiritual marketing, where spiritual marketing based on human centric marketing (Kartajaya, 2005).
The “new management paradigm” incorporates a broad range of techniques and strategies associated with managing contemporary organizations, which are characterized by flatter, less hierarchical, and more flexible structures and work arrangements. Where human resources are crucial to organizational success, and offer the best return on investment for sustainable competitive advantage, so human resources are most important asset and ‘‘do something about it’’ actually ‘‘stick to’’ their beliefs and commit to these high performance work practices over time(Luthans and Youssef, 2004). Hall (1996) predicted drastic changes in the organizations of the 21st century. He speculated that individuals rather than organizations would control careers and that success would be measured in terms of psychological fulfillment rather than financial accomplishment. In addition, he suggested that both managers and employees should start facilitating the transition to this new paradigm by putting more meaning on relationships in the workplace. Cacioppe (1999) also argue the same opinion that successful leaders and organizations of the twenty-first century will be those who understand, foster and help create this new spirit at work (see figure 2.1).
Figure 2. 1
A new view of reality, leadership and organization development
Source: Cacioppe, 1999
Companies want their workers to contribute with their heads and hearts have to accept that emotions are essential to the new management style. The new management paradigm says that managing people is managing feelings. Emphasizes that the “era of managing by dictate is ending and is being replaced by an era of managing by inspiration”. To change the organizational paradigm requires-evaluating the organization’s core beliefs, values and purpose, the next section links these concepts to the notions of emotion and feeling in organizations, which in turn provide the genesis for organizational spirituality (Dehler and Welsh, 1994).
For a conclusion the new paradigm in organization can be describe as where traditional organizations have focused on form and function reorganizations, contemporary organizations will now focus on energy and flow. Energy and flow is sourcing from emotion and spirituality.
2. 2. Definition of Spirituality
Spirituality is derived from the Latin word Spiritus, which means the breadth of life. At various points in history the word Spiritus has been used synonymous with wisdom, the capacity for reason, intelligence, and the soul for any non-psychical life force. Spirit has been defined as “an animating life force, an energy that inspires one toward certain ends or purposes that go beyond self” (Dehler and Welsh, 1994). Religion has also been used synonymous with spirituality in psychological literature. The distinction between a religious life and a spiritual life, in psychological literature, is a recent one (Harmer, 2005).
Spirituality is often to seen as same context with religion, particular beliefs, moral rules and tradition. Spirituality however is not formal or organized and unstructured. Spirituality is involves a person looking inward and therefore is accessible to every one whether religious or not. Spirituality in the context of work and organizations does not require taking a position on religion (Dehler and Welsh, 1994). Even though religious principles also can be integrated into human resource management and some spiritual beliefs and practices are founded in religion and others are connected to any religious doctrine or organization (Lewis and Geroy, 2000). Spirituality is above and beyond any specific religious denomination and seeks to find and experience the common principles and truths that each religion offers (Cacioppe, 1999). Spirituality therefore, in its broadest sense, is the evidence of, or attempt to explain, human transcendence. Unlike religion, which may or may not be universal, spirituality is universal. It is often acknowledged that spirituality as "alive" both in and out of a religious context. (Harmer, 2005) where spirituality may be personal, inclusive, and positive, whereas religiosity might be external, exclusive, and negative (see figure 2.2).
Based on the expert definition spirituality is seeks connection (through belief systems and relationships) to something beyond (or greater) than oneself to find meaning and purpose in one’s life. This could be the transcendent, community, nature, etc. Connection could be sought to one or several or engaged everywhere (Shea, 2003).
Perle (in Laabs, 1995) also states about the spirituality: it’s not about religion. It’s not about converting people. It’s not about making people believe a belief system. It about knows that we’re all spiritual beings having a human experience. It’s about knowing that every person has within him or herself a level of truth and integrity, and that we all have our own divine power. Spirituality is the inner experience of the individual when he or she senses a beyond, especially as evidenced by the effect of this experience on his or her behavior when he or she actively attempts to harmonize his or her life with the beyond. Spirituality also defined as “the lived transformation of self and community” toward what is sacred within any given culture (Rothberg, 1994). Mitroff and Denton (1998) also define spirituality as the basic desire to find the ultimate meaning and purpose in one’s life and to live an integrated life.
Figure 2. 2
The spirituality conceptSource: Harmer, 2005
Mitroff and Denton (1998) also describe the characteristic of spirituality based on their interview to 85 senior executive and human resource managers, the characteristic is;
- Spirituality is a feeling of interconnectedness with oneness, higher power or a being. Everything is a part and an expression of this oneness and everything is connected with everything else
- There is a basic harmony or “goodness” in the universe that underlies its design.
- Spirituality is inextricably connected with caring, hope, love, and optimism
- Science may not able to prove that this principles exist throughout the universe but it is possible to experience these and to “know intuitively” that these are woven into the fabric of universe
- It is universal, applicable to every one and timeless. Spirituality sees everyone as unique but sees the underlying principles as universal and timeless. This principles are through yet beyond the physical creation of the universe
- Spiritual is the awe and mystery we feel in the presence of the transcendent which is at the core of the universe and life it self.
Neal (1997) has translated views of spirituality into the workplace and defines it as being: “…about integrity, being true to oneself, and telling the truth to the others. Workplace spirituality refers to an individual’s attempts to live his or her values more fully in the workplace. Csikszentmihalyi’s (1982) early research revealed that “the activity most often associated with flow experiences was work” that an essential aspect of “mobilizing energy in the organization”. So this research focus on the spirituality definition as individual inner experiences that given any values (energy) for organization culture that can be implemented in many level of organization, it can refer to the ways in which organizations structure those selves to support the spiritual growth of employees.
2. 2. 1. Spirituality in Organization
We are experiencing the growth of a postmodern or post-- industrial society that, by its very nature, struggles for meaning (Haroutiounian, Ghavam, Gomez and Ivshin, 2000) that made the search for spirituality and the interest in integrating spirituality with everyday work life have gained momentum during the late 1990s and it have taken many experts to investigate this theme into their book. Such as Spiritual Quotient (Johar and marshal), The Corporate Mystic (Hendricks and Ludeman), From Faith and Fortune: The Quiet Revolution to Reform American Business (Gunther), and Mega Trends 2010: Rise of Conscious Capitalism (Aburdene). So the business world is not entirely opposed to spirituality orientations. There have been some important efforts to consider personal life, ethics, and deeper spirituality while conduction business.
The concept of workplace spirituality has emerged as a fairly significant area of interest in the 1990s (Conger et al., 1994; Hawley, 1993; Lee and Zemke, 1993). The place of spirituality in organizations has been increasingly considered by (a) managers, (b) executives, (c) employees, and (d) researchers to be essential to the organization's interactions with employees, customers, and the community (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000; Conger, 1994; Dehler & Welsh, 1994; Hansen, 2001).
For now, managers face a challenge as a result of a free expression of spirituality in the work place (Mitroff and denton, 1999). The statement is give us understanding about the necessary of spirituality now, because based on Lee and Zemke (1993) and Vaill (1989) the constant turbulence of the contemporary workplace is a primary challenge for current and future leaders and managers. As a result we are experiencing a renewed search for spiritual and moral anchors in our work and lives. However many authors agree that spiritual connection to work is a means and source of creating life meaning (Covey, Merrill, & Merrill, 1994; Fleming, 1999; Freud, 1927; Richards, 1995; Zalesnik, 1966). So that spirituality integrates and influences organizational behavior not only as a personality dimension but as a reflection of people’s values and meanings.
Graber and Johnson (2001) discussed the rationality of the spiritual dimension in organizational life. They concluded that the search for spiritual growth and fulfillment should not be separated from work because of the challenge of balancing personal, subjective, and unconscious elements of individual experience with rationality, efficiency, and personal sacrifices demanded by organizations. Bickham (1996) claimed that when spirituality is cultivated in the workplace, a creative energy is unlocked. Marcic (1997) recommended the incorporation of spiritual values into the modern theory of organizing as an alternative for reengineering and downsizing initiatives. Several studies (Conger, 1994; Marcic, 1997; Mitroff & Denton, 1999a; Mohamed et al., 2001; Palmer, 2001) suggested that spirituality is a critical human need and definitely should be part of organizational culture. Finally, organizations realized they could become more successful by meeting their member’s needs and allowing them to express their spirituality.
Haroutiounian, Ghavam, Gomez and Ivshin (2000) classified the relationship between spirituality and work as spirituality in and of work. Spirituality in work is the expression of spiritual beliefs and practices within the tasks and activities of work. One example of spirituality in work can be the application of various spiritual ethics (such as compassion or right action) to one's conduct of work tasks and interactions. It could also be the use of spiritual practices (such as prayer or meditation) in the workplace. It can be manifest in many ways from having a personal altar in one's office to holding loving acceptance for a coworker in one's heart.
By contrast, a notion of spirituality of work tends to speak to the transcendent nature of working. Essentially, this is the notion that the act of working can be a transcendent experience. Spirituality of work can include any aspect of working that leads the worker to find a higher order purpose or connection to God or Spirit in whatever he or she does. In spirituality of work, it is the act of working that serves to connect one to a larger purpose or meaning and/or to God/Spirit. In spirituality of work, work is a vehicle of transcendence. Like meditation, prayer, chanting, and so on, working is a means of accessing the higher self, God, or the Divine.
So based the statement above this research more focus on spirituality in work, that implementation the spirituality to create value as experiences the human resource that can influencing the company culture.
2. 2. 2. Spirituality Values in Workplace
Weber (1930) wrote, "Labor is not merely an economic means; it is a spiritual end". To fully experience the spiritual end of work may require shifting from working from the assumptions of ego to working from the assumptions of soul. Of course, there are relationships between spirituality and work, in organizations, spirituality represents a specific form of work feeling that energizes action. Human feeling (emotion) has been described in terms of the “unconscious” and is often depicted in the realm of aesthetic experience – a mental activity, detached from purpose, at the “fringe of awareness” as opposed to purposeful thinking at the centre of awareness. On the other hand, feelings about work represent a response to a stimulus and involve information processing. Some of the literature makes suggestions for change in which organizations and leaders adopt particular values to enhance spirituality at work for their employees (see, e.g., Bracey, Rosenblum, Sanford, & Trueblood, 1990; Chappell, 1993; Orsborn, 1992; Van Horn & Weichel, 1997).
Kolodinsky, Giacalone and Jurkiewicz (2007) classified three distinct conceptual understandings of workplace spirituality. First at the most basic and individual level, workplace spirituality can be viewed as the incorporation of one’s own spiritual ideals and values in the work setting or ‘‘personal spirituality’’ of personal spiritual values that an individual brings to the workplace and how such values influence both ethically-related and ethically-unrelated worker interactions and outcomes. Second, workplace spirituality can also refer to a more macro-level view of the organization’s spiritual climate or culture. Whereas ‘‘personal spirituality’’ encompasses the individual values brought to the workplace, we view ‘‘organizational spirituality’’ as reflecting an individual’s perception of the spiritual values within an organizational setting. Given that the relationship between values and organizational culture and important work outcomes is well-established, how workers view organizational spirituality likely impacts their work attitudes, beliefs, satisfaction, and personal capacities to meet work challenges. Third conceptualization of workplace spirituality is an interactive one. Workplace spirituality reflects the interaction between an individual’s personal spiritual values and the organization’s spiritual values.
To integration spirituality values into business practice Cavanaugh, Hanson, Hanson, Hinojoso in their research conclude five dimensions:
1. The human relations movement. Argue that workers perform better when they feel valued for themselves, are more self-aware, and have greater freedom from supervisory control. Where survival, success, and profits are generated by “putting people first.” (Pfeffer, 1998).
2. The stakeholder movement. Stakeholders are defined as those who are influenced by the firm’s activities and therefore have a stake in its operations. The stakeholder movement has involved both theory and practice. The theory has been advanced and defended by several authors. (Friedman, 1986;Eagan et al, 2002; Svendsen, 1998) Two very large corporations committed to the practice of stakeholder responsibility are Royal Dutch Schell and BP Amoco, both of which have formal stakeholder policies and systems—often called “social audits”—for measuring their performance on stakeholder concerns.
3. The social responsibility movement. Companies Business for Social Responsibility as a resource to help companies “be commercially successful in ways that demonstrate respect for ethical values, people, community and the environment.”
4. The business ethics movement. Since the late 1970s there has been considerable attention to business ethics. A growing number of books on the subject; undergraduate and graduate courses, research centers, and professional societies devoted to business ethics have also appeared. Many corporations have developed statements of ethical principles and have launched internal training programs in business ethics.
5. Religious support groups. Some organizations exist to support business leaders in their religious faith. Thomas Monoghan, founder of a Detroit pizza chain, founded an organization called Legatus dedicated to the faith development of Catholic executives. Small group discussions executives in the Catholic Tradition are also conducted by The Woodstock Business Conference through about twenty chapters in the United States. Evangelical Christians have created the Christian Business Leadership Worldwide and another organization called Connecting Business and the Marketplace to Christ. In addition, there are a number of Christian business directories that encourage business people and consumers to support other Christian business people.
As mention above, the five dimensions can use to search the significant company spirituality values this research. Focus of this research is spirituality in work, spirituality in work exercising spiritually based values or practices within the context of work. Where leaders expect workers will positively affect the organizational bottom line and for many workers, such dynamics mean that work has taken an ever more prominent and time consuming place in their lives. As a result, workers’ need for connectedness, meaning, purpose, altruism, virtue, nurturance, and hope in one’s work and at one’s workplace likely is also at an all-time high (Jurkiewicz and Giacalone, 2004; Pfeffer, 2003). Given that the relationship between values and organizational culture and important work outcomes is well-established (Deal and Kennedy, 1982; Meglino et al., 1989)
The values and practices spirituality in work place include of: right action, communal action, compassion, tolerance, forgiveness, impeccability, integrity, continuous learning, emotional intelligence, self-reflection, acting from the heart, caring for the earth, meditation, prayer, ceremony, visualization, "brotherly" love, and dropping ego (Haroutiounian, Ghavam, Gomez and Ivshin, 2000). Certainly, some of the organizational literature suggests generally laudable values such as truth, honesty, and respect that may indeed be universal. And perhaps love and compassion were such universal values (Kolodinsky, Giacalone and Jurkiewicz, 2007). Giacalone (2004) have argued that a focus on such transcendent needs and values is an important way to bring about the ethical decisions and outcomes that are desired in organizations today. Because spiritual values as openness, connection, truth, personal development and growth, serving and sharing, and finding meaning and purpose through one’s work, make more closely identify with their organizations (Kolodinsky, Giacalone and Jurkiewicz, 2007).
Gynanjar (2005) have classified the characteristic or values of CEO’s that implement the spirituality in their work activities, the characteristics are: 1) Honest, 2) Forward Looking, 3) Inspiring, 4) Fair-minded, 5) Broad-minded, 6) Supportive, 7) Intelligent, 8) Imaginative, 9) Loyal, and 10) Cooperative. Osborne (1995) also define people values in organization as: 1) Trust and respect for one another, 2) Teamwork and win-win partnerships, 3) Giving power away, 4) Coaching and serving, 5) Overtly recognizing small successes and good tries, 6) Open, honest, clear communication.
For conclusion, to measuring the spirituality values this research using the spirituality gift inventory that developed by Hendrix (1979) where classified the spirituality values as: 1) Prophecy, 2) Service, 3) Teaching, 4) Exhorting, 5) Sharing, 6) Leading, 7) Mercy, 8) Love, 9) Enthusiasm, 10) Hope, 11) Prayer, 12) Hospitality. Hendrix (1979) has definite the spirituality values, where: prophecy means strong verbal abilities, feels God’s leadership in speaking. Service means closely tuned to everyday needs of persons. Teaching means desires to speak truth in ways that nurture growth and willingness to “be an example” for others. Exhorting means capacity for stirring and inspiring speech. Sharing means appreciation for simple and natural things. Leading means interested in organization and delegation, concerned about directions that are according to the purposes and the will of God. Mercy means compassionate and caring. Love means capacity for intimacy and closeness, feelings of affection toward many people. Enthusiasm means highly motivated. Hope means Sensitive and aware of spiritual concerns, optimistic about other persons’ motives and actions. Prayer means Capacity to express affection and love in simple ways. Hospitality means Outgoing, informal, and friendly.
2. 3. Competency
2. 3. 1. Definition Competency
The competency approach to human resources management is not new, so many authors have defined the competencies (see figure 2.3)
Figure 2.3
Current definitions of the competency conceptSource: Draganidis and Mentzas, 2006
As conclusion Draganidis and Mentzas (2006) conclude the definition competency as a combination of tacit and explicit knowledge, behavior and skills that gives someone the potential for effectiveness in task performance and this research using this definition.
2. 3. 2. Definition of Core Competency
Core competencies are those capabilities that are critical to a business achieving competitive advantage. The main ideas about Core Competencies where developed by Prahalad and Hamel (1990) argue that in the 1990s managers will be judged on their ability to identify, cultivate, and exploit the core competencies that make growth possible - indeed, they'll have to rethink the concept of the corporation it self Their central idea is that over time companies may develop key areas of expertise which are distinctive to that company and critical to the company's long term growth. Core Competencies are some of the most important sources of uniqueness: These are the things that a company can do uniquely well, and that no-one else can copy quickly enough to affect competition.
So Core competency is an area of specialized expertise that is the result of harmonizing complex streams of technology and work activity. For example Honda’s expertise in engines. Honda was able to exploit this core competency to develop a variety of quality products from lawn mowers and snow blowers to trucks and automobiles. To take an example from the automotive industry, it has been claimed that Volvo’s core competency is safety. This, however, is perhaps the end result of their competency in terms of customer benefit. Their core competency might be more about their ability to source and design high protection components, or to research and respond to market demands concerning safety (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990). As conclusion core competencies, or the collective learning and coordination skills behind the firm's product lines.
Core Competencies should change in response to changes in the company's environment. They are flexible and evolve over time. As a business evolves and adapts to new circumstances and opportunities. Prahalad and Hamel (1990) suggest three factors to help identify core competencies in any business based on “The Core Competence of the Corporation”:
1. Provides potential access to a wide variety of markets, the key core competencies here are those that enable the creation of new products and services. It should be something that opens up a good number of potential markets. If it only opens up a few small, niche markets, then success in these markets will not be enough to sustain significant growth.
2. Makes a significant contribution to the perceived customer benefits of the end product, Core competencies are the skills that enable a business to deliver a fundamental customer benefit - in other words: what is it that causes customers to choose one product over another.
3. Difficult for competitors to imitate a core competence should be "competitively unique": In many industries, most skills can be considered a prerequisite for participation and do not provide any significant competitor differentiation. To qualify as "core", a competence should be something that other competitors wish they had within their own business. This allows you to provide products that are better than those of your competition. And because you're continually working to improve this competence, or mean that you can sustain your competitive position.
A core competency can take various forms, including technical/subject matter know how, a reliable process, and/or close relationships with customers and suppliers (Mascarenhas, 1998). It may also include product development or culture, such as employee dedication. Core Competency includes services that an organization must do to be in an industry. Competitive advantage is services that are unique, like a special form. There are instances where core competency can be competitive advantage—that being the case where a product is superior.
Ever since Prahalad and Hamel introduced the term in the 1990’s, many researchers have tried to highlight and further illuminate the meaning of core competency. According to Leonard-Barton (1992), "Capabilities are considered core if they differentiate a company strategically." On the other hand, Galunic and Rodan (1998) argue that "a core competency differentiates not only between firms but also inside a firm it differentiates amongst several competencies. Core competencies guide firms recombine its competencies in response to demands from the environment"(www.wikipedia.com). Means the core competencies affect to organization performance.
2. 3. 3. Developing Core Competencies
According to Prahalad and Hamel, core competencies arise from the integration of multiple technologies and the coordination of diverse production skills. Core competencies tend to be rooted in the ability to integrate and coordinate various groups in the organization. While a company may be able to hire a team of brilliant scientists in a particular technology, in doing so it does not automatically gain a core competence in that technology. It is the effective coordination among all the groups involved in bringing a product to market that result in a core competence.
To better understand how to develop core competencies, it is worthwhile to understand what they do not entail. According to Prahalad and Hamel, core competencies are not necessarily about:
· outspending rivals on R&D
· sharing costs among business units
· integrating vertically
While the building of core competencies may be facilitated by some of these actions, by themselves they are insufficient.
Prahalad and Hamel suggest that a corporation should be organized into a portfolio of core competencies rather than a portfolio of independent business units. Business unit managers tend to focus on getting immediate end-products to market rapidly and usually do not feel responsible for developing company-wide core competencies. Consequently, without the incentive and direction from corporate management to do otherwise, strategic business units are inclined to under invest in the building of core competencies.
If a business unit does manage to develop its own core competencies over time, due to its autonomy it may not share them with other business units. As a solution to this problem, Prahalad and Hamel suggest that corporate managers should have the ability to allocate not only cash but also core competencies among business units. Business units that lose key employees for the sake of a corporate core competency should be recognized for their contribution. (www.QuickMBA / Strategy / Core Competencies)
A core competence provides a competitive advantage through being competitively unique and making a contribution to customer value or cost (Prahalad & Hamel, 1990). Long & Vickers-Koch (1995) expand the idea of core competences to core capabilities. They distinguish these two by noting that "...competencies relate to the skills, knowledge, and technological know-how that give a special advantage at specific points of the value chain, which, in combination with the strategic processes that link the chain together, form core capabilities."
Related with that, Robinson, Sparrow and Birdi (2007) argue that future competency will enable organizations to maximally exploit such HRM processes by approaching them in a more strategic manner. Support by Guest (2005) that HRM linked with organizational performance (see figure 2.4). Because of that Markides and Williamson (1994) define core competences as a pool of experience, knowledge, and systems that together can act as catalysts that create and accumulate new strategic assets. These strategic assets, which are imperfectly imitable, constitute a firm's competitive advantage. Following Nelson (1991) core capabilities can be linked to a set of skills and search routines developed within firms. The interactions indicate that this relationship is even stronger when refineries are pursuing product innovation strategies and when managers perceive skilled employees as the core competence (Wright, McMahan, McCormick and Sherman, 1997).
Figure 2.4
Human resource management will result in organization performanceSource: Guest, 2005
2. 3. 4. Measuring Core Competencies
Core competencies should heave by all people in organization. Core competencies are reflected values that are principles to running organization and for developing the human resources. The characteristic core competencies are: motive, character, attitude, value, knowledge, and skills (Ruky, 2003).
Core competencies can measure by means of three basic indicators: technological specialization, innovative capabilities and specialization/diversification (Duysters and Hagedoorn, 1996) to measure the effect of core competence to company performance, but this research don’t use this indicators because it more focus on technological on other hand this research more focus to human resources.
Three core competencies that measure in this research are linked with value chain that using to measuring the out come of company and have positive relationship. The indicators are skilled workforce, efficient production, and new business development. Skilled workforce competence described refineries in terms of the extent to which they characterized their core competence as attracting, retaining, and developing a skilled set of employees, or the input to the value chain. The efficient production competence characterized the extent to which refineries achieved competitive advantage through developing an efficient production process staffed by a highly motivated set of employees, i.e., the throughput component of the value chain. Finally, the new business development competence described the extent to which refineries characterized their ability to develop new products, new markets, and new business contracts as a core competence, focusing on the output end of the value chain (Wright, McMahan, McCormick and Sherman, 1997).
2. 4. Review of Previous Studies
The research for spirituality value and organization outcome have been investigate by many researchers, such as Liedtka (1989), Posner and Schmidt (1993) that suggest when a worker’s values and his or her perceptions of the organization’s values is strong, better work outcomes will result. A shared person-organization value has been found to positively affect work attitudes (Balazas, 1990; Posner et al., 1985), job satisfaction and turnover (O’Reilly et al., 1991), and operating unit performance (Enz and Schwenk, 1991). Along with the impact various types of cultures (e.g., strong versus weak, Schein, 1985, 1999) have on outcomes, the spiritual values evident in an organization’s culture appear to have important effects on worker attitudes known to influence worker motivation, productivity, and retention (Herman, 1973; Lawler, 1994).
Beside that the spirituality values also measured the linked with company outcome, the result is organizational spirituality was found to be positively related to job involvement, organizational identification, and work rewards satisfaction, and negatively related to organizational frustration. Personal spirituality was positively related to intrinsic, extrinsic, and total work rewards satisfaction. The interaction of personal spirituality and organizational spirituality was found related to total work rewards satisfaction. (Kolodinsky, Giacalone and Jurkiewicz, 2007).
The measuring of core competence also found about higher involvement of HR in organizational strategy was strongly related to perceptions of HR effectiveness, and that the relationship was strongest to the extent that refineries pursued a product innovation strategy and viewed skilled employees as their core competence (Wright, McMahan, McCormick, Sherman, 1997) and core competencies can be easy solution through which companies can improve their existing capabilities (Duysters and Hagedoorn, 1996).
But the literature that study about the relationship of spirituality values and core competencies is lack, the common research is more focus on the company performance or out come (Kolodinsky, Giacalone and Jurkiewicz (2007), Enz and Schwenk (1991), Liedtka (1989)) even though the research also including about the spirituality values in company that influencing the company culture (Schein (1985), Herman (1973), Lawler (1994)) but they don’t linked the spirituality values with company core competencies, even though the company outcome is impact of core competencies.
As explicit the researchers study don’t mention the spirituality values is influencing the core competencies but they just describe the spirituality values is influencing the company performance. Based on SWA magazine (2007) survey spirituality values make company more sustainable to business turbulence, and made conclusion that company should implemented the spirituality values to their company for survive and sustainable. Means the spirituality values is core competence, because based Prahalad & Hamel (1990) a core competence provides a competitive advantage through being competitively unique and making a contribution to customer value or cost. Wright, McMahan, McCormick and Sherman (1997) also said that product innovation strategy and viewed skilled employees as core competence. So the core competencies based on Watson Wyatt in Ruky (2003) is combination of skill, knowledge and behavior (core competencies) that applied trough organization succeeds and bring organization to competitive advantages. Draganidis and Mentzas (2006) conclude the definition competency as a combination of tacit and explicit knowledge, behavior and skills that gives someone the potential for effectiveness in task performance.
The spirituality values measured by Hendrix (1979) are: 1) Prophecy, 2) Service, 3) Teaching, 4) Exhorting, 5) Sharing, 6) Leading, 7) Mercy, 8) Love, 9) Enthusiasm, 10) Hope, 11) Prayer, 12) Hospitality. And the indicators of core competencies based Wright, McMahan, McCormick and Sherman (1997) are skilled workforce, efficient production, and new business development
In this research, researcher just only uses 6 spirituality values that indicated contribute to the core competencies. They are: 1) Service, 2) Teaching, 3) Leading, 4) Enthusiasm, 5) Hope and 6) Hospitality. The core competencies that would be measuring are core competencies that develop by Wright, McMahan, McCormick and Sherman (1997), the indicators are: 1) Skilled workforce, 2) Efficient production, and 3) New business development.
2. 5. Research Frame Work
Figure 2.5
Research Frame Work
| Spirituality values
|
Source: Developed by Researcher
2. 6. Research Hypothesis
Based on the literature and the concept of thinking above so this research hypothesis is:
“Spirituality values factor such as service, teaching leading, enthusiasm, hope and hospitality are determinant factor for core competencies”
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar