Downsizing and organizational culture essay

Downsizing and Company Culture

By simply Joe Gonzalez

Sociology 100

Dr . Mario Reda

Stand of Material

Chapter 10

Chapter twenty-two

Organizational Tradition Defined2

Downsizing Defined.. several

Culture Change.. 4

Linking the Literary works. 7

Company Level Analysis7

Organizational/ Individual Level Analysis10

Downsizings Effect on Culture12

Section 3. 13

Downsizing And Organizational Culture

Introduction

A mentioned scholar lately assessed downsizing as by far the most pervasive yet understudied trend in the business community 1 . When we have turn into numbed by the near daily accounts of new layoffs, a brand new York Moments national survey finding is perhaps more telling: since 80, a family member in one-third of most U. H. households continues to be laid off installment payments on your By several measures, downsizing has failed abjectly as a tool to achieve the key raison detre, reduced costs. According into a Wyatt Company survey within the period among 1985 and 1990, fifth 89 percent of organizations which in turn engaged in downsizing reported price reduction because their primary aim, while simply 42 percent actually reduced expenses. Downsizing for the sake of price reduction alone has been castigated intellectually since short-sighted and neglectful of what assets will be required to increase the revenue stream for the future 3.

A truer and fuller understanding of the causes shaping and thrusting downsizing forward today comes from a great appreciation of increased global competition, changing technologies, which in turn are greatly impacting the nature of work, raising availability of a contingent work force 4, and shifting stability of electric power among organizational constituents from rank and file personnel and in the direction of shareholders as well as the chief professionals who function as their serwery proxy. When we contemplate downsizing within just these larger frameworks, it is clear that individuals are speaking of downsizing equally as a response to and as a catalyst of organizational tradition change.

This article will later offer a formal meaning of organizational tradition. For as soon as, it is suggested that culture is to an organization what personality is usually to an individual. Just like personality, change takes time and may even be hard to discern, particularly for persons inside the organization. This article will argue that, finally, the most dominant effects of downsizing will be regarding culture change, not in relation to saved costs or immediate productivity gains. Key motorists of company culture will certainly tend to condition an organizations approach to downsizing. For in whose benefit does the organization can be found? What are the basic assumptions among people who work in the organization? Exactly what the basic assumptions the organization as well as the employee help to make in relation to one another?

Building a direct link between downsizing and organizational culture is definitely not an easy matter, nevertheless , as the following example is going to demonstrate. The Chief Executive Police officer of Apple Computer just lately bought himself more time with disgruntled investors by saying they will take forceful action on the number of methodologies, including downsizing. The executive cited five crises: lack of cash, suffering quality, a failed operating system advancement project, Oranges chaotic lifestyle, and a fragmented strategy. How do you connect downsizing, which is one of a number of actions staying taken, with corporate culture, which is merely one of a quantity of crises being solved in a manner and to a level that establishes a positive relationship?

Another reason that it is hard to draw a certain link between downsizing and organizational lifestyle is that there are various variations and approaches to downsizing. A variation has been produced between positive downsizing, which is planned beforehand and usually bundled with a greater set of goals, and reactive downsizing, which would be typified by cost cutting as a final measure after a continuous period of unfocused attention to looming problems by management5. Employees reductions can range from forceful in character, i. elizabeth., involuntary cutbacks, to the milder approaches, such as resignation incentives and job sharing six. There are other ways of deciding who stays on, who will go from the outwardly arbitrary to criterion-based 7. There are diverse modes of planning, ranging from secretive sessions to open discussion posts and solicitation of tips from staff. There are different standards of notice of terminations, which include relatively harsh same working day terminations and also more good 90 day time or for a longer time notices. As well as differences in intentionality, i. elizabeth., reductions could be planned to provide employees with as little an escape as possible by what they include known in the past or they may be designed to be deliberately bothersome to the status quo 8.

Organizational Culture Described

It has been observed with respect to the idea of power that its omnipresence helps it be difficult to usefully apply in specific circumstances 9. Precisely the same may be explained of culture. If it is all over the place, and pervades every aspect of the existence, after that how can this be subject to analysis. Anschein (1992) offers at least a partial remedy. He splits organizational lifestyle into 3 levels: 1) at the surface area are artifacts, those factors (such since dress) that can be easily discerned, yet are hard to understand, 2) beneath artifacts will be espoused values which are conscious strategies, goals and sagesse, 3) the core, or essence, of culture is represented by the basic actual assumptions and values, that happen to be difficult to detect because they will exist by a largely unconscious level, yet supply the key to understanding why items happen how they do. These kinds of basic presumptions form about deeper proportions of human being existence like the nature of humans, human relationships and activity, reality, and truth.

Schein (1992) himself acknowledges that, despite rigorous study, we can just make claims about portions of culture, not really culture in the entirety. The approach which usually Schein recommends for inquiring about tradition is an iterative, specialized medical approach, similar to a therapeutic marriage between a psychologist and a patient. Scheins disciplined approach to culture stands in contrast to the almost flippant way in which lifestyle is reported in some from the popular managing literature.

Downsizing Defined

Just like culture, downsizing is difficult in its usefulness. Because it is popularly associated with giving people the axe in organizations, it is far from a term that many management consultants are there to use. On the reverse side of the variety, there are research workers who are worried that downsizing has become as well closely associated with the process of company decline and its naturally unwanted effects. Cameron, for example , defines downsizing as a great and purposive strategy: a couple of organizational activities undertaken for management of your organization and designed to increase organizational performance, productivity, and competitiveness 15. Downsizing as a result defined declines into the class of management tools for attaining desired modify, much like rightsizing and reengineering.

Plainly, the Cameron j. definition can be overly expansive. Downsizing may well and very most likely will impact or impinge on systemic change efforts such as the advantages of total quality management, reengineering, or perhaps reinventing endeavours. They are not merely one and the same, however , because the Cameron definition might imply. This is certainly significant, mainly because Camerons interconnection of downsizing with a larger, purposive technique allows him to conclude unabashedly that downsizing is a good and positive issue and that agencies should strive to do it on a regular and ongoing basis. This kind of cheery summary flies when confronted with Camerons individual four year study of thirty businesses in the automotive aftermarket, data from where revealed that hardly any of the agencies in the research implemented downsizing in a way that better their performance. Most deteriorated in terms of pre-downsizing levels of top quality, productivity, success, and the dirty dozen, elizabeth. g., issue, low well-being, loss of trust, rigidity, scapegoating) 11. Downsizing is defined in this hard work simply like a reduction in how big is the work push. This classification provides a few analytical clearness, because it does not imply a worth, either confident or adverse, and encompasses a wide range of feasible approaches. As a result defined, downsizing does not actually imply a decrease in the assets of the business, for example , a business may agreement out a function that was once done by permanent employees. The elimination from the jobs in the employees makes up downsizing.

Traditions Change

Changing an organization is messy, challenging business. Research by Kotter and Heskett (1992) indicated that culture change becomes tougher as organizations are more established and successful. The particular bases to get a companys before success could be hindrances to needed alterations under fresh and different scenarios from those which existed recently.

Prevailing models provide uncertain guideposts. For instance , it is standard fare in the leadership literature12 to depict the need for a vision of any desired long term state with the enterprise. What if elements of a vision battle with each other? Imagine if a leader, for example , decides to embrace an overall total quality managing culture constructed upon trust among all parties and, simultaneously, embarks upon a series of layoffs which are more likely to engender mistrust among those self same parties? The conventional wisdom in answer is to accept that you will see sadness and losses and a murky period which goes within the heading with the neutral region, but , in the long run, there will be new beginnings13. How much time does the simple zone last? Existing research provides no solid answers. How long will certainly a leader using a vision wait for the culture to change in confident ways? Research supports the idea that culture transform is a multi-year effort 14.

If we increase our conceptualization of culture change to incorporate both intended consequences (planned change) and unintended implications (unplanned change), then it is at least likely to be self-confident that downsizing is a catalyst for traditions change. Organizational theorists by Lewin (1951) forward, which includes Argyris (1992) have insisted upon the need for a destabilizing element in virtually any change method. The existing circumstances is considered as a energetic in which causes resisting change and makes pushing pertaining to change have found a balance. In order to move the balance (in the favor of change), the situation has to be unfrozen. Basically, people have to be rocked out of their cozy existence, and so they will be notified to the need for change.

Downsizing qualifies as being a destabilizer of status quo bet even beneath circumstances exactly where departures happen to be voluntary. Hickok (1995), for instance , documented symptoms of survivor illness at an Air force installation that had, up to the point of the exploration, experienced just voluntary take-offs. The literary works is crammed with examples of burnout, despression symptoms, anger, and betrayal as common replies by remainders of layoffs. Not all responses are adverse: there are information of people receiving charged up, finding new exhilaration in their job, being challenged by the prospective client of doing even more with fewer or saving the organization15 found that implementers of layoffs (i. e, these pulling the strings) acquired more positive reactions than performed implementees (i. e., people who were having the layoffs done to them).

The point is, it should be recognized that downsizing has modified the rule of the job game. The way in which these adjustments have tended to be theoretically euphemized is by demonstrating that the mental contract among employers and employees has become violated16. Will no longer can the employer offer work security. The modern psychological deal being marketed is conditional employment, with all the availability of schooling and creation opportunities to help in keeping employees employed, even if not at this particular company17.

By a wider cultural point of view, downsizing can be seen as the embodiment of the creative break down inherent in capitalism. Since Schumpeter (1950) wrote regarding capitalism, downsizing may not be pretty to watch and folks will get hurt for sure, but this is the way the industry takes care of alone. There is no entitlement to a task any more than there exists entitlement to get a corporation to exist. People, as well as businesses, need to equip yourself to compete in the market. Bridges (1994) and others warn anyone inside hearing range that only the foolish will let all their fates become decided by those they will work for, the wise types will believe and behave like entrepreneurs regardless if they belong to the label employees.

The representational aspects of culture change connected with downsizing really should not be overlooked. The particular act of downsizing makes an overall look of management that is taking charge. In the instance of the United States government, for example , Clinton-Gore make the claim that by eliminating 272, 900 national jobs they have reduced the price tag on government. The symbolism linked to the change may possibly weigh more heavily in peoples heads than the costs, which may include contracting away at a far higher cost for services previously offered in-house.

The political areas of culture alter associated with downsizing are also quite dramatic. Downsizing represents a power change in the direction of top rated management and shareholders. One way of conceptualizing the change is usually via expectations theory 18. The unsaid message is the fact management is definitely not afraid to decide who have a future with this business and who not. The message as if you want to continue to work here, you will have to operate harder, be a little more responsive, be more of a team player, etc .

You will find Theory By and/or Theory Y dynamics19 at work with downsizing too, depending upon the circumstances. The root theme of Theory X considering is that personnel can not be trusted to put forth effort by themselves. They need to be externally encouraged by the danger of punishment in order to put out their best efforts. Of all the downsizing practices, normally the one most tightly associated with Theory X may be the practice of giving persons no end of contract notice. Inspite of what would appear the obvious inhumanity of going for walks people who have worked for a business for 20 or more years straight to the doorway, this remains a common business downsizing practice. The presumption which would seem to underlie the practice is that people will use notice time to undermine the organization at least to be unproductive.

From a Theory Y perspective, downsizing may be seen as a way to free up employees to do the good work that they care to perform. The examination which precedes downsizing was created with the purpose of lowering unnecessary or low benefit work, reducing bureaucratic regulates, and getting rid of unneeded sales and marketing communications layers. Downsizing intent, from a Theory Y perspective, is to allow workers to get challenged by simply interesting function and to have the opportunity to produce remarkable results which are aligned with all the organizations quest and goals.

Linking the Books

It has been left a comment that the books on downsizing is sketchy and bumpy 20. Cameron j. (1994: 183) identifies, specifically, a lack of scientific data on the organizational degree of analysis. Hickok (1995) features identified significant insights being gained both equally from books at the organizational level (i. e., focused on strategy, policy, or decision-making) and at the organizational/individual program level (i. e., worried about impact of individual and group-level thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in organizational functioning).

Organizational Level Research

The primary thrust of organizational level evaluation is to focus on the need to prepare, analyze and implement downsizing carefully and within the platform of company purpose 21. Downsizing is definitely framed in the context of improving and streamlining job processes, since exemplified by total top quality management and reengineering 22. Key presumptions include a mechanistic notion of organizations, when the parts will be examined to improve fit with the whole. Organizational survival is seen as very important (e. g., the 1st order of business is made for organizations to thrive and be competitive). Key mental shifts involve development of a customer initial attitude (stated as part of a total quality supervision approach) and a modification of importance between stakeholders, with shareholders approaching first (largely unstated).

In one of the key early ideal for downsizing, Tomasko (1987) pinpoints corporate nationalities based on doubtfulness as a leading cause of excessive staffing. American corporate tradition, he disagrees, rewards champions, not guys, places control at the top of the agenda, and causes people to believe that it is better to cover mistakes than admit all of them. In consequence, staff groups (such as organizing departments) are formed to serve as watchdogs. Managers react by seeking to gain charge of ever more bloated corporate bureaucracies. Tomaskos solution is a flatter, leaner firm in which a staff environment dominates and people trust each other to contribute to common goals.

Cameron j. et approach (1991) carried out the most intensive single research of downsizing to date in terms of number of agencies involved, breadth of investigation, and span of time. The writers conducted a four 12 months longitudinal research of 31 organizations inside the automotive industry. Their very own viewpoint was that downsizing can be described as necessary and affirmative approach to becoming more competitive, and the right response to the disproportionate growth in the white-collar work force above recent years. The powerful companies within their study did not only decrease the work force, although also engaged in organizational renovate and systematic efforts at quality improvement. Successful firms engaged in downsizing as a purposeful and positive strategy. Strangely enough, only a few companies in their study were found to obtain improved organizational performance.

Two studies of change at major U. S. organizations Xerox 3 and Standard Electric (GE) 24 offer explicitly with culture alter. Tichy and Sherman label a revolution at GE, a part of that trend, under Jack Welch, was to eliminate almost 170, 1000 positions. Among the basic assumptions at GE: The ultimate check of command is improving the long term value from the organization. Pertaining to leaders of any publicly organised corporation, this implies long-term shareholder value (p. 367). GE turned resistant to the notion of lifetime employment in favor of a stated aim of rendering employees with all the best training and creation opportunities, but only conditional employment. Photocopied also resorted to significant layoffs. Just like GE, this downsizing was framed inside the larger photo of using a total quality management lifestyle. Kearns presumed that the number 1 key to success was shifting focus outward to the customer.

The Kearns and Nadler book and the Tichy and Sherman book lucidly address the process of tradition change administration, and they clearly state what many is not going to: that section of the intentional aspect of downsizing accompanied by culture alter is the imposition of discomfort on in least a few to get the focus of all. Tichy and Sherman talk of keeping away from the hard boiled frog phenomenon (p. 400) in which frogs boil to death while the water slowly changes by cold to boiling. Kearns and Nadler conclude (p. 280): There is also to create discontentment with the circumstances. Otherwise, what makes people going to work hard to disrupt it? And you can not wait around until everyone feels induced discomfort from the industry, because then simply its past too far. So you require induced discomfort. You need to chuck a few punches here and there.

There are some organizational level analyses which in turn dissent from the litany of praise for downsizing. Handy (1990) states that an organization does not can be found only for income, that is, profits should be seen as a means to different desired ends rather than while the sole end. His look at is that investors have taken above too much of the power. They should, rather, be merely one element of a hexagonal engagement ring of stakeholders which also includes employees, environmental surroundings, community, and suppliers. Petruno (1996) shows the concern that institutional aktionär activists possess gotten also greedy and imposed too large a price on the thousands upon thousands of personnel who have shed their careers, performance raises may be on the expense of hollowed out businesses. Hamel and Prahalad (1994) do not issue the legitimacy of downsizing, but argue that time spent on determining core competencies and relating those competencies towards the external marketplace is period much better spent than reorganization, rearrangement, reshuffling and reengineering, the latter may well shore up your current position, but will little to organize you to contend in the future.

Lows (1995) offers an even harsh critique. Downs decries the prevalence and public acceptance of any culture of narcissism, by which corporations have got only one objective, profit. This individual contrasts the view outside the window of Hewlett-Packards David Packard that the key to effective management was to keep in harmony the triangular interests of shareholders, administration, and personnel. Part of this narcissism can be reflected inside the increase of senior business salaries by simply 1, 500 percent among 1980 and 1995, precisely the same period of time in which record layoffs were gathered. In a Newsweek cover story, Sloan (1996: 44) states that Shooting people has gotten to end up being trendy in corporate America, in the same way that building fresh plants and being regarded as a good corporate and business citizen gave you boasting rights twenty-five years ago. You now fire employees especially white-collar workers for making your business bones.

Organizational/ Individual Level Analysis

The analysis on the organizational/individual user interface is mainly focused on telling and ameliorating the effects of downsizing on those who remain in the organization. A stream of research, the two laboratory and field, has provided documents of the damaging effects downsizing can include on remainders, these results have been explained in terms of lower morale 25, high stress 26, and a affliction marked simply by anger, jealousy, and guilt 27. The perceived fairness of the downsizing is considered an important mediating variable28 as is the potency of the conversation of information29.

Key actual assumptions include: 1) the pre-eminence of the organization in the individual, along with a strong disagreement that the business cannot reach its complete potential devoid of maximizing the effective usage of human resources, 2) reliance upon the Lewins three stage approach of unfreezing, going to a new level, and freezing in a new level, as illustrated by the Xerox and GENERAL ELECTRIC cases explained above, Lewin argued that to break open the cover of complacency, it is occasionally necessary to lead to a planned emotional stir-up 30, 3) reliance upon psychological changeover models, especially as put forward by Links (1991), Connections theorizes 3 overlapping phases of move the ending of what was, a unpleasant neutral area, or limbo, and a new start, 4) the final of the older implicit emotional contract guaranteeing lifetime work security provided that the employee maintains his or her nose area clean and does an adequate task and formulation of a fresh contract through which employees will be more autonomous and self-reliant31.

Brockner and acquaintances have analyzed the justness of layoffs from a procedural justice perspective and also have shown a link between perceived fairness from the layoffs and survivor determination to the organization32. Among the justness factors which usually Brockner investigates is the reference to existing corporate and business culture. Companies such as APPLE and Digital Equipment that have traditionally had a policy of averting layoffs are likely to be recognized by employees as violating the internal contract and for that reason as more unfair if they do use layoffs.

Noer (1993) views letting get of the outdated employment contract as hard but important. His watch is that acted lifetime career guarantees will be unhealthy the two for individuals and organizations. They will result in a kind of organizational codependency in which people invest gigantic energy in trying to control the system as well as have a lot of their self-worth tied up in trying to meet the organizations, not their own, values. Within a similar line of thinking, Hecksher (1995) concludes that management devotion to the organization is no longer required, what is needed is more professionalism, evidenced by simply creative input to the firm. Bridges (1994) goes even further, he sees a high-end trend away from traditional work, with protection, job explanation, etc . Like Noer, he sees increased possibility for people to achieve autonomy and fulfillment by taking responsibility for their own futures.

Function relationships may become much more testy during durations of company decline. That may take the sort of backstabbing, positioning of fault, and overt failure to cooperate33. Hickok (1995) examined interview answers at two downsizing military bases and found that says of increased conflict at work were significantly greater than the more positive mentions of pulling with each other.

Downsizings Impact on Culture

To get organizations, particularly the IBMs and Digital Equipments of the world which long opposed layoffs, it is hard to photo that the companies or all their cultures possess remained anything at all close to undamaged. Getting back towards the questions posed earlier:

For in whose benefit does the organization exist? It seems clear that businesses exist less today intended for the well-being of rank-and file staff than they once performed. With the Dow shattering every records, it seems like clear which the shareholders have the upper hand to make critical corporate decisions. They may be partnered with CEOs whom received an average pay raise in 95 of 23% 34. Merely look at that is prospering and who is not.

What are the basic presumptions among people about working relationships in the business? The basic assumptions about working relationships possess changed, in ways that can not yet be well assessed. It appears, at least, that associations tend to become less familial and more competitive than in the past. Precisely what is the worth of what have typically been known as commitment and loyalty? We all just do certainly not know? Precisely what is the impact with the feeling that the organization is a community even a family with relatively steady long-term operating relationships? And just how will that play out regarding cooperation provided to others as opposed to backstabbing inside the intense competition for hard to find resources? We could only be sure that things have changed, certainly not how.

What are the fundamental assumptions the organization and the worker make in relation to each other? The standard assumptions simply by employees and organizations of their employment marriage have altered from long lasting and stable, with businesses expected to make accommodations to stop laying persons off to more immediate and conditional. Researchers just like Bridges and Noer outlook a more happy future for individuals who adapt to the changing moments in the fresh scenario, yet that is a difficult forecast to evaluate.

Organizations will often have some degree of flexibility about how precisely they lessen personnel bills. Decisions to inflict pain upon staff as part of the process may very well indicate an effort to bust the current culture. Decisions to minimize soreness may echo an effort to strengthen the existing tradition. Table you sorts a number of downsizing techniques by whether or not they tend to strengthen (or leave alone) existing culture in order to intentionally destabilize the lifestyle. For these reasons, methods which can be less disruptive and/or offer members more of a sense of control happen to be labeled as reinforcing and those techniques which are especially likely to generate pain amongst members in the work force (particularly those who are asked to leave) are labeled as destabilizing:

Bottom line

It is difficult to publish with power about the relationship of downsizing to organizational culture, in part because these are the two subject areas in need of clarification and empirical study. It is without effort evident, also definitional, that a leaders social mind set will have a great deal regarding whether and exactly how downsizing is usually implemented within an organization. In addition, it seems, beyond question, that downsizing acts as an organizational destabilizer and therefore as a catalyst for culture change. Whether resultant cultural change is beneficial to the corporation as a whole is usually open to conjecture. Because downsizing is a relatively recent phenomenon at the white-collar level, time will have to differentiate between short-term results and reactions and the longer-term consequences. Most likely less fat bureaucracies is going to free visitors to get more work done and to interact more efficiently. Perhaps a whole generation of management thinkers overstated the importance of loyalty and commitment that accrues over a long and stable career tenure. That, again, will be for time for you to judge.

This information has observed three observations in relation to the effect of downsizing on organizational culture. Initial, it obviously appears that power offers shifted faraway from rank-and-file personnel in the direction of leading management/ownership. Associating this change is a shift in emphasis away from the health of individuals in the direction of the pre-eminence and predominance of the firm as a whole. Second, it appears working relationships have changed far from being familial in the direction of becoming more competitive. Third, the employer-employee marriage has shifted away from long lasting and stable in the direction of initial and contingent.

It was argued in this article that decisions associated with a downsizing action may well tend both to be broadly reinforcing (i. e., much less disruptive, more individual control) or broadly destabilizing (i. e., more likely to induce pain). Key downsizing practices had been categorized with which of these were most generally connected.

Finally, the author suggested five simple question areas that organizational leaders whom are interested in prying the moral and spiritual dimensions of downsizing may usefully consider. These include making sure the fundamental decency of the strategy being considered, engaging in ideal dialogue, considering through the implications for those who can be adversely afflicted, having prepared explanations pertaining to multiple constituencies, and providing a realistic chance for a better long term for the business and the companies stakeholders.

Functions Cited

1 ) American Management Association (1994). 1994 study on downsizing.

2 . Armstrong-Stassen, Meters. (1993). Remainders reactions into a workforce lowering: A comparison of blue-collar workers and their supervisors, Canadian Diary of Administrative Sciences 10 (4), pp. 334-343.

3. Argyris, C. (1992). Knowledge for action: A guide to conquering barriers to organizational transform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

4. Bennis, T. (1989). On becoming a innovator. Reading, MUM: Addison-Wesley.

5. Links, W. (1987). Managing changes. Reading, MUM: Addison-Wesley.

6. Bridges, W. (1988). Surviving the survivor problem.

six. William Bridges and Co-workers (pamphlet, 13 pages). (1994). Job move: How to grow in a community without jobs. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

8. Brockner, J. (Winter, 1992). Handling the effects of layoffs on other folks, California Management Review, pp. 9-27.

9. Brockner, J., Konovsky, M, Cooper-Schneider, R., Folger, R., Martin, C., and Bies, R. (1994).

15. Interactive associated with procedural rights and final result negativity about victims and survivors of job loss, Academy of Management Diary 37(2), pp. 397-409.

11.

12. Cameron j., K. S i9000., Freeman, S i9000. J., and Mishra, A. K. (1991). Best practices in white-collar downsizing: Managing contradictions, Academy of Management Business 5(3), pp. 57-72.

13. Cascio, W. (1993). Downsizing: So what do we know? What have we learned? Academy of Managing Executive 7(1), pp. 95-104.

16. Downs, A. (1995). Business executions. NY: AMACOM (225 pages).

15. Fierman, J. (January 24 1994). The backup work force, Lot of money, pp. 30-36.

sixteen. Greengard, S i9000. (November 1993). Dont run downsizing: Strategy, plan, program, Personnel Log 72(11), 64-76.

seventeen. Hamel, G., and Prahalad, C. T. (July-August 1994). Competing for the future, Harvard Business Review, pp. 122-128.

18. Convenient, C. (December 5 1990). What is a organization for? Michael jordan Shanks Funeral Lecture reprint (13 pages).

nineteen. Hecksher, C. (1995). White-collar blues: Managing loyalties in an age of restructuring. New York: Basic Books.

20. Hickok, T. (1995). The impact of force reductions on those who remain: Research of civilian workers at two Office of Protection bases. Unpublished doctoral texte, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

21. Kearns, D. and Nadler, M. (1992). Prophets in the dark: How Xerox reinvented itself and beat back the Japanese. New York: HarperCollins (334 pages).

22. Kotter, J. And Heskett, T. (1992). Corporate culture and satisfaction. New York: The Free Press.

twenty three. Kozlowski, T., Chao, G., Smith, E., and Hedlund, V. (1993). Organizational downsizing: Strategies, interventions, and study implications, Intercontinental Review of Industrial and Company Psychology eight, pp. 263-332.

24. Leana, C. and Feldman, D. C. (1992). Coping with job loss: How persons, organizations, and communities interact to layoffs. Nyc: Lexington Ebooks.

twenty-five. Lewin, T. (1951). Basic field theory. New York.

26. McGregor, D. (1960). The human part of business. New York: McGraw-Hill.

28. Mohrman, T. A., and Mohrman, A. M., Junior. (1983). Staff involvement in declining organizations, Human Resources Management 22(4), pp. 445-465.

28. New York Times (1996). The downsizing of America. Ny: Times Literature.

twenty nine. Noer, G. (1993). Treatment the wounds: Overcoming the trauma of layoffs and revitalizing reduced organizations. S . fransisco: Jossey-Bass.

30. Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, Mass: Pitman Publishing.

31. Petruno, T. (December 19 1996). Has greed supplanted shareholder value? Are usually Times.

32. Rousseau, D. (1995). Psychological deals in businesses: Understanding created and unsaid agreements. 1, 000 Oaks, CALIFORNIA: Sage.

33. Schein, E. (1992). Organizational traditions and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

thirty four. Schumpeter, M. (1950). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New york city: Harper and Row.

35. Sloan, Allan (February 26 1996). The strike men, Newsweek, pp. 44-48.

thirty-six. Sutton, L. I. and DAunno, Big t. (1989). Decreasing organizational size: Untangling the consequences of money and people, Academy of Management Assessment 14(2), pp. 194-212.

37. Tichy, N. and Sherman, H. (1994). Control your future or someone else can. New York: HarperCollins.

32. Tomasko, Ur. M. (1990). Downsizing: Reshaping the corporation for future years. New York: AMACOM.

39. Washington Post (March a few 1996). Entrepreneurs at main corporations got 23 percent raise in 95, s. c1.

40. Washington Post (May 5 1997). DIGEST, l. c1.

41. Waterman, R., Waterman, J., and Collard, B. (July-August 1994). Toward a much more career-resilient labor force Harvard Organization Review, pp. 87-95.

42. The Wyatt Firm (1993). Best practices in business restructuring: Wyatts 1993 survey of corporate and business restructuring.

43. Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. Ny: Wiley.