CONCEPTUL DE CULTURĂ ORGANIZAȚIONALĂ ȘI RELATIVISMUL CULTURAL, ÎN CONTEXTUL LIBERTĂȚII RELIGIOASE
The Concept of Organizational Culture and Cultural Relativism, in the Context of Religious Freedom.
Organizational culture consists of norms of conduct, values, aspirations and expectations, beliefs and habits. There are certain community values that encourage a certain type of behavior within them: from the way they dress, to the way they resolve conflicts. Organizational culture differentiates one community from another. The organizational culture of the community generates how the activities are structured within the community and the relationships between people, the links with the external environment, but also the results obtained within the community because it indirectly affects the motivation, loyalty and creativity of the community members. There are communities that have a culture of power, where the formal leader leads by a strict control. At the opposite pole, there are communities that have a team-type culture, where what matters is everyone’s participation in a collective effort for the common good, and which value members’ creativity and communication. There are also communities that have an academy- like culture, where the emphasis is on personal development and attracting individual talent. There is an individualistic approach to community and a holistic approach. Within the individualistic approach, each initiative is configured on an open stage, but also behind the scenes of the others’ interpretations. When individual participation is hindered, the risk of dysfunction and decreased performance is very high. From the holistic perspective, culture means norms, values, patterns of behavior, rituals, traditions, independent of the individual, made up of either cognitive, normative or affective elements. In the context of religious freedom, cultural relativism must also be considered. In such a society, man has to face an avalanche of information, customs, beliefs, religions. The cultures, characteristic of some peoples or some geographical spaces, ended up intersecting more and more often, coexisting in the same society and exerting a special pressure on the formation of the individual. Religious pluralism came to have an increasing influence on culture. Considering all these things, in the present article the concept of organizational culture and cultural relativism will be particularly highlighted, in the context of religious freedom.
• ALMOND, G. & VERBA, S., Cultura civică, CEU Press, DU Style, București, 1969/1996.
• BARNLUND, C. D. & ARAKI, S., „Intercultural encounters: The management of compliments by Japanese and Americans” în Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16, 1985.
• BOESCH, C., „Symbolic communication in wild chimpanzees?”, în Human Evolution, 6, 1991.
• BOZIAN, M., Dinamici identitare și procese aculturative. Studiu intercultural în România și SUA, Lucrare de licență, UVT, Timișoara, 2004.
• DAHL, S., Intercultural Research: The Current State of Knowledge, Middlesex University Discussin Paper No. 26, available at SSRN; http://ssrn.com/abstract=658202, 2005.
• DASEN, P., PERREGAUX, C., MICHELINE, R., Educația interculturală, Editura Polirom, Iași, 1999.
• EMBER, R. C. & EMBER, M., Anthropology (Ed. a IV-a), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1985.
• GAVRELIUC, Alin, Psihologie interculturală, Repere teoretice și diagnoze românești, Editura Polirom, Iași, 2011.
• GEERTZ, C., The interpretation of cultures, Basic Books, New York, 1973/2001.
• HERSKOVITS, J. M., „Some Further Comments on Cultural Relativism”, în American Anthropologist, 60 (2), 1958.
• HOFSTEDE, G., Culture’s Consequences: International differences in work-related values, Sage, Beverly Hills, 1980/2001.
• KLUCKHOHN, C. & KROEBER, L. A., Culture: A critical review of concepts and definitions, Peabody museum, Cambridge, 1952, apud Adler, International Dimensions of Organizational Behaivior, wadsworth Publishing, New York, 1997.
• MCGREW, C. W., Chimpanzee Material Culture: Inplications for Human Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992.
• MOORE, K. O. & LEWIS, J. D., „Learning theory and culture”, în Psychological Review, 59 (5), 1952
• NICOLAU, Irina, Talmeș-Balmeș de etnologie și multe altele, Editura Ars Docendi, București, 2001.
• RENARD-CASEVITZ, M. F., „Aculturație”, în P. Bonte, M. Izard (ed), Dicționar de etnologie și antropologie, ed. 1, Editura Polirom, Iași, 1999.
• ROTARU, Ioan-Gheorghe, “Libertatea religioasă – temelie a demnității umane”, în Religie și libertate. Săptămâna libertății religioase, 9-16 aprilie 2011, București, Casa de editură “Viață și Sănătate”, 2011, pp. 29-36.
• SCHEIN, E., Organizational Culture and Leadership (ed. a III-a) – Wiley Publishers, New York, 2004.
• SHWEDER, A. R. & SULLIVAN, A. M., „The semiotic subject of cultural psychology”, în L.A. Pervin (ed), Handbook of personality theory and research, Guilford, New-York, 1990 .
• SPENCER-OATEY, H., Culturally speaking: managing rapport through talk across cultures, Continuum, Londra, 2000.
• TRIANDIS, C. H., The Analysis of Subjective Culture, John Wiley, New York, 1972.
• WHITE, A. L., „Culturalogical vs psychological interpretations of human behavior”, în American Sociological Review, 12, 1947.
• ZIMBARDO, G. P., On the ethics of intervention in human psychological research with special reference to the Stanford prison experiment, în Cognition, 2, 1973.