外文出处： European Management Journal
Vol.19,No.3,pp.268–275,2001
附 件： 1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文。
附件1：外文资料翻译译文
原文来源：欧洲管理杂志卷，2001年11月19日，第3期，268页-275页。
企业文化
在过去十年中'企业文化'对组织整体的绩效有重要影响已成为公认的事实（锡尔和马丁，1990年显着影响;科特和赫斯克特，1992年）。或明示或暗示，它已被推定，企业文化会影响一个公司的整体财务表现。尽管有这一推定，但是很少有针对企业文化对财务绩效的影响的实证研究。不过这有一个例外，科特和赫斯克特（1992）对不同的公司进行了宏观层面上研究，比较了（先验）'强势文化公司'与'弱势文化的样本公司（1992年，第19页来自22个不同行业） 。不过，他们和其他人一样也没有针对某一家单一的公司中企业文化对财务绩效影响的研究。在某种程度上，这可能是因为难于获得适当的研究点。不过，这是我们对这一现象的认识分歧。因此，本文的目的是发现在某单一公司中企业文化对财务绩效的影响。它提供了一个比较难得的机会，去探讨企业文化与财务绩效之间的关系。
文化的本质
企业文化的概念已经融入管理词汇和思想中。虽然有许多不同的概念，但大至的中心是企业文化关系到组织的核心价值观。反过来，价值观对组织、基础决策和行为有重要影响。所有组织都有自己的文化或影响组织成员行为的价值观，如客服，绩效标准，创新能力等。越来越多的组织把他们的成功归因于他们的文化管理。例如，星巴克咖啡公司，在过去的十年该公司已经从只有西雅图的两个零售店发展成又有2500家店的跨国公司，他们将他们的文化视为其成功的关键因素，具体来说，该公司的发展模式是：“我们对待我们的员工的方式会影响员工对待客户的方式，反过来，我们的成功，其中包括财务业绩。”这种信念导致了该公司的大量员工去实践旨在提高对公司的自我认同。这些措施包括广泛使用股票期权和对每周工作超过二十小时的员工提供全额补贴。在多领域中的企业文化影响企业行为和决策。然而，似乎在四个关键领域中，所有组织必须管理好自己的文化和价值观：（1）客户服务，（2）员工或人力资本的管理，（3）组织性能标准，以及（4）问责意识。这些是所有组织应该关注的企业文化的关键领域。当然，也有很多其他的组织绩效应受关注，但这些往往是对一些特殊的公司。这种额外的领域可以包括在创新，企业公民意识，对变化的开发程度，以及其他。
文化与组织绩效
企业文化影响企业绩效的基本模式基是基于以下几个关键点：第一，文化会影响目标的实现。更具体地说，具有强势文化的公司比有弱势文化的公司更容易实现自身目标。由于有可靠的动机，所谓的强势文化组织被认为有较高的成功率，正如科特和赫斯克特所说，强大的文化说经常被认为有助于提高绩效，因为它们在员工创造了一个不寻常的动机水平（1992年，第16页）。
除了文化和财务绩效之间关系的假设外，文化也已经被视为是实现组织绩效和成功的重要组成部分（Flamholtz和兰德尔，1998年，2000年）。研究发现企业文化是组织实现其功能的六要素之一。并反过来，也包括影响财务绩效（福莱姆霍特兹，1995年; 福莱姆霍特兹和兰德尔，1998年，2000年）。具体来说，企业文化已被视为是一个成功组织应具备的关键模块。这一模式，将受到进一步的实证研究支持（福莱姆霍特兹和艾克，2000年）。
研究问题
本文研究一般问题是：企业文化和财务绩效之间是否存在一定的关系？具体研究问题是：企业文化和财务绩效之间的决定因素。
结果
所得的数据比照后的结果显示在下图中。X轴显示“分区协议与企业文化的分数”。这能衡量企业文化和存在于各部门中的文知觉间的相似程度，它可以被看作是一种衡量各部门“买进”文化的方法。在某种程度上人们认为，他们各部门的行为是与公司期望的文化一致的。Y轴表示各部门的EBIT（ 息税前利润）值。
附件2：外文原文
Source：European Management Journal Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 268–275, 2001
Corporate Culture
During the past decade it has become recognized that ‘corporate culture’ has a significant impact on overall organizational performance (Siehl and Martin, 1990; Kotter and Heskett, 1992).
Explicitly or implicitly, it has been presumed that corporate culture affects the overall financial performance of a firm.
In spite of this presumption, there has been very little empirical research dealing with the financial effects of corporate culture. In one notable exception, Kotter and Heskett (1992) conducted macro-level research on different companies, and compared samples of (a priori) ‘strong culture companies’ with ‘weak culture companies’ (1992, p. 19) from 22 different industries.
However, neither they nor others have done much research on the effects of culture on financial performance of a single firm. In part, this might be due to the difficulties of gaining a suitable research site. Nevertheless, there is a gap in our understanding of this phenomenon. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to report the results of a field study of the impact of corporate culture on the ‘bottom line,’ or financial performance, of a firm. It presents the results of a relatively singular opportunity to investigate the relationship between corporate culture and financial performance in a single firm.
The Nature of Culture
The concept of corporate culture has become embedded in management vocabulary and thought.Although there are many different definitions of the concept, the central notion is that culture relates to core organizational values. In turn, values are things which are important to organizations and underpin decisions and behavior. All organizations have cultures or sets of values which influence the way people behave in a variety of areas, such as treatment of customers, standards of performance,innovation, etc. An increasing number of successful organizations have, at least in part, attributed their success to effective culture management. For example, Starbucks Coffee Company, which has grown from just two retail stores in Seattle (USA) to more than 2500 stores world-wide during the past decade, views culture as a critical factor in the organization’s success (Schultz and Yang, 1997; Flamholtz and Randle, 1998). Specifically, the company’s paradigm is that: ‘the way we treat our people affects they way our people treat our customers, and, in turn, our success, which includes financial performance.’ This belief has led the company to a number of human resource practices that are designed to enhance people’s feeling of being valued by the company. These include the widespread use of stock options and the practice of providing full benefits to all employees who work more than 20 hours per week.
There are many areas in which corporate culture influences behavior and decision-making. However,
there appear to be four key areas in which all organizations must manage their culture or values: (1) the treatment of customers, (2) the treatment of an organization’s own people or human capital, (3) standards of organizational performance, and (4) notions of accountability. These are the ‘key areas of cultural concern’ for all organizations. Naturally, there are also many other areas of organizational performance that are of concern, but these tend to be more idiosyncratic to specific firms. Such additional areas can include beliefs with respect to innovation, corporate citizenship, openness to change, as well as others.
Culture and Organizational Performance
The basic paradigm underlying the notion that culture affects performance is based upon a few keyideas. The first is that culture affects goal attainment. More specifically, companies with ‘strong’ cultures are more likely to achieve their goals than those with relatively ‘weak’ cultures. So-called ‘strong-culture organizations’ are thought to have a higher degree of organizational success (measured in market value or other financial measures of performance), because of a believed link to motivation. As stated by Kotter and Heskett, strong cultures are often said to help business performance because they create an unusual level of motivation in employees (1992, p.16).
In addition to the hypothesized relationship between culture and financial performance, culture also has come to be viewed as component of other organizational effectiveness or success models (Flamholtz and Randle, 1998, 2000). It has been theorized that the role of culture, as part of a six factor framework, explains organizational effectiveness and, in turn, financial performance (Flamholtz, 1995; Flamholtz and Randle, 1998, 2000). Specifically, culture has been viewed as a critical organizational development area, or key strategic building block, of successful organizations. This framework has, in turn, been supported by further empirical research (Flamholtz and Aksehirli, 2000).
Research Question
The general research question this article addresses is: Is there a relationship between a corporate culture and the financial performance of an organization? There was also a more specific research question in the context of this study. We were interested in determining the relationship between: (1) the extent to which people in the divisions accepted the stated culture of the company and (2) the company’s financial performance.
Results
The data derived and used in this comparison are shown in a graph in Figure 3. The x-axis shows a ‘divisional agreement with corporate culture score.’ This is a measure of the degree of similarity between the desired corporate culture and the culture perceived to exist in each division. It can be viewed as a measure of cultural ‘buy-in’ by the divisions. The y-axis presents EBIT values for the various divisions.
此处忽略！！！！！！！！
