article rmt

8/14/2019 Article Rmt

1/22

Enterprise ethical climatechanges over life cycle stages

Jernej Belak and MatjazMulejFaculty of Economics and Business, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia

Abstract

Purpose Life cycle stages may see, result from, and/or cause, changes in culture and climate asthe right-brain attributes of both managers and their co-workers. A four-stage model is used to perceivethese possible changes. Findings are tested in Slovenian enterprises. Differences per stages may becrucial and shouldtherefore be known to managers/owners. Basedon thecase study research,this paperaims to suggest that enterprise awareness of importance of ethical climate can be of essential meaningforits long-termsuccess. Thepurposeof this paper is to discover differences in enterprise ethical climatein different enterprise life cycle stages and to identify their importance for active ethical climate care bythe enterprises.

Design/methodology/approach In this paper, the qualitative research is applied. The researchcognitions on ethical climate are discussed in application of the dialectical systems theory.

Findings The paper finds that there are some differences in enterprise ethical climate for enterpriselife cycle stages and indicates a significant presence of the rule, law and code and instrumentalethical climates. Movement towards a more bureaucratic method of enterprise functioning, as anenterprise moves from the pioneer stage towards the stage of turn-over, was also found.

Practical implications This paper gives us some insights in the state of ethical climate inSlovenian enterprises. In a frame of practical implications, a further research should be done to showwhich measures of such ethical climate implementation should be used to stimulate the enterprisesinnovative behaviour in accordance with the state of enterprises life cycle stage.

Originality/value The available literature does not provide for a similar research of linkagebetween the ethical climate and enterprises life cycle.

KeywordsCybernetics, Business ethics, Organizational innovation, Systems theory, SloveniaPaper typeResearch paper

1. IntroductionOne speaks much more about knowledge management than about values/culture/ethics/norms, which result from the right rather than leftbrain hemisphere and influencehow knowledge is directed and applied (Potocan and Mulej, 2007a, b, c; Mulej, 2007a, b).This situation reflects the usual lack of requisitely holistic (systemic) thinking ofspecialists. In the functioning of enterprises all stakeholders matter and each group ofbusiness participants has its own interests (Kajzer et al., 2008), not knowledge only(Thommen, 2003). Lack of interest consideration of and by any interest group may causeconflict, which has to be resolved, if the enterprises aim is to survive and be successful(Belak and Kajzer, 1994; Belak, 2005). Stakeholders interests develop and change intime, as enterprises change and develop. There is an extensive body of literature on theconcept of organizational life cycle, which attempts to model the stages that enterprisespass through, as they evolve from start-up to mature enterprises (Pu mpin and Prange,1991; Bleicher, 1994, 2004; Fueglistaller and Halter, 2005).

In economic science, the biological life cycle was used for describing and explainingthe developmental and growth changes of enterprises. Several authors refer to variouslife cycle stages of enterprises within which they then describe different enterprise

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0368-492X.htm

Enterpriseethical climate

changes

1377

KybernetesVol. 38 Nos 7/8, 2009

pp. 1377-1398q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0368-492XDOI 10.1108/03684920910977032


2/22

characteristics and problems. Pumpin and Prange (1991), as well as other authors,argue that no uniform management model exists as an answer to problems ofenterprises in different life cycle stages.

While opinions on the number and nature of specific stages in a life cycle differ, it is

clear that organizational challenges and managerial approaches vary as the enterpriseevolves (Morris et al., 2002). These developments would also seem to have ethicalimplications, although little research has been done to address the relationship betweenlife cycle stages and enterprise ethics.

Since science recognizes the fact that an enterprise passes through different lifecycle stages, and that life cycle stages differ in terms of management systems, formalstructures, control systems, documentation of transactions and number of proceduralhurdles (Morriset al., 2002), our main research problem was focused on differences inenterprise ethical climate as one of the most important business ethics impact factor.The present paper considers the fact that there are several elements and factorsimpacting the enterprises ethical behaviour such as enterprises core values, enterprise

culture, formal and informal measures of business ethics implementation (Kaptein,1998; Belak, 2008), not enterprise climate only.The first part of this contribution therefore deals with the argumentation of the

enterprise life cycle phenomena. In the second part, the importance of the enterpriseethical climate is argued, and in the third part the empirical research and the researchcognitions are presented. Before them, we will briefly present how this research hasbenefited from the application of the Dialectical Systems Theory (DST).

2. The general and the dialectical systems theoriesIn our understanding of the General Systems Theory (Bertalanffy, 1968, edition 1979),the most crucial sentences read: [. . .] systems theory originally intended to

overcome current over-specialization (exposure of these words by bolding is ours,M. Mulej) [. . .] (Bertalanffy, 1968, edition 1979, p. VII); General systems theory, then, isscientific exploration of wholes and wholeness which, not so long ago, were consideredto be metaphysical notions transcending the boundaries of science (Bertalanffy, 1968,edition 1979, p. XX). As we see inEncyclopaedia (Francois, 2004), most authors of variousversions of systems theories and cybernetics have not overcome the currentover-specialization. This may solve many problems rather the one of crucialoversights resulting along with deep insights due to over-specialization. Hammond(2003) studied the history of systems theory and found that the fathers of both systemstheories and cybernetics used to work on an interdisciplinary basis.

Three decades earlier the same problem was detected by Mulej (1974, 1979) and Mulejet al. (2009). His response was labeled the dialectical system. The ancient Greek word for

interdependence was used dialectics (Britovsek et al., 1960). For wholeness of insightsand action (Drack and Apfalter, 2007), all attributes of the object under investigationwould have to be considered, which is impossible to attain inside a single selectedviewpoint that the narrow specialist tend to apply (tacitly and mostly). Hence, a system,i.e. network of all viewpoints of all different specialists is needed, which reaches beyondthe human capacity. Thus, the dialectical system is defined as a system, i.e. network ofall crucial viewpoints, which enables the requisite holism (Mulej, 2007b). TheBertalanffys crucial aim to fight important oversights has thus become attainable by

K38,7/8

1378


3/22

the DST much more than by most other versions of systems theory and cybernetics.DST supports also informal systemic thinking and requisitely holistic behaviour.

In the case of investigation reported about in this contribution, the requisite holismis met by the synergy of the enterprise life cycle approach and the enterprise ethical

climate viewpoint.

3. Enterprise life cycle approachThe application of the biological life cycle model to economic science and practice is arelatively new phenomenon. Fueglistaller and Halter (2005) refer to Grabowski andMueller (1975), who developed the Life Cycle Theory (Lebenszyklustheorie) in the 1970s.According to Fueglistaller and Halter (2005) and Korallus (1988) was the author whoimportantly contributed to this area, likewise Pumpin and Prange (1991), Rosenbauer(1995) and Kemmetmuller and Schmidt (1995). An especially significant role indeveloping the enterprise life cycle among these authors was played by works of theco-creators of the St Gallen Model of Integral Management Bleicher (1994, 2004),Pumpin and Prange (1991) and Fueglistaller and Halter (2005).

Pumpin and Pranges (1991) concepts of the enterprise life cycle described in theirlatest work have been used by various Slovenian scientists and researchers. Pucko(2003) and Duh (2002), in particular, derived from it important discussions andresearch. With the application of ideas from these enterprise developmental models,Duh (2003) developed her own developmental model of family enterprise.

Cathomen (1996 in Fueglistaller and Halter, 2005) differentiates betweenorganizational and technology life cycles. He categorizes the organizational life cycleinto: life cycle of products, organizations, branches and industries, as well as resourcepotentials. His concepts focus on the establishment/beginning and aging of enterprisesand organizations, which in time change from entrepreneurial to bureaucratic

organizations. In technology life cycles, the author (Cathomen 1996 in Fueglistallerand Halter, 2005) differentiates between: the life cycles of technologies, systems, costsand processes. In his classification, the author proposes a combination of economic andmanagerial ideas, as well as ideas about the enterprise life cycle (the enterprises partsystems, and its environment).

With the life cycle concept, the life of an enterprise is presented, making allusions toits growth and development a business changes qualitatively and quantitatively.Most authors explain both terms in combination with an enterprise life cycle andcombine these phenomena in their models of enterprise developmental cycle.

In his model of enterprise development, Bleicher (1994) distinguishes sixdevelopmental stages. Each stage has its own context at the end of every stage, theenterprise faces specific problems. If the crisis at the stage transition is not managed

correctly, the enterprise can regressto a previous stage or even reach the stageof decline and,consequently, bankruptcy.During the first three developmental stages, the enterpriseis capable of developing from its own strengths these are called the stages of internaldevelopment (Bleicher, 1994). In the authors opinion, further enterprise development ispossible only by acquisition of and in cooperation with other enterprises, and commonexploitation of business opportunities; hence, we can speak of external enterprisedevelopment. In the last developmental stage, enterprise shrinks and consolidates afterunsuccessful external development, or it divides into specific parts. At every


changes

1379


4/22

developmental stage, its management faces specific problems that are reflected at thenormative, strategic and operative management levels.

Thommen supplemented Bleichers developmental model with the components ofstrategy, structure, and culture of an enterprise at a certain developmental stage. In

Thommens opinion, it is not only strategic decisions but that also develop the businesslife cycle. An enterprise witnesses changes in its structure and culture when passingthrough various developmental stages. For example, in small enterprises where thefounder (pioneer) has a strong impact on management, stakeholders, and businessstrategy, the enterprise can act in a very flexible manner (Thommen, 1997).

Pumpin and Prange (1991) developed their model of business development within theframework of the St Gallen concept of integral management. They distinguish fourenterprise configurations, which are suitable for describing an enterprisesdevelopmental stages. Pumpin and Prange (1991) named these stages pioneer,growing, mature, and enterprise in turn-over. In the authors opinion (Pumpin andPrange, 1991), enterprise development is defined by its use of business opportunities.The enterprise should always exploit environmental and internal change, from whichnew business opportunities occur. Since business opportunities follow their own lifecycle, which in the end leads to the stage of decline, it is essential for an enterprise tosearch for and discover new business opportunities (Duh, 2002).

4. Enterprise ethical climateEthical climate concepts remain popular as a means of understanding theright-brain-based ethical atmosphere in enterprises. For the purpose of ourdiscussion, we will use ethical climates as identified by Victor and Cullen (1988). Intheir opinion, an institutional normative system can be considered as an element ofculture, although enterprise culture is more comprehensive and includes the patterns ofbehaviour, artefacts, ceremonies and special language. Observers of organizational

ethical climate discuss only those organizational norms that concern practices andprocedures with ethical consequences in only a segment of their organizational culture.

To describe the difference between enterprise culture and climate, Grover and Enz(2005) argue that climate is an informal, attitudinal categorisation of the ethical context.They also claim that enterprise culture refers to the artefacts and representations of theethical beliefs of the enterprise. Furthermore, the distinction between ethical culture andclimate helps to clarify in what way the enterprise rules of conduct make a difference.Culture has a manifestation, andit has a stronger impact on theobserved ethical behaviourin enterprises that have codes of ethical conduct, as well as other formal measures ofbusiness-ethics implementation, compared to those with no codes. In contrast to culture,ethical climate is composed of subjective, shared beliefs about the ethical position of theenterprise, and has a stronger influence in enterprises with no code of conduct or anyother

measures of business ethics implementation (Grover and Enz, 2005). Agarwal and Malloy(1999) considers enterprise culture as a broader term, and defines ethical climate as ashared set of norms, values and practices of enterprise members regarding appropriatebehaviour in the workplace.

Several researchers have focused on understanding the factors that influence ethicalbehaviour in enterprise. Various ethical decision-making models propose that ethicalbehaviour is influenced by a combination of individual characteristics such as valuesand cognitive moral development, and contextual factors such as reward systems,

K38,7/8

1380


5/22

rules and codes (Ferrelet al., 1989). The researchers argue that although the individualcharacteristics have strong importance in enterprises ethical behaviour the researchershould put emphasis on the role of contextual factors, which seem to have strongerimportance from the practical perspective because managers have more control over

the work environment that they do over individuals values or moral development(Trevino, 1990; Trevino and Ball, 1992; Trevinoet al., 1998, 2000).

In the scientific theory, ethical context of enterprises behaviour has been representedmostly by two multidimensional constructs: ethical culture and ethical climate (Trevino,1990; Trevinoet al., 2000; Victor and Cullen, 1988). These two constructs were mainlydeveloped independently and were based on slightly different assumptions andliteratures. Although both constructs have been theoretically associated with individualethical behaviour, empirical support for these relationships is lacking (Trevinoet al.,1998). This can be also the reason for the number of further unresolved issues such as:are measures of enterprise culture end enterprise climate addressing the same ordifferent aspects of the ethical context? Do enterprise culture and climate predict the

same or different outcomes as attitudes, behaviours (Trevinoet al., 1998)?The above-stated questions are origin of the organizational studies literature about

the relationship between enterprise culture and enterprise climate, and the relationshipbetween these context variables and attitudes and behaviour (Kopelmanet al., 1990).Denison (1996) proposed an important thesis that differences between culture andclimate literatures are differences of theoretical roots, perspective and preferredmethodology rather than differences of substance.

Several other scientists argue that important difference between enterprise cultureand enterprise climate exists. In Moran and Volkweins (1992) opinion enterpriseclimate is an enduring characteristic of an enterprise. By contrast, culture is a highlyenduring characteristic of an enterprise where it evolves slowly. In their opinion,culture is, in a sense, a record of a social units interpretation of its history and thereforedepends on the existence of a known past of considerable duration. Climate evolves outof some of the same elements as culture but it is, in terms of enterprise realities,shallower in that it both forms more quickly and changes more rapidly.

Bothenterprise culture and enterprise climaterefer to aspects of an enterprises contextthat are thought to influence attitude and/or ethical behaviour (Trevinoet al., 1998). Forbetter understanding, these two constructs their authors proposed their metaphoricexplanation. The term climate suggests meteorological climate and qualities such astemperature, humidity, wind, and other atmosphericconditions thatcan affect individuals(e.g.feelings), although it is unclear exactlywhat the effects will be (Trevino etal., 1998). Incontrast, the culture evokes from rules, codes, rewards, leadership, rituals and stories sense-making devices that more explicitly guide and shape behaviour (Smircich, 1983).

Climate may therefore characterize enterprisesin terms of broad normative characteristicsand qualities that tell people what kind of enterprise this is essentially what theenterprise values are. Therefore, enterprise climate is likely to be associated with attitudes,but may influence decision making and behaviour only indirectly (Gaertner, 1991).Enterprise culture on the other hand, characterizes the enterprise in terms of formal andinformal control systems (e.g. rules, reward systems and norms) that are aimed morespecifically at influencing behaviour (Trevinoet al., 1998). In such manner, the authors(Trevino et al., 1998) also argue that there is a strong relationship between enterprise


changes

1381


6/22

culture and enterprise climate. For example, a culture that supports ethical conductthrough codes of conduct is likely to be related to a climate that values rules and laws.

For the purposes of our research on enterprise ethical climate, we used methodologydeveloped by Victor and Cullen (1988) who describe the enterprise climate as perceptions

that are psychologically meaningful molar descriptions that people can agreecharacterize a systems practices and procedures. Further on, the authors argue thatthe prevailing perceptions of typical organizational practices and procedures that haveethical content constitute the ethical work climate. In their opinion, ethical climate isconceptualized as a general and pervasive characteristic of an organization, affecting abroad range of decisions. Ethical climate, therefore, informs/influences members of theorganization what one can do and what one ought to do regarding the treatment of others.The authors believe that climate types represent perceived norms of an organization orgroup with an ethical basis.

Victor and Cullen (1988) developed a two-dimensional theoretical typology of ethicalclimates (as shown in Figure 1). The first dimension represents the ethical criteria used

for organizational decision making. The second dimension represents the locus

ofanalysis used as a referent in ethical decisions. Cross-tabulation of the two dimensionsresults in nine theoretical ethical climate types.

Based on the ethical criterion and locusof analysis, Victor and Cullen (1988) arguethat five major types of ethical climate occur in enterprises, the:

(1) caring climate, where employees are expected to act in a way which is best forall enterprise stakeholders;

(2) rules climate, where employees must obey rules and procedures determinedby the enterprise;

(3) law and code climate, where employees are expected to respect and obey thelaw as well as codes and professional standards;

(4) instrumental climate, where fulfilment of individual interests is in focus; and

Figure 1.Theoretical ethical climatetypes

Locus of analysis

Individual Local Cosmopolitan

Egoism

Self-interest Company profit Efficiency

Benevolence

Friendship Team interest Social responsibility

Ethicalcr

iterion

Principle

Personal morality Company rules and

procedures

Laws and

professional codes

Source:Victor and Cullen (1988, p. 104)

K38,7/8

1382


7/22

(5) independence climate, where employees are expected to follow their ownmoral beliefs in their decision making.

5. Research methodologyFor our research on enterprise ethical climates, we chose a multiple case study researchmethodology (as shown in Figures 2 and 3). Bell (1993) defines this methodology as anumbrella with common characteristics of focusing research attention on certainspecific examples or phenomena. Case study research is defined by Yin (1993, 1999) asempirical research into contemporary phenomena in the real environment. The mainpurpose of such a methodology is to obtain an idea about the real and reciprocalfunctioning of variables or events. As such, the case study research method enables theresearcher to focus on certain specific phenomena in a quest to define the reciprocalprocesses that are fundamental in their meaning for other research methods such assurveys, interviews, focus groups, experiments, analyses of archive data, etc. In ourresearch, we carried out face-to-face interviews, which were based on pre-designed

questionnaire. The interviews were made with the owners/managers of 17 Slovenianenterprises and took 2.5 hours on average.In our research, we examined enterprises in various life cycle stages. Life cycle stage

of an enterprise was defined in the first part of the questionnaire, our first construct,following the methodology developed by Pumpin and Prange (1991). As shown inAppendix 1, in the first part their methodology defines the characteristics of each lifecycle stage (pioneer, growth and maturity stage and the phase of turn-over). In thesecond part, the data gathering were performed in order to define the life cycle stage ofthe enterprise examined.

As proposed by Yin (2003), we used a multiple case study approach in our research,where replication logic was possible (see case study design shown in Figure 2). In ourresearch, we examined enterprises in various life cycle stages. Life cycle stage of an

enterprise was defined in the first part of the questionnaire, our first construct,following the methodology developed by Pumpin and Prange (1991). Using thereplication logic, we were able to confirm specific findings in a frame of differententerprise life cycle stages, where we examined quantitative (the age of enterprise, size,etc.) as well as qualitative (management behaviour, and its attitudes towards problems,

Figure 2.Empirical multiple case

study design

Select cases

Design data

collection

protocol

Conduct 1stcase

study

Conduct 2ndcase

study

Conduct

remaining case

studies

Write individual

case report

Write individual

case reports

Write individual

case report

Draw cross-case

conclusions

Modify theory

Develop policy

implication

Write cross-case

report

Develop theory


changes

1383


8/22

the enterprises organizational structures, mission, strategic program, culture, etc.)characteristics (see also Appendix 1) of the examined enterprises.

To determine the ethical climate of the examined enterprises, we used themethodology developed by Victor and Cullen (1988). Questionnaire items representedeach of the theoretical climate types (as shown in Appendix 2). Respondents were askedto indicate on a six-point Likert-type scale how accurately each of the items describedtheir general work climate. The six-point scale had the following verbal anchors:completely false 0, mostly false 1, somewhat false 2, somewhat true 3, mostlytrue 4, completely true 5. The combination of the highest values of the ethical criteriaandlociof analyses showed the ethical climate of the enterprises. The highest summary

results under a certain climate type defined the ethical climate in the enterprise, asshown in the example in Table I.

6. Research findings6.1 Life cycle stageThe life cycle stage of these enterprises was determined by using the methodologydeveloped by Pumpin and Prange (1991). In our research, we examined the enterprises

Figure 3.Methodologies andresearch constructs usedin the empirical research

C2: Ethical climate of the enterprises examined

C1: Life cycle stage of enterprises examined

Assessing the ethical climate using the methodology developed

by Victor and Cullen (1988)

Life cycle stage of enterprises observed determined by using

Puempin and Prange's (1991) methodology of life cycle stage

Note:C = research construct

Case study research: developed questionnaire consisted of 2 research constructs,

answered by owners/managers of 17 Slovenian enterprises in face to face interviews

K38,7/8

1384


9/22

that were classified in four various enterprise life cycle stages, as shown in Tables IIand III.

Our research examined, three (17.65 per cent) enterprises in the pioneer stage, eight(47.05 per cent) in the growth stage, and three (17.65 per cent) in the maturity stage of

the enterprise life cycle as well as three (17.65 per cent) enterprises in the turn-overstage. We performed our interviews in two (11.7 per cent) micro, two (11.7 per cent)small, five (29.4 per cent) medium, and eight (47.2 per cent) large enterprises, classifiedon the basis of the Slovenian Companies Act.

6.2 Type of ethical climateIn the frame of an ethical climate examination, our case study research followed themethodology developed by Victor and Cullen (1988). As shown in Table IV and

Climate type Sum value

Caring 30

Law and code 10Rules 7Instrumental 5Independence 7

Table I.Example of ethical

climate in an enterprise

Enterprise Size Life cycle stage

A Small PioneerB MediumC LargeD Micro GrowingE LargeF MediumG LargeH LargeI MediumJ MediumK MediumL Micro MatureM SmallN LargeO Large Turn-overP LargeR Large

Table II.Enterprise distribution

by size and life cyclestage

Life cycle stage Percentage

Pioneer 17.65Growing 47.05Mature 17.65Turn-over 17.65Total 100

Table III.Distribution of research

sample by enterprise lifecycle stage


changes

1385


10/22

Figure 2, in these particular enterprises, our research showed all five types of ethicalclimate as defined by the authors (Victor and Cullen, 1988).

Our research shows (Figure 4) that in enterprises A, B and C, a caring ethical climateprevailed. As we can observe from Figure 4, the characteristics of a rule ethical

climate also have a strong impact on enterprises B and C.In Figure 5, we can observe the research findings showing that the law and code

ethical climate has the strongest impact on enterprises in the growth stage of the life cycle.In the enterprises D and F, this type of climate prevailed; on the other hand, in enterprisesE, G and J, a combination of law and code and rule ethical climate was found.

Figure 4.

Pioneer enterprises interms of their ethicalclimate

0

1

2

3

4

5Caring

Rules

Law&codeInstrumental

IndependanceA

B

C

Enterprise A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P RLife cycle stage Pioneer Growth Mature Turn-over

Ethical climate c c/r c/r l l/r l r/l r/i c/l l/r c/r r/l i l/r r/l r/l/i r/l/i

Notes:c caring climate; r rules climate; l law and code climate; i instrumental climate; in

independence climate

Table IV.Examined enterprises

and ethical climate

Figure 5.Growing enterprises interms of their ethicalclimate

0

1

2

3

4

5D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

Caring

Rules

Law&code

Instrumental

Independance

K38,7/8

1386


11/22

In enterprise H, the rule climate prevailed; however, enterprise K showed the presence ofthe care and rule ethical climate types in combination.

In the case of enterprises L and N, a strong combination of rule and law and codetype of ethical climate can be observed as shown in Figure 6. In enterprise M, the

instrumental type of ethical climate was dominant.In enterprises O, P and R, a combination of rule and law and code type of ethical

climate prevailed, while enterprise P showed strong characteristics of aninstrumental ethical climate (Figure 7).

As shown in Figure 8, our case study research showed, that in most pioneerenterprises, a combination of care and rule ethical climates was present. Pioneerenterprises expect their employees to react and act in the way best for all enterprisestakeholders. On the other hand, the research showed that it is very important forpioneer enterprises that their employees follow the rules and procedures set by theenterprise.

In the case of growing enterprises, the research results reveal that the enterprisesimplement a combination of rule and law and code ethical climates, which implies

that following the rules and procedures determined by the enterprise as well as respectfor law and professional standards play an important role.

Figure 7.Enterprise in turn-overphase in terms of their

ethical climate

0

1

2

3

4

5Caring

Rules


Independance O

P

R

Figure 6.Mature enterprises interms of their ethical

climate

0

1

2

3

4

5L

MN

Caring

Rules

Law&code

Instrumental

Independance


changes

1387


12/22

For mature enterprises and enterprises in turn-over, our research indicated asignificant presence of the rule, law and code and instrumental ethical climates.Enterprises in the maturity stage of their life cycle emphasized the importance of rulesand procedures as well as legal frames and professional standards. In the framework ofthe instrumental climate, our case study reflects a high level of its importance for thefulfilment of individual interests.

7. Concluding commentsAs the answer to our main research question, we must note that our study showed somedifferences in enterprise ethical climate per enterprise life cycle stages. Our researchindicated movement towards a more and more bureaucratic method of enterprisefunctioning, as an enterprise moves from the pioneer stage towards the stage ofturn-over. This pattern of functioning can also indicate a lower level of connectionbetween co-workers, top-management and employees, as well as less loyalty, anchoring

of enterprise values and norms, and capacity for innovative behaviour, which can beconsidered as one of the key success factors in business. Our research raises importantissues regarding the enterprises in mature stage or turn-over stage, which are neitherable to tolerate differences among employees as well as between all stakeholders norprepared to stimulate or use the individuals talents in accordance with the enterprisesvisions, missions and policies. The alienation between top management and employeescan have an important further implication such as alienation between the enterprise andits environment, which can make enterprise incapable of efficiency and effectiveness.Several authors also argue (Diener and Seligman, 2004) that the basis for creative work istrust among employees. Furthermore, by various authors trust is considered as theconstitutional element of enterprises ethical behaviour and constitutional basis forenterprises ethical climate (Victor and Cullen, 1988; Kaptein, 1998). The

above-mentioned enterprises should therefore implement all measures, institutionalas well as structural, which would foster and support trust in their enterprises. Thus, theclimate can provide for innovative behaviour.

The research cognitions about the enterprise climate type can be supported also bythe research cognitions about the enterprise culture type (Belak, 2008). Those researchfindings show that, through the life cycle stages, enterprises make a transition from aclan culture, where a very personal and familiar way of functioning can be observed,towards a hierarchy culture, where formal structures and procedures are in focus.

Figure 8.Ethical climateby life cycle stages

0

1

2

3

4

Caring

Rules


IndependancePioneer

Growing

Mature

Turn over

K38,7/8

1388


13/22

Besides, the dependency of an enterprises culture type on its life cycle stage, theresearch indicated that the culture strength depends on the life cycle stage, as well. In theenterprise life cycle transition (from pioneer enterprise towards the enterprise inturn-over), the culture strength changes from strong towards weak, as well. The

research results showed that pioneer and growing enterprises are more successful inimplementing the enterprises norms, values, vision, mission and strategic goalsthrough the entire management and governance process (from the owners through thetop and middle management to the operational level of the enterprise) than are matureenterprises and enterprises in turn-over. These results also reveal that the pioneer andgrowth enterprise culture is more compatible with the culture of the environment wherethey function than the culture in mature enterprises and enterprises in turn-over.

In terms of the DST (Mulejet al., 2008, and earlier, since 1974) the research findingssay that the managers of the case-research enterprises do not attain the requisiteholism in mastering the novelties in ethical climate that show up over their life-cyclephases. A consequence may be their need to recover from success (Whittaker and Cole,2006), or even failure, because they do not consider ethics as a factor of the deeprather than surface competitiveness (Fujimoto, 2006). Less narrowly economic viewsof the enterprise success basis might help (Potocan and Mulej, 2007a, b, c; Potocanet al.,2005). This managers attitude may be very general.

References

Agarwal, J. and Malloy, D.C. (1999), Ethical work climate dimensions in a not-for-profitorganization: an empirical study,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 1-14.

Belak, J. (2005), Etika druzinskega podjetja (Business ethics of a family enterprise), OurEconomy (Nase gospodarstvo), Vol. 51 Nos 3/4, pp. 111-5.

Belak, J. (2008), Business ethics implementation at different stages of the enterprise life cycle,doctoral dissertation (D1540), European Business School, Oestrich-Winkel.

Belak, J. and Kajzer, S. (1994), Unternehmen im Ubergangsproze zur Marktwirtschaft mitFallbeispielen aus Slowenien, Linde, Wien.

Bell, J. (1993),Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-time Researchers in Education andSocial Science, Open University Press, Milton Keynes.

Bertalanffy, L.V. (1968, edition 1979), General Systems Theory: Foundations, Development,Applications, Revised edition, Sixth Printing, Braziller, New York, NY.

Bleicher, K. (1994), Management: Politik, Verfassung und Philosophie des Unternehmens,Campus, Frankfurt am Main.

Bleicher, K. (2004),Das Konzept des Integriertes Management: Visionen, Missionen, Programme,Campus, Frankfurt am Main.

Britovsek, M. et al. (1960), Vodnik skozi cas in druzbo (The Guide through Time and Society),

Mladinska knjiga, Ljubljana.Denison, D.R. (1996), What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational

climate? A natives point of view on a decade of paradigm wars, The Academy ofManagement Review, Vol. 21 No. 3.

Diener, E. and Seligman, M. (2004), Beyond money: toward an economy of well being,Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 1-31.

Drack, M. andApfalter, W. (2007), IsPaul Weiss und Ludwig vonBertalanffys systems thinkingstill valid today?,Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 537-46.


changes

1389


14/22

Duh, M. (2002), Razvojni modeli podjetja in managementa (The Developmental Models ofEnterprises and Management), MER Publishing House in Maribor, Maribor.

Duh, M. (2003), Druzinsko podjetje, razvoj in razvojni management druzinskega podjetja (TheFamily Business, Development and Development Management of a Family Business), MER

Publishing House in Maribor, Maribor.

Ferrel, O.C., Gresham, L.G. and Fraedrich, J. (1989), A synthesis of ethical decision models formarketing, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 9 No. 2.

Francois, C. (Ed.) (2004), International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics, 2nd ed.,K.G. Saur, Muenchen.

Fueglistaller, U. and Halter, F. (2005), Fuhren Gestalten Leben: KMU in Bewegung, EineAuseinandersetzung mit Klein- und Mittelunternehmen (KMU) undlebenszyklusorientierter Unternehmensfuhrung, Reader Wintersemester 05/06,KMU-HSG, St Gallen.

Fujimoto, T. (2006), Competing to Be Really, Really Good, International House of Japan, Tokyo.

Gaertner, K. (1991), The effect of ethical climate on managers decisions, Morality, Rationality

and Efficiency: New Perspectives on Socio-economics, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.

Grabowski, H. and Mueller, D. (1975), Life-cycle effects on corporate returns on retentions, TheReview of Economics and Statistics, p. 57.

Grover, L.S. and Enz, C.A. (2005), The influence of company rules, ethical climate, andindividual characteristics on sales representatives honesty,Journal of the Australian and

New Zealand Academy of Management, Vol. 11 No. 2.

Hammond, D. (2003), The Science of Synthesis. Exploring the Social Implications of GeneralSystems Theory, University Press of Colorado, Boulder, CO.

Kajzer, S., Duh, M. and Belak, J. (2008), Integral management: concept and basic features of theMER model,Zeitschrift fur KMU und Entrepreneurship, Duncker & Humbolt, Berlin.

Kaptein, M. (1998), Ethics Management: Auditing and Developing the Ethical Content of

Organizations, Kluwer Academic, Boston, MA.

Kemmetmuller, W. and Schmidt, M. (1995), Strategicshe Fuhrung von KMU mit Lebenszycklus-Konzepten (Strategic Management of SMEs with Life Cycle Concepts),Geburstag, Linz.

Kopelman, R.E., Brief, A.P. and Guzzo, R.A. (1990), The role of climate and culture inproductivity, Organizational Climate and Culture, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Korallus, L. (1988), Die Lebeszyklustheorie der Unternehmung: Eine Analyse ihrer Bedeutungfur die Managerialismus (Enterprise life cycle theory: its meaning and importance to themanagerialismus), Debatte sowie ihre empirische Uberprufung fur deutscheAktiengesellschaften, Lang, Frankfurt a.M..

Moran, E.T. and Volkwein, J.F. (1992), The cultural approach to the formation of organizational

climate,Human Relations, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 19-47.Morris, M., Schindehutte, M., Walton, J. and Allen, J. (2002), The ethical context of

entrepreneurship: proposing and testing a developmental framework,Journal of BusinessEthics, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 331-61.

Mulej, M. (1974), Dialekticna teorija sistemov in ljudski reki,Nase gospodarstvo, Vol. 21Nos 3/4,pp. 207-12.

Mulej, M. (1979), Ustvarjalno delo in dialekticna teorija sistemov (Creative Work and theDialectical Systems Theory), Razvojni Center, Celje (in Slovenian).

K38,7/8

1390


15/22

Mulej, M. (2007a), Inoviranje navad drzave in manjsih podjetij z invencijami iz raziskovalnihorganizacij, Fakulteta za management, Univerza na Primorskem, Koper.

Mulej, M. (2007b), Systems theory a worldview and/or a methodology aimed at requisiteholism/realism of humans thinking, decisions and action, Systems Research and

Behavioral Science, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 347-57.Mulej, M., Fatur, P., Knez-Riedl, J., Kokol, A., Mulej, N., Potocan, V., Prosenak, D., Skafar, B. and

Zenko, Z. (2008),Invencijsko-inovacijski management z uporabo dialekticne teorije sistemov(podlaga za uresnicitev ciljev Evropske unije glede inoviranja), Korona Plus d.o.o. Institut zainovacije in tehnologijo, Ljubljana.

Mulej, M., Bozicnik, S., Cancer, V., Hrast, A., Jurse, K., Kajzer, S., Knez-Riedl, J., Mlakar, T., Mulej, N.,Potocan, V., Rosi, B., Ursic, D. and Zenko, Z. (2009),Dialectical Systems Thinking and the Lawof Requisite Holism, ISCE Publishing, Goodyear, AZ (in press).

Potocan, V. and Mulej, M. (2007a), Ethics of a sustainable enterprise and the need for it,Systemic Practice and Action Research, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 127-40.

Potocan, V. and Mulej, M. (2007b), Requisite holism precondition of reliable businessinformation, Kybernetes: The International Journal of Systems & Cybernetics , Vol. 36Nos 3/4, pp. 319-32.

Potocan, V. and Mulej, M. (2007c), Transition into an Innovative Enterprise, Faculty ofEconomics and Business, University of Maribor, Maribor.

Potocan, V., Mulej, M. and Kajzer, S. (2005), Business cybernetics, Kybernetes: TheInternational Journal of Systems & Cybernetics, Vol. 34 Nos 9/10, pp. 1496-916.

Pucko, D. (2003), Stratesko upravljanje (Strategic Management), Faculty of Economics,University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana.

Pumpin, C. and Prange, J. (1991), Management der Unternehmungsentwicklung, PhasengerechteFuhrung und der Umgang mit Krisen, Campus, Frankfurt am Main.

Rosenbauer, C. (1995), Strategische Erfolgsfaktoren des Familienunternehmens im Rahmeseines Lebenszyklus (Strategic developmental factors of family enterprises in a frame of

life cycle), Dissertation der Hochschule St Gallen, Nr. 1605, Rosch-Buch, Hallstadt.

Smircich, L. (1983), Concepts of culture and organizational analysis, Administrative ScienceQuarterly, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 339-58.

Thommen, J.-P. (1997), Management Kompetenz und Unternehmungsentwicklung, in Belak, J.,Mugler, J ., Kajzer, S., Senjur, M., Sewing, N. and Thommen, J .-P. (Eds),Unternehmensentwicklung und Management, Versus, Zurich.

Thommen, J.-P. (2003), Glaubwurdigkeit und Corporate Governance, 2. vollstandig uberarbeiteteAuflage, Versus, Zurich.

Trevino, L.K. (1990), A Cultural Perspective on Changing and Developing Organizational Ethics,JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Trevino, L.K. and Ball, G.A. (1992), The social implications of punishing unethical behavior,

Journal of Management, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 751-68.Trevino, L.K., Butterfield, K.D. and McCabe, D.L. (1998), The ethical context in organizations:

influences on employee attitudes and behaviors, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 8 No. 3.

Trevino, L.K., Hartman, L.P. and Brown, M. (2000), Moral person and moral manager: howexecutives develop a reputation for ethical leadership, California Management Review,Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 128-42.

Victor, B. and Cullen, B.J. (1988), The organizational bases of ethical work climates,Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 33 No. 1.


changes

1391


16/22

Whittaker, H. and Cole, R.E. (2006), Recovering from Success, Oxford University Press,Oxford.

Yin, K.R. (1993), Applications of Case Study Research, Sage, London.

Yin, K.R. (1999), Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research, Health

Services Research, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 1209-24.

Yin, K.R. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, London.

Appendix 1. The enterprise life cycle stage diagnosis by Pumpin and Prangesmethodology

Agree Disagree5 4 3 2 1

Elements of a pioneer enterpriseA focus on new business opportunities XThe enterprise is radically innovative XThe enterprise is young XThe turn-over is low XA low number of employees XA low number of consumers XBetween the top management and the operational divisions,there is max. one level of management

X

At the top is the entrepreneur owner XThe top management is very interested in details ofbusiness functioning (all-rounder)

X

The top management has personal contacts with almostevery customer

X

The power of decision making is centralized and veryintuitive

X

Authoritarian-patriarchal management style using directoral directions to every employee, manager giving thedirections

X

No formal organizational elements (organigrams, adescription of the working place)

X

Employees spontaneously rewarded by the manager inperson and orally, as an alternative to financial rewards fora job well done

X

No standardization of products or processes, an individualapproach toward satisfying customer demands

X

A low level of employee specialization XInventors or super sellers at the top XThe amount of capital is high enough only to satisfy thelegislation

X

The level of self-financing is from 1:3 to 1:5 XTotal 0 1 3 4 11

Elements of a growing enterpriseEnterprises business opportunities are mostly at thegrowth stage

X

(continued)Table AI.

K38,7/8

1392


17/22


Rather less radical innovation in focus than multiplication

of successful concepts and activities

X

Innovations used are mildly radical: new products aresimilar to previous ones

X

Breakthrough with the basic business activity to newmarkets and new regions

X

Turn-over; the numbers of employees and customersincrease rapidly

X

Thinking of enterprise expansion at all levels, focusing onthe interests of every stakeholder

X

The management and innovators can become wealthy bybeing personally successful and innovative (participating inthe profit)

X

The enterprise management consists of the representatives

of various business areas and branches

X

Personal contact between enterprise management and thekey customers is still present

X

The leadership type is delegation of responsibility X3-4 hierarchy levels XImplementation of only a few formal organizationalinstruments, the presence of organigrams, the descriptionsof working places are limited to essential elements

X

Enterprise shows a functional structure that is in its furthergrowth transforms into a divisional structure

X

Formal communication structure has developed, uniformleadership is still in operation

X

Product standardization, sub-activities are abolished XA growing number of employees and equipment

specialization

X

Initiating the service cores/departments (market research,planning and legislation/taxes) that used to be hired fromoutside

X

X

Total 1 7 6 3 1

Elements of a mature enterpriseEnterprises business opportunities are mostly at the stageof maturity (harvest, following, etc.)

X

Cash flows are very good and stable XA slow transition into stagnation in the frame of theturn-over

X

Branch benchmarking shows that the enterprise is old andlarge

X

The top management has almost no connection with thecore or the base of the enterprise

X

Financial specialists and lawyers dominate the top of theenterprise

X

Focus on ROI and efficiency is greater than followingqualitative goals

X

(continued) Table AI.


changes

1393


18/22


Formal (written) communication is used instead of informal

(oral) communication

X

An environment of mistrust, control and formalresponsibilities are emphasized

X

Working manuals as the instrument of standardization andcontrol, impatience towards a negative attitude

X

Balanced salary structure, a low level of innovativebehaviour support

X

Matrix structure XA wasteful multi-level planning system XMany commissions XParticipative type of leadership XBattles for power on a managerial level (mostly hidden) XDiscussion ob business decisions between internal and

external interest groups

X

The level of self-financing is about 1:1 XTotal 5 6 2 4 1

Elements of an enterprise at the turn-over stageEnterprises business opportunities are mostly in the stageof turn-over or decline

X

Decline in cash flow and consequent negative cash flow XDecline in turn-over XOnly sub-innovations in the context of old products XOver-capacity, the competition is taking over theenterprises market share, constant price lowering

X

One-sided focus on expenses (costs) XHigher number of product recalls, superficial errordismissal, product quality level decrease

X

Brain-drain XImprovement in cash flow and turn-over is always onagenda for the next year

X

A short-term orientation (one to two years), setting onlyshort-term goals and business activities, tactical reactions tocompetitors

X

The regulation and governmental protection (subventions,donations, etc.), shaping of the branch cartels and trusts

X

The top management has been in place for several years;therefore they are elderly

X

Battles between individual leaders for their own survival inthe enterprise, mutual accusations

X

Unclear directions to employees, interference of superiors,

concerned employees

X

Powerful authority groups XUnfinished paper work XEnterprises isolation from its environment XLarge projects XTotal 1 1 5 4 7Table AI.

K38,7/8

1394


19/22

The total score of the above-revealed enterprises characteristics gives us the opportunity todefine the life cycle stage of the enterprise.

Considering the characteristics of the exemplar enterprise, we can conclude that it is in transitionfrom the growth to the maturity stage of its life cycle. The positive characteristics of a pioneerenterprise are slowly moving into the background, and pioneer spirit is not so strongly present inthis enterprise any more. On the other hand, this particular enterprise is financially stillwell-positioned, meaning that there are no evident characteristics of an enterprise in turn-over.

This particular enterprise should pay attention to the brain drain problem, which can causeserious problems in future enterprise functioning. Considering the above results, themanagement should take the following steps:

(1) Consciously, motivate pioneer entrepreneurial spirit (e.g. with the implementation of anentrepreneurial program).

(2) Strengthen the external activities of the management (connections and contacts withcustomers, paying visits to employees during execution of their jobs, etc.).

(3) A consciously intensified search for new business opportunities in the frame of anenterprises core activity.

(4) Steps in the frame of an organizational structure (perhaps the implementation ofdecentralized, autonomic units).

(5) Overly, bureaucratic managerial instruments should be removed.(6) Analysis of the enterprises total costs could help in organization.

Appendix 2. The enterprise climate diagnosis following the methodology developedby Victor and CullenPlease answer the following in terms of how it really is in your enterprise and not how you wouldprefer it to be. In your answers, give values from 0 completely false to 5 completely true.

Care

1. (BL) What is best for everyone in the company is the major consideration here:

0 1 2 3 4 5

2. (BL) The most important concern is the benefit of all people in the enterprise as a whole:

0 1 2 3 4 5

3. (BI) Our major concern is always what is best for the other person:

0 1 2 3 4 5

4. (BI) In this enterprise, people take care of each others interests:

0 1 2 3 4 5

Pioneer elements Growth elements Maturity elements Turn-over elements

5 pt 0/0 1/5 5/25 1/54 pt 1/4 7/28 6/24 1/43 pt 3/9 6/18 2/6 5/152 pt 4/8 3/6 4/8 4/81 pt 11/11 1/1 1/1 7/7Total 31 58 64 39 Table AII.


changes

1395


20/22

5. (BC) In this enterprise, it is expected that you will always do what is right for the customersand public:

0 1 2 3 4 5

6. (EC) The most efficient way is always the right way in this enterprise:0 1 2 3 4 5

7. (EC) In this enterprise, each person is, above all, expected to work efficiently:

0 1 2 3 4 5

Law and code

8. (PC) People are expected to comply with the law and professional standards over and aboveother considerations:

0 1 2 3 4 5

9. (PC) In this enterprise, the law or ethical code of their profession is the major consideration:

0 1 2 3 4 5

10. (PC) In this enterprise, people are expected to follow legal or professional standards strictly:

0 1 2 3 4 5

11. (PC) In this enterprise, the first consideration is whether or not a decision violates the law:

0 1 2 3 4 5

Rule

12. (PL) It is very important to follow the enterprises rules and procedures here:

0 1 2 3 4 5

13. (PL) Everyone is expected to follow the enterprises rules and procedures:

0 1 2 3 4 5

14. (PL) Successful people in this enterprise go by the book:

0 1 2 3 4 5

15. (PL) People in this enterprise strictly obey the company policies:

0 1 2 3 4 5

Instrumental

16. (EI) In this enterprise, people protect their own interests above everything else:

0 1 2 3 4 5

K38,7/8

1396


21/22

17. (EI) In this enterprise, people are mostly out for themselves:

0 1 2 3 4 5

18. (EI) There is no room for ones own personal morals or ethics in this enterprise:

0 1 2 3 4 5

19. (EI) People are expected to do anything to support the enterprises interests, regardless ofthe consequences:

0 1 2 3 4 5

20. (EI) People here are concerned with the enterprises interests to the exclusion ofeverything else:

0 1 2 3 4 5

21. (EI) Work is considered substandard only when it damages the enterprises interests:

0 1 2 3 4 5

22. (EI) The major responsibility of the people in this enterprise is to control costs:

0 1 2 3 4 5

Independence

23. (PI) In this enterprise, people are expected to follow their own personal and moral beliefs:

0 1 2 3 4 5

24. (PI) Each person in this enterprise decides for themselves what is right and wrong:

0 1 2 3 4 5

25. (PI) The most important concern in this enterprise is each persons own sense of right andwrong:

0 1 2 3 4 5

26. (PI) In this enterprise, people are guided by their own personal ethics:

0 1 2 3 4 5

About the authorsJernej Belak was born on 7 December 1976 in Maribor, Slovenia. He is an Assistant at TheDepartment for Strategic Management and Enterprise Policy at the Faculty of Economics andBusiness, University of Maribor, Slovenia. He is also a Director of non-profit institution MEREvrocenter for Management and Development. In his master and doctoral dissertations, he dealt


changes

1397


22/22

with the problems of business ethics and its implementation. Embracing this topic, he publishedseveral articles and attended various scientific conferences. Jernej Belak is the correspondingauthor and can be contacted at: [email protected]

MatjazMulej was born on 20 January 1941 in Maribor, Slovenia. He was married having two

adult children living healthy in Maribor, Slovenia. He was retired from the School of Businessand Economics, University of Maribor, Maribor, as Professor Emeritus of Systems andInnovation Theory. He has been published more than 1,100 publications in 40 countries(IZUM Cobiss, 08082). He is a Visiting Professor abroad for 15 semesters. He is a author of theDST (see Francois, 2004, International Encyclopedia) and innovative business paradigm forcatching-up countries. He is a Member of New York Academy of Sciences (1996), EuropeanAcademy of Sciences and Arts in Salzburg (2004), European Academy of Arts, Sciences andHumanities in Paris (2004). He is the President of the International Federation for SystemsResearch (with 35 member associations), Many Who is Who entries. He finished his MA inDevelopment Economics and Doctorates in Systems Theory and Management.

K38,7/8

1398

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

article rmt

Documents