1
Strategic Cultures of Transformative Organization:
The Coates of India Story1
Vipin Gupta
Assistant Professor, Fordham University, New York, USA
Kumkum Mukherjee
Assistant Professor, Eastern Institute for Integrated Learning in Management, Calcutta, India
Roma Puri
Fellow, Eastern Institute for Integrated Learning in Management, Calcutta, India
1
We are thankful to the US National Science Foundation and Centre for New Economy and Culture in eGLOBE
(EMPI Business School, Delhi), for funding the study as part of worldwide cross-cultural CEO research of Globe
Research and Educational Foundation; and to Robert House, Principal Investigator, GLOBE Program, for
allowing us to participate in the study.
2
Abstract
In this chapter, recent developments in the transformative perspective are reviewed, with
special reference to the concepts of change, leadership, and learning. The transformative
perspective emphasizes how dynamic organizational learning can shape not just what the firm
does, but also the meaning the firm associates with what it has been doing and its mission in
the future. The transformative organizations gain a competitive advantage in a global milieu,
as reflected in their high performance on multiple criteria, including profitability, agility,
growth and reputation. In other words, transformative perspective allow the firms to
transcend the paradox of performance, identified by Meyer & Gupta (1994), that an emphasis
on some measures of performance makes the organizations simultaneously effective on those
measures, and ineffective on other measures and thus subject to failure. A model of four
strategic cultures is formulated, and the workings of the transformative organization are
explicated using the story of Coates of India.
3
Introduction
In recent years, transformative perspective has gained popularity among the social
scientists, as is indicated by the concepts such as transformative change (Lichtenstein, 2000),
transformative leadership (Astin & Astin, 2001; Bass, 1985; Bemis & Nanus, 1985),
transformative mediation (Bush & Folger, 1994), transformative justice (Morris, 1994),
transformative learning (Mezirow, 1991), transformative knowledge (Vargas, 1987), and
transformative technology (Brent, 1991). Here we review the core insights of the
transformative perspective with respect to change, leadership and learning. Then, we develop
a theoretical model that highlights the importance of four domains – investor, competence,
post-competence, and spiritual – in the strategic decision-making of the organizations.
Our theoretical model builds on the GLOBE research (Gupta, Hanges & Dorfman,
2002) that highlights distinct sets of cultural values and practices in different regions of the
world. We propose that the transformative organizations must deal with all these domains of
strategic issues in their decision-making and learning process. The firms in different regions
simplify the complexity of simultaneously managing multiple domains by prioritizing them
from most important to least important, and then rewarding and legitimating firms based on
the extent to which they adhere to the institutionalized expectations. Each firm is influenced
by the institutional norms of the region for including the most important domains as critical
element in its strategic decision-making, but at the same time enjoys substantial freedom of
giving at least equivalent importance to the other domains. The processes of globalization and
transnational investments make the need for excellence in all the domains particularly salient.
The transformative perspective emphasizes how dynamic organizational learning can
shape not just what the firm does, but also the meaning the firm associates with what it has
been doing and its mission in the future. Such dynamic organizational learning is facilitated
by a comparative understanding of the behaviors and values, generated through processes
4
such as perspective taking (Parker & Axtell, 2001) and relational capability (Dyer & Singh,
1998), which allows the firms to identify common patterns in apparently divergent behaviors.
Through interactive learning, firms realize that the alternative strategic domains are also
associated with high-performance, and so it is important to emphasize each, and not one over
the others. The result is a change in the very system of organization, that encourages the firm
to identify how devaluing some domains in the past limited its overall performance, and
impeded development initiatives under conditions where the norms for the targeted domain
were fulfilled. We identify the firms that demonstrate a focus on transformative perspective
as the “transformative organizations”. We propose that the transformative organizations seek
multifaceted competitive advantage in a global milieu, emphasizing multiple criteria,
including profitability, agility, growth and reputation. In other words, transformative
perspective helps the firms to transcend the paradox of performance, identified by Meyer &
Gupta (1994), that an emphasis on some measures of performance makes the organizations
simultaneously effective on those measures, and ineffective on other measures and thus
subject to failure. The failure of Enron, whose policies were very effective in the investor
domain, but not other domains, is a case in point.
Next, we review the literature on transformative perspective, and present a theoretical
model of strategic cultures of transformative organizations. Then, we explicate the theoretical
model using the story of Coates of India. The story is based on the CEO interview and survey
of the top management team conducted in 2001 as part of an international cross-cultural study.
Review of the Transformative Perspective
Below, we review transformative perspectives in three major domains: change, leadership,
and learning.
Transformative Perspective and Change
5
The transformative perspective fundamentally involves a transition in the forming
process, from one focused on incremental change to that catalyst oriented towards quantum
change. The emphasis is not on accelerating the incremental change, or bypassing certain
steps of incremental change, but to generate a qualitatively different approach on how the
change is evaluated and managed.
In general, change happens when there is some variance, either in what the firm does
and what it is expected to do (practices and norms to be met), or it what it does and what it
expects to do (practices and values to be fulfilled). Once the change is ‘formed’, the firm
seeks to benefit from its learning by institutionalizing the change intervention in all relevant
aspects of its functioning. It may also diffuse the change among its external constituencies,
and seek financial or non-financial benefits from such knowledge spillovers. This
institutionalization and diffusion reflects ‘norming’ of the change. As the norms mature,
including through reverse learning from the outcomes of other internal applications and of the
use by the external constituencies, the change initiative is fulfilled, and the changed behavior
becomes routinized for effortless enactment. However, the outcome of the changed behavior
may not be the same in all cases. The more systematic and sustained the institutionalization
and diffusion process, the greater the possibility of learning about its shortcomings. When the
shortcomings are diagnosed and validated, the firm seeks to develop corrective interventions,
and again goes through the forming, norming, and fulfilling phases, as shown in Figure 1.
Insert Figure 1 About Here
Thus, typically, the organizations go through a sequential process of change. In this
process, they (1) may deny the need for change (Change by denial), (2) may become aware of
the need for change, only after it has already happened gradually (Change by experience), (3)
may mandate an instant change, as soon as they recognize and validate the need for change
(Change by mandate), or (4) may reinterpret the pre-changed behavior in a way that the need
6
as well as direction for change becomes self-evident (Change by reinterpretation). In our
view, the transformative change reflects a continuous openness to the change by
reinterpretation, and a systematic approach to change by mandate and change by experience,
so that the need for change is not denied.
One may relate the four processes of change to Ferguson’s (1980) types of change.
These types include: (1) Change by exception: the firms allow exceptions to their beliefs but
do not change these beliefs. For example, when they encounter a case that does not fit their
mental models, they classify them as being an exception to the rule (e.g. a profitable e-firm at
the height of internet revolution). (2) Incremental change: a collection of small changes
eventually alters, rather unconsciously, the mental model of the firm (e.g. failure of several
unprofitable e-firms, along with reduced e-funding before the burst of internet bubble). (3)
Pendulum change: an extreme point of view is exchanged for its opposite, and past is
completely discredited as irrelevant or mistaken (e.g. a unprofitable e-firm that suddenly
mandates profit as its Number 1 goal after the burst of internet bubble, and divests most of its
businesses as not expected to be profitable). (4) Paradigm change: the firm steps out of the
box for a more fundamental rethinking of premises, based on the integration of available
information (e.g. a initially unprofitable e-firm that is able to stick to its fundamentally viable
business plan, by improving its learning about new project management).
In short, from a change perspective, transformative organizations recognize not only
the reality of the changing world and of the accelerating pace of change, but also of the
changing nature of change. Consequently, they do not seek to be effective in only some parts
of a system, but seek proficiency in managing the multifaceted dimensions of their operation.
Transformative Perspective and Leadership
The transformational theory of leadership focuses on the ability of the leaders to
motivate others to do more than they originally expected to do (Bass, 1985). The
7
transformational leaders shape and elevate the motives and goals of followers, thereby
achieving significant change reflecting the community of interests of both leaders and
followers, and freeing up the collective energies in pursuit of a common goal. The thrust is on
creating institutions that motivate employees to recognize the community of their needs, and
to empower them to satisfy these collective needs (Bemis & Nanus, 1985).
The transformative perspective further integrates the collective organizational needs
with an enhanced understanding of the potentiality of each member, and a wholesome
conception of self in the personal, relational, societal, and communal domains. By
recognizing that each employee is more than just an individual or a member of the
organization, and has societal and communal identities also, the transformative leaders
facilitate more of what each employee truly wants to accomplish without necessarily
sacrificing the realization of collective needs. The employees also discover that their life in
the organization need not be disjointed from their lives in the society and the community, and
that the former can be lived in a way which serves their purpose and enhances their prestige in
the society and the community also. As a result, transformative leadership becomes a
reciprocal process whereby both leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of
motivation and morality. In this sense, transformative leadership builds on the values-based
approaches to transformational leadership (Kuczmarski & Kuczmarski, 1995; Goeglein &
Indvik, 2000).
Further, Gandhi’s concept of trusteeship, which recognizes service as the purpose of
leadership; moral principles as the basis of goals, decisions, and strategies; and employing a
single standard of conduct in both public and private life; is crucial to the transformative
leadership (Gupta et. al., 2002). In contrast to the transformational leadership, which focuses
on enhancing efficiency and effectiveness through first-order quantitative change in
motivation, the transformative leadership emphasizes a higher-order qualitative integration of
8
motivation over multiple domains. Consequently, transformative leadership generates
changes in basic assumptions and goals of life, so that accomplishments in each domain are
reinterpreted as being related to other domains, and thus serves higher-order purposes of life.
Despite some similarities, the transformative leadership can also be distinguished from
the transactional, transformational, and values-based transformational models of leadership.
In the transactional model, the roles of each individual are clearly defined, and the
responsibilities and expectations are limited and predictable. In contrast to the view of a
transactional leader who must get things done, whether by focusing on the task or on the
person, the transformative leader emphasizes the purpose, mission, and spirit of the action, so
that the quantum nature of its benefits become self-evident to all. While the transformational
model allows the expectations to be challenged, and motivates the individuals to see
themselves as a member of the group and to focus on the satisfaction of collective needs, the
values-based transformational model emphasizes how certain values of the leader are
fulfilling for the followers, and encourage them to seek their attainment. Both these
approaches could result into unjust outcomes, for they may exclude the members who do not
find the values of the leader as fulfilling. The transformative model, on the other hand,
generates a new interpretation of the reality, where the previously marginalized members are
also able to engage themselves in the task of learning, and where meaningful linkages can be
constructed between these members and the dominant organizational values and social and
communal institutions. This is made possible because of the common learning on part of both
organization as well as the members that they are an important part of others’ life.
In summary, from a leadership perspective, transformative organizations recognize not
just the reality of changing roles and of the need to empower participants to effectively and
rapidly perform these roles, but also the changing nature of the roles that the leadership should
be focusing on if the participant lives as well as the organizational mission are to be fulfilled.
9
Transformative Perspective and Learning
Transormative approaches to learning focus on how learners construe, validate, and
reformulate the meaning of their experience. One of the most popular models of
transformative learning is of Mezirow (1991). According to Mezirow (1991: 167),
transformative learning involves ‘perspective transformation’, which "is the process of
becoming critically aware of how and why our assumptions have come to constrain the way
we perceive, understand, and feel about our world; changing these structures of habitual
expectation to make possible a more inclusive, discriminating, and integrating perspective;
and, finally, making choices or otherwise acting upon these new understandings" Mezirow
distinguishes between meaning structures, which are frames of reference based on the totality
of individuals' cultural and contextual experiences that influence how they behave and
interpret events, and meaning schemes (specific beliefs, attitudes, and emotional reactions)
that make up these meaning structures. The usual learning process, as an individual adds to
and integrates ideas within an existing scheme, contributes to a routine change in meaning
structures. However, transformative learning, involving change in meaning structures, results
from an accumulation of transformations in meaning schemes over a period of time, or more
often from a ‘disorientating dilemma’ triggered by a life crises or major life transition. In
general, Mezirow identifies experience, critical reflection, and rational discourse as three
major catalysts of transformative learning. Each of these can encourage a change in the
people’s frame of reference through critical reflection of their assumptions and beliefs, and
consciously bringing about new worldviews.
Boyd & Myers (1988) offer an alternative approach, which recognizes transformative
learning to be more of an intuitive, creative, emotional process. They use the term
transformative education to connote a fundamental change in one's personality involving both
the resolution of a personal dilemma as well as the expansion of consciousness resulting in
10
greater personality integration. Transformative education draws on the "realm of interior
experience, one constituent being the rational expressed through insights, judgments, and
decision; the other being the extrarational expressed through symbols, images, and feelings"
(Boyd & Myers, 1988: 275). It builds on the process of discernment, i.e. creating a personal
vision or meaning of being a human. The discernment involves receptivity, recognition, and
grieving. First, an individual shows receptivity to "alternative expressions of meaning," then
recognizes that the message is authentic, and finally realizes that old patterns or ways of
perceiving are no longer relevant, moves to adopt or establish new ways, and to integrate the
old with the new patterns.
Bush & Folger (1994) apply the transformative perspective to Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR). They suggest a shift from a problem solving or settlement-oriented
mediation that focuses on finding a mutually agreeable settlement of an immediate dispute, to
‘transformative mediation’ that seeks to transform the disputing parties by empowering them
to understand their own situation and needs, as well as enabling them to recognize the
situation and needs of their opponents. At the organizational level, transformative mediation
may transform the representatives, but could leave out the constituencies, and engender a
‘scale up problem’ (Burgess & Burgess, 1996). Lederach (1989) emphasizes a more inclusive
concept of “conflict transformation” which entails development of not just empowerment and
mutual recognition, but also interdependence, justice, forgiveness, and reconciliation. The
thrust is on creating dialogues in which people are empowered to express their needs and
explore their differences, so that inclusion and participation is encouraged. Similarly,
Montville (1993) underlines how dialogue helps people confirm each others' humanity and
recognize beliefs and values of the other person, and the importance of historical analysis,
including sharing of grievances and their recognition by the opponents, for encouraging
transformation in the parties' relationships.
11
In essence, from a learning perspective, transformative organizations recognize not
only the differences in perspectives and the need to empower participants to advocate their
unique perspectives, but also the need to transform each individual’s meaning associated with
these perspectives so that a more inclusive perspective is developed.
Summary:
There are significant similarities in the transformative approaches used in change,
leadership, and learning domains. Each emphasizes the importance of recognizing differences
and the need for change, empowering participants to share these differences and to bring
about the change, and finally developing an integrative perspective relating these differences
and changes to the very purpose of human and organizational life across multiple domains.
As a result, the differences and changes are not seen as threatening or exceptions, and are
instead sought for improving multiple dimensions of organizational and participant life.
Consequently, the target of transformative approaches is not the actions of the organization,
but the very culture of the organization. It is the emic aspect of the culture – the meaning the
participant attach to the actions, that is more relevant for transformative approaches, than the
etic aspect – the cross-culturally comparable actions and behaviours.
Theoretical Model
Using a transformative lens, we develop a theoretical model of the importance placed
by the firms on alternative strategic values. We identify four types of strategic cultures, each
typical of a distinct region of the world, and each reflecting an alternative domain of strategic
values and associated change, leadership, and learning. The four strategic culture types are:
(1) Investor Orientation, (2) Competence Orientation, (3) Post-competence Orientation, and
(4) Spiritual Orientation. The first type is typical of the Western Hemisphere, the second of
the Asia-Pacific, the third of the Europe, and the fourth of Africa. The key characteristics of
each of these types are summarized below.
12
1) The first strategic culture type is Investor Orientation. It reflects paramount importance of
cost control, sales volume, product quality and firm profitability in strategic decision-making.
A focus on firm profitability, along with the significance of cost, sales and quality variables
that have a direct impact on this profitability, indicates a strong investor culture where the
emphasis is constantly on business unit and corporate performance. Investor culture is
typical of the Western Hemisphere and Anglo societies, where the foremost responsibility of
the business is towards its owners. Such cultures support autonomous organizational learning
oriented towards tapping of well-defined business opportunities and resolution of anticipated
and experienced business threats. The investor-oriented firms invest into multiple learning
trajectories, each oriented towards a distinct business opportunity, and seek flexibility of
shifting resources from one trajectory to another depending on the changing environmental
context and the expected jackpot from the chosen trajectories. The change typically occurs
through exception, recognizing that the same jackpot can not be shared by all firms; and the
leadership is transactional in nature – oriented towards realization of the expected jackpot.
2) The second strategic culture type is Competence Orientation. It signifies a decisionmaking value where most emphasis is put on long-term competitive ability of the
organization, along with the relational issues with those directly involved in the business
operations. The thrust is mostly on cultivating and sustaining relationships with key business
partners such as suppliers, alliances, and government agencies, customer satisfaction,
employee professional growth and development, and employee relations issues such as
employee well-being, safety and working conditions. Competence culture is typical of the
Asia-Pacific societies, where the relationships and long-term competitive ability are most
critical. Such cultures support collaborative organizational learning, but limit the flexibility of
the firms in seeking new know-how. This is so because the benefits of know-how generally
are diffused quite quickly throughout the relational network. On the other hand, the firms
13
incur the costs of know-how discovery and its codification on their own, and thereby seek to
stand out from the rest and be recognized for their pioneering contributions. The change
typically occurs through experience, based on accumulated learning of self and the partners;
and the leadership is transformational in nature identifying community of group interest.
3) The third strategic culture type is Post-competence Orientation. It signifies a strategic
perspective that puts most priority on societal welfare, including environmental concerns,
welfare of local community, nation’s economic welfare, minority employees, and employee
gender. Post-competence culture is typical of the European societies. Such cultures support
socialist organizational learning, where the non-business partners such as the special interest
groups, social activists, and community leaders play an important role in the corporate
decision-making. The primarily responsibility of the firms is not to their investors or their
business partners, but to respect collective interest of the members of the community in
ecology and welfare issues. The post-competence oriented firms are most willing to assume
the costs of social charter, and to believe that the social charter is not necessarily at odds with
the investor and business relationship concerns. Such firms develop competence in specific
areas of social charter through targeted interventions, such as environment-friendly machinery
and products, which are supported by the institutionalized laws at the national level. These
firms are valued as responsible corporate citizens and enjoy high stock valuation as rewards to
their investors and that brings prestige and similarly high valuation for the business partners.
The change tends to occur through mandate, where specific interventions are legitimated; and
values-based transformation is emphasized for supporting the participant initiatives towards
these interventions.
4) The final strategic culture type is Spiritual Orientation. It reflects a strategic preference for
ethical considerations, and being devoted to the super-natural forces, such as auspicious days,
forecasts by truth sayers, and pleasing, respecting, not offending a divine being. Spiritual
14
culture is typical of the firms in Africa. Such cultures support communal organizational
learning, where the self-identity of the firms is defined in terms of the membership of a
specific community of beliefs. Each community of belief, religious or otherwise, expect
certain forms of role performance from its members, including holding to certain beliefs about
a deity, engaging in ritual behaviors, and using certain spiritual, cognitive and emotional
criteria about morality. Glock and Stark (1965) have identified five manifestations of spiritual
orientation. These include: (1) an experiential manifestation, capturing normative religious
experiences; (2) a belief manifestation, capturing normative religious beliefs, (3) a ritual
manifestation, capturing normative religious practices, (4) an intellectual manifestation,
capturing knowledge about these religious norms, and (5) a devotional manifestation,
capturing enacted religious practices and attitudes. The spiritually oriented firms are highly
concerned about the kind of people they deal with. To them, it is difficult to separate the
identity of the firm from that of the others the firm interacts with. The key implication is the
importance of the relationship with and recognition by others, since the key organizing
principle is “ubuntu” or that a person is a person through others. Ubuntu refers to
“humaneness – a pervasive spirit of caring and community, harmony and hospitality, respect
and responsiveness – that individuals and groups display for one another.” (Mangaliso, 2001:
24). In Africa, ubuntu is invariably invoked as a scale for weighing good versus bad, right
versus wrong, just versus unjust, while interpreting critical issues and solving problems. The
change is based on self-interpretation process, involving assessment of its humaneness; and
the transformative leadership is favored to facilitate an integrative interpretation.
Strategic Types and Cultural Salience: While the four strategic types typify the strategic
cultures of firms in distinct regions, each is also characteristic of the firms in any given
region. Since each region is multifaceted, each firm’s culture puts at least some strategic
significance to issues identifiable with more than one type. The cultural orientation of the
15
firms can be ordered in a salience space indicating the significance of each particular cultural
type in their strategic values. The salience space has an influence on not just the firm’s
behavior, but also of the behavior of the members. At the individual level, salience indicates
“the degree to which the person’s relationships to specified set of others depends on his or her
being a particular kind of person, i.e. occupying a particular position in an organized structure
of relationships and playing a particular role.” (Stryker & Serpe, 1982: 207). At any level,
Cultural Salience can be measured using comparative scores on the four types of strategic
cultures. The more salient a strategic culture type, the more likely the firms would activate it
in their strategic decision making, and the more likely its organizational learning would be
dominated by the issues critical to that type. On the other hand, the more transformative an
organization is, the more likely it would be responsive to the issues related to other types also.
Next we discuss the research methodology used to test the relevance of the theoretical
model, for validating the force of Cultural Salience, and for investigating the development of
a transformative organization that recognizes the integrative importance of the four domains.
Research Methodology
For our study, we chose to study an Indian firm, whose ownership has transferred from
a British parent, to first a French parent, and then to Dutch/Japanese parent, over the last ten
years. The firm was studied using the CEO interview guide and top management team survey
of the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) program.
GLOBE program developed these research instruments for study of CEOs and top
management teams in more than 30 nations of the world, under the overall coordination of
Professor Robert House at the Wharton School. In India, the study is being conducted in 30
states, with a sample of 40 firms in each state, under the overall coordination of the first
author. The top management team surveys included questions relating to the leadership of the
CEO. In addition, there were 17 questions intended to learn about the strategic values, where
16
the respondents were asked how much importance “should be” assigned to each factor when
making critical management decisions. These 17 value items were used to construct four
types of strategic culture scales. The item composition of the four scales is given in Table 1.
A scale validation analysis of 212 firms from 7 states in Northeast India showed that the four
scales were internally consistent (Cronbach alpha>0.70), both at the firm level as well as the
top management level.
--------------------------------Insert Table 1 About Here
--------------------------------The interview guide asked the CEOs about their background, leadership goals,
management philosophy, and personal strengths and weaknesses. These items were
supplemented withquestions about the industrial relations climate in the main plant of the firm
in India, located in the same city where the firm had its domestic headquarters. More details
about the firm (Coates of India) are given in the next section to set the research context.
Research Context:
Coates of India (COI) was set up in 1947 as a wholly owned subsidiary of Coates
Brothers Plc, UK in the state of West Bengal in Calcutta, for manufacturing and marketing of
printing inks and allied products used in the process of printing. The parent firm diluted its
stake in COI to 66.2% in 1962. In 1991, French group TotalFina, a leading player in global
crude and petroleum industry, took over the parent firm, and acquired a 51% stake in COI. In
1999, TotalFina sold its printing inks business worldwide to Sun Chemical group of the
Netherlands, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of $10-billion Dainippon Inks and
Chemicals (DIC) Group of Japan. DIC Group, besides being a global leader in graphic arts
products, has a significant presence in printers' supplies, machinery, pigments and
reprographic products. As part of the deal, the resins and industrial adhesives business of COI
17
were spun off to TotalFina, and the ownership of COI was transferred to DIC. DIC had been
operating in India through marketing agents, and saw COI as a valuable opportunity for
expanding further into India. It immediately sought to use the entire marketing network of
COI, and increased its equity stake in COI to 59.4 per cent. The board of COI was
restructured to bring in four Japanese directors to oversee the strategic growth.
On December 31, 1997, COI had transferred its packaging coatings business to a
separate 100% subsidiary Coates Coatings India Limited (CCIL). The goal was to bring in
Valspar Corporation of the US as a joint venture partner for the packaging coatings business,
and to divest that business in a phased manner totally to Valsper as the business develops
through a capital infusion and new technology from the latter. In the meantime, there was a
shift in packaging concept from metal containers to plastic poly-tubes in India, which led
Valsper – whose interests lay principally in can packaging coatings market – to back out of
the joint venture deal in 2001.
In June 2001, COI/CCIL initiated an alternative agreement with the new group parent
company DIC for perpetual transfer of printing inks technology. The printing ink industry
essentially consists of pigments, resins, additives and solvents. Pigment is the main raw
material for manufacturing inks, resins give special properties to the inks while additives are
necessary for maintaining the flow. The principal users of printing inks are packaging,
printing and publishing industries. In India, packaging market for fast moving consumer
goods (FMCG) sector is a key segment, accounting for a share of 40 per cent. In addition, in
November of 2001, a new $1.3 million plant was inaugurated in the state of Gujarat at
Ahmedabad for the manufacture of newspaper blank with the technology support from DIC.
DIC is currently looking to upgrade product mix of COI, which has a battery of seven
manufacturing plants spread in all parts of India, at Calcutta, Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Delhi,
18
Chennai, Bangalore and Noida (New Delhi), and seven sales offices located in various
metropolitan cities, deemed a key advantage in the applications-oriented printing ink industry.
Globally, the US, Japan, and Germany account for two-thirds of the $15 billion sales
of the printing ink industry. The US accounts for about 30 percent of the global market. Two
firms hold a total of 80% market share in the US: Sun Chemicals and Flint Ink. These two
firms have transformed the industry into a highly concentrated structure through a series of
acquisitions of smaller ink manufacturers in the US and overseas. With diminished
opportunities for growth through acquisitions, DIC is now looking for organic growth
opportunities for its subsidiary. India represents a key emerging market for such organic
growth.
The Indian domestic ink market is valued at $125 million (Rs. 6 billion), with a
production volume of 50,000 tons. It has seen 12-15% growth over the past few years, and is
expected to sustain this growth rate in the near future. The market is divided equally between
a concentrated organized sector, with a few medium-to-large scale firms, and a fragmented
unorganized sector, with more than 200 small-scale ink manufactures. At the top are the two
firms: COI and its principal competitor, Hindustan Inks & Raisins Ltd (HRIL). HRIL, set up
in 1991, has been steadily gaining market share from COI, principally because of a 15-year
sales tax exemption for its core plant at Daman, that has allowed it to become the first Indian
firm to successfully backward integrate manufacture of two core ingredients of printing inks
viz. resins and flushed pigments, and to set up new units including a wholly-owned subsidiary
in Austria to facilitate exports.
In response, COI has increasingly focused on the premium segment, realizing a greater
price per kg of ink as compared to other players in the market. The strategy of COI is based
on its strong brand equity, regional manufacturing plants and sales offices to cater to specific
needs of different markets, and now on the technological and marketing support of the DIC
19
group. Its products are perceived to be high quality, backed by continuous research and
development expenditures, and its technology state-of-the-art. It has been at the forefront of
ongoing modernization of its plants through extensive capital investments, raising its installed
capacities by 10-15 percent every year, and revamping the computer system and other
balancing equipment in its factories to meet the higher demand for products, and has seen
profitable growth despite a recent slowdown in the global and Indian packaging coatings
market.
In summary, Coates of India has been historically influenced by the culture of the
Anglo parent, and later of the European parent, and more recently by the Japanese parent.
Further, its presence in the State of West Bengal – which is known to have leftist/socialist
leanings should also influence the strategic culture of Coates of India. It has strong brand and
technological base that has enabled it to realize profitable growth, but does not necessarily
have a significant competitive edge in costs over the new entrants. On the whole, the
formative Anglo influences appear to support its Investor Orientation, while the recent
Japanese influences appear to be dominant in a focus on Competence Orientation. The French
influences appear to be relatively weak on the strategic culture of Coates of India, particularly
because the core business of the ex-French parent was quite different from that of the Coates
of India. Also, the Dutch influences are possibly dwarfed by the proactive role taken by the
Japanese global parent company with respect to the Indian subsidiary. Still, the presence in
the socialist state of West Bengal should have strengthened its Post-competence Orientation.
Finally, since the firm is based in India, where the culture is relatively spiritual in nature, one
would expect non-trivial significance of Spiritual Orientation in firm’s strategic culture.
Next we confirm these expectations using the top management questionnaire survey.
20
Findings: Top Management Questionnaire Survey
Table 2 gives the scores of the firm on the four Strategic Culture scales, both at the
individual top management level as well as the aggregated firm level.
--------------------------------Insert Table 2 About Here
--------------------------------As can be seen, on a scale of 1 to 7, the firm scored 6.29 on Investor Orientation and
6.03 on Competence Orientation. The difference between these two types of strategic culture
was not significant (difference = 0.26; df=5; p>0.05). Thus, the top management of the firm
puts “very high” importance on both Investor Orientation and Competence Orientation. The
Spearman’s rank correlation between the scores of top management on these two was 0.96
(p<0.01). Thus, the top managers who focused more on Investor Orientation emphasized
more of Competence Orientation also. However, there was a greater variation in the
individual top manager values for Investor Orientation (from 5.00 to 7.00), than for
Competence Orientation (from 4.80 to 6.40).
The firm’s score on Post-competence Orientation was 4.90, which was significantly
different from its scores on Investor Orientation (difference = 1.39; df=5; p <0.05) and on
Competence Orientation (difference =1.13; df=5; p<0.01). Further, the Spearman’s rank
correlation of the top manager scores on Post-competence orientation was not significant with
either Competence Orientation or Investor Orientation. Thus, emphasis on Post-competence
Orientation was independent of the focus on Competence and Investor Orientation.
Finally, the firm scored 3.11 on Spiritual Orientation, which was significantly different
from its scores on Investor Orientation (difference = 3.18; df=5; p<0.01), Competence
Orientation (difference = 2.92; df=5; p<0.01) and Post-competence Orientation (difference =
21
1.79; df=5; p<0.01). However, the Spearman’s rank correlation was not significant for the top
manager scores on Spiritual Orientation and any of the other three scales.
On the whole, the firm put only “some” emphasis on Spiritual Orientation, “high”
emphasis on Post-competence orientation, and “very high” importance on Competence and
Investor Orientation. There was an indication that the firm’s top managers took an integrated
and stronger view of the Investor and Competence orientation, while taking an independent
but positive view of Post-competence Orientation without being overwhelmed by the socialist
forces in the West Bengal State. Finally, the top managers gave a non-trivial priority to the
Spiritual Orientation in their strategic decision-making, consistent with its significance in the
Indian culture. On the whole, the firm appears to operate according to the transformative
perspective. Next, we present the findings of the CEO interview to show how this
transformative perspective must be created, and cannot be taken for granted.
Working Towards the Transformative Perspective
Of the seven manufacturing units of Coates of India, the plant at the city of Calcutta
(at the Headquarters, in the State of West Bengal) with a workforce of 620 is the largest. The
plant experienced a rapid growth in production volumes and values during 1990-95, realizing
an enormous growth in productivity, profitability, and value realizations, as shown in Table 3
and Table 4.
--------------------------------Insert Table 3 and 4 About Here
--------------------------------The increase in production took place with largely stable number of workers, and allowed
continued rise in wage incomes for these workers, in profitability for the firm, and in product
quality for the consumers, with diminishing costs as the ratio of wage costs to both units
produced/ production value showed a significant reduction. The growth was a result of a new
22
business vision, pursuant to the liberalization of Indian economy in the early 1990s and a
concomitant change in parent group from Coates Brothers of UK to Totalfina of France.
The new vision emphasized substantial modernization of the plant, with sustained
increase in the production capacity, and introduction of automated machines and application
of latest technologies, in ways that would be labor and skill enabling, rather than labor and
skill displacing. Table 5 provides data on the investments made by the firm in Computers and
Plant & Machinery at Calcutta Plant.
--------------------------------Insert Table 5 About Here
--------------------------------The success with modernization in the Calcutta plant, home to India’s one of the most
left-leaning workforce, unions and the government, instilled the company with confidence to
persist with further investments in computerization and technology improvement in other
plants of COI, in the second half of the 1990s. The State of West Bengal was notorious for
perpetual strikes, politically sanctioned labor agitation and industrial unrest and sense of
animosity between the managers and the workers, which were at their peak during 1960-90.
Despite such a historically dismal socio-political context of the workplace, COI led the
transformation in the industrial atmosphere of West Bengal during the 1990s. The thrust of
COI’s vision was not on incentives – in fact, no incentive schemes were operational in the
Calcutta unit. Rather, there was a new sense of collaboration among managers, workforce and
the unions, which helped contain the average absenteeism levels to single-digit levels of 710%, avoid overtime costs with mutual consent, and enhanced the productivity and standards
of living for the benefit of the workforce, consumers and the investors at the same time.
COI’s new model for managing the “living assets” was founded on mutual respect and
trust. It recognized the shift in workforce ranks to the fourth generation workers, who were
23
extremely loyal to the firm and were looking at better futures than ones obtained by their
predecessors as part of COI. It was built on the confidence that the firm had not experienced
any strike or lockout throughout its history, in a socio-political context where these incidents
were quite common part of the industrial life. The firm had since its inception resolved all the
issues with the workers and the unions through continuous discussions, formalized into annual
agreements, signed by both union and the management. This allowed the firm to keep its
industrial relations free from political intervention. Now, the new governance environment,
both at the corporate level as well as at the national and state level, encouraged the
management to bring the two rival unions together, and for seeking a collaborative approach
for enhanced productivity of the firm and welfare of the workers, within a framework of
modernization, technological advancement, and organizational learning.
The Old and the New
In the past, especially during the 1980s, the rivalry between the two unions for
realizing supremacy among the workforce and having their say in the discussions with
management disrupted the organizational climate. Both the unions had about an equal
number of members, and each struggled hard to prove their majority showing 49:51 or 51:49
situation almost as a rule. There were always several opportunist members who made the most
of this by switching unions on a regular basis and threatening to leave one particular union in
the event of not being given a coveted status in the union. Their movement back and forth was
a sheer nightmare for most loyalists in the two unions and they tried every trick in the book to
win back the lost members. Once it went to the extent of one union coercing members of the
other union to join their union by going to their respective houses and making them sign the
membership related documents. And consequently the other union made a big hue & cry over
this issue.
24
The unions had so many complaints against one another that the management had to
employ some selected individuals in management position especially for listening to their
problems and negotiate issues separately with each of the unions. The amount of time spent
by these people with each of the unions was so much that eventually the persons concerned
were jokingly referred to as owning that particular union. Under these conditions, the
management had to sit with the two unions separately and it was almost impossible to arrive
at any consensus at any given point of time. Any agreement with one of the unions
automatically meant opposition from the other union. It was more of a vicious circle with no
end in sight in so much that some members of the management thought that classic divide and
rule policy would be the best course of action.
As the British parent company was mulling its takeover by Totalfina of France, and
the new economic policy being introduced in the nation and the state, a new managerial
philosophy emerged at COI at the turn of the nineties. The change agent was Dr. P. K. Dutt,
who had joined COI in 1970 as a management trainee, after Ph. D. in polymer science and
decade-long job as a faculty at University of Arizona over 1960-1970. Dutt rose rapidly to
become the first non-British Chief Technical Manager of COI over the next few years. After
a 2-year strategy stint at the British head-office, he came back as a General Manager for COI
and West African operations of the parent company in 1982. Soon thereafter, he was
appointed to the Board of COI in 1984, given charge as Assistant Managing Director in 1986,
and eventually made Managing Director (equivalent to CEO) of COI in 1991. Regarding this
period, Dutt commented in our interview:
“I had no intention of coming back to India when I was posted in UK but I was called
here as the company was going through some difficulty. In this context therefore I had a very
clear mandate: (1) to modernise the company and (2) to take it forward. Though one should
not boast, the subsequent results, however, proved that after I came back the turnover more
than doubled and the profit grew to four times during the period 1988-89.”
25
With his appointment as Managing Director, Dr. Dutt and his management team
charted out a fresh approach to break the long- standing union impasse. The previous
management had worked under the assumption that the existence of two weak rival unions
instead of one strong union flexing its muscles was certainly an ideal situation from the
control point of view. The belief of the new management was that if they could appeal to the
good senses of the workers they would understand the importance of collaboration and unity.
No employee, whichever union he belonged to, was interested in petty squabbles and union
fights on a daily basis. They were coming to work to earn their daily bread and had enough
sense to understand what was good for them in the long run. In other words, the new model
was to approach workforce as “loving” and “living” assets, who loved their firm and who
would prefer to live in a healthy and vibrant work environment. In words of Dr. Dutt, the
model was guided by the changing worldview of competition and strategy:
“Till the mid-eighties we had to become competitive against local small-scale
companies which had a lot of fiscal advantage and the product did not require any
sophisticated technology. Being a British company, on the other hand, we had a very high
overhead cost. During that time we could, however, manage to improve our efficiency and
survive. From mid-nineties and afterwards, due to liberalisation, our competitors are not the
local companies anymore. We have to now compete with anybody, anywhere across the globe
and remain really “world-class”. It was not easy for the company to become world-class
which was functioning in a country closed for nearly forty years.”
Taking the opportunity of upcoming annual agreements with the unions, the
management put to test their hypothesis of workforce as ‘loving and living assets’. In
response to the two separate charters of demand from the two unions, the management placed
a unique and hitherto unheard of proposal. They intended to recognize both the unions as one
representing the interests of the entire workforce. They announced that the management
would only entertain a joint charter of demands and the process of negotiation and final
settlement would only be done with representatives from both the unions attending the
meeting. There was an immediate resistance from all the quarters, including members of the
management that the new model was doomed to fail.
26
However, the management took a firm stand and adopted the strategy of
communicating extensively highlighting the benefits of such collaboration at several meetings
with workers on the shop floor. They explained to the workers that the strength in numbers in
deciding majority /minority did not make much of a difference to them as the management
was committed to treating both the two unions at par. The management would always follow
a policy of non-discrimination, recognizing both the unions as representing the interest of the
workers. The union leaders resisted this move strongly, fearing to lose the power and
attention they had become accustomed to. But the communication exercises of the
management were beginning to have a profound effect on the general workers. In this regard,
Dr. Dutt observed:
“my major strength is my total openness. I don’t hesitate to say the truth straight and
value transparency. It might be seen as my weakness as well but I do honestly perceive it as
my strength. I could be blunt, if required. I believe that after all the CEO is the leader and if
anything is not right the leader has to say it. To tell the truth in the Indian situation speaking
the truth may be, often perceived as weakness. Culturally, we are always looking for
sympathy. Sympathy for the right reason or the right cause is humane. But sympathy for
somebody’s failure does not exist in my book. I believe that everybody should show a sense
of responsibility. I also have a very high expectation from people as I believe that
performance is truly limitless. Though I at times sound rather blunt, people know that what I
tell them is nothing personal based on my liking/disliking. I am always perceived as fair.”
The rank and file members recognized the new model as fundamentally designed for
their own benefit, and at the same time for enhancement of organizational effectiveness. The
union leaders soon gave in to the popular grassroots sentiments, and called a joint meeting for
joining hands together and tried to resolve mutual differences on their own without
managerial intervention. Finally they decided to accept practically all the pre-conditions of
the new model, i.e. they agreed to sit in joint negotiation meeting with the management
having equal representatives from both the unions. They also decided to have equal number
of representatives for the Works committee and the Canteen Committee where the number of
union reps required was even. But the Provident Fund committee seemed to pose a problem,
as the number of reps required was three. This was resolved through a management
27
suggestion to have a ratio of representation from the two unions as 2:1 in one year and 1:2 in
the next year. In addition, switching between the unions was banned forever. Any new recruit
would be given a choice to join any of the union but they would have to remain with that
union for life. Though the union leaders vehemently opposed the idea of submitting a single
memorandum, they eventually landed up submitting virtually identical copies of Charter of
Demands on their union letterheads. As part of the new Code of conduct, built on the
message of solidarity, no labor related issue was at all to be discussed from now onwards,
without the presence of both the union representative even when discussing issues pertaining
to one union only. Further, to contain costs and ensure dedicated work during normal hours,
all overtime hours were eliminated with mutual consent. Looking back in 2001, Dr. Dutt
noted:
“Here, the unions have different political affiliations. But we always talk to them
together. I don’t even know who belongs to which union and people often laugh at me for
that, but it really does not matter. There are only some token symbols ( like union flags ) but
no real politics goes on inside the company. Long back, in mid-eighties I had told them it is
their choice whether they want to be a part of a sick company or a healthy business
organisation. If they want politicking and unionism they would surely dig their own grave.”
Towards a Shared Future
Today, after almost a decade, the workplace climate has so transformed that the union
members hardly differentiate between the unions. More often than not, they invite the
opposite union’s leader to solve intra-union problems, urging that the presence of any one
leader would be enough to handle any situation. In the event of any one leader being absent it
would be taken for granted that the other leader would intervene. The two union leaders, who
used to avoid being seen together in public, now share a very good rapport, and an equal
status from members of both the unions. Management is seen as a true friend, guide and
philosopher, with umpteen instances where workers, after having been promoted to the
28
managerial positions with adequate experience, still retaining their union memberships. In
this regard, Dr. Dutt observed:
“I do not believe in any management-union division, which is very artificial in nature.
I know almost all the workers personally go, meet and talk to them and they can also talk to
me freely. I tell them, “Look, what you are doing is not right” and they listen to me since they
know I don’t talk rubbish. I am working in this company for so many years and whenever in
Calcutta I go to the factory, at least three-four times a day. I never restrict myself in the office
because I don’s believe in running a company from an office.”
The success of the “loving and living asset” model has allowed COI to move ahead
with several innovative work practices, to face the new era of globalization and competition
that is emerging. As part of the annual agreement signed on 2nd January, 2000, to celebrate
the new millennium, the management and unions decided to introduce a new night shift, to
relocate existing manpower and support further growth in productivity through multi-skilling
and flexible learning. Already, there is an increased thrust on training workers to run several
machines, instead of limiting them to only one. To capitalize upon the opportunity for
enhanced learning, the number of holidays has been reduced to 12 instead of earlier 16,
without any extra compensation for these days, which has allowed the company to commit to
the enhanced training despite growing competition.
The boundary of the jobs has now become flexible, so that in case of shortage of
manpower the work never suffers. Further, the workers have been entrusted with tasks, such
as quality control, previously entrusted to management staff only. In addition, housekeeping
is now a part of everybody’s job. On the other hand, peripheral jobs like security have been
contracted with outside agency to allow focus on jobs where the firm can contribute to skill
enhancement of the workers. All the workers are now paid through cheque, and are eligible
to draw money using an ATM card from zero-balance accounts with a bank. As noted by Dr.
Dutt, these developments have taken a fresh meaning with changeover to the Japanese parent:
“being a part of DIC, a very large group of companies, COI has access to the very best
technology in the world. We are training the people all the time and like any other company
the focus is now on cost, we are now much more cost-conscious than we were before.”
29
In summary, the management belief in treating human assets with dignity and
believing in their inherent goodness has been key to the development of COI. While the firm
has done well in preserving and fostering its human and technical competencies, and
responding to the Post-competence challenges, it is looking forward to a renewed integration
of these with Investor Orientation. As shown in Table 6, the profits of the firm took a beating
in 2000, as compared to the earlier years, on account of increased depreciation and material
costs.
--------------------------------Insert Table 5 About Here
--------------------------------In this regard, a spiritually guided attitude of Dr. Dutt, reflected in the following quote,
may prove as decisive in the transformative organization without any discontinuity:
“I don’t see or need any major change, which can only happen when there is no proper
planning. I believe the changes should be focused on the business process. I do not believe in
drastic downsizing because I understand that in this country without any social security
system people are really helpless without a job. I firmly believe that in every sick company it
is the failure on the part of the management rather than the fault of the workers. I attribute
75% weight to the change of business process and reducing wastage and 25% reducing the
number of people. In a country with a tremendous growth potential, in fact, we need people. I
welcome the process of automation but I will also like to calculate the real cost-effectiveness.
We reduce numbers through a really soft Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) program
which basically emphasizes the concept of natural attrition and job-freezing.”
Already, Coates of India’s positive climate has become an exemplar in the State of
West Bengal, which is now shedding its past image of leftist unionism and moving towards a
more positive, meaningful, relationship between the workforce and the management.
Conclusions
In this chapter, we reviewed the transformative perspective in change, leadership, and
learning domains. In its essence, transformative perspective allows an organization to
develop a higher-order integrative insights into the differentiated features of various domains,
30
so that a new meaning of change, leadership, and learning is created, which allows the
organization to live a fulfilling life in each of those domains. The participants in the
organization are also thereby able to share their differences, and develop a shared sense of
reality, and construct bridges between their different realms of life. The transformative
organizations go to the very purpose of human and organizational life, which pervades all the
domains of human and organizational behavior. Thus, transformative approaches influence
the heart or culture of the organization, and help generate a new integrative emic meaning of
each behavior.
We developed a theory of strategic cultures of organizations, identifying four types of
strategic cultures – each associated with one region of the world. The four types were
Investor Orientation (typical of Western Hemisphere and Anglo), Competence Orientation
(typical of Asia-Pacific), Post-Competence Orientation (typical of Europe), and Spiritual
Orientation (typical of Africa). We proposed that the globalization creates the challenge for
developing an integrative culture, and suggested that the transformative perspective allows the
firms to put appropriate proportionate priorities on each of these strategic domains without
sacrificing any one of them.
We tested the proposition about the integrative strategic cultures of the transformative
organization using the analysis of an Indian firm, Coates of India, whose holding shifted from
a British parent, to first French parent, and then to Dutch/Japanese parent over the last ten
years. Using survey data from the top management team, we found that the firm puts very
high priority on Investor and Competence Oriented culture, high priority on Post-competence
culture, and some but limited priority on Spiritual culture. The CEO interview further
indicated that the firm has enjoyed greatest gains in Competence oriented culture over the
recent years, as manifested in a complete transformation of the industrial relations climate,
while also building up Post-competence orientation involving the positive effect of this
31
transformation on the local state. The Investor oriented culture has taken some beating in the
recent times, but may improve as the firm looks at its role in transformative terms, covering
co-development of employees, community, and the nation.
32
Table 1: Item Composition of Strategic Culture Scales
Investor Orientation
Cost control; firm profitability; product quality; sales volume
Competence Orientation
Long-term competitive ability of the organization; effect on
relationships with other organizations with which you do
serious business; employee professional growth and
development; employee relations issues; customer satisfaction
Post-Competence
Contribution to the economic welfare of the nation; welfare of
Orientation
the local community; environment; minority employees;
female employees
Spiritual Orientation
Ethical considerations; supernatural forces, such as auspicious
days and forecasts by truth sayers; pleasing, respecting, not
offending a divine being
Note: All items evaluate how much importance should be assigned when making critical
management decisions, with response alternatives ranging from 1 (none)… 4 (moderate)… 7
(most important)
33
Table 2: Strategic Culture Scores for Coates of India
Respondent Respondent Respondent Respondent Respondent Respondent Firm’s
1
2
3
4
5
6
Average
Investor Orientation
6.29
7.00
5.50
7.00
5.00
6.50
6.75
Competence
Orientation
6.03
6.40
5.80
6.60
4.80
6.20
6.40
Post competence
Orientation
4.90
5.20
4.80
4.40
4.40
4.40
6.20
Spiritual Orientation
3.11
3.33
3.00
3.33
2.00
2.00
5.00
34
Table 3: Production Growth at Calcutta Plant of COI during early 1990s
DEPARTMENTS
PRODUCTION
PRODUCTION
INCREASE IN
BEFORE 90s
DURING 94-95
PERCENTAGE
LIQUID INKS
2000
3600
80
LIQUID INKS
7 JOBS
10 JOBS
43
1200
2600
117
2000
4000
100
4TONS
7 TONS
75
3 TONS
7.7 TONS
93
BLENDING
LIQUID INKS
VARNISH
PASTE INKS
WEIGHING
PASTE INKS
VARNISH
CHIPS
35
Table 4: Growth in Calcutta Plant Productivity over the early 1990s
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
148.32
205.73
255.17
277.02
361.25
1605.13
1802.15
1958.65
2150.58
2497.93
Value Added (Rs. Million)
44.88
65.41
80.14
95.71
116.45
Wages (Rs. million)
11.87
12.75
14.74
16.03
17.12
Number of Workmen
240
237
235
234
227
187,000
276,000
341,000
409,000
513,000
138,000
6.69
222,000
7.60
278,000
8.33
341,000
9.19
438,000
11.00
618,000
868,000
1,086,000
1,184,000
1,591,000
7394
7076
7527
7456
6855
8
6.2
5.78
5.79
4.74
0.09
0.11
0.13
0.13
0.14
Production Value (Rs.
Million)
Production units (in Million
tons)
Productivity (Rs. Value
Added/worker)
Profitability (Rs. Valueadded-Wages)/worker
Units produced ( in million
tons )per workman
Production Value ( Rs. per
worker)
Wage Cost in Rs. / units
produced in million tons
Wage Cost/ Production
Value
Unit Realization (Rs/ton)
36
Table 5: Modernization Investments in Calcutta Plant of COI, (Rs. million)
Year
Computers
Plant & Machinery
1994
-
52.257
1995
-
51.049
1996
11.851
24.388
1997
10.347
30.715
37
Table 6: Recent Performance of Calcutta Plant of COI
Year
Sales Figures( in
Profit After Tax( in
Production units( in
million rupees)
million rupees)
tons)
1998
1448
85
2531
1999
1642
101
2657
2000
1844
90*
3051
* There was a significant increase in material costs and depreciation leading to reduction in
the amount of profits
38
References:
Astin, A. and H. Astin. (2001); “Principles of Transformative Leadership,” AAHE Bulletin,
January, Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher Education.
Bass, B. M. (1985) Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bemis, W. & B. Nanus. (1985); Leaders: the strategies for taking charge. New York: Harper
& Row.
Boyd, R.D. & Myers, J. G. (1988);. "Transformative Education." International Journal of
Lifelong Education, 7(4): 261-284.
Brent, Doug. (1991); "Oral Knowledge, Typographic Knowledge, Electronic Knowledge:
Reflections on the History of Ownership." Ejournal 1 (3), Albany, New York: University of
Albany.
Burgess, H. & Burgess, G. (1996). Constructive confrontation: A transformative approach to
intractable conflicts. Mediation Quarterly, 13(4): 305-322.
Bush, RAB & Folger, JP (1994). The promise of mediation: Responding to conflict through
empowerment and recognition, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dyer, J.J. & Singh, H. (1998); “The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of
Interorganizational Competitive Advantage,” Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 660–
679.
Glock, C.Y. & Stark, R. (1965). Religion and Society in tension, Chicago: Rand McNally.
Goeglein, A. & Indvik, J. (2000). "Values-Based Transformational Leadership:
An Integration of Leadership and Moral Development Models." Proceedings
of the Academy of Strategic and Organizational Leadership, 5(2), 12-16.
Gupta, V., Hanges, P.J., & Dorfman, P.W. (2002) “Clustering of GLOBE Societies,” in
Cultures, Organizations, and Leadership: GLOBE Study of 62 Nations, Eds. House, R.J.,
Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W., Gupta, V., & GLOBE, CA: Sage Publications.
Gupta, V., Rajasekar, J., and E S Srinivas, (2002) “Managing Performing Workforce:
The Case of India - Challenges and Legacies,” in Pattanayak, B. & Gupta V. (eds.), Creating
Performing Organizations: International Perspectives for Indian Management, New Delhi,
India: Sage Publications.
Kuczmarski, S.S., & Kuczmarski, T.D., (1995). Values-based leadership. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Lederach, J.P. (1989); "Director's Circle." Conciliation Quarterly, 8(3): 12-14.
Lichtenstein, B. M. B.. (2000); Self-organized Transitions: A Pattern Amidst the Chaos of
Transformative Change. (4): 128-141. Academy of Management Executive.
39
Mangaliso, M.P. (2001) “Building Competitive Advantage from Ubuntu: Management
Lessons from South Africa.” 15(3): 23-33, The Academy of Management Executive.
Meyer, M.W. & Gupta, V. (1994) 'The Performance Paradox', In BM Staw & L. Cummings
(eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press, 16: 309-369
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: JosseyBass, Inc.
Montville, J.V. (1993). The Healing Function in Political Conflict Resolution. In Conflict
Resolution Theory and Practice: Integration and Application, edited by Dennis J. Sandole and
Hugo van der Merwe, 112-127. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Morris, R. (1994); A Practical Path to Transformative Justice, Toronto: Rittenhouse.
Ferguson M (1980) The Acquarian Conspiracy: personal and social transformations in the
1980s, Los Angeles, J P Tarcher.
Parker, S.K., & Axtell, C.M. (2001) “Seeing Another viewpoint: Antecedents and outcomes
of employee perspective taking,” The Academy of Management Journal, 44(6): 1085-1101.
Stryker, S. & Serpe, R.T. (1982). “Commitment, Identity salience, and role behavior: Theory
and research example. In W. Ickes & E.S. Knowles (Eds.) Personality, roles and social
behavior, 199-218. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Vargas, R. (1987) “Transformative Knowledge: A Chicano Perspective,” In Context, 17: 4850, Langley, WA: Context Institute.
40
Figure 1: The Process of Transformative Change