Artificial Intelligence in William Gibson’s Neuromancer Essay -- Neuro

Artificial Intelligence in William Gibson’s Neuromancer   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Artificial Intelligence is a term not too widely used in today’s society.   With today’s technology we haven’t found a way to enable someone to leave their physical body and let their mind survive within a computer.   Could it be possible?   Maybe someday, but for now it’s just in theory.   The novel by William Gibson, Neuromancer, has touched greatly on the idea of artificial intelligence.   He describes it as a world where many things are possible.   By simply logging on the computer, it opens up a world we could never comprehend.   The possibilities are endless in the world of William Gibson.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   This world of artificial intelligence has the power to produce many questions and theories because we don’t understand something that isn’t possible.   â€Å"How smart’s an AI, Case?   Depends.   Some aren’t much smarter than dogs.   Pets.   Cost a fortune anyway.   The real smart ones are as smart as the Turing heat is willing to let ‘em get.†Ã‚   (Page 95)   This shows that an artificial intelligence can be programmed to only do certain ...

“Judgements about dialects are often essentially judgements about the speakers of those dialects

Language is primarily considered to perform two major functions in society. It is designed to convey information to those around us as well as establish and maintain relationships. However, linguistically (albeit from social stereotypes) certain paradigms relating to class, social and financial status are attributed to dialects – a consensus that has been perpetuated in recent times due to the diversity of today's society and the integration of many differing dialects and languages in cities and countryside alike. Indeed, a stereotype regarding a dialect usually derives from the views held on the characteristics of its speakers. Although a direct correlation between the aforemented stereotypes and linguistic fact has little scientific basis in reality it has not served to reduce the almost established dialect prejudice rife in the media, judiciary and education systems. In the early 20th Century, the ‘Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis' advanced the theory that the derivative of language we use is respective of our social, cultural and ideological background, and ever since various linguists and sociolinguists have studied dialectal differences and correlation between dialect and social judgments therein to determine the extent and implications of prevalent dialect prejudice. The size of the British Isles often leads people to discern that the languages predominant in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are homogenous and that one dialect (‘British English') is the most prevalent throughout, but even within a nation the size of England there is a great diversity of dialect both regionally and socially. Though these respective dialects can be categorised in vague groups such as ‘north' and ‘south' they do not adhere to any sharp boundaries or coincide with county/city lines. Instead, dialects are said to form a â€Å"dialect continuum†1 as they merge and alter near other cities or counties (i.e.: other dialects) so therefore one cannot define dialectal boundaries as they would be based on social fact, not linguistic. The most ubiquitous dialects within society (‘Geordie', ‘Cockney', Jock', etc.) often receive the most scrutiny for their variation to standardised English, and it is because of this that the speakers of r espective dialects are stereotyped with traits common to their culture. However, while it is true that some dialects represent certain social and political variants, this is predominantly due to geographical reasons and not because a dialect accurately represents one cohesive body of social genre. Also, the extent of Dialect Continuum means that dialects are often bandied together into broad categories (Geordie, Scot, etc.) meaning that certain dialects are often misinterpreted as others and therefore leads to people being attributed characteristics of a similar dialect. This reiterates the irrational social judgments by which dialects are often quantified as its speakers can be attributed to a dialectal collective that, while phonetically similar, may be wholly unrelated. An active example of this is in one particular study which showed â€Å"attitudinal responses were statistically significant between speakers of different dialectal groups in Great Britain in spite of the fact that respondents were inaccurate in the identification of the area from which the speakers came†. Indeed, the hypothesis that dialect is representative of one's background (which is linked intrinsically to social preconceptions) is accepted by the majority of sociolingustical commentators, the established view being that â€Å"accents and dialects have come to act as indicators not only of one's relationship to a locality but also of one's social class position† 3. The fundamental consensus of the ‘Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis' (formulated in the early 20th Century by prominent linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf) highlighting the striking difference between both languages themselves and their subsequent dialect derivatives, and that the surroundings and ideologies of a community are prominent in its form of speech. Therefore, one could discern that, if dialectal content necessitates the input of social background, judgments of dialects could be verified as the respective social traits of the speaker are evident in what they say and how it is said. In Britain, â€Å"people are often able to make instant and unconscious judgements about someone's class affiliation on the basis of their accent†4. Indeed, phonetic factors assume a primary role in highlighting ones social background. A 1972 survey undertaken by National Opinion Polls in England provides an example of how significant speech differences are associated with social class variety. Subjects, randomly chosen from the British public, were asked which factor (from eleven provided) was most indicative of a person's class. The most popular answer was ‘the way they speak' followed by ‘where they live'. This evidence highlights, albeit only to a certain degree, that speech mannerisms (governed primarily by one's dialect) are considered to be more indicative of one's social class than education, occupation or income5. This is highlighted primarily through the paradigms of ‘Subjective Inequality', which details the origins of linguistic prejudice in the public domain. Societies throughout the world credit characteristics such as intelligence, friendliness and status according to the traits of respective dialects, though these views are based not on linguistic merit – rather its emulation of the ‘received' or ‘standardised' variety of the language (the most revered British dialect utilised by various official establishments such as Government and the BBC). Thus, language is shown to proliferate social stereotypes, as it is one of the qualities (albeit highly unreliable) by which one is initially judged by those in the public domain. Despite the judgements of dialects categorizing the speaker with various socio-political elements, one should note that, from a purely linguistical standpoint, no regional dialect displays any signs of deficiency in its ability to convey information – social predispositions are therefore centred wholly on the idiosyncrasies and eccentricities of each respective dialect. This is a consensus supported by the majority of linguistic research (â€Å"there is nothing at all inherent in non-standard variety dialects that make them linguistically inferior†6). People will invariably draw conclusions upon one's persona regarding the characteristics of speech, not on its content. Indeed, due to the lack of linguistic discrepancy between the respective British dialects it is discernable that, aside from social factors, they are arbitrarily stigmatised. However, many maintain that this linguistic superficiality is perpetuated by the media; characters on television or radio that repr esent non-standardised dialects are often simply manifestations of traits commonly associated with their respective culture. Furthermore, some Sociolinguists have propagated the theory that perceived linguistic inequality (namely those dialects that do not conform to standardised forms of pronunciation and syntax) is a consequence of social inequality as â€Å"language is one of the most important means by which social inequality is perpetuated from generation to generation†7.The language and style utilised within a society has an innate relationship with the geography, occupation and ideologies prevalent in the community – making dialectal prejudice easier to circulate as the social traits of a speaker are evident in his diction and style of conversation. This is again based upon the ‘Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis', maintaining that language (and thus dialect) structure is, to some extent, influenced by a society's surroundings which in turn affects the way the community perceives the world around it. In reality, dialect prejudice is apparent in every sector of society, from education to business, highlighted through the ‘matched-guise' experiments conducted by Strongman and Woozley in 1969. These experiments served to highlight the extent to which people are quantified on the basis of their dialect and consisted of groups of subjects listening to people reciting a passage to assess the perceived traits of prevalent ‘RP English', Yorkshire, Northern and Scottish dialects. The subjects were then asked to gauge certain attributes regarding each speaker (friendliness, intelligence, success, etc.). The results showed that several of the dialects emerged with stereotypical traits – despite the fact that linguistically, none of the speakers had recited the passage any better or worse than the others as each speaker had been the same person adopting a series of dialects. Table 1 – Results from W.P. Robinson ‘Language and Social Behaviour' (1972). RP English Intelligent, successful, not friendly. Yorkshire Dialects Perceived as†¦ Serious, kind-hearted, not intelligent. Scottish Dialects Friendly, good-natured. Northern Dialects Industrious, reliable, lower class. It is clear from this that society assumes characteristic inferences upon others based primarily on their dialects. In short, speech characteristics of a social stereotype inherit the stereotypes evaluation. Further evidence of this is seen from an experiment conducted in America to highlight the prejudice between public reception of prominent ethnic and native dialects. A single speaker was recorded and played to listening subjects saying the word ‘hello' in three dialects: Standard American English (SAE), Chicano English (ChE), and African American Vernacular English (AAVE). Variation in the tenseness of the vowel and pitch prominence on the first syllable of ‘hello' was enough to elicit a significantly accurate identification of the dialects by listeners. When the stimulus was expanded to include ‘Hello, I'm calling about the apartment you have advertised in the paper', in actual calls to landlords (who were obviously unaware of the experiment), the SAE speaker guise was given an appointment to see housing at roughly the seventy percent level. Both the AAVE and ChE guises were given appointments only about thirty percent of the time8. This underlines the universal presence of dialect prejudice, the latter dialects are shown be regarded in certain sectors as less prestigious than the former. There is a great deal of evidence to underline lack of knowledge that institutes these social judgements of dialectal variety. Firstly, the prominent linguist Edward Sapir maintained that dialect and culture are not always intrinsically associated and that many unrelated cultures can share very similar dialectal derivatives of the same language. An active example of this was prevalent in aboriginal America – the Athabaskan varieties are clearly unified despite the wide distribution of its people, from the hunting communities of Western Canada to the ritualised Southwest. The illogical stigmatisation of dialects highlighted in the stigma towards the employment of double negatives in certain dialects (an action that is derided as a sign of low social standing or poor intelligence). Whilst being both widely considered a standard linguistical construction in other languages (e.g.: French and Arabic) and prevalent in such classical literary works as Shakespeare and Chaucer, modern English encourages the marginalisation of its usage. Thus, it is evident yet again that perceptions regarding dialects are not founded upon established linguistic principles, the case in point highlighting that syntactical and grammatical constructs are more figurative in a dialects perception. This has in turn lead sociolinguists to conclude that dialects cannot be adversely regarded on account of grammatical inconsistencies, as â€Å"these features have no intrinsic consequences for our capacity to communicate or restrict the range of meanings we can express†9. Furthermore, the illogical parameters by which dialects are linguistically quantified are reiterated in the cultural paradox of ‘American' and ‘British' English. In England, dialects without a non-prevolic /r/ are given prestige and constitute an integral part of the ‘RP' dialect; those that do not share this trait are stigmatised and portrayed as belonging to a rural and/or uneducated populace. Conversely, in New York those containing a non-prevolic /r/ are socially marginalized whilst non-prevolic /r/ usage is commonplace in upper class society. In English towns such as Reading and Bristol this pattern is again reversed – serving to reiterate that value judgements regarding dialect are completely random (at least from a linguistic standpoint). As well as this, another example of social perception strongly influencing the respective status' of dialects was conducted in New York by Labov, who examined shop assistant speech patterns in three differing department stores of high, medium and low repute. The procedure was then to ask several clerks a question regarding the department (e.g.: ‘where are the woman's shoes?') with two possible occurrences of non-prevolic /r/, to test the hypothesis that non-prevolic /r/ usage correlates with social class. Table 2 – Results of the Labov's Survey, taken from P. Trudgill (1983). High-ranking Store 38% used no non-prevolic /r/. Medium-ranking Store 49% used no non-prevolic /r/. Low-ranking Store 83% used no non-prevolic /r/. Thus Labov discerned that, to a certain extent, his hypothesis was verified: those dialects that do not frequently use non-prevolic /r/ are usually of a lower class. Also, this experiment demonstrated the paradigm that dialects are socially affected; the fact that this dialectal trait is marginalized is due to its affiliation with lower classes, reinforcing the fact that views on dialect are socially governed10. The communal view of certain dialects is not determined arbitrarily; they have as much to do with personal opinions regarding the dialect as the social and cultural values of the respective community. Certain dialects are given more prestige and status than others, which leads to some being more favourably evaluated than others (some are considered ‘good' or ‘attractive' whilst others are regarded as ‘slovenly' or ‘bad' in comparison). Dialects judgements are again propagated through the media, the frequent usage of ‘RP' English in official reports and programs responsible for the high level prestige attributed to those that utilise it. Judgements about dialects are therefore based on social connotations as opposed to any inherent linguistic properties. In short, it is the speaker that is judged, rather than the speech. This consensus is reiterated by Giles and Sassoon11, who cite consistent findings of subjects evaluating anonymous speakers with more standardised dialects more favourably for such characteristics as intelligence, success and confidence. In Britain the middle class is associated with not only its widespread representation of the standard dialect (‘RP' or ‘Estuary English') but also speaking with in a formal, articulate style than more common or marginal dialects (‘Cockney' and ‘Indian English' respectively). However, whilst many linguists conclude that social judgments are the parameter that separates dialects, the linguist Brown12 proposed the notion that perhaps there was a linguistic discrepancy between the standardised and stigmatised dialects in society. Brown contrasted the speech characteristics of upper and lower social class French Canadian speakers of varying dialects reading a pre-set passage and discovered, relative to the lower class dialects, the upper class subjects were considered as more articulate and had a better range of intonation and diction. From this, one could discern that there is an argument to support the idea that dialects are not wholly based on social judgment and that dialects utilised by the upper classes are generally more articulate and a more accurate representation of standardised diction (widely considered the quintessential form of a language). Nevertheless, there is a great deal that negates the validity of this information; firstly, as the subjects were reading prepared material and not speaking freely they could have been judged partly on their reading ability – not their dialectal traits. Secondly, it is difficult for subjects to not be affected by their personal views with respect to certain dialects, as neutrality can be hard to maintain in the artificial environment in which the is experiment was set (which could also be considered an adverse factor in itself). Though some experiments have shown that dialects are, in certain respects, revered on a purely phonetic level, analysis of large amounts of data seemed to group together paired opposites which pointed to competence, personal integrity, and social attractiveness constructs in the evaluation of speaker voices. A great deal of subsequent research in this field confirmed that these constructs were regularly at work, and, more interestingly, that standardised (or â€Å"RP English†) speakers were most often judged highest on the competence dimension while nonstandard (or regionally and/or ethically distinct speakers) were rated higher for the integrity and attractiveness dimensions13. Irrespective of social background, we can see that dialects can be judged (albeit very rarely) solely upon the speaker's representation of a particular dialect. In summary, the views surrounding many of today's modern dialects are primarily based upon out-moded stereotypes of the culture that said dialects represent. Though linguists have proved that language is influenced by predominant factors within a community (surroundings, ideologies, etc.) it does not justify dialectal prejudice as the information upon which these are founded are often erroneous and generalised. There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that no dialect is linguistically inferior to any other as they all possess the capacity to convey information effectively (if they did not, they would have been discarded or adapted by its community, making their very presence today confirmation enough of their abilities). Limiting the social and occupational possibilities of a certain group of people through dialect prejudice (albeit for many a machiavellian-esque social stigma), simply preserves social asymmetries and propagates tension between differing cultural factions.

Variable Of Organization Culture And Managerial Characteristics - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 14 Words: 4109 Downloads: 9 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Statistics Essay Did you like this example? Purpose à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" Literature has studied the variables of organization culture and managerial characteristics separately in various dimensions. This study investigates the effects of organizational culture and managerial characteristic on the tradeoff between organizational sincerity and work performance for promotion. Design/methodology/approach à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" The data was collected using self-administered questionnaire, from managers of different departments. The final sample size was 250 managers. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Variable Of Organization Culture And Managerial Characteristics" essay for you Create order Findings à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" The result showed that there is a positive relation between organizational culture, work performance, and organizational sincerity. A positive association also exists between managers education level and work performance given that the gender is male. Research limitations/implications à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" Few limitations would be the shortage of time and resources. In future studies other managerial characteristics should also be examined. Practical implications à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" In this era of immense competition, companies may ask themselves what to criteria to choose while promoting employees. Result shows that there is a positive relation between organizationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s culture, work performance, and organizational sincerity. Originality/value à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" The most interesting and significant finding is that there is a positive relation between organizational culture, work performance, and organizational sincerity. Accordingly the stronger the culture of the organization the better work performers and sincere employees it has. Keywords Organizational culture, Managerial characteristics, Work Performance, Sincerity CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Overview It has been argued that loyal and sincere employees are very important for success of organizations (Jaunch, Glueck, Osborn, 1978). It is said that coherent and carefully developed corporate values play an important role, in making employees, loyal to organizations (Smith Rupp, 2002). Work performance has been studied in different dimensions. Earlier the study of work performance was limited only to job satisfaction (Martin Shore, 1978). Ovadje, Obinna and Muogboh (2009) also studied the relation between job satisfaction and individual performance, according to their study the relationship between the two was high and consistent. Jaunch, Glueck and Osborn (1978) have argued that loyalty has no relationship with work efficiency. They used five point scales to measure organizational sincerity, commitment and productivity. Avolio, Waldman, and McDaniel (1990) studied the effect of age and experience on work performance and concluded that experience is a better predictor of performance than age. It is argued that health of organizations depends upon health of employees, if employees are healthy they will perform better and organizations will grow (Baptiste, 2008). Paswan,Pelton and True (2005) studied perception of managerial sincerity in context of motivation and job satisfaction, they concluded that loyalty of employees is very important in getting good feedback as they are employees are more interactive and motivated. The relationship between employees and organization depends upon how they perceive the organization (Martin Shore, 1989). Baffour (1999) also argues that organizations in which employees are part of decision making perform better than those with centralized decision making. Employeeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s loyalty may lead to employeesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ satisfaction and productivity or it may result in dissatisfaction and absenteeism (Becker, Billings, Eveleth Gilbert, 1996). Previously supervisory ratings and questionnaire have been used to measure organizational sincerity and work performance respectively (Jaunch et al, 1978). It is argued that participative management makes employees satisfied (Kim, 2002). Therefore loyalty and sincerity of employees to organization is considered as an important factor in promotions (Jaunch et al, 1978). It is also said that quality has relationship with satisfaction (Ilias, Rahman Razak, 2008). Barney (1986) argued that that firms which do not have the required cultures cannot sustain optimal financial performance because their respective cultures are neither rare nor difficult to imitate. Weick (1987) also argued that organizations whose cultures value reliability more than efficiency often face unique problems in learning and understanding, which could affect the performance of the organization. It is argued that top management involvement is very essential to handle strategic change efficiently and effectively (Boecker, 1997). Gupta and Govindarajan (1984) also argued that tolerance of mangers contribute positively make business unit more efficient Although work performance is studied by different researchers in different dimensions, but no one has tried to link organizational sincerity to work performance. This study aims to identify the interrelation of work performance and organizational sincerity. Today in the world of immense competition both traits of sincerity and hard working in an employee is hard to find. Through this study we want to find whether a manager will prefer an employee who is hard worker or an employee who is sincere towards his organization. Problem Statement To study the effects of managerial characteristics and organizational culture on managers trade-off between organizational sincerity and work performance for employee promotion. Proposed Research Hypotheses H1: There is a relationship between managerial characteristics and promotion criterion due to organizational sincerity. H2: There is a relationship between managerial characteristics and promotion criterion due to work performance. H3: There is a relationship between organizational culture and promotion criterion due to organizational sincerity. H4 : There is a relationship between organizational culture and promotion criterion due to work performance. H5: There is a relationship between managersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ education and work performance due to male gender. H6: There is a relationship between managersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ education and work performance due to female gender. Outline of the Study Chapter one includes the an overview of variables, problem statement that shows the possible relationship between managerial characteristics, work performance and impact of both on promotion criterion and six proposed research hypotheses with a brief outline of the study. Chapter two includes the literature review. In this chapter organizational culture, organizational sincerity and work performance are explained. Chapter three is comprised of method of data collection which is personal survey, sampling technique which is non-probability convenient sampling ,size which is two hundred and fifty, instrument of data collection, research model developed which supports the problem statement and statistical technique which is correlation. Chapter four includes the results which show the relationships between variables. Lastly Chapter five includes conclusion, discussions, implications and possible future researches. CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW The labor markets are becoming competitive day by day and it is very rare to find an employee that performs efficiently and whose goals are compatible with those of organizations. Therefore, most of times managers have to choose between a loyal employee and an efficient employee. Several factors influence this phenomenon. Culture It has been argued that there are considerable differences in the attitudes of managers as well as employees in the geographically and historically similar countries. These differences have been found across such variables as control, supervision, commitment, and decision type and leadership style. It was further revealed that these differences in the attitudes of managers and employees was associated with their respective countryà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s position on the Hofstedeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s cultural dimensions.(Mockaitis, 2005). Glinow, Huo and Lowe argued that despite numerous researches conducted on International Management styles, the studies have still failed to illustrate how ideal leadership or management style is affected by the specific cultural characteristics in different countries. They argued that although multinational firms should maintain some form of consistency in terms of management style, yet the management style used overseas (in different cultures) should be enfused with the local culture to maintain acceptability within the cultural context. Ralston, Holt, Terpstra and Cheng argued that economic ideology and national culture has a deep impact on individual work values of managers. Barney argues that organizational culture can be a source of sustained competitive advantage. He argued that some organizations have developed a culture which provides means to achieve competitive advantage. Schein argued that organizational culture has profound effects on its survival. He stated that an organization cannot survive if it cannot manage itself as an organized one through the use of deeply entrenched culture. He further argued that organizational culture brings in stability and thus it must be instilled into the new members. Schein argued in another paper that culture needs to be understood thoroughly and analyzed if an organization intends to take advantage of it in the field of organizational psychology. Denison and Mishra argued that there was a relationship between organizational culture and effectiveness. According to them organizational culture can be measured and can be related to critical organizational outcomes. Chatman and Jehn argued that the use of organizational culture to attain competitive advantage may not bear as much fruit as some scholars have argued it to be. They argued that there may be some constraints in the way to achieving this competitive advantage by using organizational culture. According to Sheridan (1992), organizational culture and employee retention are related. His study showed that the differences in employeesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ cultural values and the organizational values resulted in significant cases where employees deliberately left their jobs indicating that cultural fit is imperative to job retention for the organizations. Gordan DiTomaso (1992) argued that a strong organizational culture is positively associated with better performance. Their research also concluded that a strong culture lends itself to a short-term performance hike. Organizational Sincerity Loyalty is directly related to corporate vision, mission and values. As the business world is multifaceted therefore approach should be chosen with great care to analyse the gap between promise and performance gap (Fassin Buelens, 2011). Managersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ role in encouraging employees, giving them feedback regarding their performance and guiding leading them towards right career is very important. When employees are motivated because of management support they deliver quality sevice. Except of that employees whose goals are compatible with those of organizations are more productive and enthusiastic (Paswan, Pelton and True). Ali and Kazemi (1993) argue that loyal employee are real assets of an organization because they are those who do not quit in rainy days and stand by the organization as they own the problems of organization. Furthermore they say that sincere employees are more productive and are punctual. In case of loyalty, in US skills are preferred on seniority and seniority is not as important promotion criterion as skills are. While in Japan seniority is most important to be qualified as leader. But in Taiwan connections with owners are also valued along with seniority as important criteria to be qualified as leader (Glinow,Huo Lowe,1999). In US mangers are considered more competent than employees therefore speaking skills are important criteria to be promoted as leader and leaders tend to be good speakers to communicate corporate vision. While Japanese believe in equality and homogeneity of human talent therefore subordinatesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ input is considered very important. Taiwan is hybrid of both (Glinow et al, 1999). In US a leader needs to develop specialized skills to be promoted as leader while in Japan to be a leader one needs to possess broad-cope skills and experience. In Taiwan both, specialized skills and broad-scope skills with experience are important criteria to be an effective leader (Glinow et al, 1999). Chen and Tjosvold (2006) have argued that to strengthen the relationship between employees must tbe cooperative and not the competitive especially when mangers are from different countries. Work Performance There is a noteworthy impact of HRM practices that a company adopts on the wellbeing and positive performance of employees (Baptiste, 2007). Performance can be improved by employee participation and flexibility in job design. (Gershenfeld, 1988; Jaikumar, 1986). Managers should encourage employee participation and flexible structures to enhance the performance. Firms that are changing their traditional rigid organizational structure and bringing flexibility in work design are able to improve their performance and output quality (Baffour, 1999). Age and experience have non linear relationship with performance. Experience, rather than age, is a better predictor of performance ( Avolio, Waldman McDaniel, 1990) Blumberg and Pringle (1982) emphasized a model of work performance which says that performance is a result of ability motivation and opportunity. It is argued that health of organizations is directly influenced by health of employees, if employees are healthy they will perform better and organizations will grow and become healthy (Baptiste, 2008). Gillespie and Mann (2004) and Dirks and Ferrin (2002) have argued that trust is an important feature in the relationship that leaders have with their subordinates and that it is through this subordinate trust and respect for their leader, that subordinates are motivated to perform well. This view is supported by Bijlsma and Koopma (2003) who claim that trust is an important factor to organizational performance, because it facilitates discretionary effort to assist the organization. Standing (1997) argues that the critical areas of labor insecurity that should be considered as they effect work performance are those that relate to income insecurity (unsteady earnings or where earnings are contingency-based), working time insecurity (irregular hours at the discretion of the employer, and insufficient hours worked) and representation insecurity (where the employee has limited power to negotiate or participate). Design and physical properties of work place can have negative or positive effect on work performance of employees. A greater environment innovative work settings, a greater task performance in innovative work settings and a greater interaction with innovative work settings are associated with greater satisfaction and enhanced productivity (Ilozer, 2002) According to Armstrong (2000), performance management is a way of getting better results from the whole organization or individuals within it, by understanding and managing performance within an agreed framework of predetermined goals, standards and competence requirements. According to Walters (1995), performance management is about guiding and supporting employees to work as effectively and efficiently as possible according to the goals of the organization. A drug-free workplace helps to enhance output and performance and lowers the chance of injury. Many companies feel testing employees has helped to bring about lower costs, lower absenteeism, and lower medical costs (Bacon, 1989). CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS Method of Data Collection As our research study is descriptive and sources of information are primary, therefore we have used personal type of survey to collect the data. First of all data collection process was planned properly and then instrument was developed accordingly. After the development of instrument, pilot testing was done. Lastly actual data was collected and compiled. To collect the data through questionnaire we approached managers of different organization and used snow ball technique. Sampling Technique As the number of elements is unknown, we have used Non-probability sampling technique. To collect data in proper and convenient way, Convience sampling is used. The managers are easily accessible so it is most beneficial of all other sampling techniques. First of all the population was defined, and then sampling frame was determined. After determination of sampling frame, sampling technique was decided. Once the technique is decided, sample size was decided too. At last, the sampling process was executed. Sample Size The proposed number of respondents is two hundred and fifty (250). Instrument of Data Collection To study the effects of managerial characteristics and organizational culture on managerà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s trade-off between organizational sincerity and work performance for employee production, a questionnaire is developed comprising of nine questions. First question is about the work practices of mangers and their individualistic approach towards the work and how they perceive and conceive it. This question is further divided in ten questions in order to become more specific. Second question, which is further subdivided into twenty questions, is about the organizational culture. The number of questions is higher as compare to previous one because culture is more descriptive and a lot of information is required to comprehend it. Third question is about gender. It will tell us that whether gender makes any difference in giving promotion either to an efficient or loyal employee. Question four is about the age. It will also help us to see whether attitudes and beliefs regarding loyalty and efficiency change with respect to age. Fifth and sixth questions are about employee experience with current organization and overall experience respectively. The seventh and eighth questions education and functional department is asked from respondents. It will enable us to comment whether perception of employee importance as education level and department change. Ninth and last question regarding name is optional because we are studying role of managers in promoting efficient or loyal employees impartially and irrespective of name, caste or color. In short the questionnaire was designed to collect about employees work practices, the culture of organization they work in and the managerial characteristics. Validity and Reliability test. The instrument used here is valid and reliable. Because it is specifically designed to collect data specifically required to study the effects of managerial characteristics and organizational culture on managersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ trade-off between organizational sincerity and work performance for employee promotion. To check the validity and reliability of instrument we did pilot testing and found the instrument valid and reliable in accordance with our study. Therefore data collected through this instrument is also valid and reliable and leads us to more useful and specific results. Research Model Developed Figure 3.1 Managerial Characteristic Organizational Sincerity Work Performance Organizational Culture Organizational management has to deal with different types of employees. Some are very hardworking and efficient while others are very loyal to the organizations. It is of great importance to an organization to understand the relationship between the organizational sincerity and work in order to grow, compete and even survive. Statistical Technique Correlation will be used for data analysis. We have used correlation because it is the statistical technique which enables us to understand and interpret the interdependence between organizational sincerity and work performance for employee performance. CHAPTER 4: RESULTS Table 4.1 Promotion criteria Managerial characteristics Organizational culture Organizational Sincerity Work Performance Age (Male) .055 (.404) -0.13 (.837) Age (Female) .226 (.418) -.170 (.546) Working Experience With Current Organization (Male) .058 (.376) .077 (.238) Working Experience With Current Organization (Female) .262 (.346) -.025 (.930) Overall Working Experience (Male) -0.19 (.768) .049 (.455) Overall Working Experience (Female) .269 (.333) -.239 (.390) Education Level (Male) -0.25 (.706) .117* (.073) Education Level (Female) .107 (.704) .314 (.254) Organizational Culture .395** (.000) .299** (.000) *, Correlation is significant at the 0.10 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). P value is written in parenthesis. All the Managerial characteristics except for Education Level of Male are insignificant as their P value ÃŽÂ ±. A positive relation is shown between organizational culture, organizational sincerity, and work performance having P-value ÃŽÂ ±, which makes them significant. CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION, DISCUSSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH Conclusion Data analysis shows that there is no relation between managerial characteristics and organizational sincerity for both the genders, male and female. But in case of managerial characteristics and work performance, a relationship is established between managersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ education level and work performance but only for male gender. For female gender no such relationship exists. Analysis also shows that organizational culture is positively related to organizational sincerity and work performance. That suggest that stronger the organizational culture, better the wok performance and sincerity. Discussions, Implications and Future Research Organizational culture, sincerity and work performance are very important and crucial towards the achievement of organizational goals. Therefore work performance has been studied in relation to job satisfaction and consistent relations are established. But few attempts are made to find out the impact of organizational culture on achievement of organizational goals which is dependent upon work performance which leads to greater output and organizational sincerity. As we have found out a positive relationship between organizational culture and sincerity and between that of organizational culture and work performance. We can say that organizations in order to improve performance and build stronger relationship with their employees should work on building stronger and compatible organizational culture. It will not only improve employeesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ productivity but employee turnover will also reduce which will save the training costs et cetera ultimately. Except of that competencies and skills which are developed in employees over a period of time can also be retained and even competitive advantage can be achieved on basis of it. Even though we have studied very important relationships among managerial characteristics, organizational culture, organizational sincerity and work performance, a lot needs to be done in this newly identified direction. In this unexplored direction and field of study researchers can study many variables like impact of organizational culture on conflict of interest and can enhance the understanding further. References Ali J Abbas and Kazemi Al- Ali (2005),à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬? The Kuwaiti Manager: Work Values and Orientations Journal of Business Ethicsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬? , 60: 63-73 DOI 10.1007A10551-005-2626-6 Armstrong, M. (2000), Performance Management: Key Strategies and Practical Guidanceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s, Kogan Page, London. Avolio J. Bruce, Waldman A. David and McDaniel A. Michael (1990),à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?Age and work performance in non-managerial jobs the effects of experience and occupational typeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33, No 2, 407-422. Bacon, D. (1989), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Businessà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Role in War on Drugsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, Nationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Business, January, p.5. Baffour Gyan- George, (1999) The effects of employee participation and work design on firm performance: A managerial perspective, Management Research News, Vol. 22 Iss: 6, pp.1- 12 Baptiste Renee Nicole, (2008),à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?Tightening the link between employee wellbeing at work and performance: a new dimension for HRMà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬? Volume: 46 Number: 2 pp: 284-309 Barney B. Jay (1986) , à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Organizational Culture: Can It Be a Source of Sustained Competitive Advantage?à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?,The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11, No. 3 , pp. 656-665 Becker E. Thomas, Billings S. Robert, Eveleth M. Daniel and Gilbert L. Nicole (1996),à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?Foci and bases of employeesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ commitment: implications for job performanceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39, No 2,464-482. Bijlsma, K. and Koopma, K. (2003), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Introduction: trust within organizationsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, Personnel Review, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 600-4. Blumberg, M., Pringle, C. C. (1982), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“The missing opportunity in organizational research: Some implications for the theory of work performanceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?. Academy Of Management Review,7: 560-569. Boeker Warren (1997), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“The Influence of Managerial Characteristics and Organizational Growthà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, the Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 152-170. Chatman A. Jennifer Jehn A. Karen (1994). Assessing the relationship between industry characteristics and organizational culture: how different can you be?. Academy of management Journal 1995. Vol. 37, No. 3, 522-553 Chen Feng Yi and Tjosvold Dean, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?Participative Leadership by American and Chinese Managers in China: The Role of Relationshipsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?,Journal of Management Studies 43:8 December 2006 0022-2380 Denison r. Daniel Mishra K. Aneil (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness. Organization science. Vol. 6, No. 2, March-April 1995. Dirks, K. and Ferrin, D. (2002), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practiceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 611-28. Fassin Yves and Buelens Mark, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“The hypocrisyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å"sincerity continuum in corporate communication and decision-making: a model of corporate social responsibility and business ethics practicesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, Ghent University, Department of Management and Entrepreneurship, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent And Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School, Reep 1, 9000 Gent, Belgium. Gershenfeld Cutcher(1988), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Industrial Relations and Economic Performanceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, Working Paper, School of Labor and Indus trial Relations, Michigan State University.. Gillespie, N. and Mann, L. (2004), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Transformational leadership and shared values: the building blocks of trustà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, Journal of Managerial Psychology,Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 588-607. Glinow Ann Von Mary, Huo Paul Y., Lowe Kevin (1999),Leadership across the Pacific Ocean: a tri-national comparison,International Business Review, 8(1), 1-15. Gordan G. George DiTomaso (1992), Predicting corporate performance from organizational culture, Journal of Management Studies. Volume 29, Issue 6, pages 783-798. Gupta K. Anil and Govindarajan .V (1984), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Business Unit Strategy, Managerial Characteristics, and Business Unit Effectiveness at Strategy Implementationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1,pp. 25-41. Ilias Azleen, Rahman Abd Rahida, Abd Razak Zulkeflee Mohd (2008) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Service Quality and Student Satisfaction: A Case Study at Private Higher Education Institutionsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, International business research, Vol. 1, No 3. Ilozer Dozie Ben, Love E.D Peter. Treloar Graham (2002), The Impact of Work Settings On Organizational Performance measures in built FacilitiesVolume 20, pp 61-68. Jaikumar, R, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Post industrial manufacturing.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬? Harvard Business Review, 64(6). 1986; pp.69-76. Jaunch R Lawrence, Glueck F William and Osborn N Richard (1978),à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?Organizational loyalty, professional commitment, and academic research productivityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, Academy of management Journal ,Vol. 2,No 1,84-92 Kim Soonhe (2002), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Participative management and job satisfaction: lessons for management leadershipà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?. Public Administration Review. Martin J. Harry and Shore McFarlane Lynn (1989),à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?Job satisfaction and organizational commitment in relation to work performance and turnover intentionsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?. Human Relations, Volume 42 pp. 625-658 Mockaitis I. Audra (2005). A Cross-Cultural Study of Leadership Attitudes in Three Baltic Sea Region Countries. International Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 1 Iss. 1, 2005, pp. 44-63 Ovadje Franca Muogboh S. Obinna, (2009),à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?Exploring the motivation to stay and to perform among managers in Nigeriaà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, International Journal of Business Research. Paswan K. Audhesh, Pelton E. Lou and True L. Sheb (2005),à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?Perceived managerial sincerity, feedback-seeking orientation and motivation among front-line employees of a service organizationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, Journal of Services Marketing Volume 19  · Number 1, 3à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å"12. Ralston A. David, Holt H. David, Robert H. Terpstra and Cheng Kai Yu (2007). The impact of national culture and economic ideology on managerial work values: a study of the United States, Russia, Japan, and China. Journal of International Business Studies, 1à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å"19 Schein Edger H (1984). Coming to a new awareness of organizational culture. Slogan management Review. Vol 25, Issue: 2, Publisher: Samfundslitteratur, Pages: 3-16 Schein, Edgar H (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, Vol 45(2), Feb 1990, 109-119. Sheridan E. John (1992). Organizational culture and employee retention. Academy of management journal 1992. Vol. 35, No. 5, 1036-1056. Smith D. Alan and Rupp T. William (2002),Communication and loyalty among knowledge workers: a resource of the firm theory view, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 6,No. 3,pp250-261. Standing, G. (1997), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Globalisation, labour flexibility and insecurity: the era of market regulationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, European Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 3, pp. 7-37. Walters, M. (1995), Performance Management Handbook, Institute of Personnel and Development, London. Weick KE (1987), à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Organizational culture as a source of high-reliabilityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬?, The California Management Review , volume 29, Issue: 2, Pages: 112-127.