下载文档原格式
中国最具影响力研究机构分析报告之中金公司（研究部）篇中期研究院2009年8月18日一、公司简介：中金公司成立于1995年，是由国内外著名金融机构和公司基于战略合作关系共同投资组建的中国第一家中外合资投资银行，注册资本为1.25亿美元。
中金公司的股东包括：中国建银投资有限责任公司、摩根士丹利国际公司、中国经济技术投资担保有限公司、新加坡政府投资公司、名力集团控股有限公司。
公司背景参考：1993年，时任世界银行驻中国办事处首席代表的林重庚，向其高层递交了关于成立一家中外合资投资银行的报告，并获得高层的首肯。
1994年9月，央行告知时任建行行长的王岐山："可以着手准备工作。
"1994年10月25日，王岐山会同摩根士丹利总裁约翰·麦克、中国经济技术投资和担保公司总裁蒋乐民、新加坡政府投资公司副总裁郑国枰和名力集团董事总经理查懋声5位股东代表，筹备"中金"事宜。
成立中金公司这家拥有政府背景的投行，是为向华尔街顶尖金融公司取经并为未来中国投行的发展提供样板。
中金成立于1995年，出任中金第一任董事长的王岐山，把中金的发展目标描述为，"提供全方位服务的世界级投资银行"。
1995年7月20日，中金与摩根签订的《经营技术转让合同》约定：摩根向中金提供投资银行、直接投资、司库、外汇操作和其他技术与专门技术的转让与协助，并管理部分业务领域。
2001年4月18日，证监会颁布了禁止证券公司从事风险投资业务的规定，中金被迫将直接投资部和投资业务进行了分拆。
目前，鼎辉管理的资产总额超过4亿美元，投资的著名品牌包括蒙牛乳业、平安保险、新浪网、李宁公司、南孚电池、分众传媒等。
中金历任董事长：王岐山、周小川、王雪冰、张恩照、汪建熙、李剑阁。
二、组织架构：中金公司总部设在北京，在香港设有子公司，在上海设有分公司，在北京、上海和深圳分别设有证券营业部。
中金公司现有六个主要业务部门：投资银行部、资本市场部、销售交易部、研究部、固定收益部、资产管理部和直接投资部。
北京奥运会历史影响与社会效益研究第一章引言北京奥运会在2008年8月8日至24日举办，是中国近年来最大的一次国际活动。
本文将从历史影响和社会效益两个方面来研究北京奥运会，探究其对中国的贡献和影响。
第二章历史影响2.1提升中国在国际舞台上的地位北京奥运会让世界看到了中国强大的国力和综合实力。
比赛场馆的建设、交通设施的完善、服务水平的提高、组织协调的能力都表明了中国的发展和进步。
北京奥运会为中国赢得了国际社会的认可和尊重，提升了中国在国际舞台上的地位。
2.2促进中国社会的进步和发展为了准备北京奥运会，中国政府大力投资于基础设施建设和环境改善，促进了城市和地区的现代化。
同时，奥运会为社会提供了很多就业机会，也促进了体育产业和相关行业的发展。
北京奥运会对中国社会的进步和发展产生了积极的影响。
2.3推动中国深化改革和扩大开放北京奥运会是中国继改革开放以来举办的最大的一项国际活动。
通过举办奥运会，中国向世界展示了国家的进步和成就，也向外界传递了扩大开放和深化改革的信息。
北京奥运会推动了中国向更开放和更自由的方向发展。
第三章社会效益3.1促进国民体质的提高北京奥运会作为体育盛会，促进了全国民众的体育意识和体育锻炼热情。
通过活动的普及和宣传，北京奥运会激发了广大人民群众的运动热情，提高了国民体质。
此外，建设的各项體育場館，方便了人们的运动需求。
3.2促进文化交流和民心相通北京奥运会为世界各地的运动员和观众提供了一次难得的交流和沟通的机会。
同时，北京奥运会为中国与世界各国的文化交流和民心相通提供了良好的平台，增进了不同国家和民族之间的了解和友谊。
3.3促进旅游产业的发展北京奥运会吸引了来自世界各地的数百万运动员和观众。
这次盛会为中国的旅游产业注入了巨大的活力和动力，推动了旅游业的发展。
此外，北京奥运会也推动了城市和地区的现代化，提高了民众的生活水平，吸引更多的游客来到中国旅游。
第四章结论北京奥运会作为中国近年来最大的一次国际活动，对中国社会和国家的各个方面都产生了积极的影响和贡献。
1 基于GDP 角度对2008年北京奥运会影响力的研究摘 要2008年北京奥运会的成功举办，对我国产生了深远影响。
本文首先阐述了重大体育赛事的基本性质及乘数效应，之后针对经济效应方面研究了北京奥运会的影响力问题，以投入----产出模型的核心思想，以年份与GDP 的对数值的二次相关关系和北京市社会固定资产总投入与GDP 的对数值的线性关系，利用北京统计年鉴发布的数据，分别建立无奥运影响的表达式，与有奥运影响的表达式，两式的预测误差均在3%以内。
与2008年真实值比较，用表达式1Q 预测2008年的GDP 的值可以得出奥运会对2008年北京市经济贡献率达到24%。
并且在得知申办奥运会后第i 年北京市固定投入总额的前提下由%100212⨯-=Q Q Q η可求出奥运会对北京地区经济的持续性积极影响。
在投资乘数模型中，基于宏观分析下建立了投资乘数模型，并量化了北京奥运会对北京经济的影响力。
关键词:投入----产出模型 GDP 投资乘数1. 引言体育盛会是特大城市参与区域性或全球性竞争而举办的超大型公共活动，如奥运会、亚运会、世界杯、全运会等体育盛会已经成为城市政府乃至整个国家提升城市竞争力的重要手段。
尤其近 20 年来，通过现代传媒的推动，体育盛会已深刻地影响和改变了城市空间和日常生活。
2008年北京奥运会是中国经济的新动力，是世界打开中国巨大商业市场的一把钥匙，加速形成我国全方位，多层次，宽领域的对外格局，进一步促进中华民族的伟大复兴。
这次规模空前的盛会，对北京的政治，经济，文化等领域产生深刻的影响，本文以GDP 作为衡量经济增长的指标，对北京奥运会的影响力进行了分析评价。
对于奥运会产生的一系列影响，许多前辈做出了自己的贡献。
其中李晓宇、由宗兴、殷键（2009）分析了奥运会、亚运会、世界杯、全运会等体育盛会对城市政府乃至国家竞争力的影响，提出了典型体育盛会导向下的城市发展提出意见[1]；郑振国（2009）分析了举办大型体育赛事收环境因素的影响和制约，针对大型体育赛事环境保护提出十大要点 [2]; 王家宏、张金成（2013）分析了北京奥运会对我国体育事业快速发展产生的积极影响，经济价值对北京市及全国经济增长的拉动作用，对北京经济结构的调整，就业结构调整，城市品牌的促进和调整作用，为后续大型赛事提供参考与借鉴[3]。
Employee organizational commitment:the influence of cultural and organizational factors in the Australian manufacturing industrySophia Su*,Kevin Baird and Bill BlairDepartment of Accounting and Finance,EFS,Macquarie University,Sydney,NSW,AustraliaThe importance of enhancing employee organizational commitment (EOC)ishighlighted by the extensive literature revealing its positive impact on employees’jobperformance,reducing absenteeism and turnover rates,and improving employees’adaptability to organizational change.This study provides an insight into how EOClevels can be enhanced by examining the contextual factors that can influenceEOC.Specifically,the study examines the association between cultural,organizational,and demographic factors with the level of EOC in the Australian manufacturingindustry.Data were collected by a survey questionnaire from a random sample of 500managers with the results revealing that two cultural factors (outcome orientation andstability)and three organizational factors (organizational size,perceived organizationalsupport and job satisfaction)were found to be significantly associated with the level ofEOC.Further analysis provides a preliminary insight into how to enhance the EOC ofspecific managers with different cultural and organizational factors found to beassociated with the EOC of managers at different levels in the organizational hierarchy.The findings have important implications for practitioners attempting to improve thelevel of EOC of their employees with the subsequent enhancements in the level of EOClikely to contribute to improvements in productivity and growth in the Australianmanufacturing industry.Keywords:employee organizational commitment (EOC);job satisfaction;manufac-turing industry;organizational culture;perceived organizational supportIntroductionEmployee organizational commitment (EOC)reflects employees’identification with the organization’s goals and values;their willingness to exert a great effort on behalf of the organization;and their intention to stay with the organization (Porter,Steers,Mowday and Boulian 1974).The importance of EOC is highlighted by the extensive literature which has focused on EOC as a potential determinant of employee motivation,and staff absenteeism and turnover rates (Porter et al.1974;Mathieu and Zajac 1990;Hackett,Peter and Hausdorf 1994;Ko,Price and Mueller 1997;Agarwala 2003;Meyer,Becker and Vandenberghe 2004;Smeenk,Eisinga,Teelken and Doorewaard 2006;Bhatnagar 2007).For example,Pool and Pool (2007)maintain that EOC plays a significant role in creating an organizational environment that promotes motivation and job satisfaction in the workplace.In addition,Gellatly (1995)suggested that EOC is a powerful predictor of absenteeism while Stallworth (2004)found that there is a negative correlation between the level of EOC and an employee’s intention to search for job alternatives and to leave one’s job.ISSN 0958-5192print/ISSN 1466-4399onlineq 2009Taylor &FrancisDOI:10.1080/09585190903363813*Corresponding author.Email:xsu@.auThe International Journal of Human Resource Management ,Vol.20,No.12,December 2009,2494–2516The International Journal of Human Resource Management2495 Given the importance of EOC,the overall objective of this study is to provide practitioners with an insight into how they can enhance the level of EOC within their organization.The study aims to achieve this objective by extending the literature examining the contextual factors that can influence EOC.Accordingly,this study’s overall objective is categorized into three main objectives:to examine the association between(i) cultural,(ii)organizational and(iii)demographic factors with the level of EOC in the Australian manufacturing industry.Thefirst objective is to examine the association between cultural factors with the level of EOC.Despite the claim that critical outcomes such as EOC and employee performance are affected by an organization’s prevailing culture(Nystrom1993),only a few studies(Nystrom1993;Lok and Crawford1999,2001;McKinnon,Harrison,Chow and Wu2003;McMurray,Scott and Pace2004)have examined the association between organizational culture and the level of EOC,with McMurray et al.(2004)the only study conducted within the Australian manufacturing industry.Each of these studies incorporated small sample sizes(maximum of13organizations).Accordingly,the motivation for examining the association between organizational culture and EOC is the dearth of studies examining this relationship.Furthermore,the study aims to contribute to the literature by examining this association using a large sample size and by focusing on the Australian manufacturing industry.Specifically,the study will explore the association between EOC with the six dimensions of culture attributed to O’Reilly,Chatham and Caldwell’s(1991)Organizational Culture Profile(OCP)measure:team work;respect for people;outcome orientation;innovation;stability;and attention to detail.The second objective of the study is to examine the association between organizational factors with the level of EOC.Specifically,the study hypothesizes the association between five organizational factors(organizational size,training,link to rewards,perceived organizational support,and job satisfaction)with the level of EOC.While thefive organizational factors examined do not represent an exhaustive list of factors associated with the level of EOC,they are chosen as examples of the factors that have been examined in past studies.Previous studies have produced mixedfindings in respect to the association between three of these factors(organizational size,training,and job satisfaction)and the level of EOC. It is hoped that the current study can contribute to resolving such conflicts.In addition,the study will contribute to the literature by examining the association between organizational factors and the level of EOC for employees possessing specific demographic characteristics.A third objective of the study is to assess the association between specific demographic factors with the level of EOC.Consistent with previous research the study examines if there is any association between gender,age,education,salary,duration of employment,and position level1with the level of EOC.While these relationships are examined they are not the primary focus of the study and hence no formal hypotheses are developed.The motivation for incorporating these demographic details in the study is two-fold.First, the results should prove to be interesting and assist organizations by making them aware of the manner in which EOC levels may differ amongst their managers based on the specific demographic characteristics of individual employees.Second,thefindings will facilitate a more extensive examination of the association between the cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC.Specifically,it is intended that any identified divergences in respect to the level of EOC based on demographics will be further explored by examining the association between the cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC for employees with differing demographic characteristics.Suchfindings will assist organizations in attempting to improve the level of EOC of specific managers.This paper is organized as follows.The next section defines EOC and outlines the benefits of higher levels of EOC for organizations.This is followed by a discussion of the association between the cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC.We then discuss the use of the survey method to gather data,and provide details concerning the measurement of each of the variables.The results are then presented and,finally,the conclusions,limitations and future directions for research are discussed.Employee organizational commitment (EOC)There are various definitions of EOC in the literature.Some studies define EOC from an attitude perspective (Mowday,Porter and Steers 1982;O’Reilly 1989),while other studies define EOC from a behavioral perspective (Meyer and Allen 1997).In this study,the definition of EOC is adopted from Porter et al.(1974)who defined EOC as an employee’s identification with the organization’s goals and values;their willingness to exert a great effort on behalf of the organization;and their intention to stay with the organization.This definition is preferred as it defines EOC from both the attitudinal and behavioural perspectives.Meyer and Allen (1991)provide a more in-depth analysis of EOC classifying it into three components:affective;continuance;and normative commitment.Affective commitment is defined as an employee’s emotional attachment to a particular organization which makes them willing to assist in the achievement of the organization’s goals.Continuance commitment refers to an employee’s awareness of the costs related to leaving an organization,while normative commitment is defined as a feeling of obligation to continue employment in the organization.Employees with a high level of normative commitment feel that they ought to stay with the organization as it is the moral thing to do (Meyer and Allen 1991).Two of these three components are beyond the control of management.First,in regard to continuance commitment,employees who live closer to the company would be expected to have a higher level of continuance commitment compared with those who live further away from the company.Second,normative commitment may result from employees’internalization of normative pressures before they enter into the organization such as familial socialization.For example,employees may have been told by their family members that to be loyal to their organization is important.Hence,continuous commitment and normative commitment are both beyond the control of management and therefore outside the scope of the current study.Alternatively,the degree of an employee’s affective commitment is dependent upon their attitude towards the organization which may be influenced by their organizational environment.Accordingly,this study focuses on the association between specific cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC as assessed by the level of affective commitment.Benefits of EOCFrom a broad perspective,a high level of EOC can benefit society because of the decrease in job movement and the increase in national productivity and/or work quality (Mathieu and Zajac 1990;Chow 1994).From a narrower perspective,EOC remains important for organizations because of its potential impact on employees’job performance (Mathieu and Zajac 1990;MacKenzie,Podsakoff and Aheame 1998;Ketchand and Strawser 2001;Riketta 2002),employee turnover (Mathieu and Zajac 1990;Ketchand and Strawser 1998;Stallworth 2004)and acceptance of organizational change by employees (Lau and Woodman 1995;Iverson 1996;Yousef 2000;Nikolaou and Vakola 2005).S.Su et al.2496The International Journal of Human Resource Management2497 According to Porter et al.(1974)employees who exhibit a higher level of EOC are more likely to exert effort on behalf of their organization,thereby resulting in better performance.This positive link between EOC and job performance has been supported by a number of prior studies(Meyer,Paunonen,Cellatly,Goffin and Jackson1989;Meyer, Allen and Smith1993;Hackett et al.1994;Jaramillo,Mulki and Marshall2005).Studies have consistently shown a strong negative relationship between EOC and employee turnover(Ketchand and Strawser1998;Meyer and Allen1997;Iverson and Buttigieg1999;Stallworth2004).Specifically,employees with a higher level of organizational commitment are less likely to consider alternative job opportunities and are less likely to actually leave their organization for other employment(Mathieu and Zajac 1990).Chow(1994)found that highly committed employees have greater loyalty and are more likely to remain in their organizations.Given the high costs related to hiring and training new staff and the low productivity and staff morale which tends to be associated with employee turnover(Koh and Boo2004),organizations should focus on EOC as a means of reducing employee turnover rates.In addition to the impact on employees’job performance and turnover,EOC has been found to play an important role in employees’acceptance of organizational change. In Australia,employees are experiencing various organizational changes such as downsizing,the introduction of new plant and technology,and internationalization of businesses(Savery and Luks2000).The costs associated with organizational change include the costs resulting from an employee’s resistance to change.Specifically, employees’uncertainty and fear in dealing with new situations can lower organizations’productivity and morale(Mack,Nelson and Quick1998;Nikolaou and Vakola2005).As a result,employees’acceptance of organizational change becomes extremely important for organizations to manage.Iverson(1996)suggested that EOC is one of the most important determinants of employees’attitudes towards organizational change.Similarly,Lau and Woodman(1995)argued that highly committed employees are more likely to accept organizational change as they are more willing to expend more effort to adapt to new situations.Factors affecting the level of EOCOrganizational cultureOrganizational culture refers to‘a system of shared values and norms that define appropriate attitudes and behaviours for organizational members’(O’Reilly and Chatman 1996,p.160).It is one of the fundamental factors in developing and maintaining a high level of organizational commitment among employees(O’Reilly1989).However,few studies have investigated the effect of organizational culture on the level of EOC(Nystrom 1993;Lok and Crawford1999,2001;McKinnon et al.2003;McMurray et al.2004). Australian studies are limited to Lok and Crawford(1999,2001)who tested the link between organizational culture and the level of EOC in an Australian hospital context,and McMurray et al.(2004)who conducted their study in three South Australian manufacturing companies.Given that McMurray et al.(2004)is the only study conducted within the Australian manufacturing industry,a gap exists in the literature in respect to studies examining EOC in this industry in Australia.In addition,prior studies examining the link between organizational culture and the level of EOC have incorporated relatively small sample sizes(13organizations in Nystrom (1993);seven organizations in Lok and Crawford(1999,2001);one organization in McKinnon et al.(2003)and three organizations in McMurray et al.(2004)).According toMathieu and Zajac (1990)there is little or no variance in employees’perceptions of organizational characteristics such as culture if employees are sampled from a single or a limited number of settings.Therefore,this study seeks to overcome the limitations of prior studies by examining the association between cultural factors and the level of EOC in the Australian manufacturing industry using a large sample size (500organizations).O’Reilly et al.’s (1991)Organizational Culture Profile (OCP)instrument is used as the measure of organizational culture in the present study.This measure consists of 26items and has been used extensively (Sheridan 1992;Windsor and Ashkanasy 1996;McKinnon et al.2003;Baird,Harrison and Reeve 2004,2007)with similar findings in regard to the dimensions of culture:team work;respect for people;outcome orientation;innovation;stability;and attention to detail.Team work refers to the extent to which employees within a firm cooperate with each other and work in unison towards overall organizational goals.The importance of teams has been emphasized in the modern economy as they can increase employees’flexibility and productivity which are both essential components for organizational success (Cohen and Bailey 1997;Bishop,Scott and Burroughs 2000).Gil,Alcover and Peiro (2005)suggested that teams empower greater responsibility to team members thereby increasing their involvement and commitment to work.A positive association between team work and the level of EOC was found by both Becker (1992)and Hayes (1997)and hence,the level of EOC is expected to be higher in organizations where team work is more prevalent.Respect for people refers to the extent to which business units focus on fairness,respect for the rights of the individual,and tolerance (Windsor and Ashkanasy 1996).Being respected by the organization can increase employees’commitment to their organization (Tyler 1999).Specifically,employees who are treated with genuine respect and fairness are more likely to behave with loyalty and hard work.McKinnon et al.(2003)found a positive association between respect for people and the level of EOC in a Taiwan organization.It is expected that a similar result will be found in Australia as the importance of value and respect is universal (Bond 1991).Outcome orientation refers to the extent to which business units emphasize action and results,have high expectations for performance,and are competitive (O’Reilly et al.1991,p.505).Nystrom (1993)argued that employees feel more committed in organizations that focus on pragmatic values where results are more important than processes.Hofstede (1998)also suggested that employees in organizations with a process-oriented culture perceive themselves as risk-averse and only exert the minimum amount of effort on their work,while in outcome oriented organizations,employees perceive that everyday can bring new challenges and exert maximum effort into their work.McKinnon et al.(2003)treated the link between outcome orientation and the level of EOC as an empirical question with the results demonstrating a positive relationship.Similar findings are expected in the current study.Innovation represents a business unit’s receptivity and adaptability to change,and its willingness to experiment (O’Reilly et al.1991,p.505).Innovative organizations are more likely to experiment with new practices and their employees are more likely to respond positively to new techniques (Baird et al.2004,2007).Drucker (1998)argues that innovation requires focused and hard work everyday rather than just genius,and therefore employees in innovative organizations will exhibit higher levels of EOC.A strong positive relationship between the culture dimension ‘innovation’and the level of EOC was found in McKinnon et al.(2003)and similar results are expected in this study.S.Su et al.2498The International Journal of Human Resource Management2499 Stability refers to security of employment(Windsor and Ashkanasy1996).It represents the extent to which an organization provides stable employment for employees(Windsor and Ashkanasy1996)and employees’perceptions that the employment will continue as long as they exert the appropriate effort in their job (Valletta1999).In terms of Armknecht and Early’s(1972)study,employees’attitudes to job security are contingent on the behaviour of the labour market.Morris,Lydka and O’Creevy(1993)argue that job security will only exhibit a strong positive relationship with employees’commitment to organizations during recessionary economic conditions. Hence,given the study was conducted prior to the globalfinancial crisis,economic conditions in Australia were stable and job security was not expected to be related to the level of EOC.Attention to detail is defined as a strict compliance with detailed rules and procedures in terms of precision and accuracy(O’Reilly et al.1991).The phrase‘initiation of structure’refers to the degree to which managers define the roles of their subordinates in job-related activities,specify procedures,and assign tasks(Kohli1989).Hence, organizations with a high degree of initiation of structure are indicative of a culture which emphasizes‘attention to detail’.Agarwal,Decarlo and Vyas(1999)and Lok and Crawford (2001)suggest that there is no direct relationship between initiation of structure and the level of EOC.Similarly,Johnston,Parasuraman,Futrell and Black(1990)found that the extent of specific information given by supervisors has no direct impact on employees’commitment to their organization.As a result,attention to detail is not expected to be associated with the level of EOC.The above discussion leads to the development of the following hypothesis: Hypothesis1:Organizations that value the organizational culture dimensions of team work,respect for people,outcome orientation,and innovation to agreater extent are more likely to exhibit higher levels of EOC.Organizational factorsThis section discusses the association betweenfive organizational factors(organizational size,training,link to rewards,perceived organizational support and job satisfaction)and the level of EOC.Stevens,Beyer and Trice(1978)suggested that larger organizations have increased opportunities for promotions and interpersonal interactions,thereby resulting in more committed employees.Alternatively,Hodson and Sullivan(1985)argued that larger organizations are perceived to be less personable and harder to identify with,thereby resulting in lower levels of EOC.Employees working in smaller organizations feel stronger personal relationships with their employers and co-workers,and are therefore more committed to their organization.Given these inconsistentfindings,the hypothesis examining the association between organizational size and the level of EOC is stated in the null form:Hypothesis2:The size of the organization does not affect the level of EOC.Prior literature maintains that training plays a significant role in enhancing the level of EOC.For instance,Taormina(1999)found that employees who felt they had received good training exhibited a higher level of commitment to their organization.Similarly, Lambooij,Flache,Sanders and Siegers(2007)suggested that employees are more willing to work overtime when they have been provided adequate training.Alternatively,McGunnigle and Jameson’s (2000)study in UK hotels found little evidence to support the relationship between training and the level of EOC.Such findings were consistent with Davies,Taylor and Savery (2001)who found training was linked to improvements in productivity and reduced employee turnover,but was not linked to increased levels of EOC.Furthermore,there is concern that employees who are given significant levels of training may become more competent and consequently more likely to look for alternative employment (Lermont-Pape 2002).Given these mixed findings,the hypothesis concerning the relationship between training and the level of EOC is stated in the null form:Hypothesis 3:The level of training does not affect the level of EOC.Phoenix (2006)argued that the extent of commitment to an employer is determined by employees’perceptions of how their performance is linked to their rewards.Employees who are rewarded for their performances are more likely to be motivated to excel and increase their commitment.In terms of path-goal theory,subordinates choose their level of effort to be applied once leaders define the paths they must trace in order to receive rewards for their performance (House 1996).Therefore,the provision of the mutual benefits between performance and rewards can encourage employees’extra effort and involvement within their organization.Hence,employees whose rewards are contingent on their performance are more likely to commit to their organization (Densten 2006).The above discussion leads to the development of the following hypothesis:Hypothesis 4:Organizations with stronger links to rewards are more likely to exhibithigher levels of EOC.Social exchange theory treats commitment as an exchange commodity (Fuller,Barnett,Hester and Relyea 2003)and suggests that employees will be more likely to commit to an organization when they feel that the organization commits to them (Shore and Tetrick 1991;Guzzo,Noonan and Elron 1994;Tsui,Pearce,Porter and Tripoli 1997;Aube,Rousseau and Morin 2007).Eisenberger,Fasolo and Valerie (1990)found that there is a positive relationship between employees’perceived organizational support and their affective commitment to the organization.Employees experiencing higher perceived organizational support will exhibit greater effort and will be less likely to leave.This positive relationship was also found in Rhoades,Eisenberger and Armeil (2000).The above discussion leads to the development of the following hypothesis:Hypothesis 5:Organizations that are perceived to provide a higher level oforganizational support are more likely to exhibit higher levels of EOC.Many studies have examined the relationship between job satisfaction and EOC.Bateman and Strasser (1984)found that job satisfaction was an outcome of EOC rather than a predictor.They argued that employees’job satisfaction was developed based on their existing level of EOC.This result was supported by Paik,Parboteeah and Shim (2007).Alternatively,Johnston et al.(1990)argued that job satisfaction was a direct determinant of EOC rather than an outcome of organizational commitment.Similar results were found in Koh and Boo (2004),Lok and Crawford (2001),MacKenzie et al.(1998),and Mannheim,Baruch and Tai (1997).Alternatively,Shore,Barksdale and Shore (1995)investigated the link between job satisfaction and the level of EOC,with the results indicating that job satisfaction was not associated with the level of affective or continuous commitment.In addition,Rayton (2006)argued that there is an interdependent correlation between job satisfaction and EOC.Hence,given the mixed findings regarding theS.Su et al.2500The International Journal of Human Resource Management2501 relationship between job satisfaction and the level of EOC,the hypothesis is stated in the null form:Hypothesis6:The level of job satisfaction does not affect the level of EOC.MethodA survey questionnaire was mailed to the managers from a random sample of500 Australian manufacturing organizations chosen from the Kompass Australia database (2006).The survey was administered using the Dillman Tailored Design Method(2007) which provides guidelines in relation to the design and distribution of the questionnaire and has been shown to improve response rates to mail survey questionnaires.Variable measurementThe level of EOCThis study applies Cook and Wall’s(1980)nine-item scale to measure the level of EOC.It has been shown to be a reliable measure of EOC in prior studies(Jaramillo et al.2005;Karami,Boojke and Sainfort2005;Varona1996).The scale consists of three components(organizational identification,organizational involvement,and organizational loyalty)with respondents required to indicate the extent to which they agree with each of the statements using afive-point scale with anchors of‘strongly disagree’and‘strongly agree’(see Appendix).The level of EOC was measured as the combined score for the nine items(ranging from9to45),with higher(lower)scores representing a greater(lower)level of EOC.Reverse scoring was applied for the three items that were negatively stated.Organizational cultureThere are two main perspectives in relation to the measurement of organizational culture, the quantitative and qualitative approaches.The quantitative approach maintains that ‘culture can be objectively determined and measured’(Goddard1997)with numerous instruments having been developed to examine organizational culture(including the Culture Gap Survey(Kilmann and Saxton1983),the Corporate Culture Survey(Glaser 1983),the Organizational Beliefs Questionnaire(Sashkin1984),the Organizational Culture Inventory(Cooke and Lafferty1989),and the Organizational Culture Profile (O’Reilly et al.1991)).The qualitative approach assesses organizational culture through observation thereby facilitating a more detailed insight into the prevailing culture.The quantitative approach has been criticized by advocates of the qualitative approach who maintain that the measures used fail to represent observed reality and inhibit the‘depth and breadth of cultural understanding’(Martin2002;Martin,Frost and O’Neill2006;Schein1996).In addition,Alvesson(2002)argues that this approach prevents the careful and detailed observation warranted to clear up ambiguities concerning organizational culture.However,while the qualitative approach provides a more detailed insight into the prevailing culture,the obtained data does not permit systematic comparisons to be made(Siehl and Martin1988).Quantitative approaches overcome this problem by requiring respondents to evaluate organizational culture based on the dimensions included in the questionnaire,thereby facilitating the comparison of cultural attributes between organizations and across time(Hofstede,Neuijen,Ohayv and Sanders1990,p.313).Hence,given the objective of the study was to determine how。
北京影响力人的九大精神修炼之一个梦想一个梦想：创建一家伟大的公司北京影响力人拥有同一个梦想——创建一家伟大的公司。
一家公司规模很大，但未必伟大，很盈利的公司也未必受人尊敬，一家伟大的公司一定是要满足客户的根本需求，引领行业的发展方向，推动社会的进步。
满足客户的需求：我们要尊重市场，了解市场，根据客户需求设计产品，在我们的服务范围内，满足客户的需求，让我们的产品得到客户的认可。
引领行业的发展方向：引领行业的发展是一家伟大公司的第二个关键点，我们通过学习将先进的思想和模式转化成自身的主导方向，我们必然会发展成为行业的引领者。
创建一家伟大的公司需要时间，需要过程，但我们必须始终坚持这个梦想，哪怕慢一点，只要方向正确，梦想最终会成为现实。
推动社会进步：教育培训是推动人类进步最重要的一个行业，我们目前最关键的是提升自身的管理意识和技能。
如果我们能用十年、二十年的时间为中国民营企业普及管理必修课程，那么我们必将推动社会的进步，必将成为一家受人尊敬的、伟大的公司。
北京影响力人的九大精神修炼—两个坚持二个坚持：坚持培训产业报国的使命；坚持做一个忠诚专业的职业经理人1. 坚持培训产业报国的使命坚持培训产业的使命，我们就能凝聚更多的人才，赢得更多客户的支持。
北京影响力用七年的时间见证了客户因为培训而提升，而蜕变，见证了这种使命感的力量。
因此无论公司发展到什么阶段，我们必须始终坚持培训产业报国的使命。
2.坚持做一个忠诚专业的职业经理人北京影响力是培养职业经理人的摇篮，忠诚和专业是职业经理人的必备素质。
忠诚：这是一个人基本的职业素养。
实现自我与忠诚敬业是相辅相成的，只有真正忠诚于自己的职业，才不至于在利益诱惑面前失去职业操守。
只有忠诚于自己的职业，才能真正获得尊敬。
忠诚于我们的公司：前提是自我价值观与公司价值观统一。
本着“我是革命一块砖，哪里需要哪里搬”的精神，在公司需要的时候，真正体现一种专业态度。
反过来，由于公司对员工有养育之恩，所以我们要懂得感恩。
呼和浩特市7家企业参加第七届中国专利信息年会
武雪彬
【期刊名称】《呼和浩特科技》
【年(卷),期】2016(000)003
【摘要】9月19日至20日，第七届中国专利信息年会在北京国家会议中心举行。
内蒙古伊利实业集团股份有限公司、内蒙古蒙牛乳业（集团）股份有限公司等7
家呼和浩特市企业参加了本届年会。
【总页数】1页(P25-25)
【作者】武雪彬
【作者单位】
【正文语种】中文
【中图分类】F275
【相关文献】
1.第七届中国专利信息年会各种活动精彩纷呈 [J], 陈幸
2.专利运营助推供给侧改革--第七届中国专利信息年会开幕式概览 [J], 马浛菲
3.责任生态圈日益成熟——参加第七届中国电子信息行业社会责任年会有感 [J],
林波
4.中国会计学会会计教育专业委员会2014年年会暨第七届会计学院院长论坛在呼和浩特市召开 [J], 本刊编辑部
5.欢迎参加中国内燃机学会第七届青年学术年会 [J],
因版权原因，仅展示原文概要，查看原文内容请购买。
Urban Great Events Marketing: From Flowing Space to Place Promotion: Case Study of Beijing Olympic Games张京祥 陆枭麟 罗震东 王莉莉城市大事件营销：从流动空间到场所提升——北京奥运的实证研究1 引言1990年代以来，日益加深的全球化营造了一个非对称的全球城市体系，一个更加极化的竞争环境正在日益生成[1, 2]。
正如卡斯特（M.Castells ）所指出的那样，全球网络化社会里的国家与城市同时生存在两种空间之中：一种是以国家、城市地理疆域为界限的固定“场所空间”（space of place ），另一种则是资本快速转移的“流动空间”（space of flow ）[3]。
显然，一个国家或城市为了在全球竞争的环境里获取更多的发展机会、捕捉更多的发展资源，就必须在这个流动的资本世界中更有所作为，进行更加积极的城市营销（city marketing ）[2, 4]。
以吸引全球目光聚焦并进而提升城市空间环境和综合美誉度为目的的“大事件”（great events ），被誉为在全球化世界中提升国家或城市竞争力的有力工具[5]，甚至是“特效药”[6]。
中国近30年的改革开放过程，总体上是在全球化、市场化、分权化、城市化四位一体的主线下所进行的[7]，城市之间的竞争就表现得更为激烈，对大事件营销的热情也极度高涨。
2008年北京奥运会、2010年上海世博会、2010年广州亚运会、2014年南京青奥会等等，都表达了中国城市在当今全球性流动空间（flowing space ）中实现场所提升（place promotion ）的强烈愿望[5]。
本文将结合对北京2008年奥运会的回溯性研究，来检讨在流动空间中城市实现场所提升的效果，客观分析其对城市短期和长期发展的多面影响。
2 解析“空间”研究视角的转变学术界对“空间”的理解一直处于不断变化之中，并随着时间的推移而不断进步。
