不同層面的忠誠(chéng)度【外文翻譯】

1、本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）外 文 翻 譯原文：the different dimensions of loyalty the first problem in studying loyalty in human organizations is that there seems to be no generally accepted definition of this concept. often, loyalty is taken to mean remaining in an organization for a long time. but some studies have shown h

2、ow it can have many different dimensions. cole (2000), for instance, interviewed david l. sturn, president of the loyalty institute, an arm of chicago-based aon consulting, about a study undertaken by that organization interviewing the employees of more that 200 of its corporate clients. according t

3、o that study, what characterizes a “committed” employee is that (1) he is a team player; (2) willing to make sacrifices for the good of the company; (3) believes in the companys products; (4) will recommend the company as among the best places to work, and (5) is prepared to stay in the company for

4、the next several years, even if offered a modest pay increase elsewhere (cole, 2000).obviously, the first four characteristics of a committed employee go well beyond the fifth one, which is the only one related with remaining in the organization; and, still qualifying the fact of remaining in the or

5、ganization by rejecting a change with a “modest” pay increase elsewhere.employees are the basic ingredients, their enthusiasm on behalf of corporate morale, awareness of their work reflected in the subtle strength of the enterprise. employee loyalty will greatly stimulate their initiative and creati

6、vity. so that potential employees into full play. loyalty is the efficiency, increase employee loyalty and increase customer satisfaction there is promotion. business per employee increased loyalty, competitive strength will have been improved.in the modern economy, employees will be judged accordin

7、g to their own personal development continue to find their own space, the flow of talent to be a common phenomenon. enterprises as always in the dynamic development of economic organizations, employees and business contract between the text. does not guarantee a stable relationship between employees

8、 and enterprises. to maintain this long-term stable relationship, and in good faith reliance on the need to build the employment relationship, nurture and increase employee loyalty. powers (2000) offers an interesting set of indicators of loyalty: remaining with the company; not leaving, not job hun

9、ting staying late to complete a project keeping the companys business confidential; no whistle-blowing promoting the company to customers and community adhering to rules without close supervision sacrificing personal goals to achieve companys goals no gossiping, lying, cheating or stealing buying co

10、mpanys products contribution to company-sponsored charities offering improvement suggestions participating in companys extracurricular activities following orders taking care of company property and not being wasteful working safely not abusing leave policies; including sick leave helping coworkers;

11、 cooperating again, remaining with the company is a symptom of loyalty, but only a symptom. and a symptom is an indication, a noisy signal. a headache may be a symptom of a malignant brain tumor or a symptom of poor eyesight. the remaining indicators are also noisy signals, which go along with the b

12、asic intuitive concept of loyalty. in summary, both in the cole and powers articles, the basic idea is that an employee is committed, or loyal, to an organization when he holds two kinds of beliefs: (1) believes that what the organization is doing “is worth the while”, i.e., feels that the products

13、of the company are really solving some type of human need; and (2) feels that the people he works with (superiors, subordinates, or at the same level) are people he can work with, and, therefore, is willing to cooperate with them, is willing to have initiatives, and be a team player. it is interesti

14、ng to point out though, that in these analyses, loyalty and commitment are viewed as very positive for the organization and (possibly) for the individual. on the opposite side, some researchers have noticed some negative characteristics of loyalty and commitment. randall (1987), for instance, signal

15、s as disadvantages of a strong commitment to an organization: (a) for the individual, that it may stymie individual growth and limit opportunities for mobility, as well as stifle creativity and innovation, and (b) for the organization, that it may blindly devote the individuals to their employers, a

16、nd therefore perhaps waste their time and talents in jobs they dont like, making it a situation that is unprofitable both for the individual and for the organization. essentially then, the unfavorable consequences of loyalty are reduced to the possible loss of efficiency that is obtained if an indiv

17、idual is used where he shouldnt be, which harms both the individual and the organization, but much more the former than the latter, and has to do with a misallocation of resources that is rather an error in judgement than a mistake arising from loyalty itself. improve related incentives. incentives

18、for employees means recognition of the work of employees, whether an enterprise to meet the core needs of employees largely determines the respect and recognition of the core staff of the enterprise and work attitudes. first, material incentives, improve pay and benefits system of enterprises and th

19、e establishment of an effective performance appraisal system, so that pay and reward key employees as much as possible match; second spiritual motivation for the core employees is more important incentive in this regard , enterprises should fully express the respect and trust of key employees, such

20、as regular communication with key employees, interest in and solve their problems, give them challenging work distribution and give the appropriate permissions and so on.the premise of the herzberg et al. (1959) theory, known as the two-factor theory of motivation, was that managers could use factor

21、s known asmotivators to encourage employees to gain satisfaction and, subsequently, better performance in the workplace. similarly, managers could try to minimize those factors that increase job dissatisfaction, 'hygiene factors' or ' hygienes ' for short. maximizing the motivators a

22、ssociated with their jobs could enhance employees job satisfaction. on the other hand, if employees believe that factors associated with hygienes drop below acceptable levels, job dissatisfaction grows. an interesting point of the theory is that lack of satisfaction does not equate to dissatisfactio

23、n. satisfaction and dissatisfaction are on two separate continua. this means that when employees do not perceive satisfaction among the motivators, they also may not perceive dissatisfaction among the hygienes. employees may well be in a state of limbo, where they are neither satisfied nor dissatisf

24、ied. this is an unproductive state for both employees and organizations, as it does not fuel growth, creativity or innovation. therefore, there is entity value for organizational leaders and managers to recognize those aspects of the jobs within their purview that can promote satisfaction among empl

25、oyees and optimize them. according to herzberg (1966), the factors associated with work considered to be motivators include: achievement; recognition; tasks (the work itself); responsibility; advancement; and personal growth. the factors associated with work considered to be hygienes include: polici

26、es and administration; supervision/managerial relationships; salary; working conditions; status; security; and coworker relationships. other motivation theories have been studied extensively in the business literature, but they do not break down the components of motivation as specifically as the tw

27、o-factor theory and consequently do not allow for such detailed analysis. for example, maslows theory of needs (1954) states that individuals reach higher level needs such as self-esteem and self-actualization only after lower level needs such as belongingness and safety needs have been met. while u

28、seful in other contexts, this theory is not geared towards job-related motivation. alderfers erg theory (1972) states that people have three core needs: existence; that people have three core needs: existence; relatedness; and growth. this scheme does not include the rigid hierarchy of maslow, indic

29、ating that employees may experience needs concurrently. but its broad categories lead to a generalized evaluation of motivation. mcclellands needs theory (1961) also acknowledges three sets of needs: achievement; power; and affiliation. his research suggests that achievement needs, and to a esser de

30、gree, power and affiliation needs, are related to job performance, thus linking employee motivation with job outcomes. while beneficial at an individual level, the needs theory does not focus on the dynamics of group-level motivation. adams equity theory (1965) explains that employees will strive fo

31、r equitable situations when comparing themselves to coworkers as they consider inputs to a job, level of effort expended and job outcomes. however, equity theory does not expound upon the actual motivators that cause individuals to act the way that they do in the workplace. thus, herzbergs (1966) th

32、eory is best suited to this study because it contains many categories for analysis which allow for cultural evaluation, it is tailored to theworkplace, and it considers both individual and group level motivation. herzbergs work (1966) is considered a major advancement in the literature. befittingly

33、, it has also been used recently by researchers in the study of job satisfaction (brislin, macnab, worthley, kabigting and zukis 2005; deshields, kara and kaynak 2005) with support for the theory. herzbergs work has been employed to evaluate travellers satisfaction (crompton 2003) and student satisf

34、action (chyung and vachon 2005), illustrating its applicability to a variety of settings. yet all tests of the theory have not been confirmatory. park (1988) and al-mekhlafie (1991) found partial support for the motivator-hygiene dichotomy with samples from korea and yemen, while williams (1992) and

35、 timmreck (2001) found mixed results using us samples. in an evaluation of herzberg et al. (1959) of the thai construction industry,ruthankoon and ogunlana (2003) found partial support for the theory. they attribute differences in the literature to the varying occupations and variety of workplaces i

36、ncluded in the research. despite these mixed theory results, motivation has been often associated with job satisfaction. those employees who express satisfaction with their jobs often are motivated in their jobs (thierry 1998). tietjen and myers (1998) also linked motivation and job satisfaction usi

37、ng the herzberg (1966) framework. they concluded that once managers understood what motivated employees, managers could focus on the appropriate strategies to create job satisfaction among those workers. these varying results set the stage for additional research to occur with a new emphasis, i.e. t

38、he role of culture.interestingly, the hospitality industry has been the focus of many job satisfaction studies. in a study of over 4,000 hotel workers, barsky and nash (2004) found that employee satisfaction on the job was driven by the emotions of the employees and their beliefs about their company

39、. aksu and aktas (2005) studied job satisfaction among turkish managers in first-class hotels. they discovered that despite long hours, low salaries and little colleague support (all hygienes), the managers were generally satisfied with their jobs due to the nature of the work itself and the authori

40、ty (motivators) that came from managing a first-class facility. in a study of employee job satisfaction among taiwanese hotel workers, hwang and chi (2005) found that internal marketing, or treating employees as customers, was positively related to job satisfaction and job satisfaction was positivel

41、y related to organizational performance. sizoo, plank, iskat and serrie (2005) determined that among hotel workers at four-star hotels in florida, employees with higher intercultural sensitivity expressed higher levels of job satisfaction and social satisfaction. this finding indicates that culture

42、may influence employee perception of job satisfaction.although a great deal of research has been completed in the area of job satisfaction, an examination of south american businesses remains a topic of value considering the continents rapidly increasing economic and development status. recent schol

43、arship has been promising. ritter and anker (2002) found workplace safety and job security issues were important to brazilians, while spector, cooper, poelmans and allen (2004) found that latin americans in general had high job satisfaction. barreto (2005) found that hotel guest satisfaction in bahi

44、a, brazil increased when employee satisfaction programmes were implemented. though interesting, these studies did not comprehensively address all of herzbergs (1966) factors and they did not fully consider the role of culture in the workplace.source: josep m. rosanas and manuel velilla. loyalty and

45、trust as the ethical bases of organizations.djournal of business ethics , 2003(1): 2944.譯文： 不同層面的忠誠(chéng)度在研究人類組織中的忠誠(chéng)度的論題時(shí)，我們第一個(gè)面臨的問(wèn)題是人們對(duì)于忠誠(chéng)還沒(méi)有一個(gè)廣泛接受的定義。通常，忠誠(chéng)是指采取在組織剩余時(shí)間長(zhǎng)。但一些研究也顯示，它可以有許多不同的層面。科爾（2000年），例如，該訪談采訪了更多的企業(yè)客戶，其200名員工組織開(kāi)展的一項(xiàng)研究與david l.斯特恩總裁的忠誠(chéng)研究所，一個(gè)總部位于芝加哥的怡安咨詢機(jī)構(gòu)。根據(jù)這項(xiàng)研究，忠誠(chéng)員工有如下特征：（1）他是一個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)合作精神;（2

46、）愿意為公司的良好犧牲;（3）對(duì)公司產(chǎn)品的信念;（4）將建議作為其中最好的地方工作的公司，及（5）愿意留在公司未來(lái)數(shù)年，即使提供了一個(gè)溫和的加薪別處（科爾，2000年）。  顯然，前四個(gè)致力于員工的特點(diǎn)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超出了第五個(gè)，這是唯一一個(gè)與該組織其他有關(guān);并斷然拒絕了排位賽還是用“溫和”支付改變組織中的其余事實(shí)增加其他地方。員工是企業(yè)的基本成分，他們的熱情代表企業(yè)的士氣，他們的工作自覺(jué)性于潛移默化中體現(xiàn)企業(yè)的實(shí)力。員工忠誠(chéng)將大大激發(fā)員工的主觀能動(dòng)性和創(chuàng)造力使員工潛在能力得到充分發(fā)揮。忠誠(chéng)是效率，員工的忠誠(chéng)度提高與客戶滿意度的提高存在著促進(jìn)的作用。企業(yè)每名員工的忠誠(chéng)度提高了，企業(yè)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)實(shí)力也就

47、得到了提升。在現(xiàn)代經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展中，員工會(huì)根據(jù)自身的個(gè)人的判斷不斷尋找適合自己發(fā)展的空間，人才流動(dòng)成為一個(gè)普遍現(xiàn)象。企業(yè)作為經(jīng)濟(jì)組織始終處于動(dòng)態(tài)發(fā)展中，員工與企業(yè)之間的文字契約。并不能保證員工與企業(yè)之間穩(wěn)定關(guān)系。要想維持這種長(zhǎng)期穩(wěn)定關(guān)系，就需要構(gòu)建依賴和真誠(chéng)的雇傭關(guān)系，培育并提高員工的忠誠(chéng)度。權(quán)力（2000年）提供了一個(gè)有趣的忠誠(chéng)度指標(biāo)設(shè)置： - 繼續(xù)呆在公司不走了，不找工作- 為了完成項(xiàng)目而加班加點(diǎn)- 保持公司的商業(yè)機(jī)密- 推進(jìn)公司向客戶和社會(huì)- 堅(jiān)持不嚴(yán)密監(jiān)督規(guī)則- 犧牲個(gè)人的目標(biāo)，以實(shí)現(xiàn)公司的目標(biāo)- 不說(shuō)人家閑話，撒謊，欺騙或偷竊- 購(gòu)買公司的產(chǎn)品- 促進(jìn)公司贊助的慈善機(jī)構(gòu)- 提供改進(jìn)建議-

48、參與公司的課外活動(dòng)- 服從命令- 以公司財(cái)產(chǎn)的關(guān)心和不被浪費(fèi)- 工作安全- 不濫用給政策;包括病假- 幫助同事;合作再次，該公司余下的則是一個(gè)忠誠(chéng)的癥狀，但只有一種癥狀。而一個(gè)癥狀是一種預(yù)示，嘈雜的信號(hào)。頭痛可能是一個(gè)惡性腦腫瘤的癥狀或視力不佳的癥狀。其余指標(biāo)也有噪聲的信號(hào)，它走的基本概念以及直觀的忠誠(chéng)?？傊?，在科爾與權(quán)力的條款的，基本的想法是，一個(gè)員工對(duì)公司的忠誠(chéng)，對(duì)一個(gè)組織時(shí)，他認(rèn)為二種信念：（1）認(rèn)為，該組織正在做什么“是值得的“，即認(rèn)為該公司的產(chǎn)品是真正解決某種類型的人的需要;（2）認(rèn)為，他的作品與他人（上司，下屬或同級(jí)）符合，他能一起工作，和因此，愿意與他們合作，愿與有舉措，是一個(gè)團(tuán)

49、隊(duì)球員。有趣的是，雖然指出，在這些分析，忠誠(chéng)和承諾是非常積極態(tài)度，對(duì)組織和（可能）對(duì)個(gè)人觀看。在另一方面，些研究者已經(jīng)注意到的忠誠(chéng)和承諾的一些負(fù)面特征。蘭德?tīng)枺?987），例如，作為一個(gè)堅(jiān)定的承諾到組織的缺點(diǎn)信號(hào)：為個(gè)人的，它可能會(huì)妨礙個(gè)人的成長(zhǎng)和流動(dòng)性限制的機(jī)會(huì)，以及扼殺創(chuàng)造力和創(chuàng)新，以及為組織，它可能盲目地投入到他們的雇主的個(gè)人，因此可能浪費(fèi)自己的時(shí)間和工作，他們不喜歡的人才，使其成為一個(gè)無(wú)利可圖的情況是無(wú)論是對(duì)個(gè)人和組織。從本質(zhì)上講然后，忠實(shí)的不利后果減少到可能的效率損失，如果一個(gè)人得到使用，他不應(yīng)該的，這既損害了個(gè)人和組織，但比后者的是前者，必須做的資源配置不當(dāng)，而這是判斷一個(gè)比一個(gè)忠

50、誠(chéng)本身所產(chǎn)生的錯(cuò)誤，從錯(cuò)誤。完善相關(guān)的激勵(lì)機(jī)制。對(duì)員工的激勵(lì)也就意味著對(duì)員工工作的肯定，企業(yè)是否滿足核心員工的尊重與認(rèn)可需要很大程度上決定了核心員工對(duì)企業(yè)與工作的態(tài)度。首先物質(zhì)上的激勵(lì)，完善企業(yè)的薪酬與福利制度與建立有效的績(jī)效考評(píng)體系，讓核心員工的付出與回報(bào)盡可能的匹配；其次精神上的激勵(lì)，對(duì)于核心員工來(lái)說(shuō)這方面的激勵(lì)更重要，企業(yè)應(yīng)該充分表達(dá)對(duì)核心員工的尊重與信任，比如經(jīng)常與核心員工進(jìn)行溝通、關(guān)心并解決他們的問(wèn)題、給他們分配挑戰(zhàn)性的工作并給予相應(yīng)的權(quán)限等等。該赫茨伯格等人的前提（1959）理論，作為雙因素激勵(lì)理論，是管理人員可以利用一些因素，比如動(dòng)機(jī)來(lái)鼓勵(lì)員工，使之在工作場(chǎng)所得到滿意，同樣，管理

51、者可以盡量減少這些因素，增加就業(yè)的不滿，'保健因素'或'hygienes'的簡(jiǎn)稱。最大限度地提高他們的工作有關(guān)，會(huì)提高員工的工作滿意度的激勵(lì)因素。另一方面，如果員工認(rèn)為，隨著hygienes低于可接受的水平下降有關(guān)的因素，工作不滿增加。該理論的一個(gè)有趣的一點(diǎn)是，缺乏滿意并不等于不滿。滿意和不滿意的是兩個(gè)獨(dú)立的連續(xù)。這意味著，當(dāng)員工不認(rèn)為滿意度之間的激勵(lì)，他們也可能無(wú)法察覺(jué)其中hygienes不滿。雇員很可能是在不穩(wěn)定，他們既不是滿意或不滿意的狀態(tài)。這是一個(gè)對(duì)雇員和組織的非生產(chǎn)性的狀態(tài)，因?yàn)樗粫?huì)刺激經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)，創(chuàng)造或創(chuàng)新。因此，有實(shí)體的組織領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者和管理者認(rèn)識(shí)到其職權(quán)范圍內(nèi)的工作那些方面，可以促進(jìn)員工的滿意度和優(yōu)化他們的價(jià)值。根據(jù)赫茨伯格（1966年），被認(rèn)為是激勵(lì)因素與工作有關(guān)的因素包括：成就，承認(rèn)，任務(wù)（工作本身）的責(zé)任;地位;和個(gè)人成長(zhǎng)。被認(rèn)為