Communications as a tool for managing corporate culture

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Communications as a tool for managing corporate culture

T. Poda

National Aviation University

The article analyzes communications as a mechanism for the formation and development of corporate culture, and examines the current practice of their application. Corporate culture is considered as an object of management, which is deliberately influenced by the company's management in order to improve the efficiency of its activities. The author examines the impact of communication levers of corporate culture formation on both the internal and external environment of the organization. Among the functions of communications as a tool for corporate culture management, the following can be noted: broadcasting the organization's values and mission; strengthening the coherence of activities; creating feedback; crisis and conflict management.

Keywords: corporate culture, organizational culture, levers of corporate culture formation, corporate communications.

Т.А. Пода

КОМУНІКАЦІЇ ЯК ІНСТРУМЕНТ УПРАВЛІННЯ КОРПОРАТИВНОЮ КУЛЬТУРОЮ

Вступ. Корпоративна культура, як найвищий рівень розвитку організаційної культури, покликана визначати добровільне прийняття місії, цінностей, традицій, норм та правил організації, які регулюють поведінку, діяльність, спілкування та відносини між співробітниками. Прагматичний підхід до формування і розвитку корпоративної культури передбачає налагодження механізмів цілеспрямованого управління даним процесом. Перед науковцями постає потреба узагальнити механізми формування корпоративної культури організації, а в сучасному світі одним з основних таких механізмів виступають комунікації. Мета дослідження - окреслити механізми формування корпоративної культури. Завдання: виявити комунікаційні механізми формування корпоративної культури та особливості їх застосування. Методологія дослідження. Для досягнення мети дослідження було використано соціокультурний методологічний підхід та комплекс основних методів наукового пізнання: системний аналіз, порівняння, критичний аналіз. Результати дослідження. Розуміння генезису і розвитку корпоративної культури пов'язане з розкриттям процесу переходу індустріального світу в останній третині XX століття в постіндустріальний із постекономічною системою. У процесі формуванні корпоративної культури важливо виокремлювати ті комунікативні інструменти, використання яких забезпечить найбільший ефект. В управлінській діяльності ефективність комунікаційного процесу супроводжується досягнутим взаєморозумінням, тобто це побудова ефективної системи комунікації зі зворотним зв'язком. В умовах людського спілкування інформація не тільки передається, а й зазнає кількісних і якісних перетворень, сприймається та інтерпретується відповідно до мотивації, досвіду комунікантів. У соціальних системах управління ми маємо справу із взаємодіями «людина-людина». Це стосується не тільки окремих індивідів, а й колективних суб'єктів, якими є організації. Уміння організувати людей для реалізації цілей, завдань організації пов'язане зі здатністю надавати певного сенсу їхній діяльності, а завдання сенсу можливе тільки через комунікацію. Висновки. Отже, серед функцій комунікацій як інструменту управління корпоративною культурою можна зазначити такі: трансляція цінностей і місії організації; посилення узгодженості діяльності; створення зворотного зв'язку; управління кризами та конфліктами. Комунікація виступає інструментом передачі, підтримки та зміцнення корпоративної культури. Різні типи комунікацій «керівники-підлеглі», «керівники-керівники», «колеги-колеги», «співробітники-клієнти» можуть бути адаптовані до специфіки та цілей кожної організації. Правильно вибудовані комунікації дозволяють організації створити позитивний імідж і досягти максимального ефекту від своєї діяльності.

Ключові слова: корпоративна культура, культура організації, інструменти формування корпоративної культури, корпоративні комунікації.

Introduction

сommunications managing corporate culture

In today's world, culture occupies a prominent position in human activity and prevails in all spheres of society, gaining self-sufficient significance. It is a prerequisite for social relations, communication and information interaction, and harmonization of interests of different social groups, organizations, and the public.

Corporate culture, as the highest level of organizational culture development, is intended to define the voluntary acceptance of the organization's mission, values, traditions, norms and rules that govern the behavior, activities, communication and relationships between employees.

Due to its high practical importance, the topic of corporate culture is attracting increasing interest among researchers from various fields. Global experience shows that corporate culture plays a crucial role in a company's long-term success. Corporate culture is one of the most important conditions for the successful operation of any organization. It is a powerful motivating lever that influences the labor potential of employees. Turning a team into a cohesive, organized team that strives for a single goal has a positive impact on the quality of tasks, affects the profitability and productivity of the organization as a whole. A pragmatic approach to the formation and development of corporate culture involves establishing mechanisms for targeted management of this process. Scientists face the need to generalize the mechanisms of corporate culture formation, and in the modern world, communication is one of the main such mechanisms.

The issues of formation and development of the organization's culture have been studied by prominent foreign and domestic scholars: E. Schein (E. Schein 2010; 2019) and P. Schein (P. Schein 2019), G. Hofstede (Hofstede 2016), P. Pisar (Pisar and Mazo 2020), A. Grof (Grof 2001) and others.

Among the Ukrainian scholars who have studied various aspects of corporate culture are I. Otenko, M. Chepeliuk ^тенко та Чепелюк 2018), O. Lytvyn, O. Halytska (Литвин та Галицька 2019), A. Mokhnenko,

K. Melnykova (Мохненко та Мельникова 2021), and others.

Ukrainian authors, including L. Drotianko (Дротянко 2013), M. Abysova (Абисова 2018), T. Poda (Пода 2023), and S. Ordenov (Дротянко та ін. 2020), have conducted analyses of the information society. They have explored the relationship between society and culture, and have also examined the unique aspects of dialogue in modern information culture. By using philosophical analysis, these authors aim to understand how the dialogue is used in various areas of communication.

Communication in its numerous aspects is studied in the works of Ukrainian scholars G. Pochyeptsov (Почепцов 2022), A. Mokhnenko, K. Melnykova (Мохненко та Мельникова 2021), I. Otenko, M. Chepeliuk (Отенко та Чепелюк 2018) and others.

The aim of the study is to outline the mechanisms of corporate culture formation. The tasks are to identify the communication mechanisms and to represent the peculiarities of their use to shape corporate culture.

Research methods

To achieve the goal set by the author of the article, the socio-cultural methodological approach and a set of basic methods of scientific knowledge, namely, systematic analysis, comparison, and critical analysis were used.

Research results

The formation of corporate culture is an important task in modern management, and its successful solution requires a theoretical framework. The scientific interest in this topic is explained by changes in the socio-economic environment that require rapid adaptation of companies. The ability to respond quickly to changes is now a key factor in the success of an organization. In such conditions, traditional methods of personnel management, especially in the areas of motivation and control, are not effective enough. Therefore, factors such as "self-control", "self-development", "responsibility" and "initiative" are turning into corporate values that can give a company a competitive advantage.

In order for a company to successfully adapt to changes, it needs to have internal unity. Integration, on the other hand, involves combining tangible and intangible aspects to create a single entity. Corporate culture plays a crucial role in this process as it forms the general principles, goals, and objectives of the company, which are then embodied by the staff in their activities.

Understanding the evolution of corporate culture is essential to comprehend the transition from the industrial world to the post-industrial world and the post-economic system in the last third of the ХХ century.

Corporate culture was first talked about in the late XIX century in the military. German field marshal H. Moltke calls "corporate culture" the relationships between officers, which include a charter, conflict resolution styles, and basic values such as honor and friendship (Moltke on the art of war... 1995, 45).

The first stage of corporate culture research involves analyzing the essence of this phenomenon, identifying its main characteristics, and defining corporate culture as a specific object for scientific study. The fundamental concepts of the modern theory of corporate culture were developed in the works of such authors as E. Pettigrew, A. Brown, E. Diehl, G. Denison, and others. G. Denison worked on a model of organizational culture known as Denison's Model of Organizational Culture, which focuses on four aspects of culture: learning, engagement, adaptation, and management (Kabigtin et al. 2019).

In one of his books, "Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail", John Kotter presents his eight-step change management process, which includes aspects related to corporate culture. He emphasizes that successful change requires not only changing the structure and processes but also the corporate culture to support the new direction of the organization (Kotter 2009, 42-48).

The research papers of E. Schein (E. Schein 2010; 2019) are particularly recognized in the scientific community. His papers provide the most complete and comprehensive analysis of the essence of corporate culture, examine its characteristics at different levels of analysis, and attempt to describe the process of corporate culture formation. Edgar Schein's work on organizational culture highlights the importance of understanding and managing culture as a fundamental aspect of organizational life. His three- level framework and insights into culture change provide valuable guidance for leaders seeking to shape their organizations' cultures effectively.

The next corporate culture research stage is associated with the names of G. Johnson, and K. Scholes, the creators of the very popular "Culture Web" model, as a universal model of corporate culture. It is important to note that corporate culture can be a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, and the "Culture Web" model helps to structure this complexity (Johnson and Scholes 1993).

The "Culture Web" is a framework that consists of six interconnected elements that altogether contribute to the "paradigm" or model of an organization's work environment. By analyzing each of these elements, one can get a better understanding of the organization's culture and identify what aspects are working well and what needs to be changed. The six elements are:

- Stories: past events and people that are talked about both inside and outside of the company.

- Rituals and routines: the daily behavior and actions of people that signify acceptable behavior.

- Symbols: visual representations of the company, including logos, plushness of offices, and formal or informal dress codes.

- Organizational structure: the structure defined by the organization chart as well as the unwritten lines of power and influence that indicate whose contributions are most valued.

- Control systems: financial systems, quality systems, and rewards (including how they are measured and distributed within the organization).

- Power structures: the individuals or groups of executives who have the most influence on decisions and strategic direction (Johnson 2000, 429-452).

Matsumoto and Juang's research in corporate culture, specifically in their work "Culture and Psychology" (Matsumoto and Juang 2016), plays an essential role in understanding this phenomenon. They describe corporate culture as not just an isolated social phenomenon but also an organic part, which is a subculture that concerns the national culture in its normative and value aspects. Therefore, the creation of an organization's corporate culture begins from the moment it is founded, provided that management attaches great importance to it. In the first stage, most employees are unaware of this process. Culture can be formed based on goals, programs, principles, rules, and patterns. Later, when employees realize the significance of corporate relations and governance within the organization and agree to the proposed values and norms, the process of developing a corporate culture begins.

According to E. Schein, the knowledge of an organization's culture begins with the "surface" level, or "layer," which includes such visible external factors as the technology and architecture used, observed behavioral patterns, communication methods, slogans, etc. In other words, at this level is everything that members of the organization can feel and perceive. Next, there is the second level of culture - the "subsurface" level. At this level, the values, beliefs, and convictions shared by the members of the organization are studied according to the extent to which these values are reflected in symbols and language, and how they carry the semantic explanation of the upper level. The third, "deep" level includes fundamental assumptions that are difficult for even the members of the organization to realize without special focus on the issue (Schein 2010, 35, 38, 53).

Ukrainian researchers A. Mokhnenko and K. Melnikova distinguish "the basic levels of corporate culture: external, internal and hidden. The external level includes how the company is seen by consumers, competitors, and the public. Internal - values expressed in the actions of employees. Hidden [...] beliefs that are consciously shared by all team members" (Мохненко та Мельникова 2021, 47).

In the process of forming a corporate culture, it is important to identify those tools (levers) that will have the greatest effect. The following mechanisms of corporate culture formation can be distinguished as follows: organizational, economic, communication, social, and psychological.

Thus, the creation of an organization's internal corporate environment and its functioning depends on many factors. Not the least role here is played by corporate activities conditioned by information and communication tools that ensure the interaction of communication subjects in the communication space.

We agree with L. Smircich who defines corporate culture as a "semantic system" consisting of specific signs and symbols, including linguistic ones (Smircich 1983, 339-358).

Since communication is the process of exchanging information to achieve mutual understanding between employees to accomplish tasks, the following types and forms of organizational communication can be distinguished: written and oral, verbal and non-verbal, formal and informal, horizontal and vertical, external and internal. Hence, we can conclude that corporate communication is the process of exchanging information and ideas within an organization and between the organization and external stakeholders. It plays an important role in the successful functioning of the company and its relations with society. As G. Pocheptsov aptly put it: "Communication is the same basic unit of social reality as time and space are units of physical reality. Communication creates people, societies, and states" (Почепцов 2023, 134).

The study of communication in the modern world has revealed that it is a complex system with stable connections and relationships that are intrinsic to all of its forms and mechanisms. It can be applied to any type of communication, covering all social, biological, and technological objects and processes. With the rapid transformation of the information sphere in modern times, communication has become truly revolutionary.

Corporate communication includes various types such as internal communication and external communication. Internal communication can be vertical, horizontal, diagonal communication. External communication includes public relations, advertising, marketing communication, social media, and creating a positive image.

Chester Irvin Barnard, in his work "The Functions of the Executive" published in 1938, and republished many times, emphasized the importance of communication, cooperation, and a sense of purpose within organizations. Bernard believed that communication plays a key role in organization and management. He considered written and verbal communication as the main types of communication and potential sources of numerous problems faced by managers and employees in interpreting their powers and responsibilities. Barnard saw a key role of formal organizations in mobilizing “willingness of persons to contribute efforts to the cooperative system” (Barnard 2005, 83). Barnard notes several synonyms of this willingness, such as loyalty, solidarity, and esprit de corps (Barnard 2005, 84).

According to the researcher A. Grof, a company's operation can be divided into four distinct stages. The quality of communicative interaction in these stages determines the effectiveness of a company's modus operandi and its market position in any given stage. Effective internal and external communication integrates a company in the process of utilizing its internal resources to the optimum through the recognition and transfer of values from the environment. This strengthens a company through the integration of new values into its attitude, either consolidating or changing the corporate culture (Gorf 2001).

Discussion

In management activities, effective communication is essential for mutual understanding. This requires the construction of an effective communication system that includes feedback. In human communication, information is not only transmitted but also undergoes quantitative and qualitative transformations. Different people accept and interpret information differently based on their motivation and experience. Communication is successful only if people have a similar system of encoding and decoding. Also, the subjects of communication must have identical lexical and syntactic systems and understand the situation of communication in the same way.

In social management systems, communication plays a vital role in organizing people to achieve the goals and objectives of an organization. Meaning can only be assigned to activities through communication.

The modern model of communication is based on the work of Claude Shannon and Warner Weaver. The Shannon-Weaver model is a mathematical theory of communication that explains communication in terms of five basic components: a source, a transmitter, a channel, a receiver, and a destination. It allows us to represent the communication process in an organization as an exchange of messages that can be hampered by "noise" or communication barriers (Weaver and Shannon 1998). The modern communication model takes into account various types of noise and barriers that can distort or prevent the effective exchange of information between the source and the receiver. Therefore, it is important to consider them when planning and managing communications in an organization to ensure more effective interaction and prevent potential problems.

Taking into account mentioned above, the communication process can be represented in such a way of its characteristics: the beginning of the exchange of information (embodied in some symbols and arranged into a message), what is being transmitted and why, and what response is expected; transmission of information through selected verbal, non-verbal and electronic channels, including speech, gestures, facial expressions, written materials, and electronic means of communication, etc.; decoding of the information by the recipient; and feedback as an effective result of the communication process.

To define and execute functional responsibilities related with corporative culture communication within an organization, certain communication factors are of great importance. These include the need to identify the primary communication channels of external and internal communication; ensure direct and shorter communication chains wherever possible in them, giving priority to formal ones; and inspect the result of any kind of communication by competent employees.

Internal communication is meant to unify staff to effectively solve all tasks and consolidate efforts to achieve set goals. Information is used for this purpose to understand and comprehend all events, processes, and phenomena within the organization. Information is a crucial component of communication management. Properly communicated information can help improve the ethical level of an organization, enhance the microclimate, reduce anxiety and conflict, and transform the organization's values.

In contrast, external communication refers to an organization's interaction with the external environment and stakeholders. The result of this interaction is the image that makes a company well-known.

Therefore, corporate communication is viewed as a set of actions that an organization takes to manage internal and external communications with different audiences. These communications are realized through the dissemination of information about certain aspects of corporate activities and forming a certain public opinion about the organization, its leaders, goods and services, projects, and initiatives. Ukrainian scholars I. Otenko and M. Chepelyuk support this view and note that "corporate communications can be viewed as a set of actions of an organization to manage internal and external communications to create a favorable basis for interaction with different audiences. Communications are realized through the dissemination of information about certain aspects of corporate activities and to form a certain public opinion about the organization, its leaders, goods and services, projects and initiatives, etc." (Отенко та Чепелюк 2018, 65).

Conclusions

Communication plays an important role in managing corporate culture. The analysis of the literature on this issue, represented within the research, allows to identify the key functions of communication in corporate culture management:

1. Broadcasting values and mission. Communication allows management to convey the company's core values and mission to employees, creating a common vision and direction for the organization's development.

2. Strengthening coherence. Communication helps establish and reinforce consistent standards of behavior within the company, contributing to a unified corporate culture.

3. Feedback. Communication enables organizations to collect feedback from employees on the current corporate culture, allowing them to adapt to changing employee needs and expectations.

4. Managing crises and conflicts. Effective communication can help maintain the unity and stability of corporate culture during difficult times.

Overall, communication is a tool for transmitting, maintaining, and strengthening corporate culture. The corporate culture determines the norms and prerequisites for all communication systems, including "managers-subordinates," "managers-managers," "colleagues-colleagues," and "staff-clients." Different types of communication and corporate culture can be adapted to the specifics and goals of each organization. Correctly built communications with target groups allow an organization to create a positive image and achieve maximum impact from its activities. Communication must be systematic, clear, and aimed at supporting the company's values and goals.

Literature

1. Barnard C. I. The functions of the executive. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2005. 334 p.

2. Drotianko L., Abysova M. Communication in a globalized multicultural society: ethnic mentality aspect. International Science Conference SPbWOSCE-2017 “Business Technologies for Sustainable Urban Development”: MATEC Web of Conferences, 170. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201817001019.

3. Johnson G., Scholes K. Exploring corporate strategy - Text and Cases, Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall. 1993.

4. Johnson G.N. Strategy through a cultural lens: learning from managers' experience. Management Learning. 2000. Вип. 31. С. 429-452.

5. Grof A. Communication in the creation of corporate values. Corporate Communications: An International Journal. 2001. Vol. 6 No. 4. P. 193-198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006147.

6. Harrison M. T., Beyer J.M. Studying organizational cultures through rites and ceremonials. Academy of management revie. 1984. № 9 (4). P. 653-669. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/258488.

7. Hofstede G. Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. SAGE Publications, Incorporated. 2016. 108 p.

8. Kabigting F., Brooks D., Loures L. The Denison Organizational Culture Survey (DOCS): A Culture Measurement Critique. 2019. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24995.68643

9. Kotter J. P. 2009. Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. IEEE Engineering Management Review. 2009. № 37(3). P. 42-48.

10. Matsumoto D., Juang L. Culture and Psychology. Wadsworth, 2016. 544 p.

11. Moltke on the art of war: Selected writings / ed. by D. J. Hughes. Novato, CA: Presidio Press, 1995. 275 p.

12. Pisar P., Mazo M. E. Controlling, communication and corporate culture - the opportunity for SMEs. Economics & Sociology. 2020. № 3(13). P. 113-32. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.14254/2071 -789x.2020/13-3/8.

13. Schein E. H. Organizational Culture and Leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 2010. 437 p.

14. Schein E. H., Schein P. A. 2019. Corporate Culture Survival Guide. Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, John.

15. Smircich L. Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1983. Vol. 28. P. 339-358.

16. Weaver W., Shannon C. E. Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press, 1998. 144 p. URL: https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2383164/component/file_23831 63/content.

17. Абисова М. А. Комунікативний потенціал культурних відмінностей в інформаційному суспільстві. Вісник Національного авіаційного університету. 2018. Вип. 1 (27). С. 39-43. (Серія «Філософія. Культурологія»). DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.18372/2412-2157.28.13370.

18. Дротянко Л. Г., Абисова М. А., Пода Т. А., Орденов С. С.

Філософія діалогу в комунікативних практиках інформаційного суспільства. Соціальні комунікації

інформаційного суспільства: теоретичні та прикладні аспекти. Талком; Talkom. 2020. С. 8-27. DOI: 10.18372/42478

19. Дротянко Л. Г. Ментальний аспект комунікації в

полікультурному середовищі в умовах глобалізації. Вісник Національного авіаційного університету. 2013. Вип. 2. С. 5-8. (Серія «Філософія. Культурологія»). DOI: https://doi.org/

10.18372/2412-2157.18.7162

20. Литвин О., Галицька О. Вплив корпоративної культури на ефективність діяльності організації. Фінансовий простір. 2019. 4 (36). С. 127-138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18371/fp.4(36).2019.190230.

21. Мохненко А. С., Мельникова К. В. Особливості корпоративної культури на IT-підприємствах в сучасних умовах ведення бізнесу. Науковий вісник Херсонського державного університету. 2021. № 42. С. 45-49. (Серія «Економічні науки»). DOI: 10.32999/ksu2307-8030/2021-42-7.

22. Отенко І. П., Чепелюк М. І. Корпоративна культура: міжнародний та трансформаційний аспекти. 2018. 242 с. URL: http://surl.li/nkkma.

23. Пода Т. А. Дискурс кризових комунікацій: соціокультурний аналіз. Вісник Національного авіаційного університету. 2023. Вип. 2 (36). С. 115-120. (Серія «Філософія. Культурологія»). DOI: https://doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.36.16984.

24. Почепцов Г. Г. Токсичний інфопростір. Як зберегти ясність мислення і свободу дії. Vivat, 2022. 384 с.

References

1. Barnard, Chester I. 2005. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

2. Drotianko, Liubov, and Maria Abysova. 2018. "Communication

in a globalized multicultural society: ethnic mentality

aspect."MATEC Web of Conferences 170. https://doi.org/10.1051/ matecconf/201817001019.

3. Johnson, Garry and Scholes Kevan. 1993 Exploring corporate strategy - Text and Cases, Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall.

4. Johnson, Garry. 2000. "Strategy through a cultural lens: learning from managers' experience". Management Learning 31: 429-452.

5. Grof, Agnes. 2001. "Communication in the creation of corporate values." Corporate Communications: an international journal 6(4): 193-198. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006147.

6. Harrison, M. Trice and Janice M. Beyer. 1984. "Studying organizational cultures through rites and ceremonials." Academy of management review 9(4): 653-669. https://doi.org/10.2307/258488.

7. Hofstede, Geert. 2016. "Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations."Collegiate Aviation Review 34(2): 108.

8. Kabigting, Florencio, Brooks, Dilys and Larissa Loures. 2019. "The Denison Organizational Culture Survey (DOCS): A Culture Measurement Critique." DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24995.68643.

9. Kotter John P. 2010. "Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail." IEEE Engineering Management Review, 37(3): 42-48.

10. Matsumoto, David and Linda Juang. 2016. Culture and Psychology. Wadsworth.

11. Moltke on the art of war: Selected writings. 1995. Edited by Daniel J. Hughes. Novato, CA: Presidio Press.

12. Pisar, Premysl. 2020. "Controlling, communication and corporate culture-the opportunities for Smes." Economics & Sociology 13 (3): 113-132. DOI: 10.14254/2071 - 789X.2020/13-3/8.

13. Schein, Edgar H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

14. Schein, Edgar H. and Schein Peter A. 2019. Corporate Culture Survival Guide. Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, John.

15. Smircich, Linda. 1983. "Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis". Administrative Science Quarterly. Vol. 28: 339-358.

16. Weaver Warren and Claude E. 1998. Shannon Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press. https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2383164/component/file_23831 63/content.

17. Abysova, Mariia 2018. "Komunikatyvnyy potentsial kulturnykh

vidminnostey v informatsiynomu suspilstvi" ["Communicative Potential of Cultural Differences in the Information Society"]. Visnyk Natsionalnoho aviatsiinoho universytetu. Seriia: Filosofiia.

Kulturolohiia, Proceedings of the National Aviation University.

Series: Philosophy. Culturology 1 (27): 39-43. https://doi.org/

10.18372/2412-2157.28.13370.

18. Drotianko, Lubov, Abysova, Mariia, Poda, Tetiana and Serhii

Ordenov. 2020. Filosofiya dialohu v komunikatyvnykh praktykakh informatsiynoho suspil'stva [Philosophy of Dialogue in

Communicative Practices of the Information Society]. Kyiv, Talkom.

DOI: 10.18372/42478.

19. Drotianko, Lubov. 2013. "Mentalnyi aspekt komunikatsii v polikulturnomu seredovyshchi v umovakh hlobalizatsii". ["Mental Aspect of Communication in Polycultural Conditions of Globalization"]. Visnyk Natsionalnoho aviatsiinoho universytetu.

Seriia: Filosofiia. Kulturolohiia, Proceedings of the National Aviation University. Series: Philosophy. Culturology 2(18): 5-8.

https://doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.18.7162.

20. Lytvyn, Olena, and Olha Halytska. 2019. "Vplyv korporatyvnoi kultury na efektyvnist diialnosti orhanizatsii" ["The Impact of Corporate Culture on the Efficiency of the Organization's Activities"]. Finansovyi prostir, Financial space 4 (36): 127-138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18371 /fp.4(36).2019.190230.

21. Mokhnenko, Andrii and Kateryna Melnykova. 2021.

"Osoblyvosti korporatyvnoi kultury na IT-pidpryiemstvakh v suchasnykh umovakh vedennia biznesu" ["Peculiarities of corporate culture at IT enterprises in modern business conditions"]. Naukovyi visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu. Seriia "Ekonomichni nauky", Scientific Bulletin of Kherson State University. Series "Economic Sciences" 42: 45-49. DOI:

10.32999/ksu2307-8030/2021 -42-7.

22. Otenko, Iryna and Marharyta Chepeliuk. 2018. Korporatyvna

kultura: mizhnarodnyi ta transformatsiinyi aspekty [Corporate culture: international and transformational aspects].

http://surl.li/nkkma.

23. Poda, Tetiana. 2023. "Dyskurs kryzovykh komunikatsii:

sotsiokulturnyi analiz" ["Discourse of Crisis Communications: SocioCultural Analysis"]. Visnyk Natsionalnoho aviatsiinoho universytetu. Seriia: Filosofiia. Kulturolohiia, Proceedings of the National Aviation University. Series: Philosophy. Culturology 2(36): 115-120.

https://doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.36.16984.

24. Pocheptsov, Georgii. 2022. Toksychnyi infoprostir. Yak zberehty yasnist myslennia i svobodu dii [Toxic Infospace. How to Maintain Clarity of Thought and Freedom of Action]. Kharkiv : Vivat.

Размещено на Allbest.ru