不同層面的忠誠(chéng)度外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　中文3525字</b></p><p>　　外 文 翻 譯</p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　The different dimensions of loyalty </p><p>　　The first problem in st

2、udying 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

3、how 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

4、interviewing the employees of more th</p><p>　　According to 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;

5、(3) believes in the company’s products; (4) will recommend the company as among the best places to work, and (5) is prepared to stay in the company for the next several years, even if offered a modest pay increase elsewh

6、ere (Cole, 2000).</p><p>　　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 qualify

7、ing the fact of remaining in the organization by rejecting a change with a “modest” pay increase elsewhere.</p><p>　　Employees are the basic ingredients, their enthusiasm on behalf of corporate morale, aware

8、ness of their work reflected in the subtle strength of the enterprise. Employee loyalty will greatly stimulate their initiative and creativity. So that potential employees into full play. Loyalty is the efficiency, incre

9、ase employee loyalty and increase customer satisfaction there is promotion. Business per employee increased loyalty, competitive strength will have been improved.</p><p>　　In the modern economy, employees wi

10、ll be judged according 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, employe

11、es and business contract between the text. Does not guarantee a stable relationship between employees and enterprises. To maintain this long-term stable relationship, and in good faith reliance on the need to build the e

12、mployment relationship, n</p><p>　　Powers (2000) offers an interesting set of indicators of loyalty:</p><p>　　– Remaining with the company; not leaving, not job hunting</p><p>　　– S

13、taying late to complete a project</p><p>　　– Keeping the company’s business confidential; no whistle-blowing</p><p>　　– Promoting the company to customers and community</p><p>　　– A

14、dhering to rules without close supervision</p><p>　　– Sacrificing personal goals to achieve company’s goals</p><p>　　– No gossiping, lying, cheating or stealing</p><p>　　– Buying co

15、mpany’s products</p><p>　　– Contribution to company-sponsored charities</p><p>　　– Offering improvement suggestions</p><p>　　– Participating in company’s extracurricular activities&

16、lt;/p><p>　　– Following orders</p><p>　　– Taking care of company property and not being wasteful</p><p>　　– Working safely</p><p>　　– Not abusing leave policies; including

17、 sick leave</p><p>　　– Helping coworkers; cooperating</p><p>　　Again, remaining with the company is a symptom of loyalty, but only a symptom. And a symptom is an indication, a noisy signal. A he

18、adache 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 basic intuitive concept of loyalty.</p><p>　　In summ

19、ary, 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

20、while”, i.e., feels that the products 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, an

21、d, therefore, is willing to cooperate with them, is w</p><p>　　It is interesting to point out though, that in these analyses, loyalty and commitment are viewed as very positive for the organization and (poss

22、ibly) for the individual. On the opposite side, some researchers have noticed some negative characteristics of loyalty and commitment. Randall (1987), for instance, signals as disadvantages of a strong commitment to an o

23、rganization: (a) for the individual, that it may stymie individual growth and limit opportunities for mobility, as well as stifle creati</p><p>　　Improve related incentives. Incentives for employees means re

24、cognition 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 incenti

25、ves, improve pay and benefits system of enterprises and the establishment of an effective performance appraisal system, so that pay and reward key employees as much as possible match; second spiritual motivation for the&

26、lt;/p><p>　　The premise of the Herzberg et al. (1959) theory, known as the Two-Factor Theory of Motivation, was that managers could use factors known as‘motivators’ to encourage employees to gain satisfaction

27、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 t

28、he motivators associated with their jobs could enhance employees’ job satisfaction. On the other h</p><p>　　According to Herzberg (1966), the factors associated with work considered to be motivators include:

29、 achievement; recognition; tasks (the work itself); responsibility; advancement; and personal growth. The factors associated with work considered to be hygienes include: policies and administration; supervision/manageria

30、l relationships; salary; working conditions; status; security; and coworker relationships.</p><p>　　Other motivation theories have been studied extensively in the business literature, but they do not break d

31、own the components of motivation as specifically as the Two-Factor Theory and consequently do not allow for such detailed analysis. For example, Maslow’s Theory of Needs (1954) states that individuals reach higher level

32、needs such as self-esteem and self-actualization only after lower level needs such as belongingness and safety needs have been met. While useful in other contexts, this theo</p><p>　　workplace, and it consid

33、ers both individual and group level motivation.</p><p>　　Herzberg’s work (1966) is considered a major advancement in the literature. Befittingly , it has also been used recently by researchers in the study

34、 of job satisfaction (Brislin, MacNab, Worthley, Kabigting and Zukis 2005; DeShields, Kara and Kaynak 2005) with support for the theory. Herzberg’s work has been employed to evaluate travellers’ satisfaction (Crompton 20

35、03) and student satisfaction (Chyung and Vachon 2005), illustrating its applicability to a variety of settings. Yet all tests of t</p><p>　　Interestingly, the hospitality industry has been the focus of many

36、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. Aksu

37、 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 general</p&

38、gt;<p>　　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 continent’s rapidly increasing ec

39、onomic and development status. Recent scholarship 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)

40、found that Latin Americans in general had high job satisfaction. Barreto (20</p><p>　　Source: Josep M. Rosanas and Manuel Velilla. Loyalty and Trust as the Ethical Bases of Organizations.[D]Journal of Busine

41、ss Ethics , 2003(1): 29~44.</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p><p><b>　　不同層面的忠誠(chéng)度</b></p><p>　　在研究人類組織中的忠誠(chéng)度的論題時(shí)，我們第一個(gè)面臨的問題是人們對(duì)于忠誠(chéng)還沒有一個(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

42、可以有許多不同的層面?？茽枺?000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)。</p><p>　　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）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）愿意留在公司未來數(shù)年，即使提供了一個(gè)溫和的加薪

43、別處（科爾，2000年）。</p><p>　　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。</p><p>　　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，

44、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)力也就得到了提升。</p><p>　　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。</

45、p><p>　　權(quán)力（2000年）提供了一個(gè)有趣的忠誠(chéng)度指標(biāo)設(shè)置：</p><p>　　- 繼續(xù)呆在公司不走了，不找工作</p><p>　　- 為了完成項(xiàng)目而加班加點(diǎn)</p><p>　　- 保持公司的商業(yè)機(jī)密</p><p>　　- 推進(jìn)公司向客戶和社會(huì)</p><p>　　- 堅(jiān)持不嚴(yán)密監(jiān)督規(guī)

46、則</p><p>　　- 犧牲個(gè)人的目標(biāo)，以實(shí)現(xiàn)公司的目標(biāo)</p><p>　　- 不說人家閑話，撒謊，欺騙或偷竊</p><p><b>　　- 購(gòu)買公司的產(chǎn)品</b></p><p>　　- 促進(jìn)公司贊助的慈善機(jī)構(gòu)</p><p><b>　　- 提供改進(jìn)建議</b>&

47、lt;/p><p>　　- 參與公司的課外活動(dòng)</p><p><b>　　- 服從命令</b></p><p>　　- 以公司財(cái)產(chǎn)的關(guān)心和不被浪費(fèi)</p><p><b>　　- 工作安全</b></p><p>　　- 不濫用給政策;包括病假</p><p

48、><b>　　- 幫助同事;合作</b></p><p>　　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)。</p><p>　　總之，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

49、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)隊(duì)球員。</p><p>　　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。蘭德爾（1987），例如，作為一個(gè)堅(jiān)定

50、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)無利可圖的情況是無論是對(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)忠誠(chéng)本身所產(chǎn)生的錯(cuò)誤，從錯(cuò)誤。&

51、lt;/p><p>　　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)于核心員工來說這方面的激勵(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)心并解決他們的問題、給他們分

52、配挑戰(zhàn)性的工作并給予相應(yīng)的權(quán)限等等。</p><p>　　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)來鼓勵(lì)員工，使之在工作場(chǎng)所得到滿意，同樣，管理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hygien

53、es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)，他們也可能無法察覺其中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)

54、值。</p><p>　　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)為是hygienes與工作有關(guān)的因素包括：政策和管理;監(jiān)督/管理關(guān)系，工資，工作條件，地位，安全和與同事的關(guān)系。</p><p>　　在商業(yè)文獻(xiàn)中，其他激勵(lì)理論已被廣泛研究，但他們不打破動(dòng)機(jī)的組件，特別是因?yàn)檫@兩個(gè)因素理論，因此不允許這種詳細(xì)

55、的分析。例如，馬斯洛的需求理論（1954）指出，個(gè)人達(dá)到更高層次的需求，如自尊和自我實(shí)現(xiàn)只有在較低層次的需要，如歸屬感和安全需要得到滿足。雖然有用在其他情況下，這個(gè)理論是不是面向工作有關(guān)的動(dòng)機(jī)。奧爾德弗的ERG理論（1972）指出，人有三種核心需要：生存;相關(guān)性;和增長(zhǎng)。這個(gè)計(jì)劃不包括馬斯洛的層次結(jié)構(gòu)剛性，表明員工可能會(huì)遇到需要同時(shí)進(jìn)行。但它的兩大類導(dǎo)致廣義評(píng)價(jià)動(dòng)機(jī)。麥克萊蘭的需要理論（1961）也承認(rèn)三套需要：成就，權(quán)力和隸屬關(guān)系。他

56、的研究表明，成就需求，并在程度，權(quán)力和歸屬的需要，都與工作績(jī)效，從而為員工的工作成果掛鉤的動(dòng)力。而在個(gè)體水平有益，需要理論并不關(guān)注組級(jí)動(dòng)力的動(dòng)力。亞當(dāng)斯的公平理論（1965）解釋該員工將努力實(shí)現(xiàn)公平的情況比較時(shí)，自己的同事，因?yàn)樗麄兛紤]投入工作的努力和工作成果的水平。然而，公平理論闡述后，并沒有導(dǎo)致個(gè)人行為的方式，他們要做的實(shí)際工作中的激勵(lì)因素。因此，赫茨伯格的（1966）理論是最適合這個(gè)研究，因?yàn)樗芏囝悇e的分析，為文化評(píng)價(jià)允許，

57、它是針對(duì)工作</p><p>　　赫茨伯格的工作（1966年）被認(rèn)為是文學(xué)的重大進(jìn)步。它也被用來研究人員最近在工作滿意度（Brislin，麥納卜，沃斯利，Kabigting和Zukis2005;德希爾茲，卡拉和Kaynak2005）研究的理論支持。赫茨伯格的工作已經(jīng)被用來評(píng)估旅客滿意度（克朗普頓2003年）和學(xué)生滿意度（Chyung和瓦謝2005年），說明它適用于多種設(shè)置。然而，所有測(cè)試的理論沒有得到驗(yàn)證。公元（

58、1988年）和Al- Mekhlafie（1991）發(fā)現(xiàn)的，由韓國(guó)和也門樣品動(dòng)力，衛(wèi)生二分法部分支持，而威廉姆斯（1992）發(fā)現(xiàn)使用美國(guó)的樣品結(jié)果好壞參半。在一個(gè)赫茲伯格等評(píng)價(jià)。（1959年）的泰國(guó)建筑業(yè)，他們發(fā)現(xiàn)這個(gè)理論的部分支持。他們認(rèn)為，在對(duì)不同職業(yè)和工作場(chǎng)所的研究，包括各種文學(xué)的差異。盡管這些混合理論成果，激勵(lì)已經(jīng)常與工作滿意度。誰表達(dá)的雇員對(duì)工作的滿意度往往是出于對(duì)他們的工作（蒂埃里1998年）。泰拿（1998）也與使用動(dòng)機(jī)和

59、工作滿意度的赫茨伯格（1966年）的框架。他們得出結(jié)論，一旦管理者了解員工的動(dòng)機(jī)是什么，管理人員可以在適當(dāng)?shù)膽?zhàn)略重點(diǎn)在那些工人創(chuàng)造就業(yè)的滿意度。這些不同的結(jié)果集進(jìn)行更多的研究會(huì)出</p><p>　　有趣的是，酒店業(yè)一直是許多工作滿意度研究的焦點(diǎn)。在超過4000家酒店的工人，學(xué)習(xí)納什（2004）發(fā)現(xiàn)，員工對(duì)工作滿意度是由員工的情感和他們的公司他們的信仰驅(qū)動(dòng)。阿克蘇和阿克塔什（2005）研究之間的一流酒店管理人員工

60、作滿意度土耳其。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，盡管時(shí)間長(zhǎng)，工資低和小同事的支持，經(jīng)理人普遍對(duì)自己的工作由于工作本身和權(quán)力（激勵(lì)），從管理一流的設(shè)施來滿足的性質(zhì)。在對(duì)員工工作滿意度之間的臺(tái)灣酒店工人學(xué)習(xí)，黃芝（2005）發(fā)現(xiàn)，內(nèi)部營(yíng)銷，為客戶的員工或治療，呈正相關(guān)，工作滿意度和工作滿意度呈正相關(guān)組織績(jī)效。確定在佛羅里達(dá)州之間的四星級(jí)賓館酒店工作人員，具有較高的跨文化敏感性員工的工作表示滿意和社會(huì)滿意水平。這一發(fā)現(xiàn)表明，文化可能影響員工的工作滿意度的看法。&l

61、t;/p><p>　　盡管大量的研究已經(jīng)在工作滿意的地方完成，一南美業(yè)務(wù)考試仍然是考慮的迅速增長(zhǎng)和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展?fàn)顩r大陸價(jià)值的話題。最近獎(jiǎng)學(xué)金看好。安高（2002）發(fā)現(xiàn)工作場(chǎng)所的安全和工作安全問題是非常重要的巴西人，而斯佩克特，庫珀，發(fā)現(xiàn)，拉丁美洲普遍具有較高的工作滿意度。巴雷托（2005年）發(fā)現(xiàn)，酒店客人滿意在Bahia，巴西增加時(shí)，員工滿意的方案得到實(shí)施。雖然有趣的，這些研究并沒有全面解決赫茨伯格的（1966）因素，而