Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Introduction

While research of corporate/organizational ‘climate’ looks at the link between individuals, groups, and performance experienced on a daily basis (e.g. communication, networking, reward systems, leadership styles), the term ‘organizational culture’ refers to the context in which these events occur.

Organizational culture (OC) is what a group learns over a period of time as it solves its problem of survival in an external environment and internal integration (Schein, 1990). Schein points out three areas where culture manifests itself: observable artefacts, values/norms, and basic underlying assumptions to which most researchers refer to. OC supports effective control (to regulate behaviour), normative order (to guide behaviour), promotion of innovation (in a culture that encourages creative thinking), strategy formulation, and employee commitment. Sackmann, Phillips, Kleinberg, and Boyacigiller (1997) suggest in that respect that cultural context contains greater regional, national, industry and regional level, and within the organization a functional, hierarchy and tenure level, that are influenced by gender, profession, ethnicity and religion.

Another aspect of OC highlights how well an individual fits an organizational context (O'Reilly, Chatmann & Caldwell, 1991). In this regard values and expectations of individuals interact with facets of the situation (e.g. incentive systems, norms) to affect the individual's attitudinal and behavioural responses. Furthermore OC-concepts guide OD and Change Management activities. The sustained interest in OC throughout the past decade has confirmed that, in order to understand and change an organization, a researcher must examine the linkages between underlying values, organizational structures, and individual meaning (Denison & Spreitzer, 1991).

In regard to the assessment of OC it is challenging that values/norms and basic assumptions influence behaviour on a subconscious level and are therefore not directly accessible for questioning or observation. Even the examination of artefacts and their meaning remains at first on a descriptive level (e.g. in the form of typologies), because terms of measurement and correlations have not been established yet.

Culture as Internal and as External Variable; and as Root Metaphor

Smircich (1983) distinguishes between cultures either as an independent (external) variable (like the culture of a nation), as a dependent (internal) variable (like corporate culture), or as a root metaphor for conceptualizing organization.

Culture as an External Variable

Culture as an external variable refers to the specific culture of a country influencing organizations. This specific culture is brought into the organization by leadership practices (e.g. commitment to employees, collective decision making) and leads to comparative management studies that investigate, e.g., variations in management styles, employee practices, and attitudes across countries, e.g. Japanese and American (Ouchi, 1981).

Instruments to assess culture as an external variable include the following. Hofstede (1994) tried to determine empirically the main criteria by which national cultures differ, by using his Values Survey Module ((VSM) 1994 IRIC; see Table 1). He distinguishes Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, IndividualismCollectivism, and Masculinity-Femininity. The four value framework which was later expanded to five values (long-term-orientation) has had quite an impact not only on researchers but also on the way cross-country comparisons or value profiles were generated (Spector, Cooper & Sparks, 2001). However, Spector et al. (2001) recently showed that internal consistency (coefficient α) statistics from samples representing 23 nation/provinces tended to be poor and mainly failed to achieve a criterion of 0.60. Even when data were aggregated by samples, coefficient as were poor for all but long-term orientation. A replication of Hofstede's ecological factor analysis (from 1994) failed to support the five subscales. Spector et al. (2001) suggest that the construct validity of these scales is suspect, and that they should be used with caution.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading