Daulatram B. Lund, Associate Professor of Marketing, Managerial Sciences Department, College of Business Administration, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, USA
This empirical investigation examines the impact of organizational culture types on job satisfaction in a survey of marketing professionals in a cross-section of firms in the USA. Cameron and Freeman’s (1991) model of organizational cultures comprising of clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market was utilized as the conceptual framework for analysis. The results indicate that job satisfaction levels varied across corporate cultural typology. Within the study conceptual framework, job satisfaction invoked an alignment of cultures on the vertical axis that represents a continuum of organic processes (with an emphasis on flexibility and spontaneity) to mechanistic processes (which emphasize control, stability, and order). Job satisfaction was positively related to clan and adhocracy cultures, and negatively related to market and hierarchy cultures.
Organizational culture; Job satisfaction.
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
MCB UP Ltd
The 1980s witnessed a surge in popularity to examine the concept of organizational culture as managers became increasingly aware of the ways that an organizational culture can affect employees and organizations. This interest led management scholars and practitioners to undertake research investigations resulting in numerous articles, including a complete issue of Administrative Science Quarterly (September 1983), Organization Dynamics (Autumn 1983) and Journal of Management Studies (May 1986) being devoted to corporate or organizational culture issues. In marketing literature, despite the importance given to the study of culture in the 1960s towards understanding consumer behavior, particularly in market segmentation, communication, diffusion of innovations, and cross-cultural comparisons (Engel et al., 1968; Zaltman, 1965), relatively few studies have investigated organizational culture and its impact on marketing management issues (Deshpande and Webster, 1989). These studies include those that have recognized the importance of corporate culture in modeling selling effectiveness (Weitz et al., 1986), implementation in marketing strategy (Walker and Ruekert, 1987), customer orientation within organizations (Bonoma, 1984; Deshpande et al., 1993), and strategic market planning (Deshpande and Parasuraman, 1986; Mahajan et al., 1987).
The pervasiveness of an organization’s culture requires that management recognize the underlying dimensions of their corporate culture and its impact on employee-related variables such as satisfaction, commitment, cohesion, strategy implementation, performance, among others. However, relatively few empirical studies have examined these relationships. For example, Sheridan (1992) examined the organizational culture-employee retention link among college graduates in accounting firms, while Vandenberghe (1999) investigated that link among nurses in hospitals. Other studies, such as Buono et al. (1985), examined the effects of organizational culture on its employees in the merger process in banking firms; Koberg and Chusmir (1987) examined the relationship between organizational cultures and managerial credibility, motivation, and other variables; while Deshpande et al. (1993) examined the relationship of organizational culture, customer orientation, and innovativeness to business performance in Japanese firms. Each of these studies employed different corporate cultural measurement instrumentation. While much of the early conceptual framework for corporate cultures has been developed and investigated in management literature, Deshpande et al.’s (1993) study adapted a comprehensive framework of corporate culture typology and showed its applicability in the marketing context. Utilizing Deshpande et al.’s (1993) typology of corporate cultures, the present empirical investigation focuses on examining the relationship between organizational culture types and job satisfaction of marketing professionals in a cross-section of firms in the USA.
The notion of “culture” is often associated with exotic, distant peoples and places, with myths, rites, foreign languages and practices. Researchers have observed that within our own society, organization members similarly engage in rituals, pass along corporate myths and stories, and use arcane jargon, and that these informal practices may foster or hinder management’s goal for the organization (Baker, 1980; Deal and Kennedy, 1982; Peters and Waterman, 1982). In the organizational behavior literature, a number of definitions for organizational culture have been proposed. For example, Kilmann et al. (1985, p. 5) defined corporate culture as “the shared philosophies, ideologies, values, assumptions, beliefs, expectations, attitudes and norms” that knit an organization together. Deal (1986, p. 301) defined it as “the human invention that creates solidarity and meaning and inspires commitment and productivity.” Uttal (1983) defined it as a “system of shared values (what is important) and beliefs (how things work) that interact with a company’s people, organizational structures, and control systems to produce behavioral norms.” While no strong consensus has formed on a definition, in the present study corporate culture is defined as “the pattern of shared values and beliefs that help individuals understand organizational functioning and thus provide them with norms for behavior in the organization” (Deshpande and Webster, 1989, p. 4).
Organizational literature also acknowledges the difficulty of measuring and identifying a typology of organizational cultures, mainly, because the shared assumptions and understandings lie beneath the conscious level for individuals. Early researchers identified them through stories, special language, artifacts, and norms that emerge from individual and organizational behavior (Adler and Jelinek, 1986; Bate, 1984; Deal and Kennedy, 1982; Ouchi and Wilkins, 1985; Trice and Beyer, 1984, among others). Cameron and Freeman (1991) identified a useful framework of organizational culture types by integrating the works of several researchers (Campbell, 1977; Jung, 1923; Mason and Mitroff, 1973; Mitroff and Kilmann, 1975; Quinn, 1988; Quinn and McGrath, 1985; Quinn and Rohrbaugh, 1983; Smircich, 1983; Wilkins and Ouchi, 1983, among others). This framework presented in Figure 1 is based on four sets of attributes:
- (1) the dominant characteristics or values;
- (2) the dominant style of leadership;
- (3) the bases for bonding or coupling; and
- (4) the strategic emphasis present in the organization.
As illustrated in Figure 1, the vertical axis describes the continuum from organic to mechanistic processes, ranging from an emphasis on flexibility and spontaneity to control, stability, and order. The horizontal axis describes the relative organizational emphasis on internal maintenance (smoothing activities, integration) to external positioning (competition, environmental differentiation). The resulting culture types are clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market.
Specifically, each culture type is characterized by a particular set of shared beliefs, style of leadership, set of shared values that act as a bond or glue for members, and strategic emphases in pursuit of effectiveness. For example, the lower right quadrant, called market culture, emphasizes a goal-oriented enterprise; led by a hard driver or producer; held together by an emphasis on task and goal accomplishment; emphasizing competitive actions and achievement (Cameron and Freeman, 1991). This culture type competes or is in direct contrast to the set of values expressed in a clan culture characterized by a personal place; led by a mentor, facilitator or parent-figure; bonded together by loyalty and tradition; emphasizing human resources. Similarly, the lower left quadrant characterizes a bureaucratic hierarchy culture which stresses a formalized, structured place; led by a coordinator or organizer; held together by formal rules and policies; emphasizing stability. In contrast, in the upper right quadrant, the competing set of values for the adhocracy culture emphasizes a dynamic, entrepreneurial place; led by an entrepreneur or innovator; held together by a commitment to innovation and development; emphasizing growth and acquisition of new resources.
In sum, while validating the usefulness of the above typology of cultures, Deshpande et al. (1993) emphasize that these culture types are modal or dominant ones rather than mutually exclusive ones. Conceivably, most firms can and do have elements of several types of cultures. It thus follows that identifying a typology of cultures also makes it possible to determine if organizations are dominated by one type or have attributes of several types. The present investigation utilizes Deshpande et al.’s (1993) framework of organizational cultures typology and analysis.
Job satisfaction has been widely studied over the last four decades of organizational research (Currivan, 1999). Job satisfaction has been defined and measured both as a global construct and as a concept with multiple dimensions or facets (Locke, 1969, 1970; Price, 1997; Scarpello and Campbell, 1983). In general, overall job satisfaction has been defined as “a function of the perceived relationship between what one wants from one’s job and what one perceives it as offering” (Locke, 1969). A large number of studies have investigated the relationship between job satisfaction and various organizational variables. For example, several researchers have examined the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Agho et al., 1993; Brooke et al., 1988; Cramer, 1996; Currivan, 1999; Glisson and Durick, 1988; Lance, 1991; Lok and Crawford, 1999; Mowday et al., 1979; Vandenberg and Lance, 1992). Other researchers have examined the link between satisfaction and performance (Lawler and Porter, 1969; Locke, 1970; Tvorik and McGivern, 1997), cohesion (Odom et al., 1990), age and gender (Morgan et al., 1995), gender, organizational level, and management practices (Burke, 1995, 1996), and organizational climate (Argyris, 1973; Downey et al., 1975; Friedlander and Margulies, 1969; Pervin, 1968).
The preceding literature review notwithstanding, relatively fewer studies have investigated the link between job satisfaction and organizational cultures. For example, Odom et al. (1990) investigated the relationships between organizational culture and three elements of employee behavior, namely, commitment, work-group cohesion, and job satisfaction. They concluded that the bureaucratic culture, which dominated their sample of transportation organizations, was not the culture most conducive to the creation of employee commitment, job satisfaction, and work-group cohesion. In related studies, Nystrom (1993) investigating health care organizations, found that employees in strong cultures tend to express greater organizational commitment as well as higher job satisfaction. Despite these few studies, a void appears to exist in literature examining the direct link between organizational culture types and job satisfaction. In addition, none of the studies have examined the relationship within the framework of corporate cultures presented in Figure 1.
Given the need for management to recognize the pervasive impact of organizational culture on employee-related variables in today’s competitive environment, the present study focuses on the relationship of corporate culture types with employee job satisfaction within the typology of cultures presented in Figure 1. Organizational cultures that emphasize values of fraternal relationship, mentors, and respect for individual members, foster loyalty, long-term commitment, and aid employee satisfaction (Kerr and Slocum, 1987). In contrast, organizational cultures that emphasize order and control, aggressiveness, and a strong desire for individual achievement, may be viewed as a “ruthless” work environment not conducive to employee long-term security, loyalty, and satisfaction (Shellenbarger, 2000). In the present study framework of organizational cultures, the vertical axis represents the continuum of cultures that place an emphasis on flexibility and spontaneity (organic processes) to control, order, and stability (mechanistic processes). It thus follows that one can expect employees to be more satisfied with their jobs in firms that espouse clan and adhocracy cultures where the organizational emphasis is more on mentoring, flexibility, and spontaneity, than in firms with hierarchy and market cultures where organizational emphasis is placed on control, stability, and order, at the other end of the continuum. Therefore, within the conceptual framework of the study, it is hypothesized that:
- H1. The influence of organizational culture types on employee job satisfaction will range from best to worst along the continuum of organic processes (clan and adhocracy) to mechanistic processes (hierarchy and market).
A self-administered structured questionnaire elicited responses from marketing professionals on several issues, including organizational culture and job satisfaction. The operationalization of the culture construct was adapted from Cameron and Freeman (1991) and similar to that utilized by Deshpande et al. (1993). They constructed brief scenarios to describe the dominant characteristics of each of the four culture types, based on the framework presented in Figure 1. In the research instrument (see Appendix) all four culture types were presented as alternatives in each question. To give respondents the opportunity to indicate both the type of culture(s) and the strength of the culture, respondents were instructed to distribute 100 points among the four scenarios in the questions, depending upon how similar respondents thought each scenario was to their own organization. As shown in the Appendix, each respondent was presented with four questions, each assessing the organization’s general cultural characteristics, leadership style, institutional bonding and strategic emphases.
Job satisfaction measures were adapted from Wright and Cropanzano (1998). A five-item scale operationalized job satisfaction. Each item measured a dimension of the satisfaction construct: degree of satisfaction with the work, co-workers, supervision, total pay, and promotional opportunities. Each of the items was measured on a seven-point scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” (see Appendix). Respondents were classified into low and high satisfaction groups based on a median split of their summed scores, with ties at the median assigned to the high satisfaction group.
Sample and data collection
In a number of past studies, researchers have collected data on organizational culture from individual respondents employed in a cross-section of firms in various industries (Appiah-Adu and Singh, 1999; Boxx et al., 1991; Lok and Crawford, 1999). Similarly, the data for the present study were obtained by self-administered questionnaire mailed to a sample of 1,800 marketing professionals in a cross-section of organizations in the USA. The American Marketing Association directory comprised the sampling frame. The sample was chosen on a systematic sampling basis from the directory. To limit the study to marketing practitioners, educators and students listed in the directory were excluded from the sampling frame. Also, to confine the study to domestic marketing practitioners, individuals listed in the directory with foreign addresses were excluded from the sampling frame.
The mailing consisted of the questionnaire itself, a cover letter, and a stamped pre-addressed return envelope. As response inducement, each respondent was promised a copy of the study results on request. Of the 1,800 questionnaires mailed, 87 were returned by the post office as undeliverable and 360 usable questionnaires were received, representing a 21.0 per cent response rate. The response rate was deemed encouraging in comparison with that of past studies involving the use of the American Marketing Association directory as the sampling frame (e.g. Barnett et al. (1998) reported a 19 per cent response rate; Sparks and Hunt (1998) reported a 7 per cent response rate; Singhapakdi (1999) reported a 23 per cent response rate).
The extrapolation method of Armstrong and Overton (1977) was utilized to test for nonresponse bias. Profile of “late” respondents (25 per cent of the sample) was compared to “early” respondents (75 per cent of the sample) across organizational characteristics (size, role) and demographics (gender, age, education, income). There were no significant differences between “early” and “late” respondents across all variables except education level. However, since education level serves only to profile respondents, nonresponse bias is deemed not to affect results of the investigation.
Summary of characteristics
Table I is a summary of the characteristics of the sample. As shown in the table, the sample comprised individuals of varied demographic and organizational backgrounds. Also, the sample compares favorably in characteristics with that of past studies involving the use of the American Marketing Association directory as a sampling frame (Akaah and Riordan, 1989; Singhapakdi, 1999; Sparks and Hunt, 1998). The respondents spanned a wide range of industries. A majority of respondents were employed in firms with 100 or more employees (68 per cent), were executives (78 per cent), of rank of manager or higher (77 per cent), had at least a college degree (93 per cent), majoring in business (66 per cent), female (52 per cent), married (72 per cent), 30 years of age or older (83 per cent), and earning $50,000 or more per annum in household income (82 per cent).
The results of undertaking an analysis similar to that reported by Deshpande et al. (1993) who used the same framework of culture typology, are presented as follows. Table II presents a summary of respondents’ mean scores for the four culture types they perceived in their respective organizations and their job satisfaction. Each respondent’s four culture scores were computed by adding all four values of the A items (see Appendix) for clans, of the B items for adhocracy, of the C items for hierarchy, and of the D items for market. As previously mentioned, job satisfaction score represents summated ratings of the five-item job satisfaction scale related to work, co-workers, supervision, pay, and promotional opportunities. Scale reliability for each culture type and job satisfaction was measured by Cronbach alpha coefficient. As can be seen in Table II, the reliability coefficients range from 0.62 to 0.81, thus adequately meeting the standards for such research (Nunnally, 1967).
The overall mean scores indicate that respondents perceived their organizational culture type to be predominantly market, a fact which is consistent given the sample comprised of marketing professionals. Respondents identified clan culture type as the next most similar in their organizations, followed by adhocracy, and last by hierarchy culture type. It is emphasized that in all cases the self-reported cultures of individual firms contain elements of all the four culture types. This is consistent with past studies that have reported multiple subcultures in a firm to be the rule and unitary culture the exception (Deshpande et al., 1993; Van Maanen and Barley, 1984). Table II also reports significant differences in employee job satisfaction across the four corporate culture types. Respondents expressed lower levels of job satisfaction in organizations in which market or hierarchy culture types dominate. In contrast, organizations in which respondents expressed higher levels of job satisfaction are dominated by clan and adhocracy organizational culture types. All organizations, however, possessed attributes of several of these cultures, i.e. no organization was characterized by only one type of culture.
As in the Deshpande et al. (1993) study, and in support of the above descriptive analysis results, a two-group discriminant analysis was undertaken. A median split of employee job satisfaction scores served to classify firms into high and low satisfaction groups. Each firm’s scores for the four organizational culture types were used as explanatory variables in the discriminant analysis. Results of the two-group discriminant analysis are presented in Table III. The coefficients are essentially partial correlations of each culture type with the job satisfaction score. The coefficients of the four culture types provide support for the study hypothesis. The discriminant function separates the top two cultures (clan and adhocracy) from the bottom two cultures (hierarchy and market). Clan and adhocracy cultures are positively associated with job satisfaction, while market and hierarchy cultures are both negatively associated with job satisfaction. Thus the relative ordering of culture types from the best to worst level of job satisfaction are clan, adhocracy, market, and hierarchy cultures. The univariate tests for job satisfaction are highly significant for all four culture types. The discriminant function correctly classified 62.4 per cent of respondents in the high and low job satisfaction groups. The classification results are significantly better than chance which predicts 50.3 per cent correct classification based on the proportional chance criterion (Morrison, 1969).
Although the above analysis supports the study hypothesis, it does not indicate whether the differences in job satisfaction levels are significant across the four organizational culture types. This requires a one-way analysis of variance with post hoc tests. Also, since each organization possessed attributes of several culture types, a firm’s dominant culture needs to be established. The cultural congruence procedure of Cameron and Freeman (1991) was adapted for this purpose. A firm’s dominant culture was determined when the respondent gave the highest number of points on at least three of four questions concerning the organizational culture’s dominant attributes, leader style, bonding, and strategic emphases, representing the same quadrant of Figure 1. By this procedure, 173 of 360 firms in the sample were identified with dominant cultures with the following breakdown: clan (26 firms), adhocracy (33 firms), hierarchy (30 firms), and market (84 firms). The results of a one-way analysis of variance and Duncan’s multiple comparison procedure for main-effect means are presented in Table IV. The results indicate significant (F = 8.04, p < 0.001) differences in the level of job satisfaction between the four organizational culture groups of firms. Duncan’s multiple comparison procedure detected three significant homogeneity subsets comprising of hierarchy cultures, market cultures, and a third subset comprising of clan and adhocracy cultures (Table IV). As in the discriminant analysis, the relative ordering of culture types from best to worst level of job satisfaction are clan and adhocracy on a par, followed by market, and last by hierarchy cultures.
Corporate culture types
This study set out to explore the influence of corporate culture types on employee job satisfaction. A typology of organizational cultures consisting of four forms – clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market was utilized. Job satisfaction levels varied significantly across corporate cultural typology and invoked an alignment of culture types on the vertical axis continuum that ranges from organic processes to mechanistic processes (Figure 1). Both, clan culture (characterized by its emphasis on mentoring, loyalty, and tradition) and adhocracy culture (characterized by its emphasis on innovation, entrepreneurship, and flexibility) elicited significantly higher levels of employee job satisfaction than market culture (characterized by its emphasis on competition, goal achievement, and market superiority) and hierarchy culture (characterized by its emphasis on bureaucratic order, rules and regulation, and predictability).
It is, however, emphasized that while overall job satisfaction in clan and adhocracy organizational culture types is higher than overall job satisfaction in market and hierarchy cultures, it does not imply that employee performance will be correspondingly higher in adhocracy and clan cultures than in market and hierarchy cultures. In fact, Deshpande et al. (1993) reported the ranking of these four cultures types in terms of business performance (from best to worst) as: market, adhocracy, clan, and hierarchy. While the jury is still out on the direction of satisfaction-performance link, the inadequacy of the old bromide “the happy worker is the productive worker” should not be overlooked (Locke, 1970).
It is also interesting to note that the findings on culture types and job satisfaction are also theoretically consistent with the competing values model from which the study conceptual framework was derived (Quinn, 1988). For example, employees report higher levels of job satisfaction in the clan culture in which members exhibit a strong sense of pride in fraternity and interdependence. In contrast, positioned in the diagonally opposite quadrant, lower levels of job satisfaction are observed among members of the market culture which typically encourages a strong sense of independence and individuality. Similarly, the competing values of the adhocracy culture produce higher job satisfaction levels than those of the hierarchy culture positioned in the diagonally opposite quadrant (Figure 1).
It is emphasized that the data requirements for research on organizational culture types as well as job satisfaction are demanding. The cultural typology utilized in the study is one of many reported in literature. Also, the analyses are based on self-reported data generated from individual respondents with varied demographic and organizational backgrounds from companies spanning different industries. Such a design has limitations including a potential problem of confounding variations in cultural values with what may be broad industry-wide differences in organizations’ management. Therefore, cross-comparisons and generalizations of results from the present sample to others must be done with caution pending future research replications with improved methodologies.
Given the exploratory nature of the study results, suggestions for practice are necessarily speculative and brief. First, being cognizant of the organization’s dominant culture(s) can help management assess inherent strengths and limitations of their strategies. Furthermore, since in most organizations, attributes of several cultures are present, some of which have opposing values and emphasis (i.e. attributes of a market and a clan may exist in the same organization although these are opposite in emphasis), managers’ sensitivity to the existence of these paradoxes can be heightened towards more effective strategies.
Mergers and acquisitions
Second, mergers and acquisitions have flourished in the past decade. However, success in such activities is likely to depend upon not only the resulting economic synergy but also on the cultural compatibility of the merging entities. As discussed in the previous paragraph concerning cultural paradoxes within a single corporation, the same arguments apply in instituting changes of perhaps higher magnitudes during merger and acquisition activities. Clashes in corporate cultures of merging entities could easily overshadow synergistic benefits resulting in undesirable consequences.
The final suggestion concerns the relationship between corporate culture and employee job satisfaction. To maintain competitive advantage, companies need to nurture a relationship with workers. The womb-to-tomb mentality of staying with one employer appears to have disintegrated and combined with downsizing and layoff from mergers and acquisitions, management may be hard pressed in retaining and developing a loyal work force. Literature suggests that employees who are more satisfied with their jobs are absent less (Hackett and Guion, 1985), less likely to leave (Carsten and Spector, 1987), more likely to display organizational citizenship behavior (Organ and Konovsky, 1989), and to be more satisfied with their lives overall (Judge and Watanabe, 1993). The present study results suggest clan and adhocracy corporate cultures are conducive for higher levels of employee job satisfaction. Therefore, managers in organizations desiring to create greater levels of job satisfaction should begin a concerted effort to build consensus and cohesion, emphasize teamwork and loyalty, while encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship. The performance-based, individualism, and short-term focus of the market culture, as well as the bureaucratic setup of hierarchies may not generate the level of job satisfaction needed to foster loyalty and long-term commitment to the organization.
Table I.Profile of study sample
Table II.Measures of corporate culture and job satisfaction
Table III.Summary of discriminant analysis between high and low job satisfaction
Table IV.Summary of results of job satisfaction in dominant organizational cultures
Figure 1.A model of organizational culture typestci
Adler, N.J., Jelinek, M. (1986), "Is ‘organizational culture’ culture bound?", Human Resource Management, Vol. 25 pp.73-90.
Agho, A.O., Mueller, C.W., Price, J.L. (1993), "Determinants of employee job satisfaction: an empirical test of a causal model", Human Relations, Vol. 46 pp.1007-27.
Akaah, I.P., Riordan, E.A. (1989), "Judgments of marketing professionals about ethical issues in marketing research: a replication and extension", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26 No.February, pp.112-20.
Appiah-Adu, K., Singh, S. (1999), "Marketing culture performance in UK service firms", The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 19 pp.152-70.
Argyris, C. (1973), "Personality and organization revisited", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 18 pp.141-68.
Armstrong, J.S., Overton, T.S. (1977), "Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 14 pp.396-402.
Baker, E.L. (1980), "Managing corporate culture", Management Review, Vol. 69 pp.8-13.
Barnett, T., Bass, K., Brown, G., Hebert, F.J. (1998), "Ethical ideology and the ethical judgments of marketing professionals", Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17 pp.715-23.
Bate, P. (1984), "The impact of organizational culture on approaches to organizational problem-solving", Organization Studies, Vol. 5 pp.43-66.
Bonoma, T.V. (1984), "Making your marketing strategies work", Harvard Business Review, Vol. 62 pp.69-76.
Boxx, R.W., Odom, R.Y., Dunn, M.G. (1991), "Organizational values and value congruency and their impact on satisfaction, commitment, and cohesion: an empirical examination within the public sector", Public Personnel Management, Vol. 20 pp.195-205.
Brooke, P.P., Russell, D.W., Price, J.L. (1988), "Discriminant validation of measures of job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 73 pp.139-45..
Buono, A.F., Bowditch, J.L., Lewis, J.W. III (1985), "When cultures collide: the anatomy of a merger", Human Relations, Vol. 38 pp.477-500.
Burke, R.J. (1995), "Management practices, employees’ satisfaction and perceptions of quality of service", Psychological Reports, Vol. 77 pp.748-50.
Burke, R.J. (1996), "Sources of job satisfaction among employees of a professional service rim", Psychological Reports, Vol. 78 pp.1231-4.
Cameron, K.S., Freeman, S.J. (1991), "Cultural congruence, strength, and type: relationships to effectiveness", Research in Organizational Change and Development, Vol. 5 pp.23-58.
Campbell, J.P. (1977), "On the nature of organizational effectiveness", in Goodman, P.S., Pennings, J.M. (Eds),New Perspectives on Organizational Effectiveness, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, .
Carsten, J.M., Spector, P.E. (1987), "Unemployment, job satisfaction, and employment turnover: a meta-analytic test of the Muchinsky model", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 72 pp.374-81.
Cramer, D. (1996), "Job satisfaction and organizational continuance commitment: a two-wave panel study", Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 17 pp.389-400.
Currivan, D.B. (1999), "The causal order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in models of employee turnover", Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 9 pp.495-524.
Deal, T.E. (1986), "Cultural change: opportunity, silent killer or metamorphosis", in Kilmann, R.H., Saxton, M.J., Serpa, R. (Eds),Gaining Control of the Corporate Culture, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, .
Deal, T.E., Kennedy, A.A. (1982), Corporate Cultures: The Rights and Rituals of Corporate Life, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, .
Deshpande, R., Parasuraman, A. (1986), "Linking corporate culture to strategic planning", Business Horizon, Vol. 29 No.May-June, pp.28-37.
Deshpande, R., Webster, F.E. Jr (1989), "Organizational culture and marketing: defining the research agenda", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53 No.January, pp.3-15.
Deshpande, R., Farley, J.U., Webster, F.E. Jr (1993), "Corporate culture, customer orientation, and innovativeness in Japanese firms: a quadrad analysis", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 No.January, pp.23-7.
Downey, H.K., Hellriegel, D., Slocum, J.W. Jr (1975), "Congruence between individual needs, organizational climate, job satisfaction and performance", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 18 No.1, pp.149-55.
Engel, J.F., Kollat, D.T., Blackwell, R.D. (1968), Consumer Behavior, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., New York, NY, .
Friedlander, F., Margulies, N. (1969), "Multiple impacts of organizational climate and individual value systems upon job satisfaction", Personnel Psychology, Vol. 22 pp.171-83.
Glisson, C., Durick, M. (1988), "Predictors of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in human service organizations", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 33 pp.61-81.
Hackett, R.D., Guion, R.M. (1985), "A reevaluation of the absenteeism-job satisfaction relationship", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 53 pp.340-81.
Judge, T.A., Watanabe, S. (1993), "Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78 pp.939-48.
Jung, C.G. (1923), Psychological Types, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, .
Kerr, J., Slocum, J.W. (1987), "Managing corporate culture through reward systems", Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 1 pp.99-108.
Kilmann, R., Saxton, M.J., Serpa, R. (1985), "Introduction: five key issues in understanding and changing culture", in Kilmann, R.H., Saxton, M.J., Serpa, R. (Eds),Gaining Control of the Corporate Culture, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, .
Koberg, C.S., Chusmir, L.H. (1987), "Organizational culture relationships with creativity and other job-related variables", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 15 pp.397-409.
Lance, C.E. (1991), "Evaluation of a structural model relating job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and precursors to voluntary turnover", Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 26 pp.137-62.
Lawler, E.E., Porter, L.W. (1969), "The effect of performance on job satisfaction", Industrial Relations, Vol. 8 pp.20-8.
Locke, E.A. (1969), "What is job satisfaction?", Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 4 pp.309-36.
Locke, E.A. (1970), "Job satisfaction and job performance: a theoretical analysis", Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 5 pp.484-500.
Lok, P., Crawford, J. (1999), "The relationship between commitment and organizational culture, subculture, leadership style and job satisfaction in organizational change and development", Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, Vol. 20 pp.365-73.
Mahajan, V., Varadarajan, P.R., Kerin, R.A. (1987), "Metamorphosis in strategic market planning", in Frazier, G.L., Sheth, J.N. (Eds),Contemporary Views on Marketing Practice, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, .
Mason, R.O., Mitroff, I.I. (1973), "A program for research in management", Management Science, Vol. 19 pp.475-87.
Mitroff, I.I., Kilmann, R.H. (1975), "Stories managers tell: a new tool for organizational problem solving", Management Review, Vol. 64 pp.18-28.
Morgan, R., McDonagh, P., Ryan-Morgan, T. (1995), "Employee job satisfaction: an empirical assessment of marketing managers as an occupationally homogeneous group", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 10 pp.10-17.
Morrison, D.G. (1969), "On the interpretation of discriminant analysis", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 6 No.May, pp.156-63.
Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M., Porter, L.W. (1979), "The measurement of organizational commitment", Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 14 pp.224-47.
Nunnally, J. (1967), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, .
Nystrom, P.C. (1993), "Organizational cultures, strategies, and commitments in health care organizations", Health Care Management Review, Vol. 18 pp.43-9.
Odom, R.Y., Boxx, W.R., Dunn, M.G. (1990), "Organizational cultures, commitment, satisfaction, and cohesion", Public Productivity and Management Review, Vol. 14 pp.157-69.
Organ, D.W., Konovsky, M. (1989), "Cognitive versus effective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74 pp.157-64.
Ouchi, W.G., Wilkins, A.L. (1985), "Organizational culture", Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 11 pp.457-83.
Pervin, L. (1968), "Performance and satisfaction as a function of individual-environment fit", Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 69 pp.56-68.
Peters, T.J., Waterman, R.H. (1982), In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best-Run Companies, Harper & Row, New York, NY, .
Price, J.L. (1997), Handbook of Organizational Measurement, MCB University Press, Bradford, .
Quinn, R.E. (1988), Beyond Rational Management, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, .
Quinn, R.E., McGrath, M.R. (1985), "Transformation of organizational culture: a competing values perspective", in P. Frost (Eds),Organizational Culture, Sage Publications, Inc., Beverly Hill, CA, .
Quinn, R.E., Rohrbaugh, J. (1983), "A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: toward a competing values approach to organizational analysis", Management Science, Vol. 29 pp.363-77.
Scarpello, V., Campbell, J.P. (1983), "Job satisfaction: are all the parts there?", Personnel Psychology, Vol. 36 pp.577-600.
Shellenbarger, S. (2000), "Companies are finding real payoffs in aiding employee satisfaction", Wall Street Journal, New York, NY, .
Sheridan, J.E. (1992), "Organizational culture and employee retention", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35 pp.1036-56.
Singhapakdi, A. (1999), "Perceived importance of ethics and ethical decisions in marketing", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 45 pp.1-16.
Smircich, L. (1983), "Concepts of culture and organizational analysis", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 28 No.September, pp.339-58.
Sparks, J.R., Hunt, S.D. (1998), "Marketing researcher ethical sensitivity: conceptualization, measurement, and exploratory investigation", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 pp.92-110.
Trice, H.M., Beyer, J.M. (1984), "Studying organizational cultures through rites and ceremonials", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9 pp.653-69.
Tvorik, S.J., McGivern, M.H. (1997), "Determinants of organizational performance", Management Decision, Vol. 35 pp.417-35.
Uttal, B. (1983), "The corporate culture vultures", Fortune, Vol. 108 No.8, pp.66.
Vandenberg, R.J., Lance, C.E. (1992), "Examining the causal order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment", Journal of Management, Vol. 18 pp.153-67.
Vandenberghe, C. (1999), "Organizational culture, person-culture fit, and turnover: a replication in the health care industry", Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 20 pp.175-84.
Van Maanen, J., Barley, S. (1984), "Occupational communities: culture and control in organizations", in Staw, P.M., Cummings, L.L. (Eds),Research in Organizational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, .
Walker, O.C. Jr, Ruekert, R.W. (1987), "Marketing’s role in the implementation of business strategies: a critical review and conceptual framework", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51 No.July, pp.15-33.
Weitz, B., Sujan, H., Sujan, M. (1986), "Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: a framework for improving selling effectiveness", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 No.October, pp.174-91.
Wilkins, A., Ouchi, W.G. (1983), "Efficient cultures: exploring the relationship between culture and organizational performance", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 28 pp.468-81.
Wright, T.A., Cropanzano, R. (1998), "Emotional exhaustion as a predictor of job performance and voluntary turnover", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 pp.486-93.
Zaltman, G. (1965), Marketing: Contributions from the Behavioral Sciences, Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., New York, NY, .
Appendix. Operational measures for culture and job satisfaction
The questions that follow relate to what your company’s operation is like. Each of the numbered items contains four descriptions of organizations. Please distribute 100 points among the four descriptions depending on how similar the description is to your company. None of the descriptions is any better than any other; they are just different. For each question, please use all 100 points. You may divide the points in any way you wish. Most companies will be some mixture of those described.
1. Kind of organization (Please distribute 100 points)
___ points (A) My organization is a very ___ points (B) My organization is a
for A personal place. It is like an for B very dynamic end entrepreneurial
extended family. People seem to place. People are willing to stick
share a lot of themselves. their necks out and take risks.
___ points (C) My organization is a very __ points (D) My organization is very
for C formalized and structured place. for D production oriented. A major
Established procedures generally concern is with getting the job govern what people do. done, without much personal involvement.
2. Leadership (Please distribute 100 points)
__ points (A) The head of my organization __ points (B) The head of my organization for A is generally considered to be a for B is generally considered to be an mentor, sage, or a father or entrepreneur, an innovator, or mother figure. a risk taker.
__ points (C) The head of my organization ___ points (D) The head of my organization for C is generally considered to be a for D is generally considered to be a coordinator, an organizer, or producer, a technician, or a an administrator. hard-driver.
3. What holds the organization together (Please distribute 100 points)
___ points (A) The glue that holds my ___ points (B) The glue that holds my for A organization together is loyalty for B organization together is and tradition. Commitment to commitment to innovation and this firm runs high. development. There is an emphasis on being first.
___ points (C) The glue that holds my __ points (D) The glue that holds my for C organization together is formal for D organization together is the rules and policies. Maintaining emphasis on tasks and goal a smooth-running institution is accomplishment. A production important here. orientation is commonly shared.
4. What is important (Please distribute 100 points)
___ points (A) My organization emphasizes ___ points (B) My organization emphasizes for A human resources. High cohesion for B growth and acquiring new and morale in the firm are resources. Readiness to meet important. new challenges is important.
___ points (C) My organization emphasizes ___ points (D) My organization emphasizes for C permanence and stability. for D competitive actions and Efficient, smooth operations are achievement. Measurable goals important. are important.
[The four culture scores were computed by adding all four values of the A items for clan, of the B items for adhocracy, of the C items for hierarchy, and of the D items for market (Deshpande et al., 1993). The resulting scores can, therefore, equal more or less than 100, which would be the result only if respondents distributed points equally on each question. The scale was adopted from Cameron and Freeman (1991).]
The following statements describe your feelings toward certain job-related issues regarding the organization you currently work for. For each, please indicate the extent to which you agree/disagree with the statement by circling the appropriate number on the scale.
Strongly disagree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
- (1) All in all, I am satisfied with the work of my job.
- (2) All in all, I am satisfied with my co-workers.
- (3) All in all, I am satisfied with the supervision.
- (4) All in all, I am satisfied with my pay (total wages and tips).
- (5) All in all, I am satisfied with the promotional opportunities.
(The job satisfaction score was computed by adding responses to all five items. The scale was adapted from Wright and Cropanzano (1998).)