Out 6

973 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
973
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Out 6

  1. 1. A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND JOB SATISFACTION IN SMALL NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS by Danette L. Brown RUDOLPH RYSER, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair LINDA-MARIE SUNDSTROM, PhD, Committee Member DEBORAH GANGLUFF, PhD, Committee Member Suzanne Holmes, DPA, Dean, School of Public Service Leadership A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Capella University September 2011
  2. 2. UMI Number: 3478080 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscriptand there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI 3478080 Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
  3. 3. © Danette L. Brown, 2011
  4. 4. AbstractThe purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between organizationalculture and job satisfaction within small nonprofit organizations. A review of theliterature revealed a 30-year history of research that has contributed to organizationalmanagement literature. However, little empirical evidence was found that describes arelationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction within small nonprofitorganizations. Yet this relationship is important, as it has the potential to affectorganizational performance. This study investigated the research question, “To whatextent does a correlation exist between organizational culture and job satisfaction withinsmall nonprofits?” through the administration of two quantitative instruments,Organizational Culture Inventory (OCI) developed by Cooke and Lafferty (1983) whichmeasured organizational culture and the Job in General Scale (JIG) developed byIronson, Smith, Brannick, & Gibson (1989) which measures job satisfaction. In addition,to determine if there was a correlation between organizational culture and jobsatisfaction, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to determine ifthere are any significant differences between selected demographic variables andorganizational culture. Eight organizations participated in the study, which resulted in104 participants, a return rate of 80%. While this study did not address causation, acorrelation was anticipated and found between organizational culture and job satisfactionwithin small nonprofit organizations.
  5. 5. DedicationThis work is dedicated to my grandfather and my children, Dejane and Courtney. iii
  6. 6. AcknowledgmentsAn accomplishment such as this is not easily accomplished and it takes a circle ofrelatives, friends and colleagues to do so. I would first like to thank my mentor Dr.Rudolph Ryser for his patience and guidance during this process as well as my committeeDr. Gangluff and Dr. Sundstrom for their assistance. I also wish to thank MelissaWilliams for her continuous support and encouragement. I am grateful to my colleaguesover the years that inspired, mentored and encouraged me to pursue a terminal degree. Iam grateful to the Saunders family for their continued support. In addition, I would liketo thank a very special person who has motivated and inspired me to complete thisdegree. Finally, words alone cannot express the thanks I owe to my mother, stepfather,grandmother, sister, brothers and children who are my biggest cheerleaders and continueto motivate me to keep aiming high. iv
  7. 7. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements Table of Contents List of TablesCHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 Background of the Study .....................................................................................................2 Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................................8 Significance of the Study .....................................................................................................9 Purpose of the Study ..........................................................................................................10 Rationale ............................................................................................................................10 Conceptual/Theoretical Framework...................................................................................11 Research Questions ............................................................................................................14 Study Variables ..................................................................................................................14 Definition of Terms............................................................................................................15 Assumptions and Limitations ............................................................................................15 Nature of the Study ............................................................................................................16 Organization of the Remainder of the Study .....................................................................19CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................20 Overview of Nonprofit Organizations ...............................................................................21 An Overview of Organizational Culture ............................................................................25 An Overview of Job Satisfaction .......................................................................................39CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY/DESIGN OF THE STUDY ....................................................47 Population and Sampling ...................................................................................................50 v
  8. 8. Instrumentation ..................................................................................................................52 Data Collection ..................................................................................................................57 Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................60 Ethical Considerations .......................................................................................................64CHAPTER 4: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS.............................................................68 Overview of the Study .................................................................................................68 Participants and Demographics....................................................................................70 Education and Salary of Participants ...........................................................................73 Level in and Time With Organization .........................................................................75 Demographics of Participants by Organization ...........................................................76 Analysis of Survey Instruments ...................................................................................96 Analysis and Discussion of Research Questions .......................................................102CHAPTER 5: RESULTS, SUMMARY, AND CONCLUSIONS...............................................139 Summary and Discussion of Results..........................................................................139 Discussion ..................................................................................................................148 Significance of the Study and Implications ...............................................................153 Conclusions ................................................................................................................156REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................158APPENDIX A. JOB IN GENERAL SCALE ..............................................................................173APPENDIX B. ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE INVENTORY.............................................174 vi
  9. 9. List Of TablesTable 1. Response Rates by Organization ....................................................................................71Table 2. Age, Gender, and Ethnicity of Participants ....................................................................72Table 3. Education and Salary of Participants ..............................................................................74Table 4. Participant’s Level and Time With Organization ...........................................................75Table 5. Age by Organization .......................................................................................................77Table 6. Gender by Organization ..................................................................................................80Table 7. Ethnicity by Organization ...............................................................................................81Table 8. Level of Education by Organization ...............................................................................84Table 9. Annual Salary by Organization.......................................................................................87Table 10. Organizational Level by Organization ..........................................................................91Table 11. Years Employed by Organization .................................................................................93Table 12. Descriptive Statistics for Organizational Culture Inventory (OCI) Subcultures ..........98Table 13. Means and Standard Deviations for Constructive Style Behaviors by Organization ...............................................................................................................100Table 14. Means and Standard Deviations for Passive/Defensive Behaviors by Organization ...............................................................................................................101Table 15. Means and Standard Deviations for Aggressive/Defensive Style Behaviors by Organization ...............................................................................................................102Table 16. Summary of Pearson r Results: OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale ..............104Table 17. Summary of Pearson r Results: Organization A—OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale...................................................................................................107Table 18. Summary of Pearson r Results: Organization B—OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale...................................................................................................108Table 19. Summary of Pearson r Results: Organization C—OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale...................................................................................................109 vii
  10. 10. Table 20. Summary of Pearson r Results: Organization D—OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale...................................................................................................110Table 21. Summary of Pearson r Results: Organization E—OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale...................................................................................................111Table 22. Summary of Pearson r Results: Organization F—OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale...................................................................................................112Table 23. Summary of Pearson r Results: Organization G—OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale...................................................................................................120Table 24. Summary of Pearson r Results: Organization H—OCI Subcultures and Job in General Scale...................................................................................................114Table 25. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Achievement Subculture..........116Table 26. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Self-Actualizing Subculture ..................................................................................................................116Table 27. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Humanistic–Encouraging ............. Subculture ..................................................................................................................117Table 28. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Affiliative Subculture ..............118Table 29. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Approval Subculture ................119Table 30. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Conventional Subculture .........120Table 31. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Dependent Subculture..............120Table 32. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Avoidance Subculture..............121Table 33. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Oppositional Subculture ..........122Table 34. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Power Subculture .....................122Table 35. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Competitive Subculture ...........123Table 36. Analysis of Variance for Organizational Culture by Perfectionistic Subculture ........123Table 37. Means and Standard Deviations for Overall Job Satisfaction by Organization .........124Table 38. Analysis of Variance for Job Satisfaction Among Participating Organizations .........125 viii
  11. 11. Table 39. Summary of ANOVA Post Hoc Results: Job Satisfaction by Organization ..............126Table 40. Summary of Spearman’s Rho Results: Demographic Variables and Job in General Scale .............................................................................................................130Table 41. Analysis of Variance for Ethnicity and Job Satisfaction ............................................131Table 42. Summary of Independent Samples Test: Gender and Job Satisfaction ......................132Table 43. Job in General Responses ...........................................................................................134Table 44. Job in General Mean Score by Item by Organization (Organizations A–D) ..............135Table 45. Job in General Mean Scores by Item by Organization (Organizations E–H).............136 ix
  12. 12. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION In the past decade, nonprofit organizations (NPOs) have grown from 1.2 millionto over 1.6 million (Salmon, as cited in Dolan, 2002), thus increasing the number oforganizations competing for similar resources. As a result, organizations are continuallyevaluating their core processes and organizational paradigms to gain a competitive edge(Lettieri, Borga, & Savoldelli, 2004). These core processes and paradigms become part ofthe organization’s culture. According to Sethia and VonGlinow (as cited in Pool, 2000a),organizational culture is a set of processes that bind together members of an organizationbased on shared patterns of beliefs. However, while shared beliefs and binding processesare important, their absence is equally profound. Organizational culture’s contribution to organizational management literature hasbeen documented; however, little evidence of a relationship between organizationalculture and job satisfaction has been found, with even less relative to small NPOs.Nevertheless, a review of the literature yielded research on organizational culture and itsrelationship to employee attitudes (Bowling, Beehr, & Lepisto, 2006; Carmeli, 2005;Silverthorne, 2004). A contributing factor to the scarcity of research found on therelationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction may be due to thechallenge of studying phenomena that differ from one organization to another, and, attimes, even among departments within the same organization (Mills, 2002). Yet it isthese differences that especially speak to the need for continual assessment of theorganization’s culture to ascertain the relationship between employee behavior andorganizational performance. 1
  13. 13. Organizational management literature examines the topic of organizational culturedue to its influence on a host of individual and organizational outcomes (McKinnon,Harrison, Chow, & Wu, 2003). For example, research has found that an organization thatlacks unity among its members may find itself with employees who are dissatisfied, lackcommitment, and resent change (Lok & Crawford, 2004; Rashid, Sambasivan, &Rahman, 2004; Trimble, 2006). As a result, negative work-related behaviors such asabsenteeism and tardiness may occur that potentially affect organization performance(Pool, 2000b). Thus, examining the culture of the workplace remains a profound area ofinterest in organizational management literature (Lok & Crawford, 2004). The proposedresearch study will investigate the relationship between organizational culture and jobsatisfaction within small NPOs. Background of the StudySpecial Characteristics of NPOs The growth of the nonprofit sector is expected to continue as the demand forservices provided by NPOs continues to rise (Boris, as cited in Dolan, 2002). Accordingto Hall (as cited in Macedo & Pinho, 2006), an NPO is defined as a body of individualswho associate for any of the following purposes: (a) To perform public tasks that havebeen delegated to them by the state; (b) to perform public tasks for which there is ademand that neither the state nor for-profit organizations are willing to meet; or (c) toinfluence the direction of policy in the state, the for-profit sector, or other NPOs. Thesedistinctions set NPOs apart from for-profit organizations; however, the most distinctivecharacteristic of for-profit organizations is their inability to distribute “profit” to anyonewith a beneficial interest in the organization such as staff, trustees, and stakeholders 2
  14. 14. (Courtney, 2002). While this may be true, within the last decade the lines separating thefor-profit and nonprofit sector have become blurred. For example, NPOs are increasinglyfocused on financial resources and improving efficiency while for-profit organizationsare now focusing on their values and social mission (Macedo & Pinho, 2006). The nonprofit sector is heterogeneous with members ranging from small localassociations managed by a few volunteers to large international organizations withthousands of members and local branches (Lettieri et al., 2004). For this reason,classification of organizations as large or small may be difficult because size can meanmany things and be measured in many ways. For example, Gronjberg and Child (as citedin Garvey, 2006) classified a small organization as any tax exempt organization under theInternal Revenue Code 501(c)3 with 15.5 or fewer full-time employees whose grossannual revenue and/or assets were less than $100,000. Small NPOs face many challenges because of their flexible and lenient approachto operational and personnel issues. According to David and Rubenfeld (2005), smallNPOs have a reputation for avoiding written policies because they want greater flexibilityin responding to situations. However, this flexibility tends to lead to perceptions offavoritism or ad hoc decision- making that does not consider the needs of all employees(David & Rubenfeld, 2005). While this may be true, small organizations have beenapplauded for generally having a simpler, more streamlined operational structure thatadapts relatively well to change (Strandholm & Kumar, 2003), thus providing specificcharacteristics that may contribute to the development of the organization’s culture. 3
  15. 15. Concepts of Organizational Culture As mentioned above, organizational management and leadership literature hasgiven significant attention to the concept of organizational culture. It is likely that interestin organizational culture is based on its recognition as a factor in organizationaleffectiveness (Denison, as cited in Schraeder, Tears, & Jordan, 2005). The study oforganizations dates back to the work of Quinn, who discovered that organizations sendconflicting messages about expectations, values, and beliefs referred to as the competingvalues framework (Schimmoeller, 2006). This framework suggests that the ability ofmanagers to perform well is based on how they use these different and conflicting sets ofskills: boundary spanning, human relations, coordinating, and directing skills(Schimmoeller, 2006). More importantly, the way these skills are demonstrated by themanager help shape the culture that becomes part of organizational life. Unfortunately,external environmental demands and organizational culture may differ from the cultureenvisioned by the managers (Bradley & Parker, 2001), resulting in a disparity betweenthe preferred and the necessary cultures. The idea of organizational culture dates back to research conducted in the 1980sby Edward H. Schein, who envisioned it as a pattern of basic assumptions that a givengroup has invented, discovered, or developed in learning to cope with its problems ofexternal adaptation and internal integration. Schein further contends that as basicassumptions become valid, new members are taught the correct way to perceive, think,and feel about the organization. Although Schein and other organizational managementresearchers have attempted to establish a single operational definition for organizationalculture, their attempts, along with others, resulted in the development of multiple 4
  16. 16. definitions. For instance, organization culture has been defined as the collectiveprogramming of the mind, which distinguishes the members of one organization fromanother (Hofstede, as cited in Gambrel & Cianci, 2003); the way the organization feels tothose on the inside (Katopol, 2006); and the set of shared values, beliefs, assumptions,and practices that shape the attitudes and behavior of members within the organization(Wilson, 2001). These definitions have been found to have individual and collectivevalue as research on organizational culture expands to include its relationship to humanbehavior. In as much as organizational culture has contributed to management literature,this integration of human behavior into the discussion has proven valuable. Schulz (2001)contends that organizations with strong cultures in which employees share commonvalues enjoy distinct performance advantages over firms with weak cultures. To supportthis association, a closer look at Schein’s (1992) hierarchical conceptualization of cultureis appropriate (Schimmoeller, 2006). Schein asserts that artifacts and visible aspects areat the highest level of the organization’s culture (Schimmoeller, 2006). At the next levellies an underlying culture, which is simply an existing set of beliefs referred to asespoused values. The lowest level contains the underlying assumptions alleged to affectthe organization’s beliefs and subsequent practices. This hierarchical approach toorganizational culture contends that these levels explain “how” the environment isdeveloped and “what” behavior patterns are visible. Although this approach neglects toaccount for “why” behaviors are displayed, the presence of such behaviors, whetherpositive or negative, reveals perceptions of the workers’ overall employment experience. According to Johnson and Johnson (2000), job satisfaction is employees’ 5
  17. 17. contentment with their employment experiences. Individuals satisfied with their jobsexhibit relatively low stress and absenteeism, affirming that their important needs arebeing met (Gavin & Vinten, 2005). Relative to job satisfaction, the concept of humanmotivation is at the core of discussions within management-related disciplines, such ashuman resource management, organization behavior, strategy, and organization theory(Welbourne, Andrews, & Andrews, 2005). This is based on the assumption that moremotivation leads to better performance (Lawler, as cited in Welbourne et al., 2005).While this may be true, motivation has also been linked to the identification andsatisfaction of human needs as outlined in the works of Maslow (1943) and McGregor(1960). The investigation of human behavior through the identification of human needsbegan with the early work of Maslow (1943) and McGregor (1960). In his “Hierarchy ofNeeds,” Maslow identified five basic human needs in order of importance: Physiological,safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization. He contends that individuals are notmotivated to fulfill a higher need until lower needs are met. This is relevant for this studybecause this theory supports the notion that employees will not be satisfied or motivatedto reach for higher needs until their basic needs are met. Maslow’s theory has been citedas the theoretical framework for recent studies on organizational behavior, organizationalculture, and job satisfaction (Alas, 2005; Freed, 2003; Rad & Yarmohammadian, 2006). McGregor (1960) proposed two theories by which employee motivation should beviewed: Theory X and Theory Y. Similar to Maslow’s theory, McGregor’s work has beencited as the relevant theory for investigating organizational culture (Cseh, Ardichvili,Gasparishvili, Krisztian, & Nemeskeri, 2004); job satisfaction (Kennedy, 2002); and 6
  18. 18. organizational values (Jin, Drozdenko, & Bassett, 2007). According to McGregor (1960),Theory X assumes that the average person dislikes work, has no ambition, has littleconcern for organizational goals, and resists change. The assumptions associated withTheory X are problematic because they cause managers to operate the organization withlittle flexibility and tight controls. Furthermore, McGregor points out that suchassumptions are incorrectly used in practice and that a higher order of motivation isrequired to acquire job satisfaction. Theory Y thus assumes that people will be self-directed and committed if rewards are in place that address their higher needs. TogetherMaslow’s and McGregor’s theories support an existing relationship between humanbehavior and human needs that also contributes to describing employee job satisfaction. Research has shown that job satisfaction is affected by individual, organizational,and job characteristics (Warner, Reynolds, & Roman, 2005). Work-related attitudes, suchas organizational commitment and job involvement, have been studied and proven to berelated to changing work environments (Bowling et al., 2006). However, Bowling et al.found that career commitment and job satisfaction were not affected. The researchersspeculated that some work attitudes are less susceptible to environmental changes thanothers and indicated that further research needs to be conducted in this area. They furthersuggested that improvement in job satisfaction starts with building a sense ofachievement, increasing recognition, and increasing involvement. For this reason,continued research on managers’ contribution to employee job satisfaction is necessary todevelop a framework that managers can use to determine the methods best fitting theirorganization. One approach to achieving job satisfaction begins with the hiring process, in 7
  19. 19. which hiring managers determine which candidates best suit the organization. The topicof “person-organization fit” (P-O fit) has contributed to discussions on organizationalculture and its relationship to job satisfaction in management and human resourcesliterature (Carless, 2005). Research on the study of individual fit and its relationship toemployee satisfaction has focused on areas such as cultural fit (Testa, Mueller, &Thomas, 2003) and organizational commitment (McConnell, 2003) where evidence of arelationship has been proven. However, the study of fit does not always produceconsistent results. For example, according to Schwepker and Hartline (2005), when therelationship between individual fit and ethical fit was investigated, Sims and Galen(1994) found a relationship between individual fit and ethical fit, whereas Koh and Boo(2001) were unable to establish one based on their data. The findings of these studies areindicative of the difficulty of studying a topic that is driven by human behavior, whichtends to be constantly changing. Statement of the Problem It was not known whether and to what extent a relationship existed betweenorganizational culture and job satisfaction within small NPOs. A review of the literatureyielded little evidence describing the relationship between organizational culture and jobsatisfaction; even less literature was located relative to small NPOs. This studydetermined whether a relationship exists between organizational culture and jobsatisfaction within small NPOs. It studied this relationship by surveying employees ofsmall NPOs about their organizational culture and job satisfaction. 8
  20. 20. Significance of the Study The growth in the number of NPOs in both scope and scale speaks to theirincreasing importance in society (Macedo & Pinho, 2006). The rapid growth of thenonprofit sector has encouraged managers to identify organizational culture as aninfluential factor of organizational effectiveness. The proposed study will investigate therelationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction within small NPOs. Thestudy of organizational culture and its relationship to job satisfaction within smallnonprofits is important for several reasons. First, it will provide managers with insightabout the characteristics of the organization that will help them manage or change theculture (Schraeder et al., 2005). This, in turn, will allow managers to make the necessarymodifications to help their organization achieve its organizational goals. Second, it willencourage organizational researchers to conduct further research using various criteriasuch as the organization’s size and the services it provides as they relate to organizationalculture, job satisfaction, or both—an area that has not been fully established as part of theorganizational management literature. The researcher’s interest in the topic of organizational culture and its relationshipto job satisfaction originated from work experiences within various NPOs. Eachorganization had its own set of values, beliefs, operational processes, procedures, andpolicies. Those organizations that had a positive effect aligned with the values and beliefsof the researcher, while those that did not caused feelings of stress, awkwardness, anddissatisfaction resulting in the researcher choosing to explore other career opportunities. The researcher expected to find a relationship between organizational culture andjob satisfaction within small NPOs. It was also expected that key items would be 9
  21. 21. identified specific to the organization’s culture that are valued as well as those areas thatwould benefit from change. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this non-experimental study was to investigate the relationshipbetween organizational culture and job satisfaction within small NPOs. There is verylittle published literature that provided evidence of a relationship. To determine anyassociation between organizational culture and job satisfaction within small NPOs, theresearcher chose two survey instruments: one to measure organizational culture, and theother to measure job satisfaction. These instruments were administered to employees ofeight small NPOs to determine whether a correlation would be found betweenorganizational culture and job satisfaction. Rationale The overall purpose of this study was to explain the relationship betweenorganizational culture and job satisfaction within small NPOs. This study willcomplement organizational culture literature while providing new data relative to smallNPOs. In addition, the study will describe how the culture of an organization relates toemployees’ feelings about their work experiences. Although there have been significant advances in the research of organizationalculture within NPOs, researchers believe further studies are needed (Jaskyte, 2002;Snipes-Bennett, 2006). Furthermore, this research is important to managers because itmay raise their awareness of factors that may be directly related to the organization’spersonnel problems and performance. The studies that have been undertaken examining the relationship between 10
  22. 22. organizational culture and job satisfaction have shown that a relationship exists(Amburgey, 2005; McKinnon et al., 2003; Sikorska-Simmons, 2006).While this may betrue, the lack of research on organizational culture and job satisfaction within smallnonprofits is somewhat surprising given evidence from the literature on the relationshipbetween organizational culture and employee attitudes and behaviors (Carmeli, 2005;Kathrins, 2007; Waris, 2005). This study contributes to organizational culture research by providing data thatwill encourage managers to look at their organization’s culture and staff as vehicles thatcan guide the direction of the organization. The condition to be addressed is creatinghealthier organizational cultures that increase job satisfaction while decreasing negativework-related behaviors exhibited by employees. According to Gillett and Kroese (2003),organizational culture has captured the attention of individuals in varying organizationsand sectors because of its influence on the aspects of organizational performance thatserve as obstacles to meeting organizational objectives. This study contributes to researchby documenting an existing relationship between organizational culture and jobsatisfaction within small NPOs. If a positive relationship is found, then further researchinto causative factors would be appropriate. Conceptual/Theoretical Framework The theoretical frameworks presented below will illustrate how and why arelationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction within small nonprofitorganizations may exist. According to Katz and Kahn (1978), organizations consist of interrelated andinterdependent parts in which altering one part of the system affects the organization as a 11
  23. 23. whole (B. Wright, 2001). Thus, careful management of the system needs is required tosatisfy and balance internal needs and to adapt to the external environment. To addressthe internal needs of the organization and its members, the open systems theory employedby Katz and Kahn identifies three social psychological elements: Role of behaviors ofmembers, norms prescribing those behaviors, and values in which norms are embedded.Organizational norms and values can have a significant influence on employees byproviding them with cognitive support and structure while satisfying their affiliativeneeds. This indicates the relevance of need theories in discussions of the relationshipbetween organizational culture and job satisfaction within small NPOs. Maslow’s (1943) “Hierarchy of Needs” hypothesized that human needs aredetermined by biological, cultural, and situational conditions. He further explained thatneeds arrange themselves based on hierarchies of importance that differ for eachindividual and situation. However, the emergence of one need usually relies on the priorsatisfaction of another more urgent need, all of which is relative to an individual’s state ofsatisfaction or dissatisfaction in other areas. The work of Maslow has contributed toresearch on leadership (Rodsutti & Swierczek, 2002); organizational culture (Detert,Schroeder, & Mauriel, 2000); and motivation (Mann, 2006). For example, Detert et al.(2000) highlight Maslow’s theory as fundamental to the study of human andorganizational behavior that presently dominates organizational management literature.The authors suggest future research and theory development should be focused onunderstanding the gaps between organizational culture and its members. Relevant to thisproposed study, the relationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction willbe reflected in how the culture of the organization correlates with the motivation and 12
  24. 24. satisfaction of its employees. Another theory relevant to studying the relationship between organizationalculture and job satisfaction was developed by McClelland (1985). McClelland’s theoryhighlights the need of individuals for achievement, power, and affiliation, defined as (a)the drive to excel, to achieve in relation to a set of standards, and to strive to succeed; (b)the need to make others behave in a way they would not have otherwise; and (c) thedesire to have friendly and close interpersonal relationships. According to McClelland,many people exhibit a combination of these characteristics, but are strongly attached to aparticular motivational need which then affects their behavior and managing style. Theseconcepts have been highlighted in the organizational behavior literature to draw attentionto the needs of managers and employees. McClelland’s work has been cited in recentresearch on the motivational theory of charismatic leadership (Choi, 2006), jobsatisfaction (Laschinger, Finegan, Shamian, & Wilk, 2004), and voluntary turnover(Tang, Kim, & Tang, 2000). These studies have collectively shown that people aremotivated by different things. For example, Tang et al. found that individuals motivatedby money tend to ignore job dissatisfaction because their immediate needs are being met. The theories of Katz and Kahn (1978), Maslow (1943), and McClelland (1985)are relevant to this proposed study because they point out that human behavior is guidedby the fulfillment of needs. These theories provide the groundwork for conducting astudy that investigates the relationship between organizational culture and jobsatisfaction. It is posited that a relationship exists between the culture of the organizationand the level of job satisfaction based on individual needs affect on organizationalculture. This topic is challenging because individual needs differ, thus making it difficult 13
  25. 25. to determine each individual’s hierarchy of needs. Research Questions The principal research question examined by this study is: To what extent does arelationship exist between organizational culture and job satisfaction in small nonprofitorganizations? Subquestions were the following: 1. To what extent does organizational culture differ among small nonprofit organizations? 2. To what extent does job satisfaction differ among small nonprofit organizations? 3. To what extent does a relationship exist between job satisfaction and selected demographic variables of employees of small nonprofit organizations? 4. What is the level of overall satisfaction of employees in small nonprofit organizations? The hypotheses of this study were H0: There is no relationship between organizational culture and job satisfactionwithin small nonprofit organizations. HA: There is a relationship between organizational culture and job satisfactionwithin small nonprofit organizations. Study Variables To examine any correlation between organizational culture and job satisfaction,the researcher must first identity the study variables. In this case, the independentvariable was the organizational culture of each small NPO, while the dependent variablewas job satisfaction. It was anticipated that a positive culture will be predictive of jobsatisfaction, whereas a negative culture will predict job dissatisfaction (Leedy & Ormrod, 14
  26. 26. 2001), thus illustrating the correlation between organization culture and job satisfaction.If this was found to be the case, additional research would be useful to determine whetherthe relationship is causal. Definition of Terms The following definitions are provided to ensure understanding and consistencythroughout the study: • Employees personnel between the age 18-75 years old who are employed by theorganization (Nguyen, 2009). • Job satisfaction Employees’ contentment with their employment experience(Johnson & Johnson, 2000). • Nonprofit private, nongovernmental organizations that instead of aiming tomaximize profits for their owners or controllers have service objectives to members,users, or other beneficiaries (Ben-Ner, 2002). • Normative beliefs Perceptions held by an individual regarding others’expectations for behavior of that individual as a member of a particular group ororganization (Szumal, 2003). • Organization culture A set of processes that bind together members of anorganization based on a shared pattern of beliefs (Sethia & Von Glinow, 1985). • Shared behavioral expectations Those normative beliefs that are held in commonby members of a group or organization (Szumal, 2003). • Small nonprofit Any 501(c)3 organization with 50 or fewer employees whosegross annual revenue and/or assets are less than $1,000,000 (Garvey, 2006). Assumptions and Limitations The following assumptions have been made for this research study: 1. All employees will understand the purpose of the instrument and answer the questions honestly and to the best of their knowledge, skills, and abilities. 2. Employees may opt not to respond to the survey because of their concerns about the implications of participation. 15
  27. 27. 3. Each respondent has experienced personally and has some reaction to the effect of the organization’s culture. The researcher acknowledges the following limitations: 1. The study is limited to those employees who have been employed with the non profit organization 12 months or more. 2. The response rates may be affected due to an employee’s workload and inability to participate in activities that are not work-related (Sproull, 2003). 3. Results may represent data that could change if the data were collected at another time. 4. This study will not establish cause and effect. 5. Employees may not report accurately if they base their beliefs about their present organization’s culture on prior work experiences, as found in a study conducted by Cable, Smith, Mulvey, and Edwards (2000). 6. Responses to the study may be affected by the length of time individuals have been employed at the organization. 7. The difficulties in interpreting the meaning and content of organizational culture limit the capability of generalizing the results (Carmeli, 2005). 8. The administration of a survey instrument requires a large number of respondents to reply and depends on the respondent’s ability to recall information (Neuman, 2003). 9. The data will not be generalizable to nonprofits in other states or regions, nonprofits that are larger, and other types of organizations. 10. There may be more or less of a correlation as a result of the function or role within the organizational structure of those in management/supervisory positions. Nature of the Study This study investigated the relationship between organizational culture and jobsatisfaction and was based on the theoretical knowledge claim “positivism,” which iscommonly used for the purpose of exploring correlations and associations among 16
  28. 28. variables (Creswell, 2003). The basic assumptions of positivism state that acceptableknowledge is obtained through natural science using a mixture of mathematics andempirical investigation into cause-effect relationships, with the resulting theories capableof prediction and control over nature (Creswell, 2003). The researcher acknowledged thelimitations of positivism as: (a) lacking the ability to develop theory that becomesregarded as fact, and (b) using different measurement procedures stemming fromdifferent operational definitions, which may lead to different conclusions about the sameconstruct (Kim, 2003). However, for the purpose of this study, it is best to build upon aknowledge base appropriate for examining relationships. Thus, in accord with themathematic and measuring aspects of positivism, a quantitative approach was selected toexplore the relationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction. Specifically, quantitative research involves counting and measuring of events andperforming the statistical analysis of a body of numerical data (Sproull, 2003). This formof research has the ability to provide results that are valid, reliable, and generalizable.According to Sproull the advantages of the quantitative method are that it producesresults generalizable to a larger population and demonstrates direct comparisons amongvariables using testable and verifiable methods. However, the topic of organizational culture and job satisfaction is not exemptfrom the debate over the use of quantitative versus qualitative methods to investigate arelationship. In particular, the quantitative approach has been scrutinized for its inabilityto provide distinct information about a phenomenon (Mark, 1996). Qualitativeresearchers argue that, as human behavior is relevant at the time the behavior is observed,it should be studied holistically because some factors cannot be represented numerically 17
  29. 29. (Mark, 1996). Researchers favoring qualitative methods also argue that qualitativeresearch provides a personal approach to research because its findings are detailed(Reissner, 2005). Yet while these points may be well taken, the purpose of this study wasto provide findings that will be generalizeable and applicable over time, and qualitativemethods would limit its ability to do so. While both perspectives were considered, thequantitative approach appeared to be suitable for this type of research because it allowedinvestigation of the relationships among the variables through the use of numeric valuesand statistical analysis using a quantitative instrument. A non-experimental quantitative research design was chosen based on its abilityto test relationships among variables without controlling or manipulating subjectconditions (Creswell, 2003). The survey method of inquiry was appropriate for a studysuch as this because the independent variable (organizational culture) and dependentvariable (job satisfaction) will be measured using two survey instruments that will beadministered at the same time. While the survey method was appropriate for this study, itmay be limited by providing evidence only of association rather than causation, as citedin a study conducted by McKinnon et al. (2003). The decision to use a survey instrument to measure the aforementioned variablescould not have been made without the researcher considering both the strengths andweaknesses of the approach. The strengths of using a survey instrument to measurevariables are its low cost, usefulness in describing a large population, and ability toproduce results that are statistically reliable (Neuman, 2003). The limitations of using asurvey instrument are that a large number of respondents must reply and must be able torecall information (Neuman, 2003). However, while these disadvantages are important, 18
  30. 30. the strengths justify the choice of using the survey. Organization of the Remainder of the Study The remainder of this study has been divided as follows: Chapter 2 provides aliterature review of the history and current research on organizational culture and jobsatisfaction, and their interdependent relationship. Further, the definitions and thetheoretical framework that has been developed relevant to both are discussed. Chapter 3describes the methodology of the study, including the sampling, data collection, andstatistical data analyses that will be used. Chapter 4 reviews the results, including adescription of the organization, demographics of respondents, and the results of theOrganizational Culture Index (OCI) and the Job in General (JIG) Scale. Finally, chapter 5describes the results, limitations, implications, and recommendations for future research. 19
  31. 31. CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW Organizational development should move to establish principles with evidence of what an organization ought to be like rather than what it is forced to be like. (Spurgeon, 1999, p. 28) During the 1980s, the activities of the nonprofit sector began to affect all aspectsof society through providing services, involvement in community, or volunteerism(Goulet & Frank, 2002), spawning interest in structures, practices, and employee issueswithin the nonprofit sector. However, few research studies were located that haveattempted to investigate the relationship between organizational culture and its effect onemployees. Thus the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship betweenorganizational culture and job satisfaction within small nonprofit organizations (NPOs). A review of the literature yielded significant results relating organizational cultureand job satisfaction in individuals to variables such as organizational behavior (Chew &Basu, 2005; Lok & Crawford, 2004; T. Wright, 2006); leadership (Buble & Pavic, 2007;Politis, 2006; Rad & Yarmohammadian, 2006) and employee attitudes (Bowling et al.,2006; Carmeli, 2005; Silverthorne, 2004). However, little has been found investigatingthe relationship of organization culture to job satisfaction. The ability to diagnose the culture of an organization proves valuable because itprovides managers with information about the organization that will assist inaccomplishing organizational objectives and enhancing performance (Dunnett, 2007).According to Atkins and Turner (2006), the presence of negative work-related behaviorstranslates to a culture that neglects to meet the needs of employees, resulting inemployees moving on to other opportunities. Therefore, understanding howorganizational culture serves as an asset or liability is crucial. As an asset, it eases 20
  32. 32. communication, facilitates organizational decision making and control, and possiblygenerates higher levels of cooperation and commitment; however, as a liability it canimpede operational and process efficiency (Whitfield & Landeros, 2006). Furthermore,its classification as an asset is linked to its ability to include individuals, while as aliability it tends to exclude, resulting in segregation and a potential decrease in jobsatisfaction (Rutherford, 2001). Job satisfaction similar to organizational culture has been linked to organizationaloutcomes such as higher profitability and productivity (Koh & Boo, 2001). According toMount, Ilies, and Johnson (2006), dissatisfaction with employment conditions and unjustworkplaces forces employees to retaliate against conditions resulting in behavior harmfulto the organization. These negative work-related behaviors can be costly due to the highercosts of hiring and training (Koh & Boo, 2001). To support the need for research in thisarea, the following discusses the interdependent relationship between organizationalculture and job satisfaction. Overview of Nonprofit Organizations The historical role of nonprofit organizations in service delivery, policy advocacy,and social movements has been documented by both scholars and researchers (Jackson-Elmoore & Hula, 2000). According to Alexis de Tocqueville (1835), associations shouldbe formed to promote public safety, commerce, industry, morality, and religion. Theformation of such associations occurred for two reasons: (a) The government adopted thephilosophy of helping people by giving them skills and support to supplementgovernment assistance, and (b) the government reallocated the responsibility for domesticprograms from the national to the state and local levels (Berry, as cited in Garvey, 2006). 21
  33. 33. As a result, the nonprofit sector has been able to thrive and advance in size and services.For example, between 1977 and 1997, the number of nonprofit organizations increasedfrom 276,000 to 693,000 (Berry, as cited in Garvey, 2006). According to Ben-Ner (2002), NPOs are private, nongovernmental organizationsthat instead of aiming to maximize profits for their owners or controllers have serviceobjectives to members, users, or other beneficiaries. The Internal Revenue Service hasreported 26 different types of nonprofits varying in mission, services, and size (Berry, ascited in Garvey, 2006), which makes it difficult to establish concrete distinctions withinthe nonprofit sector. However attempts have been made; for example, Schuppert (as citedin Theuvsen, 2004), in 1995, described organizations within the nonprofit sector asfollows: (a) “Typical” nonprofit organizations characterized by autonomy from the state,solidarity with their beneficiaries, more or less democratic structures, honorary work by aconsiderable portion of their members, and a direct, non-market relationship with theirclients; (b) commercialized nonprofit organizations that have a more market-likerelationship with their clients and often apply company-like management techniques; (c)semipublic nonprofit organizations that have largely come under state control (due forexample to legislative regulation or heavy reliance on public money) and beentransformed into large bureaucracies; and (d) grassroots organizations that show somesimilarities to informal social groups. For example, small size, democratic structuresbased on common goals and friendship, and absence of full-time workers or managers. The distinction between NPOs and other organizations is that NPOs are unable todistribute profits to stakeholders and staff. Interestingly, although many believe it is 22
  34. 34. illegal for NPOs to make a profit, the actual differentiation lies in how any profit is to bedistributed, rather than whether a profit can be earned (Berry, as cited in Garvey, 2006). According to Myers (2004), the external and internal environmentalconsiderations within the nonprofit sector tend to be more complex than those in the for-profit sector. The external considerations of nonprofit organizations include the diversityof stakeholder needs and requirements of multiple revenue streams, while internalenvironmental considerations include relationships with and between staff, volunteers,service users, and trustees (Myers, 2004). It is within this context that the challenges ofmanagers within the nonprofit sector have been investigated and identified. Management of organizations within the nonprofit sector is becomingincreasingly difficult because of the influence of the central government, regionaldevelopment agencies, and local authorities on the services to be provided (Myers, 2004).Myers further contends that nonprofits continue to be scrutinized for their failure todemonstrate efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability. As a result, managers must beable to assess the organization’s priorities and develop a practical plan of action toaccomplish organizational objectives (Myers, 2004). A review of the literature revealed discussions about small organizations withinthe for-profit sector, but few specifics regarding the nonprofit sector. However, thediscussions of small organizations in the for-profit sector appear to have both merit andrelevance to the nonprofit sector. For example, the classification of organizations basedon size contributed to the discussions of small organizations in the for-profit sector.According to Hansson and Klefsjo (2003), although small organizations can be definedbased on sector or market share, most definitions are based on the number of employees. 23
  35. 35. Thus this relates to a study conducted by Gronjberg and Child (2004) defining as a smallorganization as any 501(c)3 organization with 15.5 or fewer full-time employees that hasan annual income and/or assets of less than $100,000. However, according to a studyconducted by Strandholm and Kumar (2003), the use of relative size as opposed toabsolute size has been deemed appropriate for examining differences in behavior betweenlarge and small organizations. The relative size of an organization is usually computed byaveraging numbers based on a specific criterion. For example, Strandholm and Kumarcollected the number of beds in each hospital and used the median number of beds as thethreshold to classify the organization as large or small. Strandholm and Kumar (2003) contend that organizational functions are the samefor small and large organizations; however, small organizations face the challenge ofprioritizing tasks and meeting organizational objectives with fewer resources. Accordingto David and Rubenfeld (2005), large organizations are more concerned with establishingpersonnel practices that align with acceptable human resource management practices. Assmall NPOs tend to operate informally, they may lack job descriptions or writtenprocedures, resulting in the dissolution or inactivity of many organizations (David &Rubenfeld, 2005). The misconception inherent in such informal procedures is that theywill allow for greater flexibility in making organizational decisions. However, suchpractices present the danger of perceptions of favoritism or ad hoc decision-making thatdoes not consider the needs of all employees (David & Rubenfeld, 2005). The informaloperations of small organizations may also be due to a lean staffing strategy that resultsin the organization lacking employees possessing the same knowledge, skills, abilities, or 24
  36. 36. work experience (David & Rubenfeld, 2005), thus forcing managers to use externalresources to complete work assignments. Regardless of their sector, small organizations must stay competitive whilerelying on limited resources (Martin & Martin, 2005). However, the literature tends toimply that small organizations embrace challenges and are naturally inclined to adapt(Macri, Tagliaventi, & Bertolotti, 2002). Small organizations also are able to promoteknowledge sharing and exploitation to create an organization culture that is innovative,flexible, effective, and efficient (Macri et al., 2002). An Overview of Organizational Culture The importance of organizational culture to the success of organizations wasvalidated through the increasing number of instruments and methodologies developed inthe 1960s and 1970s (Agbenyiga, 2005). The use of these instruments and methodologieshas generated debate within the literature as to how organizational culture should beinvestigated and defined (Wilson, 2001). This debate is primarily centered around whatorganizational culture means, how it manifests itself, and the way it should be managedfor the mutual benefit of the organization, its members, customers, and otherstakeholders. According to Dunnett (2007), organizational culture is manifested throughshared learning, unique experiences, managers, societal culture, and environmentalclimate. It is through this lens the researcher can investigate the effect of organizationalculture on the organization and its members. According to Ritchie (2000), strong cultures internalized by an organization’smembers lead to organizational outcome behaviors such as job satisfaction, jobcommitment, and performance. Organizational culture has also been cited as a vital 25
  37. 37. source of information that defines the diversity of the environment and assists withmanaging differences among employees (Spataro, 2005). As a result, managers are urgedto do away with the “one-size-fits-all” approach and begin thinking creatively about howto accommodate the environment produced by diversification (Coffey & Tombari, 2005).The impact of organizational culture on members has been pushed to the forefront oforganization and management discussions. For example, Atkins and Turner (2006)contend that an unsatisfactory culture that neglects the needs of its employees risksemployees becoming disillusioned and therefore motivated to pursue and move on toother opportunities. In contrast, a satisfactory culture promotes a more enjoyable workenvironment resulting in high morale (Sadri & Lees, 2001). Investigation into organizational culture has proven valuable in establishingrelationships with several aspects of the organization. It has been suggested thatorganizational culture affects such outcomes as productivity, performance, commitment,self-confidence, and ethical behavior (Rashid et al., 2004). The dominance oforganizational culture in organizational and management literature for over two decadesis due to the inability of researchers to make absolute statements about its relationship toother variables or to even establish a universal definition of organizational culture. As aresult of these problems, this topic will continue to lead discussions within organizationalbehavior and management literature.Defining and Studying Organizational Culture The literature contains many varying definitions and perspectives forconceptualizing organizational culture. According to Sackmann (1991), organizational 26
  38. 38. culture can be studied using both the variable and cognitive perspectives (Yahyagil,2006). The variable perspective focuses on expressions of cultures such as verbal andphysical behaviors or practices, along with artifacts and their underlying meanings, whilethe cognitive perspective involves studying and defining ideas, concepts, blueprints,beliefs, values, or norms that are viewed as the core of the culture (Yahyagil, 2006). Thevariable and cognitive perspectives of Sackmann have been highlighted in relevantstudies as a theoretical framework to studying organizational culture (McMurray, 2003;Yahyagil, 2006). Organizational behavior theorists have used variable and cognitive perspectivesalone or in tandem to frame their definitions of organizational culture. For example,organizational culture has been defined as a system of shared meaning based on theinterrelated concepts of symbol, myth, ritual, ideology, belief, and language (Pettigrew,as cited in Davis, 2000); a set of processes that binds together members of anorganization based on a shared pattern of beliefs (Sethia & Von Glinow, 1985); a patternof the basic assumptions a group has invented, discovered, and developed that have beenvalidated and considered the norm (Schein, as cited in Agbenyiga, 2005); and the degreeto which organizational members agree with an organizations culture or value system asa whole (Wiener, as cited in Crow & Hartman, 2002). In addition to definingorganizational culture in general, determining the culture of an individual organization isa complex task that requires defining the organization, identifying its values, determininghow it operates, and recognizing how it is viewed internally and externally (Atkins &Turner, 2006). 27
  39. 39. The study of organizational culture within individual organizations has beendiscussed in the works of Edward H. Schein. Using an integration of the variable andcognitive approach, he conceptualized organizational culture at the following threelevels: Level 1—artifacts Level 2—values and beliefs Level 3—basic underlying assumptions(Schein, as cited in Schimmoeller, 2006). At the higher and lower tiers are the variableperspectives of culture composed of artifacts and assumptions. Artifacts are described aswhat is observed upon entry into the organization (Schein, as cited in Schimmoeller,2006); they are the symbols and signs of communication to organization membersthrough visible and audible behaviors. Assumptions are unconscious, taken-for-grantedbeliefs that are the source of values and actions (Schein, as cited in Schimmoeller, 2006),with basic assumptions being the unquestioned truths organization members holdregarding the nature of human nature, human activity, and human relationships. In thecenter is the cognitive perspective of culture in which values and beliefs are reflected inthe strategies, goals, and philosophies of the organization (Schein, as cited inSchimmoeller, 2006). Finally, values are conscious, affective desires or wants, whilebeliefs are cognitive views about truth and reality. The literature presents various ways of investigating organizational culture usingquantitative and qualitative methods. In the ongoing debate between the use ofquantitative versus qualitative methods, the methodology preference of the researcherusually takes precedence. However, according to Carmeli (2005), the difficulty with 28
  40. 40. interpreting the meaning and content of organizational culture is the limitations ongeneralizing the results, as arguably the study of organizational culture requiresinvestigation of underlying assumptions, unique behaviors, language, and cultural modelsthat can only be captured using qualitative methods of inquiry (Faull, Kalliath, & Smith,2004). Qualitative methods have also been applauded for their ability to provide a richer,more comprehensive view of the culture (Schein, as cited in Davis, 2000). For example,Harris (as cited in Yauch & Steudel, 2003) used a case study methodology to analyzeresponses of employees whose organizations have embarked on strategies of culturalchange. He justified his choice by pointing out that case studies provide contextualinformation leading to a deeper understanding of the phenomenon. However, in a recent study, Yauch and Steudel (2003) indicated that a drawbackto the qualitative method in studying organization culture is that it may overlookimportant issues or take significant time. In this situation, data collection took two tothree weeks while interpretations were limited, thus reflecting quantitative researchers’arguments that qualitative methods are unable to ensure data reliability and validity. Thequantitative method also may allow the researcher to conduct theoretical testing, developuniversal statements, and facilitate intra- and inter-unit comparisons (Creswell, 2003;Yauch & Steudel, 2003). Overall, although the quantitative method has been criticized for its inability toprovide underlying reasoning behind answers in examining organizational culture (Yauch& Steudel, 2003), the literature reflects it as being the dominant method being used,particularly via survey instruments such as the OCI developed by Cooke and Lafferty(Maslowski, 2006). 29
  41. 41. Assessing Organizational Culture While undeniably it is important to assess the culture of an organization, doing socan be challenging as that culture may be influenced by several factors (Wakabayashi,2005). For an effective assessment, managers must pay attention to those items that arenoticed as well as those ignored (Wakabayashi, 2005). It is also important to notice thoseitems that are promoted versus being silenced as these factors permeate throughout theorganization (Wakabayashi, 2005). As noted above, the OCI has been cited in the literature as a viable instrument forassessing organizational culture. While instruments may be helpful, there are subtletiesand behaviors that can be studied to accomplish the same goal in a less academic manner.For example, Bolman and Deal (as cited in Wakabayashi, 2005) suggest the followingstrategies to assist managers with assessing and understanding the culture of theirorganization: [1.] observing employee reactions to the behaviors of others [2.] watching for nonverbal body language that may convey unspoken messages [3.] asking staff members for their opinions or perspectives [4.] challenging assumptions, including the manager’s own [5.] seeking candid comments during exit interviews [6.] conducting interviews with new employees who may offer fresh perspectives [7.] offering the opportunity for staff to provide feedback to each other [8.] gathering input through organizational cultural surveys [9.] asking employees what behaviors they would like to see more or less of 30
  42. 42. [10.] asking what actions leaders should start, stop, or continue [11.] encouraging open dialogue while modeling a non-defensive reaction [12.] paying attention to items bothering the manager’s conscience [13.] self-awareness and modifying actions accordinglyFunctions of Organizational Culture The literature has presented several theories illustrating the role of culture in themotivation and coordination of activities of the organization. According to Katz andKahn (1978), organizational norms indicate the appropriate behaviors expected fromemployees while values provide the justification for the normative requirements of theorganization as well as for organizational activities and functions (B. Wright, 2001). Thediscussions of Katz and Kahn have been highlighted as the theoretical framework fordiscussing the role and relationships between phenomena and variables of organizationalculture (Carmeli, 2005; Pool, 2000b; Sarros, Gray, Densten, & Cooper, 2005). Thecognitive function of organizational values and norms is to facilitate the employees’ workin the organization and their adjustment to it while providing moral justification fororganizational activities (Pool, 2000b). According to Katopol (2006), organizational culture determines what we findimportant, how we show its importance and what people consider the correct or incorrectways to act within the organizational setting. Upon establishing a systematic way ofdoing things, terminology such as “that is the way things are” or “that is how we are usedto doing things” becomes the language of the organization (Rashid et al., 2004). This ishow the culture of an organization is developed, taught, and reinforced, resulting in a 31
  43. 43. deep-rooted routine that becomes difficult to comprehend and/or change (Brown,Nicholson, Dran, & Stanton, 2004). Organizational culture plays a significant role in whether the organization is ahappy and healthy place to work. Culture serves as the knowledge within the organizationthat allows each worker to operate appropriately (Lettieri et al., 2004). However, whilemany managers acknowledge the significance of culture, few realize the roles andresponsibilities they have in its development (Urrabazo, 2005). Managers are responsiblefor creating the core culture because they bring to their work experiences their personalhistory, nature of socialization experiences, and perception of what it takes to succeed(Rashid et al., 2004). Schneider (2000) contends that organizations do not have a single culture, but thatthere is a culture that exists at the core of every organization. He notes this core cultureshould coincide with the organizational strategies and leadership practices that are at thecenter of how the organization operates. Therefore, the shift in the culture of anorganization starts and ends with those in management positions, giving them the powerto change it, but also leaving them responsible for its impact on organizational outcomes.For this reason, managers should be interested in how their employees, peers, citizens,and other stakeholders view them and the organization they operate (Atkins & Turner,2006). By understanding how organizational culture functions within the organizationmanagers are able to reduce anxiety, uncertainty, and confusion among its members(Atkins & Turner, 2006). Much of the discussion on organizational culture focuses on the members’contributions to its development. However, it has been found that external factors 32
  44. 44. influence organizational culture because organizations tend to reflect the beliefs, values,and attitudes of their customers, suppliers, and competitors (Nahm, Abraham, &Vonderembse, 2004).Organizational Culture: Values-Based Approach Cooke and Lafferty (1987) asserted that shared values of organizational memberscould be measured by specific aspects of organizational culture, mainly behavioralexpectations of members (Davis, 2000). This assertion led Cooke and Rousseau toinvestigate organizational culture using a values-based approach. This investigation of 18organizations using the OCI provided empirical support for organizational consensus anddirection regarding perceived culture (Davis, 2000). This value-based approach includesthe investigation of value-based cultures such as those that are constructive, passive-defensive, or aggressive-defensive. Specifically, an organization that has a constructiveculture is one whose members are encouraged to interact with others and approach tasksthat will help them meet their higher-order satisfaction needs. According to Szumal(2003), a passive-defensive culture encourages its members to interact with people inways that will not threaten their own security. Finally, an aggressive-defensive culturesupports its members who approach tasks in forceful ways to protect their status andsecurity. The constructive, passive-defensive, and aggressive-defensive cultures have beenacknowledged in organizational behavior research as culture preferences commonlyfound within organizations (Corbett & Rastrick, 2000; Hursthouse & Kolb, 2001;Kwantes & Boglarsky, 2004). In studies conducted by both Corbett and Rastrick (2000) 33
  45. 45. and Kwantes and Boglarsky (2004), it was found the expectations and norms of theconstructive style were preferred by employees. However, although the results were similar, the populations that were surveyedwere quite different. Kwantes and Boglarsky (2004) used a population employed in fiveoccupations: accounting, management information systems, marketing, production, andsecretarial/clerical. These occupations were further divided with marketing, production,and secretarial/clerical representing the people-oriented category and accounting,information systems, and production representing the task-oriented category. Thosewithin the people-oriented occupations not only preferred the constructive style, but alsoindicated a stronger preference for the defensive style than task-oriented employees(Kwantes & Boglarsky, 2004). It was suggested that further research be conducted toinvestigate other types of occupations. Thus Corbett and Rastrick (2000) surveyedemployees within a manufacturing company, with yet again the constructive style beingidentified as the culture that most likely would result in good performance. Corbett andRastrick suggest that altering the current style of an organization to resemble theconstructive culture would require integrating its characteristics into training, job design,work practices, supervision structure, and leadership from top management. However, theintegration of the constructive culture would continue to be influenced by the values ofthe leaders and members within the organization (Agbenyiga, 2005). Therefore, to anextent, all cultural learning reflects one’s original values—a sense of what ought to be, asdistinct from what is (Schein, as cited in Agbenyiga, 2005). 34
  46. 46. Competing Values Framework Another values-based approach to studying organizational culture arises from acompeting values framework, which requires an empirical analysis of the valuesindividuals within an organization hold about its performance and the manner in which itfunctions (Schimmoeller, 2006). However, from a review of the literature it appears thisframework is best used to assess the values of those in leadership positions as opposed tosimply an organization’s members. The competing values model developed by Quinn is an analytic framework builtaround two dimensions forming four quadrants representing competing orientations orvalues in the organizational context (Edwards, Yankey, & Altpeter, 2001). The twodimensions are flexibility-control and internal-external. The vertical dimension deals withthe organization’s flexibility in dealing with issues while the horizontal dimension dealswith the internal or focus of the organization (Edwards et al., 2001). According toCameron and Quinn (1999), organizations focusing externally tend to be concerned withthe market, new customers, and competitors as opposed to organizations with an internalfocus who tend to be concerned with employee morale and the way work is accomplished(Schimmoeller, 2007). The four cultures defined and measured by the competing values framework areclan, hierarchical, adhocracy, and market cultures. These cultures align themselves withthe leadership characteristics exhibited by those in management positions, thus aligningwith their own set of values. According to Cameron and Quinn (1999), clan leaders arevisionaries who inspire and motivate organization members by ensuring they share valuesand objectives (Schimmoeller, 2006). Within the market culture, leaders tend to excel at 35
  47. 47. negotiating terms and achieving results. Leaders within the adhocracy culture break rules,while those in the hierarchical culture enforce rules by setting standards, then criticizingmember performance. Along with leadership characteristics, the four cultures can be differentiated as totheir focus. According to Cameron and Quinn (1999), the clan culture focuses on internalmaintenance with flexibility, concern for people, and sensitivity to customers(Schimmoeller, 2006). The hierarchical structure is characterized by stability and controlthrough clear task setting and enforcement of strict rules, while the adhocracy cultureconcentrates on external positioning with a high degree of flexibility and individuality.Finally, the market culture is represented in organizations that work toward clear andrational goals achieved through high productivity and economical operations. The competing values framework has been highlighted in studies investigatingorganizational culture and its effect on higher education institutions (Obendhain &Johnson, 2004), commercial organizations (Igo & Skitmore, 2005), and purchasingmanagers (Perrone, Zaheer, & McEvily, 2003). In most institutions of higher learningsurveyed by Obendhim and Johnson (2004), clan culture was dominant; however, someinstitutions reported no culture type, which supports the presence of multiple cultures.There can also be a disparity between the existing culture and the desired one. Inparticular, Igo and Skitmore found that although market-oriented culture dominatescommercial organizations, employees would prefer an employee-focused culture thataligns with the clan culture. According to Perrone et al. (2003), the clan culture has beenacknowledged for its encouragement of trust-based practices and routines. Perrone andhis colleagues found that the presence of a clan culture promotes trust from external 36
  48. 48. parties who then extend their trust to employees, possibly increasing levels ofsatisfaction. Overall, the competing values framework continues to be used to describe alllevels of the organization while assisting managers with examining the role of differentlevels of organizational hierarchy (DiPadova & Faerman, as cited in Schimmoeller,2006).The Significance of Organizational Culture According to Macedo and Pinho (2006) organizational culture affects suchoutcomes as productivity, performance, commitment, self-confidence, and ethicalbehavior. However, a large portion of the research has concentrated on the "strong versusweak" culture dichotomy (Macedo & Pinho, 2006), suggesting that culture holds varyingdegrees of influence over the members of an organization. Organizational cultureinfluences include the implicit shared values of the members about how the world works,what is human nature, how work should be organized, and on what criteria decisionsshould be made. Thus organizational culture is a socially constructed phenomenon. Altering the culture of an organization can be a lengthy but valuable processbecause it is an attempt to close the gaps between the present and desired cultures (Buch& Wetzel, 2001). However, difficulty arises due to employee attachment to the artifactsand espoused values to which they have become accustomed (Rutherford, 2001).Research on the effects of organizational culture is overwhelming; however, the goal is tointegrate different approaches that will evolve into an approach that can be useduniversally (Tefry, 2006). 37
  49. 49. Organizational Culture: Job Satisfaction Link The link between organizational culture and job satisfaction has been indirectlyaddressed through increasing interest in the work environment of organizations and itseffect on various aspects of the organization, namely its employees. In fact, Ouchi (1981)a renowned organizational culture researcher, was one of the first to explicitly explore theeffect of organizational culture on organization members (Wilderom, Glunk, &Maslowski, 2000). Ouchi (1981) argued that the success of firms within the for-profitsector is attributed to their strong emphasis on the well- being of their employees(Wilderom et al., 2000). The literature has addressed the importance of organizational culture and itsrelationship to personal-related variables such as satisfaction, commitment, cohesion,strategy implementation, and performance (Carmeli, 2005; Lund, 2003). However, a voidexists in the literature regarding the link between organizational culture types and jobsatisfaction (Lund, 2003). Nevertheless, the psychological/affective implications of theindividual organization’s fit as to employee behaviors perhaps has the same impact onemployees’ overall satisfaction with their employment (Carmeli, 2005). Research has suggested that evaluating employee ability to fit within anorganization begins with the hiring process (Koh & Boo, 2001). Specifically, applicantswho perceive prospective employment opportunities as matching their values, needs, andgoals predicted the organization would be a positive place to work (Carless, 2005).Carless also found that a person’s job fit had a stronger attraction to the job offer andgreater intention to accept as compared to a person’s organization fit. However, the 38
  50. 50. findings in this study could not be generalized because applicants were applying fordifferent positions; therefore, the subject warrants further research. An Overview of Job Satisfaction Similar to organizational culture, several definitions have been developed todescribe job satisfaction. The research has defined job satisfaction as a function of theextent what a member receives from a job matches what the person thinks should bereceived (Lawler, as cited in Welbourne et al., 2005); in other words, it is a function ofthe perceived relationship between what one wants from ones job and what one perceivesthe job as offering (Locke, as cited in Muhammad, 2006). Later research has defined jobsatisfaction as the general attitude employees have towards their jobs, which is directlytied to individual needs (Ostroff, as cited in Williamson, 2005) and the extent to whichpeople find gratification or fulfillment in their work (Pool, 2000a). Thus, as withorganizational culture, no single universal definition of job satisfaction has beenestablished. This may be due to the varying elements that can contribute to anindividual’s level of satisfaction; in addition, the extent to which individuals are satisfiedor dissatisfied with their jobs may be contingent on whether the job threatens other self-relevant roles (Grandey, Cordeiro, & Crouter, 2005).Theoretical Framework The work experience has contributed to motivation theory discussions beginningwith Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs developed in 1943 and McClelland’s theorydeveloped in 1965 was based on the needs of achievement, power, and affiliation.Maslow and McClelland’s need theories serve as the theoretical framework for recentstudies on job satisfaction (Lord, 2002) that suggest high achievers are those who will 39
  51. 51. succeed. These need theories have been used to establish the link between needs andsatisfaction (Baysinger, 2004). However, Locke’s discrepancy theory (based on thenotion that employees will be dissatisfied with their jobs when they cease to get whatthey want) argues that an individual’s level of satisfaction does not stem from fulfillmentof needs but what the person finds important (Muhammad, 2006). Those values may infact be more external than internal as Bandura believes that individuals value what theyperceive is valued by others around them (Paswaters, 2006). The dominant theory of satisfaction relevant to this study is Lawler’s (1973)model, which identifies as determinants of job satisfaction the age, experience, seniority,education, and commitment an individual brings to the job situation as well as perceivedjob characteristics such as difficulty of task and amount of responsibility (Welbourne etal., 2005). However, these are not the only determinants of job satisfaction as severalstudies identify other factors that influence it such as pay increases, promotions, time off,new and interesting assignments, and recognition; rewards and recognition, opportunityfor growth, work life balance, perceptions of the work environment training anddevelopment; and promotion, stress, work standards, and fair rewards (Paswaters, 2006). Lawler argues that extrinsic rewards such as pay and promotion play a vital rolein motivation and in the overall culture of the organization (Welbourne et al., 2005).Extrinsic rewards define what behaviors are valued while motivating management stylesand types of performance that ultimately help to determine how satisfying employees findwork experiences, while intrinsic rewards validate an individual’s skills and abilitiesthrough accomplishments associated with actual work. The concepts of intrinsic versusextrinsic satisfaction have been discussed as part of the job satisfaction literature and 40
  52. 52. presented in several studies (Tang et al., 2000; Udechukwu, 2007). According toHirschfield (2000), intrinsic job satisfaction is how people feel about the nature of the jobtasks themselves while extrinsic job satisfaction is how people feel about aspects of thework situation external to the job tasks or work itself. The studies conducted by Tang et al. (2000) and Udechukwu (2007) investigatedthe relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction and voluntary turnover,both finding that intrinsic job satisfaction is a predictor of voluntary turnover whileextrinsic job satisfaction predicts withdrawal cognitions. However, the studies can bedistinguished related to their findings about extrinsic job satisfaction. While theUdechukwu (2007) study found no relationship existed between extrinsic satisfaction andintention to leave, Tang et al. (2000) found such a relationship. The disparity between theresults may be due to Tang et al.’s inclusion of attitudes toward money as a moderatorbetween extrinsic and intrinsic job satisfaction. Nevertheless, both studies agree thatmanagers are somewhat responsible for the leaving behaviors of employees becausemanager actions affect both intrinsic and extrinsic employee satisfaction. However,within the nonprofit sector there may be a disparity between intrinsic and extrinsicsatisfaction of employees, perhaps due to the history, mission, and characteristics ofNPOs as these organizations are less likely to attract employees who respond to extrinsicrewards (Theuvsen, 2004).Measuring Job Satisfaction Factors that influence job satisfaction have been recognized within the literaturefor the purpose of developing or identifying an appropriate instrument of measurement,such as the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) and JIG, both developed by Bowling Green State 41
  53. 53. University. The JDI provides the advantage of comparing the satisfaction of similargroups of employees and organizations. Recent studies have used this instrument toinvestigate the relationship between job satisfaction and training (Bennett, 2006), jobperformance (Kidd, 2006), and emotional intelligence (Muhammad, 2006). Kidd found arelationship between job satisfaction and job performance; however, another studyreported a weak relationship (Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton, 2001) reflecting aninconsistency in findings using the same variables, although Judge and colleaguessuggested introducing mediating variables. In many research studies the JDI and JIG assessments were administered at thesame time. However, as unlike other instruments, the JIG measures overall jobsatisfaction rather than just aspects of it (Bowling Green State University, 2002), the JIGhas been used to investigate the overall job satisfaction of nursing home administrators(Murphy & Fridkin, 2004), information technology professionals (Bennett, 2006), andteachers (Williamson, 2005). For example, using the JIG, Williamson found significantcorrelations between job satisfaction and supervision. While Williamson acknowledgedthe use of the JDI without the JIG may yield results suggesting respondents were nothappy with supervision, this would not conclusively prove that respondents were nothappy with their job overall. According to Vila and Mora (2005), research on job satisfaction has taken twomain approaches: the first highlights relevance of job satisfaction as an economicvariable, while the second approach explores diverse elements that are likely to influenceworkers’ levels of job satisfaction. As an economic variable, research has focused on theimpact of such behaviors as productivity (Ndambakuwa & Mufunda, 2006), absenteeism 42

×