Organizational Culture And Its Evolution In Organizations Management Essay

For assignment help please contact

at help@hndassignmenthelp.co.uk or hndassignmenthelp@gmail.com
The literature review sets out to provide a detailed understanding of the relationship
between organizational culture and portfolio performance, identifying previous studies
on this subject and taking cues from these on how to conduct the research, as well as
refining the parameters that will be adopted for the research. It first examines the
concept of organizational culture, then the concept of portfolio performance and then
eventually ties the two together, examining the relationship that exists. It then
concludes with a summary of conclusions derived from the literature reviewed.

Organizational culture and its evolution in

organizations.
The concept of organizational culture is one which exists in every organization
regardless of size or function, as it is the set of values, norms, artefacts and leadership or
management styles, which may or may not be defined, with which a particular set of
people behave and get things done (Armstrong, 2006). Other definitions refer to
organizational culture as a unique set of rules governing an organisation; the way things
are done or even a system or mode of operation. A common quality however is that
these values relate to and are shared by a specific group of people which are totally
unique in composition. The concept of organizational culture is mostly accepted as one
that influences performance and effectiveness in any organization (Faqir et al., 2011).
Khan & Afzal (2011) note that organizational culture would even differ by countries with
differing connotations as this would reflect their environment, beliefs or mode of
thinking.

The culture of any organization, regardless of which country it is located, is mostly

formed over a period of time and constantly being reshaped as a result of the
development of that organization, with the norms and values shaped with experiences
and over time. Some research have shown that organizations develop through different
stages or lifecycles which can vary from 3 to 10 different stages (Faqir et al., 2011: 104)

over which culture can be formed and shaped; inferring that the culture of organizations
will have a linkage to the stage of the lifecycle it is at, at any particular time. Quinn &
Cameron (1983), reviewed 9 models of organizational lifecycles and proposed 4 major
stages namely: entrepreneurial (i.e. the starting out stage dominated by innovation,
creativity and gathering of resources), collectivity (i.e. the structures are more informal,
with more face to face communication, high commitment amongst members- putting in
long hours with evident commitment), formulation & control (here, procedures and
policies become grounded and formalized with emphasis on efficiency) and the
elaboration of structure (here more attention is given to expansion and emphasis placed
on monitoring external factors/environment) stages. While there is undoubtedly a
correlation between the type of culture and the stage an organization is in its lifecycle,
this research only focuses on the relationship between an organization's culture and its
portfolio performance.
Cameron & Quinn (2011) developed an instrument known as the ''organizational culture
Assessment Instrument (OCAI) - used to assess organizational culture; an instrument
which has been widely used in research (Fralinger & Olson, 2007; Faqir et al., 2011;
Ng'ang'a, & Nyongesa, 2012). The instrument was based on a framework known as the
competing Values Framework (CVF) - a theoretical model which was developed initially
from a conducted research targeted at major indicators of effective organizations.
(Yazici, 2010; 17); and is ''now the dominant framework for assessing organizational
culture'' (Cameron & Quinn, 2011: 35). Four major culture types are proposed by
Cameron & Quinn (2011), namely the 1) Clan; 2) Adhocracy; 3) Hierarchy and 4) Market
cultures. See table 3.2 for full descriptions of the four culture profiles by Cameron &
Quinn, (2011). These have been widely acknowledged by researchers and have been
found in prevalent literature on organizational culture to depict a holistic view of culture
types (O'riley & Moses, 1984; Zammuto & Krakower, 1991, cited in Faqir et al., 2011:
105). Figure 2.0 below shows the competing values and their relationship with the 4
culture types.
Figure 2.0: The Competing Values Framework

Source: Cameron & Quinn, (2006)

The CVF helps reveal an organization's focus, i.e. whether it has more of an internal or
external focus or if it goes all out for flexibility & discretion or stability & control.
(Berriov, 2003).
Ng'ang'a, & Nyongesa (2012) in their study to assess the Impact of Organisational
Culture on Performance of Educational Institutions, endorsed the OCAI model as ''a
validated research method of examining organizational culture'', and from their study,
conclude that the type of culture existent has great bearing on performance.

Portfolio performance
The concept of portfolio performance could be considered the most important aspect of
any organization as this directly relates to the core of its existence, with the results
reflecting its performance levels and every organization would normally want to succeed
in this regard. Marcoulides & Heck (1993) in their study conclude that in line with many
other previous researches, organizational culture has a relationship with performance.
this statement has also been validated in the course of this research as more studies
have proved a strong linkage between an organization's culture and its performance.
Alvesson (2002: 67) notes organizational culture as a key element in all forms of
performance. It will be considered valuable if an organization invests in the factors or
traits that influence its performance, as such, an investment or lack of, as the case may
be, could be beneficial or detrimental to the organization in the area of achieving its
purpose, objectives or goals.

2.3.1. Portfolio performance in the public sector.

The performance of portfolio could vary across the different industry types or sectors. In
the private sector, it is common knowledge that this is probably the most important
factor as that is what drives the business of the organization, while this may be the case
in the public sector, the perception may not be as strong. Research conducted by
Santora (2009: 104), based mainly on the manufacturing industry context, showed that
organizational culture enhances performance by shaping quality practices like supplier
relationships and management commitment; the writer then acknowledges the need for
more research to link culture and performance, especially in the service sector. These
cues could also be adopted in the public sector.

In the public sector, especially relating to government departments there is often a

perception that the concept of performance is usually undermined, Hoole & Du Plessis
(2002: 255) are of the opinion that many ''government departments are not typical
project management environments thus adding to the high failure rate''. Such failure
rates could be associated to factors identified by Pinto & Kharbanda (1996: 46-53) such
as ignoring the project environment, over management of the project managers and
their teams, a lack of post project reviews, putting political agendas before project
objectives, failure to understand project tradeoffs & putting a new technology to market
too quickly. However, since the 1990s there has been a push for the public sector to
become more efficient and effective and to be open to more 'private sector' approaches
and management techniques in conducting their businesses. (Stan & Sven, n.d). More
broadly, portfolio performance in any context (whether in the private or public sector)
would be the ability of the organization to transform its inputs into the desired results or
outputs or desired goal. The performance of any organization has to be properly
strategized with key performance indicators outlined for success to be achieved; this
first starts by deciding and specifying what exactly is regarded as success and ensuring
that the scope is defined early enough and that it is clearly understood by the members
of the organization; and only then can an attempt be made at its achievement.
It is widely acknowledged that the public sector deals with a varied degree of service
providers and suppliers, hence the challenge of tying together performance indicators
that will satisfy and meet all stakeholder interests. (Cai & Wang, 2012; Stan & Sven,
n.d).
A study by Parry & Proctor-Thomson (2003) examined the New Zealand public sector in
relation to leadership, culture and performance and note that the public sector could be
more effective (probably even more than the private sector) if it had a more
transformational organizational culture, instead of the usual transactional nature; this
insinuates that the public sector is perceived to be culturally more bureaucratic in
nature. This may have held true for all or most organizations before the 21st century but,
based on perceptions, from the case study under review, there is a conscious effort to be
more innovative in nature, taking cues from the private sector approach of doing
business.
Muldrow, Buckley & Schay (2002) propose that using a survey that is reliable can be an
accurate way to help asses an organizations culture and determine employee

perceptions; providing a basis for proposing methods of improving culture, based on

findings, for better performance, as changes in culture is more likely to initiate changes
in employee behaviour. This theory has been proven in the situation of this case study
organization (i.e. DFID Nigeria),as the people survey is conducted annually with
substantial effort by the leadership or management team, put into addressing any areas
perceived to influence employee perceptions for better performance.
Overall, organizational culture is important in the public sector as noted by Parry &
Proctor-Thomson (2003: 393) as it either liberates or suppresses the display of
leadership - which in turn could be beneficial or detrimental to the organization's
performance. This then goes to show that the concept of leadership in any organization
can affect its performance, and therefore remains a key variable in the organizational
culture definition.

Portfolio management in the Public sector.

The management of portfolios would involve management of the different projects
contained in the portfolio, and in the public sector, there are challenges which are
different to those experienced in the private sector project management. Waddell,
(2010: 102) notes that these challenges are even compounded by the scarcity of capable
project managers in the public sector organizations. Notwithstanding, the management
of portfolios in the public sector has become a strong focus (with the increasing scrutiny
by tax payers) and one that has been recognized by countries' leadership as key to
achieving success in areas of transparency & accountability, maintaining public trust &
confidence and demonstrating effective governance,. This is evident as countries make
conscious efforts in ensuring that government projects and programmes are managed
using the appropriate project management principles; e.g. in the UK, the Office of
Government Commerce (OGC), was established to help in the "delivery of projects to
time, quality and cost, realizing benefits" (Office of Government Commerce, 2008a,
cited in Crawford & Helm, 2009: 74).

Most public sector organizations manage projects in similar ways, with the projects
going through similar life cycle stages as well as similar performance measurement
systems, the project life cycle shows how the different stages in projects (from

identification to Clearance or approval , to the Appraisal & design, then to Approval,

then to Implementation, Completion and Post completion stages. See figure 1.1 for the
different stages of the project management. This framework has since ''become a
standard practice for development agencies to organize their activities" in identifying
and implementing a project. (Biggs & Smith, 2003: 1743, cited in Landoni & Corti, 2011:
46). During project implementation, the Logical framework [1] is used more as a
performance monitoring tool and has been widely adopted by major international
agencies of the world such as the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA),
DFID, the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) and the United
states Agency for International Development (USAID). (Landoni & Corti, 2011). These
organizations have modified the logical framework to suit the monitoring needs such
that project, programme and portfolio implementation is guided to yield the desired
performance, and usually, on an annual basis, reviews are conducted to determine the
performance levels of the projects - sometimes the log frame even amended as
assumptions change in order for the project to adapt to the changing scenarios. The fact
that the Log frame is not a static or definite document or tool enables the possibility of
reviews and re- alignment of the project at strategic points of the project life.
While the log frame helps with the monitoring of the projects over the implementation
period, there are other factors that could affect the projects significantly: a lack of
alignment of the project with the needs of the country in which it is being implemented
in (Tadege & Jonny, 2012), using a one-size-fits all trap, a shortage of project
management capacity, and the culture trap as highlighted by Ika, (2012), where for
example in the African context, the problem of corruption eats into project
implementation, hindering success.
Success of the portfolio can be described at different levels of the project life cycle, as
each cycle is significant towards achievement of the goal- which is the bigger picture.
Most development projects aim at the socioeconomic progress of the recipient countries
and if this is achieved, then it is termed success; success could also mean that the project
management processes produced efficiency (Khang & Moe, 2008: 72). It is important
that projects are managed to yield the desired results by ensuring the right project
management capacity is employed and the processes keyed to ensure the results are
achieved.

Relationship between organizational culture &

portfolio performance.
Most previous researches have shown that there is a linkage or relationship between
organizational culture and performance. As mentioned earlier, as organizations expect
inputs to directly translate to outputs, an investment in any organization's culture,
provided it is strategic and tailored to the nature of business and it targets the desired
results; should invariably produce the desired performance, i.e. provided the supporting
environment or factors remain stable or become better. There is a need for more
research conducted on the role of organizational culture in project management as
noted by Yazici (2010); however there has been some effort in researching extensively,
project management processes & techniques and its relationship to project leadership.
The concept of organizational culture needs more examination. (Yazici, 2010: 15).
Over the years, attempts have been made at bridging the gap; Patanakul & Aronson
(2012: 220) arrives at a hypothesis that ''Organizational culture emphasizing
commitment, communication, and reward for performance contributes to project
success'', hinging on the fact that organizational culture is positively associated with
performance both at the organizational level and project level. The results an
organization achieves, not only depends on the processes followed, but also on the
behaviour of the people involved as they execute tasks; the manner in which a group of
people carry out tasks can make the difference between adequate results and
outstanding results. (Totsi, 2007: 21).
The importance of human factors in the success of a portfolio cannot be over
emphasized (Piyush, Dangayach & Mittal, 2011: 50) and culture can be defined as a
people's way of life; therefore organizational culture refers to the values and traits that
an organization set aside to guide their business operations and delivery to achieve
business objectives. Totsi, (2007: 21), notes that the organization's values 'must be
owned and demonstrated by all employee and not just managers' for such values to be
attributed to the organization as a part of its culture. More often than not, an
organization's culture will permeate through the organization and will be evident in
behaviour of its employees, especially if these cultural traits are held in high regard, and
vice versa. Suda (2007) suggests that 'when individuals become committed to the
organization's beliefs, those beliefs become internalized and individual members hold
them as their personal beliefs''. Zuckerman (2002: 158) also notes that when the values

are clear and are accepted by the organization's employees, then performance will be
enhanced .It then becomes important for those values and beliefs to be continually
shaped and guided positively to achieve the desired results. Baker (1980: 51), maintains
that 'managers consistently pay attention to shaping culture into a positive force by
encouraging those elements that are seen as beneficial and checking or eradicating those
that are less desirable', as this will surely have an impact on the success of the
organization's portfolio. This is indeed a true phenomenon as it is the modus operandi
in the case study organization under research i.e. DFID Nigeria. Results from an
annually conducted survey are reviewed and attention paid to areas that are perceived to
enhance performance.
Muldrow, Buckley & Schay (2002: 343) also note that an organizations performance is a
''result of the totality of the employees' behaviours'' and a good and clear understanding
of the culture could reveal why an organization is at a particular performance level. They
also note that in some cases, the relationship that exists between the culture and
performance could be indirect, such that the results in performance are also a
corresponding change in employee attitudes, which is more a direct result from the
culture change. Gordon & Ditomaso (1992) investigated the relationship between the
strength of culture & values (measured through surveys over years within an
organization) with corporate performance and the results revealed that these traits were
indeed predictors of performance and that overall, strong cultures would influence
performance in subsequent years. Denison & Mishra (1995), also reviews the
relationship based on the four traits of organizational culture - ''involvement,
consistency, adaptability, and mission'' with results showing that these were predictors
of performance as well as quality and employee satisfaction.
A slightly different view has also been presented by some research: Nikbakht, et al
(2012) in their study measured the impact of organizational culture on organizational
excellence- with excellence referring to the quality of an organization's methods of
assessment, human resources, organizational processes, its strategies, and quality of
leadership and found relationships between the culture and all of the above - with the
exception of a relationship between organizational culture and 'methods of assessment''.
This is unsurprising as 'methods of assessment' can be seen as the tool used to measure
the performance levels in the organization.

Other views may even be more contrary - e.g. research conducted by Lim (1995), where
he examined previously conducted research on the link between an organization's
culture and performance and concludes that there were no indications of a relationship
between culture and performance in the short term, much less a causal one between
culture and performance. He however admits to some degree that there is some
evidence of a correlation between 'adaptive' cultures and longer term performance; and
regards culture more as a ''descriptive and explanatory tool rather than a predictive''
tool. (Lim, 1995: 20).
As an organization's success or portfolio performance will mean different things to
different organizations, It could be appropriate to then argue that for culture to affect
performance, it would have to be tailored or adapted to the organization's context or
mode/ type of business in order to achieve the performance levels desired. It is found
that in different organizations, culture is either performance related - focusing more on
the projects or portfolio and the project management principles applied; while in other
organizations, more people oriented, focusing on the employees and providing the
relevant support to achieve the desired goal. Andersen & Jessen, 2000, cited in Khang &
Moe, (2008: 73) emphasized the need to make separate the ''task- and people-oriented
aspects in evaluating the project results'', this will actually provide a basis to determine
what areas exactly need attention, and then focus can be placed on that area. Knutson
(2001) notes the importance of building a project management culture, and suggests
three perspectives from which this can be achieved within a business enterprise which
include the endorsement of a culture for successful projects, the construction of a
support infrastructure for the successful management of projects and the establishment
of the executive's role.; while Combs et al (2006: 502) in their study note that
performance can be enhanced through high performing work practices such as
employee participation, training, making work arrangements more flexible, as these
would motivate employees to perform better. These approaches can then be directly
translated to the cultural traits an organization could adopt and groom to achieve the
desired results.
While looking at the subject of organizational culture, the variable components like
values, behaviours, attitudes, norms, artefacts, people, etc. are more often come across
in its definition; with most organizational culture profiles containing a combination of
these variables or traits.

Organizational culture and high performing

organizations
High performing organizations are evident from the success of their businesses; they are
seen to excel in the business they operate. Sharpe, (2001) notes that a characteristic of a
high performing organization is the achievement of significant results for the money
spent. Reviewed literature has shown a correlation between organizational cultures (or
at least with some or many of the attributes of organizational culture - see table 2.1) with
high performing organizations. These (high performing) organizations are characterised
by the quality of leadership, customer focus, efficient partnerships, articulated mission
or strategy, to mention a few. Government departments ought to continually strive to
build high performing organizations as highlighted in a forum held by the General
Accounting Office (2004), as the challenges of the 21st century arise, and acknowledge
that there has to be an effect on the predominantly existent culture to one that is ''more
results-oriented, client or customer - focused, and collaborative in nature''. (GAO, 2004:
1). A challenge, as noted by Letts, Ryan & Grossman (1999) faced by non profit
organizations is the sustenance or expansion of successful programmes. They note that
this can be somewhat tackled by attending to the 'capacities' within the organizations.
Taking a slightly different position, it is more likely that more recently the non profit or
government or public sector organizations have, to a very reasonable degree addressed
the issue of capacity within the organizations; It is seen through, as earlier mentioned,
methodologies of adopting more private sector approaches and manners of conducting
business where 'results' are more of a focus, especially when accountability has become
more paramount and is constantly being demanded by the tax payers as well as in the
extensive processes and procedures employees are recruited. High performance can be
achieved by adopting cultures that promote high performance i.e. those that are able to
sustain the processes and factors or traits that influence desired result. A recent study by
the American management association (2007) looked at trends and future possibilities
of high performing organizations. The study acknowledged that companies or
organizations perform very well as a result of good, efficient and effective leadership and
well defined modes of operation, especially when combined with the good traits - such
as those of being customer focused along with excellent execution. The study also
suggests that the traits of high performing organizations are likely to remain the same
over the next 5 years (as it examined the period 2007 - 2017), but the manner in which
these are demonstrated in terms of the organization's characteristics will evolve over

time i.e. there will likely be possible changes in customer service, leadership
competencies, etc (Overholt et al, 2007). This remains an interesting concept that will
be worthy of research in the near future. Table 2.1 below compiles traits attributable to
high- performing organizations revealed through the literature reviewed.
High- performing organizations.
Traits
Strong customer focus or client responsive, consistent and clear strategy, strong and
well defined beliefs & values (i.e. culture), solid structure, consistency, well defined
processes, excellent execution, strong leadership, innovation, peer respect, distinctive
people characteristics, management systems, vision (which is emotion packed), fair
treatment of employees, employee pride, longer term relationships, quality performance
measurement, strive to be the best, adaptability, experience fun at the work place,
strong mission, respectful of colleagues, make no excuses, frequent constructive
feedback systems, ability/desire to crush competitors, involvement,
Table 2.1: traits of high - performing organizations
Source: Overholt et al (2007); (GAO, 2004); Osborne & Cowen (2002);
The traits of high performing organizations cannot be exhausted in a world where
theories are ever evolving, and may have different meanings and compositions in
different settings, Osborne & Cowen (2002) state that personnel in high performing
organizations may even expect to have longer term working relationships rather than
frequent job swaps, have can-do attitudes with zero tolerance for excuses, but move to
get the job done, and even experience fun at the workplace.
De Waal (2008), states that in high-performing organizations, management will
combine varying characteristics to achieve its purpose; some of the characteristics will
include maintaining a high quality of management style where employees are treated
with respect, and feel valued, management have personal and honest relationships with
employees such that they feel they can trust the managers; an open culture with action
orientation, such that employees feel they are consulted in matters arising in the
organization, and see action being taken as a result of such consultation; long term
commitments to partners and employees by being customer oriented and building solid

and long term partnerships, also with employees such that there is a sense of job
security and a sense of being valued; commitment to continual improvement to make
processes better to improve efficiency and be more effective, encouraging innovation
and harnessing good traits and competences, also realising and acknowledging gaps and
filling these by outsourcing needed competencies to achieve the desired results;
investment in quality employees, by ensuring well seasoned employees are recruited
with the right skills for the job with programmes in place for continual improvement of
employee competencies.
In reality, high performing organizations will most likely contain a high or good mix of
these characteristics, as it is doubtful that any one organization can claim credibility for
exhibiting all of these attributes, as sometimes, the mode of business may influence to
some degree what characteristics an organization can have or even groom to maturity.
What remains crucial is that an organization determines what is important to its
achieving its goal and then efforts can be targeted towards these so that it attains the
high performance it desires. (De Waal, 2008:5)
Organizations are continually seeking ways to improve and better their performance and
these processes sometimes involve drastic measures of change, either in their cultures or
processes or systems. The capacity of these organizations to manage the change process
also depends on whether or not they are high performers, therefore the change process
needs to be properly managed to be effective. There are common assumptions that some
changes, especially to the more physical or aesthetic structures, will improve an
organization's performance. Depending on the nature of business of an organization,
this may be a misconception while in some other organization; it may be a step in the
right direction. A lot of literature has revealed that there is definitely not one right
answer as it is mostly working towards achieving a combination of different traits that
catapults an organization into being a high performing one.
Summarily, Kirkman, Bradley & Lowe (1999) in their review of existing literature on
high performing work organizations arrive at five characteristics of high performing
organizations to have a high level of teams self- managing their work, good/total
management of quality, use of efficient technologies to aid business, good employee
involvement, engagement and empowerment levels, and awareness of organizations to
learn from both internal and external factors in order to improve on methods and
systems or adapt to their environment or be prepared for changes to come. Kirkman,

Bradley & Lowe (1999; 8) then defined a high performing organization as an

''organizational system that continually aligns its strategy, goals, objectives and internal
operations with the demands of its external environment to maximize organizational
performance''. This definition based on their findings summarises what a high
performing organization should be - i.e. be dynamic in ensuring it achieves its goal.
However, in the writer's opinion, the concept of the culture of the organization may have
been down played in the above definition; a definition such as ''an organization with a
system that continually and collaboratively encourages its people, values, strategies,
goals and systems to align with changing internal & external environment with the aim
of maximizing organizational performance'' - now has a people dimension to it (as
people are the primary resource and will have to be engaged (GAO, 2004: 10) to meet or
achieve organizational goals. The definition also ties in culture to the concept of high
performance as the culture of any organization will affect the perception and motivation
of these people to perform to their fullest capacities.

Impact of environment on Organizational Culture

Wilkins & Ouchi (1983; 468) suggest in their article that organizations also possess
cultures that are similar to those in the communities in which they function; this could
be a function of the people in the organization, exhibiting some cultural traits within the
organizational setting that has been influenced by that of their environment. Sorensen,
(2002: 70) in a paper, analyses the effect of strong cultures on the organization in
relation to their response to internal and external change and hypothesizes that strong
culture organizations will thrive in stable environments but encounter difficulties in
more volatile environments. This may not necessarily hold on all occasions, as a 'strong'
culture could also mean availability of the capacity required to adapt to the more volatile
environments. The literature reviewed (GAO, 2004: 10; Bradley & Lowe. 1999) showed
that organizations also need to be able to adapt to both internal and external factors if
they are to thrive and excel.
In a recent study, looking at organizational culture, firm's characteristics and external
environment of firms (in Turkey) on management Accounting Practices, Alper (2012)
notes that organizational culture '' could be considered as a linking pin between society
and organization''.

Summary

This chapter examined existing literature in the subject of organizational culture and its
relationship with performance to set a background and define the scope for the research
Organizational culture was seen to have a wide number of variables. See table 2.2 for a
compiled list, which by no means is conclusive, of some of the variable
components/traits encountered. The chapter began by examining organizational culture
and its evolution in the organizational setting. The subject of portfolio performance was
then examined next and narrowed down to the public sector context, as this was most
relevant to the research. The concept of portfolio management was also examined in the
same public sector and then went on to tie the culture - performance relationship. The
concept of high performing organizations was also examined and this was followed by a
brief examination of the impact of the environment on an organization's culture.
The literature showed that there is a relationship (of varying strengths across
organizations or business sectors) between the various traits of an organization's culture
and the performance of its portfolio as the cultural traits support or aid employees in
executing their duties, and because success means different things in all organizations,
the culture of the organization has to be adapted to meet its business needs. These traits
can be influenced by leaders and employees alike, as well as by the environment or
location. (Khan & Afzal, 2011). The degree to which these traits are shaped and modified
to support the organization will determine their performance level; and this is a
continuous process throughout the organizational life cycles as organizations are
striving to be high performing at all times.
Organizational culture
Variable components
Organizational culture: the research showed that there are different variable
components constituted in a variety of mixes and these vary by organization; especially
as the nature of business vary as well.
The various components constituted in organizational culture as encountered in
literature reviewed include:
Leadership, organizational strategies, human resources, organizational goals,
organizational resources, task organization, organizational structure, organizational
purpose, responsiveness, organizational climate, openness, organizational values,

organizational processes, methods of assessment, worker attitudes and goals, flexibility,

flexibility in employee working patterns, employee involvement, employee participation,

Table 2.2: Variables constituted in the

organizational culture definition.