Infulence of Organizational Culture on Job Satisfaction

8/4/2019 Infulence of Organizational Culture on Job Satisfaction

1/113

Firstly, we express our sincere thanks to Allah that

he gave us the ability to do this project. This project is

a requirement for the fulfillment of the degree of BBA

(B&F). We tried to do it to the best of our ability but we

hereby acknowledge that this project could not have been

brought into completion without the help and support of our

teacher Sir Fida Hussain Bukhari. We are very thankful to

him for his precious time which he gave us to finalize the

project work. We cant find words to thank and appreciate

his care.

Finally thanks to our loving parents, who provided us

every suitable support both morally and financially and

always prayed for us. Without their prayers and Allahs

blessings, it was impossible for us to complete this

project.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT


2/113

This project, Influence of Organizational Culture on

Job Satisfaction is basically a causal research. In our

research we tried to find out the cause and effect

relationship between different types of organizational

cultures and job satisfaction in Pakistan. We tried to

identify those types of organizational cultures which lead

to high job satisfaction and vice versa. This project

covers the different types of organizational cultures,

different theories to measure job satisfaction, instrument

used to identify the culture of an organization and

relationship between organizational culture and job

satisfaction. This project covers following chapters,

1. Introduction2. Literature Review3. Survey Method4. Data Analysis and Results5. Conclusion and Recommendations6. References/Bibliography7.Appendix

ABSTRACT


3/113

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


4/113

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 11.1 Introduction to the Topic 1

1.2 Background 3

1.2.1 Organizational Culture 3

1.2.2 Job Satisfaction 6

1.3 Definitions 8

1.3.1 Organizational Culture 8

1.3.2 Job Satisfaction 11

1.4 Background of Problem 12

1.5 Problem Statement 16

1.5.1 Hypothesis 16

2. Literature Review 172.1 Organizational Culture 17

2.1.1 Levels of Culture 18

2.2 Diagnosing Organizational Culture 23

2.2.1 Behavioral Approach 23

2.2.2 Deep Assumptions Approach 24

2.2.3 The Competing Values Approach 25

2.3 Measuring Culture through Competing Values 26

2.3.1 Organizational Culture AssessmentInstrument (OCAI) 32

2.4 Types of Culture 33

2.4.1 Control (Hierarchy) 33

2.4.2 Compete (Market) 36

2.4.3 Collaborate (Clan) 40


5/113

2.4.4 Create (Adhocracy) 42

2.5 Company Culture and Sub-Cultures 46

2.6 Job Satisfaction 47

2.6.1 What Is Job Satisfaction? 48

2.7 Measuring Job Satisfaction 51

2.7.1 Two-factor Theory 51

2.7.3 The Value Theory 53

2.7.4 The Met Expectations Theory 54

2.7.4 The Equity Theory 55

2.7.5 The Opponent Process Model of JobSatisfaction 56

2.8 Determinants of Job Satisfaction 57

2.8.1 Individual Determinants 58

2.8.2 Reward System 60

2.8.3 Culture 61

2.8.4 Work itself 63

2.8.5 Supervisory behavior 64

2.8.6 Working Condition 64

2.9 Relationship between Organizational Culture andJob satisfaction 67

3. Survey Method 723.1 Research Type 72

3.2 Target Population 72

3.3 Sample Size 72

3.4 Sampling Method 72

3.5 Instrument for the Study 73

3.6 Variables 74

3.6.1 Independent Variable 74


6/113

3.6.2 Dimensions of Independent Variable 75

3.6.2.1 Dominant Attributes 76

3.6.2.2 Leadership Style 76

3.6.2.3 Type of Bonding 77

3.6.2.4 Strategic Emphasis 78

3.6.3 Dependent Variable 79

3.6.4 Dimensions of Dependent Variable 79

3.6.4.1 Satisfaction with Work 80

3.6.4.2 Satisfaction with Co Workers 80

3.6.4.3 Satisfaction with Supervisor 80

3.6.4.4 Satisfaction with Pay & Benefits 80

3.6.4.5 Satisfaction with PromotionalOpportunities 80

3.7 Limitations and Assumptions in Research 814. Results 83

4.1 Demographic Characteristics 83

4.2 Culture Types and Job Satisfaction 86

4.3 Organic Culture vs. Mechanistic Culture 87

5.Conclusion and Recommendations 885.1 Conclusion 885.2 Recommendations 89

6.References 917.Appendix 94

7.1 Questionnaire 94

7.2 Tables and Calculation 100

7.2.1 Clan Culture 100

7.2.2 Adhocracy Culture 102


7/113

7.2.3 Hierarchy Culture 103

7.2.4 Market Culture 104


8/113

CHAPTER 1

8. Introduction1.1 Introduction to the Topic

For a long time, managers are becoming more and more

aware of the concept of organizational culture and are

examining it. Several studies have been conducted in this

regard explaining different types of cultures and the ways

that an organizational culture can affect an organization

itself and its impact on other employee-related variables

such as satisfaction, commitment, cohesion and performance

etc. One such study in that continuum Organizational

Culture and job satisfaction was conducted by Daulatram B

Lund Professor of marketing, University of Nevada, USA, in

2003. In that study he used Cameron and freemans (1991)

model of organizational culture which identifies four types

of organizational cultures. Professor B. Lund spotted out

the effect of each culture type on satisfaction of

employees.

This empirical investigation examines the impact of

organizational culture types on job satisfaction in a

survey of marketing professionals in a cross-section of


9/113

firms in the USA. Cameron and Freeman's (1991) model of

organizational cultures comprising of clan, adhocracy,

hierarchy, and market was utilized as the conceptual

framework for analysis. The results indicate that job

satisfaction levels varied across corporate cultural

typology. Within the study conceptual framework, job

satisfaction invoked an alignment of cultures on the

vertical axis that represents a continuum of organic

processes (with an emphasis on flexibility and spontaneity)

to mechanistic processes (which emphasize control,

stability, and order). Job satisfaction was positively

related to clan and adhocracy cultures, and negatively

related to market and hierarchy cultures.

We are using the same study as a benchmark and

replicating the same research project in context of

Pakistan (specifically Lahore). We used same Cameron and

Freemans model of organizational culture. The four types

of cultures identified by that model are Clan culture,

Hierarchy culture, Adhocracy culture and Market culture.

Every culture has its own unique attributes and

characteristics which are explained later in this project.

And how the level of contentment of employees varies in

each type of culture is also the part of this study.


10/113

Figure I.I Overview of the Relationship

1.2 Background

1.2.1 Organizational Culture

The Concept of the organizational culture gained

recognition in the early 1980s when prominent business

periodicals featured articles on Corporate Culture and

Organization (Lewis, 1996: Sheridan, 1992. Peters and

Waterman (1985) article, in the search of the Excellence

was the one of driving force behind the proliferation of

this concept. Organizational Culture is extremely broad and

Clan Culture

Market Culture

Adhocracy Culture

Hierarchy Culture

Job Satisfaction

Overview of the Relationship


11/113

inclusive in scope. It comprises a complex, interrelated,

comprehensive and ambiguous set of factors (Quinn & Cameron

1999).

According to Schein 1999, culture is the property of a

group that is formed when the group develops enough common

experience. He stated that culture is very important

phenomenon because it is an unconscious set of forces,

Determining both individual and collective behaviors,

Values, thought patterns, and way of perceiving.

At the organizational level, Schein (1999) stated that

organizational culture is very critical because cultural

elements determine strategy, goals, and modes of operating.

He postulated that for organizations to become more

efficient and effective, the role that culture plays in

organizational life must be fully understood because

decisions made without awareness of the operative cultural

forces may have anticipated and undesirable consequences.

Hatch and Schultz (1997) promulgated that

organizational culture develops at all hierarchical levels,

is founded on a broad-based history, and involves all

organizational members. They perceived organizational

culture as a symbolic context within which interpretation


12/113

of organizational identity is formed and intentions to

influence organizational image are formulated. The culture,

they stated, should be considered in explanation of the

development and maintenance of organizational identity.

Actually Organizational Culture one of the few areas,

in fact, in which organizational scholars led practicing

managers in identifying a crucial factor affecting

organizational performance. In most instances, practice

has led research, and scholars have focused mainly on

documenting, explaining, and building models of

organizational phenomena that were already being tried by

management (e.g., TQM, downsizing, reengineering, and

information technology). Organizational culture, however,

has been an area in which conceptual work and scholarship

have provided guidance for managers as they have searched

for ways to improve their organizations effectiveness.

The reason organizational culture was ignored as an

important factor in accounting for organizational

performance is that it refers to the taken-for-granted

values, underlying assumptions, expectations, and

definitions present in an organization. It represents how

things are around here. It reflects the prevailing

ideology that people carry inside their heads. It conveys


13/113

a sense of identity to employees, provides unwritten and,

often, unspoken guidelines for how to get along in the

organization, and enhances the stability of the social

system that they experience. Unfortunately, people are

unaware of their culture until it is challenged, until they

experience a new culture, or until it is made overt and

explicit through, for example, a framework or model. This

is why culture was ignored for so long by managers and

scholars. It is simply undetectable most of the time.

1.2.2 Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction has received significant attention in

the studies of work place. This is due to general

recognition that this variable can be major determinant of

organizational performance and effectiveness. Some studies

have reported strong correlations of the job satisfaction

and organizational commitment (Behnkoff 1997). When the

employees are dissatisfied at work, they less committed and

will look for other opportunities to quit. If the

opportunities are unavailable, they may emotionally or

mentally withdraw from the organization. Thus the job

satisfaction and organizational commitment are important

attitudes in assessing employees intentions to quit and

overall contribution to the organization. Here


14/113

Organizational commitment can be considered as a part or

consequence of job satisfaction because it is ultimately

the organizational commitment which will affect the

performance of an organization.

The concept of job satisfaction, in relation with

other organization variables, has been studied many times

such as task demands (Dodd and Ganster 1996, Zaffare 1994,

Ting 1997 and Blau 1999), job satisfaction and leader

member exchange (Podsakaff et al, 1996 , Sparks and Schenk,

2001) , job satisfaction and social structure (Sargent and

Terry 2000) ,task demand, social structure and job

satisfaction (Seers and Graen 1984, De Jonge 2001) ,job

satisfaction and commitment (Lincoln and Kalleberg (1990) ,

Vandenberg and Lance (1992) , Farkas and Tetric (1989) and

Currivan (1999) job satisfaction and demographic

characteristics such as age, gender, tenure, and education

(Clark, 1993; Clark and Oswald, 1995; Hickson and

Oshagbemi, 1999; Oshagbemi, 1998, 2000)

These studies show that a lot of work has been done on

determining the relationship between job satisfaction and

different variables but few efforts are made on determining

the relationship of job satisfaction with organizational

culture. Out of these few Odom et al. (1990) examined the


15/113

relationships between organizational culture and three

elements of employee behavior, namely, commitment, work-

group cohesion and job satisfaction. They concluded that

the bureaucratic culture was not the culture most

conductive to the creation of employee commitment, job

satisfaction and work cohesion. Nystrom (1993) found that

employees in strong culture tend to express great

organizational commitment as well as higher job

satisfaction. He investigated health care organizations.

One of the actual investigations concerning the

relationship of job satisfaction and organization culture

has been done by Daulatram B. Lund who conducted a research

on marketing professionals in cross section of firms in the

USA. He used Cameron and Freemans (1991) model of

organizational culture, comprising of clan, adhocracy,

hierarchy, and market, as the conceptual framework for

analysis.

1.3 Definitions

1.3.1Organizational Culture

Although over 150 definitions of culture have been

identified (Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952), the two main

disciplinary foundations of organizational culture are


16/113

sociological (e.g., organizations have cultures) and

anthropological (e.g., organizations are cultures). Within

each of these disciplines, two different approaches to

culture were developed: a functional approach (e.g.,

culture emerges from collective behavior) and a semiotic

approach (e.g., culture resides in individual

interpretations and cognitions). The primary distinctions

are differences between culture as an attribute possessed

by organizations versus culture as a metaphor for

describing what organizations are. The former approach

assumes that researchers and managers can identify

differences among organizational cultures, can change

cultures, and can empirically measure cultures. The latter

perspective assumes that nothing exists in organizations

except culture, and one encounters culture anytime one rubs

up against any organizational phenomena. Culture is a

potential predictor of other organizational outcomes (e.g.,

effectiveness) in the former perspective, whereas in the

latter perspective it is a concept to be explained

independent of any other phenomenon.

Most discussions of organizational culture (Cameron &

Ettington, 1988; OReilly & Chatman, 1996; Schein, 1996)

agree with the idea that culture is a socially constructed


17/113


18/113

as situations change and new information is encountered.

The approach to change in this article focuses squarely on

cultural attributes rather than climate attributes. It

considers the links among cognitions, human interactions,

and tangible symbols or artifacts typifying an

organization (Detert, Schroeder, & Mauriel, 2000:853), or,

in other words, the way things are in the organization

rather than peoples transitory attitudes about them.

Organizational culture is defined by Brent Ruben and

Lea Stewart (1998) as the sum of an organization's symbols,

events, traditions, standardized verbal and nonverbal

behavior patterns, folk tales, rules, and rituals that give

the organization its character or personality. Ruben and

Stewart note that organizational cultures are central

aspects of organizations and serve important communication

functions for the people who create and participate in

them.

1.3.2 Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction can be defined in many ways as there

is no universal definition of the concept of job

satisfaction (Mumford, 1991), it can be considered as a

multi-dimensional concept that includes a set of favorable

or unfavorable feelings by which employees perceive their


19/113

job (Davis and Newstro, 1999). Churchill (1974) defines job

satisfaction according to all the characteristics of the

job itself and of the work environment in which employees

may find rewards, fulfillment and satisfaction, or

conversely, sentiments of frustration and/or

dissatisfaction. Price and Muller (1986) identify job

satisfaction by the degree to which individuals like their

job. Job satisfaction has been defined as a positive

emotional state resulting from the pleasure a worker

derives from the job (Locke, 1976; Spector, 1997) and as

the affective and cognitive attitudes held by an employee

about various aspects of their work (Kalleberg, 1977;

Mercer, 1997; Wright and Cropanzan, 1997; Wong, 1998. In

general, overall job satisfaction has been defined as a

function of the perceived relationship between that one

wants from ones job and what one perceive it as

offering(Locke, 1969).

1.4 Background of Problem

The concept of culture is half a century old. Culture

has always been a cornerstone variable in the study of

International Business Subjects. Organizational culture

refers to a system of' shared meaning held by members that

distinguishes the organization from other organizations.


20/113

This system of shared meaning is, on closer examination, a

set of key characteristics that the organization values.

An organization's culture can be understood as the sum

total of the assumptions, beliefs, and values that its

members' share and is expressed through "what is done, how

it is done, and who is doing it." Organizational culture is

the specific collection of values and norms that are shared

by people and groups in an organization and that control

the way they interact with each other and with stakeholders

outside the organization.

All organizations have cultures just like all people

have a personality. A culture is a persistent way,

patterned way of thinking about the tasks of human

relationships within an organization.

On the other hand job satisfaction is a multi-

dimensional concept that includes a set of favorable or

unfavorable feelings by which employees perceive their job.

Job satisfaction can be identified by the degree to which

individuals like their job. Job satisfaction has been

defined as a positive emotional state resulting from the

pleasure a worker derives from the job (Locke, 1976;

Spector, 1997) and as the affective and cognitive attitudes

held by an employee about various aspects of their work


21/113

(Kalleberg, 1977; Mercer, 1997; Wright and Cropanzan, 1997;

Wong, 1998. In general, overall job satisfaction has been

defined as a function of the perceived relationship

between that one wants from ones job and what one perceive

it as offering(Locke, 1969).

There has been a long debate amongst researchers

regarding the relationship between organizational culture

and job satisfaction. Many researchers have found

supporting evidence about the relationship between these

two.

By reviewing many articles that a lot of work has been

done on determining the relationship between job

satisfaction and different variables but few efforts are

made on determining the relationship of job satisfaction

with organizational culture. Out of these few Odom et al.

(1990) examined the relationships between organizational

culture and three elements of employee behavior, namely,

commitment, work-group cohesion and job satisfaction. They

concluded that the bureaucratic culture was not the culture

most conductive to the creation of employee commitment, job

satisfaction and work cohesion. Nystrom (1993) found that

employees in strong culture tend to express great


22/113

organizational commitment as well as higher job

satisfaction. He investigated health care organizations.

One of the actual investigations concerning the

relationship of job satisfaction and organization culture

has been done by Daulatram B. Lund, who conducted a

research on marketing professionals in cross section of

firms in the USA. He used Cameron and Freemans (1991)

model of organizational culture, comprising of clan,

adhocracy, hierarchy, and market, as the conceptual

framework for analysis.

On the basis of this study we are examining the impact

of organizational culture on job satisfaction in Pakistan.

For this purpose we have selected different organizations,

service and manufacturing in Pakistan in order to examine

the impact of different types of cultures in job

satisfaction.


23/113

1.5 Problem Statement

Our research is about the influence of the

organizational culture on job satisfaction. In this study

we will identify the type of organizational culture in

which employees have higher level of job satisfaction.

Basically there are four types organizational culture- Clan

Culture, Market Culture, Adhocracy Culture, Hierarchy

Culture. We combined these cultures into two groups on the

basis of some common dimensions. These groups are named as

Organic Culture (clan and adhocracy) and Mechanistic

Culture (hierarchy and market). For the purpose of research

we have developed two hypotheses which are as follows,

1.5.1 Hypothesis

H0: Employees in organic culture (clan & adhocracy)

have high level of job satisfaction than in mechanistic

culture (hierarchy & market).

H1: Employees in the mechanistic culture (hierarchy &

market) have high level of job satisfaction than in organic

culture (clan & adhocracy).


24/113

CHAPTER 2

9. Literature ReviewA number of articles from electronic journals and

public journals have been studied regarding the concerned

topics. Some related books have also been consulted.

Literature has been reviewed in terms of both researchers

and theorists point of view and the valuable findings are

as follow:

2.1 Organizational Culture

All organizations have cultures just like all people

have a personality. A culture is a persistent way,

patterned way of thinking about the tasks of human

relationships within an organization. In anthropology,

culture is the foundational term through which the

orderliness and patterning of much of our life experience

can be explained (Benedict, 1934) so; culture is the

inquiry into the phenomenon of social order. Culture gives

an organization distinctive way of seeing and responding to

the world. It expresses the values or social ideals and the

beliefs that organization members come to share (Louis,

1980; Siehl and Martin 1981). The values or patterns of


25/113

beliefs are manifested by symbolic devices such as myths

(Rowland, 1982), rituals (Deal and Kennedy, 1982), stories

(Mitroff and Kilmann, 1976), legends (Wilkin and Martin

1980) and specialized language (Andrew and Hirsch, 1983).

Edger Schein defines organizational culture as the

residue of success within an organization. According to

Schein, culture is the most difficult organizational

attribute to change. He describes three cognitive levels of

organizational culture. The culture of a group can be

defined as: A pattern of shared basic assumptions that the

group learned as it solved its problems of external

adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well

enough to be considered valid and therefore, to be taught

to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and

feel in relation to those problems. (Schein: 1985). Gareth

Morgan describes culture as "an active living phenomenon

through which people jointly creates and recreates the

worlds in which they live."

2.1.1Levels of Culture

There are many kinds or levels of culture that affect

individual and organizational behavior. At the broadest

level, a global culture, such as a world religions culture


26/113

or the culture of the Eastern hemisphere would be the

highest level. At a less general level are national

cultures (e.g., Pakistani culture) or subgroup cultures

such as gender-based cultures (i.e., distinctive ways in

which men and women view the world), ethnic group cultures

(e.g., differences between punjabi and pathan),

occupational cultures (e.g., police culture), or

socioeconomic group culture (e.g., rich versus poor). Each

of these cultures is generally reflected by unique

language, symbols, and ethnocentric feelings. Still less

broad is the culture of a single organization, which is the

level at which this study is aimed. An organizations

culture is reflected by what is valued, the dominant

managerial and leadership styles, the language and symbols,

the procedures and routines, and the definitions of success

that make an organization unique. This level of culture

analysis in relation with the job satisfaction is of

primary interest in this study. However these were

different cultures which affect the organizational behavior

and performance, further the organizational culture is

divided into three levels by Schein (1999).

According to Schein (1999), culture exists at several

levels in an organization, which go from very visible to


27/113

very tacit and invisible. Three levels for culture are

outlined here

1. ArtifactsThe first level is the most manifest

level and the easiest to observe. Artifacts are what you

can see, hear and feel in organization environment. It

consists of the physical and social organization, which

includes the architecture, technology, office layout,

manner of dress and how each person visibly interacts with

each other and with organizational outsiders, and even

company slogans, mission statements and other operational

creeds.

2. Espoused Values The second level explains the

behavior pattern in the first level. Constituents of this

level provide the underlying meanings and interrelations by

which the patterns of behaviors and artifacts may be

deciphered. At this level, local and personal values are

widely expressed within the organization. Organizational

behavior at this level usually can be studied by

interviewing the organization's membership and using

questionnaires to gather attitudes about organizational

membership.


28/113

3. Shared Tacit AssumptionsThe third level is an

unconscious level of culture at which the underlying values

have, over a period of time, been transformed and are taken

for granted as an organizationally acceptable way of

perceiving the world. The underlying basic assumptions,

which first started as espoused values are also the most

difficult to relearn and change. These are the elements of

culture that are unseen and not cognitively identified in

everyday interactions between organizational members.

Figure 2.1 4 Levels of Culture and their Interaction

(Schein, 1999)

These were different level of culture at

organizational level however inside an organization,


29/113

subunits such as functional departments, product groups, or

even teams may also reflect their own unique cultures.

Difficulties in coordinating and integrating processes or

organizational activities, for example, are often a result

of culture clashes among different subunits. For example,

it is common in many organizations to hear of conflicts

between marketing and manufacturing, or to hear of

disparaging comments about the fuzzy-headed HR department,

or to hear put-downs of the white-coats in R&D. One reason

is that each different unit often has developed its own

perspective, its own set of values, and its own culture. As

at macro level all units of the organization have to

coordinate and work together such cultural differences

influence the job satisfaction of individuals. It is easy

to see how these cultural differences can fragment an

organization and make high levels of effectiveness

impossible to achieve. Emphasizing subunit cultural

differences, in other words, can foster increase in job

dissatisfaction, alienation and conflict.

On the other hand, it is important to keep in mind

that each subunit in an organization also contains common

elements typical of the entire organization. Similar to a

hologram in which each unique element in the image contains


30/113

the characteristics of the entire image in addition to its

own identifying characteristics, subunit cultures also

contain core elements of the entire organizations culture

in addition to their own unique elements. There is always

underlying glue that binds the organization together. In

assessing an overall organizations culture, therefore, one

can focus on the entire organization as the unit of

analysis, or it is possible to assess different subunit

cultures, identify the common dominant attributes of the

subunit cultures, and aggregate them. This combination can

provide an approximation of the overall organizations

culture.

2.2 Diagnosing Organizational Culture

According to Cummings and Worley (1997), researchers

and practitioners have developed a number of useful

approaches for diagnosing organizational culture. They

described three different perspectives: the behavioral

approach, the Competing Values approach, and the deep

assumption approach. Each diagnostic perspective, even

though different, is yet complementary arid focuses on

particular aspects of organizational culture.

2.2.1 Behavioral Approach


31/113

According to Cummings and Worley (1997), the

behavioral approach provides specific descriptions about

task performance and the management of relationships in an

organization. It emphasizes the surface level of

organizational culture, the pattern of behaviors that

produce business results and assesses key work behaviors

that can be observed. The behavioral approach can be used

to diagnose and assess the cultural risk of trying to

implement organizational changes needed to support a new

strategy because significant cultural risks can result when

changes that are highly important to implementing a new

strategy are incompatible with the existing patterns of

behavior. It is an important approach to use when managers

want to determine whether implementation plans should be

changed to manage around the existing culture, whether the

culture should be changed, or whether the strategy itself

should be modified or abandoned.

2.2.2 Deep Assumptions Approach

The deep assumption approach typically begins with the

most tangible level of awareness and then works down to the

deep assumptions. It emphasizes the deepest levels of

organizational culture, which are the generally unexamined

assumptions, values, and norms that guide members behavior


32/113

and that often have a powerful impact upon organization

effectiveness.

2.2.3 The Competing Values Approach

The Competing Values approach assesses an

organizations culture in terms of how it resolves a set of

value dilemmas. It suggests that an organizations culture

can be understood in terms of four important value pairs;

each pair consists of contradictory values placed at

opposite ends of a continuum. The four value pairs are

internal focus versus external focus, organic processes

versus mechanistic processes, innovation versus stability,

and people orientation versus task orientation.

Organizations are faced with these competing values of

internal versus external focus and must choose between

attending to internal operations or their external

environment for continued survival. Too much emphasis on

either can result in missing important changes in the

competitive environment. As our study is identify

organizational culture in which people have more job

satisfaction and for the identification of organizational

culture we will use competing values frame work. Therefore


33/113

Competing Values Approach will be explained briefly here so

that we can understand that how this approach will be used

in our research method.

2.3 Measuring Organizational Culture through Competing

Values

Through decades of empirical research, scholars have

established abundant links between organizational culture

and organizational performance. While previously businesses

were either unaware of cultures importance or believed it

too difficult to manage, today they recognize that it can

be used for competitive advantage. This is something that

Apple Computer gets. By leveraging their culture of

innovation toward product as well as internal processes,

they have been able to survive despite incredible

competition as well as venture into new and profitable

markets. But in order to use culture strategically, a

company first needs to understand its culture. Culture is

defined as complex issue that essentially includes all of a

groups shared values, attitudes, beliefs, assumptions,

artifacts, and behaviors. Culture is broad encompassing all

aspects of its internal and external relationships and

culture is deep in that it guides individual actions even

to the extent that members are not even aware they are


34/113

influenced by it. Scholars tend to agree that the root of

any organizations culture is grounded in a rich set of

assumptions about the nature of the world and human

relationships. For example, the underlying belief that

people are selfish and only out for themselves might

unwittingly influence a companys attitudes and behaviors

toward outside salespeople, vendors, and consultants. This

is profound stuff that is largely invisible, unspoken, and

unknown to an organizations members. So is it possible to

really know a companys culture? While admittedly it would

be very difficult (and some might claim impossible) task to

fully account for all components of a companys culture,

the dominant attributes can generally be identified. In

focusing on effective organizations, research has

uncovered many critical dimensions. John Campbell (1974)

and his fellow researchers identified thirtynine important

indicators. While such a list is helpful, it is still

impractical for organizations to account for so many

dimensions to identify their own culture. Realizing this,

Robert Quinn and John Rohrbaugh (1983) reviewed the results

of many studies on this topic and determined that two major

dimensions could account for such a broad range. Their

Competing Values Framework combines these two dimensions,

creating a 2x2 matrix with four clusters.


35/113

The Competing Values Framework has proven to be a

helpful framework for assessing and profiling the dominant

cultures of organizations because it helps individuals

identify the underlying cultural dynamics that exist in

their organizations. This framework was developed in the

early 1980s as a result of studies of organizational

effectiveness (Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1981), followed by

studies of culture, leadership, structure, and information

processing (Cameron, 1986; Cameron & Quinn, 1999).

The framework consists of two dimensions, one that

differentiates a focus on flexibility, discretion, and

dynamism from a focus on stability, order, and control.

Some organizations are effective if they are changing,

adaptable, and organic, whereas other organizations are

effective if they are stable, predictable, and mechanistic.

This dimension ranges from organizational versatility and

pliability (flexibility) on one end to organizational

steadiness and durability on the other end.

The second dimension differentiates a focus on an

internal orientation, integration, and unity from a focus

on an external orientation, differentiation, and rivalry.

That is, some organizations are effective if they have

harmonious internal characteristics, whereas others are


36/113

effective if they focus on interacting or competing with

others outside their boundaries. This dimension ranges from

organizational cohesion and consonance on the one end to

organizational separation and independence on the other.

Together these two dimensions form four quadrants, each

representing a distinct set of organizational effectiveness

indicators. Figure 1 illustrates the relationships of

these two dimensions to one another along with the

resulting four quadrants. These dimensions have been found

to represent what people value about an organizations

performance, what they define as good, right, and

appropriate, how they process information, and what

fundamental human needs exist, and which core values are

used for forming judgments and taking action (Beyer &

Cameron, 1997; Cameron & Ettington, 1988; Lawrence, 2001;

Mitroff, 1983; Wilber, 2000).


37/113


38/113

internal orientation, integration, and unity at one end of

the scale with external orientation, differentiation, and

rivalry on the other. Some organizations are effective

through focusing on themselves and their internal processes

If we improve our efficiency and do things right, we will

be successful in the marketplace. Others excel by focusing

on the market or competition Our rivals have weak customer

service, so this is where we will differentiate ourselves.

What is notable about these dimensions is that they

represent opposite or competing assumptions. Each

continuum highlights a core value that is opposite from the

value on the other end of the continuum i.e., flexibility

versus stability, internal versus external. The

dimensions, therefore, produce quadrants that are also

contradictory or competing on the diagonal. The upper left

quadrant identifies values that emphasize an internal,

organic focus, whereas the lower right quadrant identifies

values that emphasize external, control focus. Similarly,

the upper right quadrant identifies values that emphasize

external, organic focus whereas the lower left quadrant

emphasizes internal, control values. These competing or

opposite values in each quadrant give rise the name for the

model, the Competing Values Framework.


39/113

Further work on defining how each of the four

quadrants (formed by combining these two dimensions) is

related to company characteristics was conducted by Kim

Cameron and Robert Quinn (1999). Each quadrant represents

those features a company feels is the best and most

appropriate way to operate. In other words these quadrants

represent their basic assumptions, beliefs, and values, the

stuff of culture. None of the quadrants Collaborate (clan),

Create (adhocracy), Control (hierarchy), and Compete

(market) is inherently better than another just as no

culture is necessarily better than another. But, some

cultures might be more appropriate in certain contexts than

others. As objective of our study is to identify the

culture in which the workers are most satisfied. In this

context we can say just take an assumption that, clan

culture creates more job satisfaction. The keys to using

culture to improve performance lies in matching culture or

attributes to organizational goals.

2.3.1 Organizational Culture Assessment

Instrument (OCAI)

It is a questionnaire type of the instrument used to

measure organizational culture. This tool consists of six

dimensions and each dimension has four alternative answers,


40/113

used to access six key dimensions of an organization. Six

key dimensions of this instrument are as follows,

1. Dominant Characteristics of the Organization

2. Organizational Leadership

3. Management of Employees

4. Organizational Glue

5. Strategic Emphases

6. Criteria of Success

In our research we used four of them- Dominant

Characteristics, Leadership, Glue (Bonding), Strategic

Emphasis, because of limitations of our research. As if we

take all these dimensions length of the questionnaire would

have increased and administration time would increase.

Normally respondents do not fill lengthy questionnaires and

exhausts. Because of such factors we take most important

dimensions required to identify culture of an organization.

2.4 Types of Culture

Now we will see four major types of organizational

culture.


41/113

2.4.1 Control (Hierarchy)

This is a formalized and structured work environment.

Procedures decide what people do. Leaders are proud of

their efficiency-based coordination. Keeping the

organization functioning effortlessly is most vital. Formal

rules and policy keep the organization together. The long-

term goals are stability and results, paired with efficient

and smooth execution of tasks. Trustful delivery, smooth

planning, and low costs define success. The personnel

management has to guarantee work and values predictability.

Hierarchical organizations share similarities with the

stereotypical large, bureaucratic corporation. As in the

values matrix, they are defined by stability and control as

well as internal focus and integration. They value

standardization, control, and a well-defined structure for

authority and decision making. Effective leaders in

hierarchical cultures are those that can organize,

coordinate, and monitor people and processes. Good examples

of companies with hierarchical cultures are McDonalds

(think standardization and efficiency) and government

agencies like the Department of Motor Vehicles (think rules

and bureaucracy). As well, having many layers of management

like Ford Motor Company with their seventeen levels is


42/113


43/113

organizational studies made the assumption that Webers

hierarchy or bureaucracy was the ideal form of organization

because it led to stable, efficient, highly consistent

products and services. Because the environment was

relatively stable, tasks and functions could be integrated

and coordinated, uniformity in products and services was

maintained, and workers and jobs were tinder control. Clear

lines of decision-making authority, standardized rules and

procedures, and control and accountability mechanisms were

valued as the keys to success.

The organizational culture compatible with this form

(and as assessed in the OCAI) is characterized by a

formalized and structured place to work. Procedures govern

what people do. Effective leaders are good coordinators and

organizers. Maintaining a smooth running organization is

important. The long term concerns of the organization are

stability, predictability, and efficiency. Formal rules and

policies hold the organization together.

2.4.2 Compete (Market)

This is a results-based organization that highlights

completing work and getting things done. People are

competitive and concentrated on goals. Leaders are hard


44/113

drivers, producers, and competitors at the same time. They

are demanding and have high expectations. The emphasis on

winning keeps the organization together. Reputation and

success are the most important. Lasting focus is on rival

activities and reaching goals. Market penetration and stock

are the definitions of success. Competitive prices and

market leadership are important. The organizational style

is based on competition.

This form of organizing became popular during the late

1960s as organizations laced new competitive challenges.

This form relied on a fundamentally different set of

assumptions than the hierarchy and was based largely on the

work of Oliver Williamson (1975), Bill Ouchi (I 9S 1), and

their colleagues. These organizational scholars identified

an alternative set of activities that they argued served as

the foundation of organizational effectiveness. The most

important of these was transaction costs.

The new design was referred to as a market form of

organization. The term marker is not synonymous with the

marketing (unction or with consumers in the marketplace.

Rather, it refers to a type of organization that functions

as a market itself. It is oriented toward the external

environment instead of internal affairs. It is focused on


45/113

transactions with (mainly) external constituencies such as

suppliers, customers, contractors, licensees, unions, and

regulators. And unlike a hierarchy, where internal control

is maintained by rules, specialized jobs, and centralized

decisions, the market operates primarily through economic

market mechanisms, mainly monetary exchange. That is, the

major focus of markets is to conduct transactions

(exchanges, sales, contracts) with other constituencies to

create competitive advantage. Portability, bottom-line

results, strength in marker niches, stretch targets, and

secure customer bases are primary objectives of the

organization. Not surprisingly, the core values that

dominate market-type organizations are competitiveness and

productivity.

Competitiveness and productivity in market

organizations arc achieved through a strong emphasis on

external positioning and control. At Philips Electronics,

for example, the loss of market share in Europe and a

first- ever year of red ink in 1991 led to a corporation

wide initiative to improve the competitive position of the

firm. Under the leadership of a new CEO, the worldwide

organization instituted a process called Centurion in which

a concerted effort was made to shift the companys culture


46/113

froth a relatively complacent, arrogant, hierarchy culture

to a culture driven by customer focus, premium returns on

assets, and improved corporate competitivenessa market

culture. Three yearly meetings were held to assess

performance and to establish new stretch targets.

Assessments using the OCAI showed a substantial shift

toward a market-driven culture from the early 1990s to the

mid-1990s.

A similar example of a market culture is a Philips

competitor, General Electric. General Electrics former

CEO, Jack Welch, made it clear in the late 1980s that if GE

businesses were not number one or number two in their

markets, they would be sold. Welch taught and sold over

three hundred businesses during his twenty-one year tenure

as CEO. The GE culture under Wetch was known as a highly

competitive, results-or-wise, take-no-prisoners type of

culture. It reflected a stereotypical market culture.

The basic assumptions in a market culture are that the

external environment is not benign but hostile, consumers

arc choosy and interested in value, the organization is in

the business of increasing its competitive position, and

the major task of management is to drive the organization

toward productivity, results, and profits. It is assumed


47/113

that a clear purpose and an aggressive strategy lead to

productivity and profitability. In the words of General

George Patron (1944), market Organizations arc not

interested in holding on to their positions. Let the enemy

do that. [They] arc advancing all the time, defeating the

opposition, marching constantly toward the goal.

A market culture, as assessed in the OCAI, is a

results-oriented workplace. Leaders are hard-driving

producers and competitors. They arc rough and demanding.

The glue that holds the organization together is an

emphasis on winning. The long-term concern is on

competitive actions and achieving stretch goals and

targets. Success is defined in terms of market share and

penetration. Outpacing the competition and market

leadership are important.

Even as parent figures. The organization is held

together by loyalty and tradition. Commitment is high. The

organization emphasizes the long-term benefit of individual

development, with high cohesion and morale being important.

Success is defined in terms of internal climate and concern

for people. The organization places a premium on teamwork,

participation, and consensus.


48/113

2.4.3 Collaborate (Clan)

This working environment is a friendly one. People

have a lot in common, and its like one big family. The

leaders are seen as mentors or maybe even as father

figures. The organization is held together by loyalty and

tradition. There is great participation. The organization

emphasizes long-term Human Resource development and bonds

fellow workers by morals. Success is described within the

framework of addressing the needs of the clients and caring

for the people. The organization endorses teamwork,

participation, and consensus

In the values matrix Collaborate (clan) are similar to

Control (hierarchy) in that there is an inward focus with

concern for integration. However, Collaborate (clan)

emphasize flexibility and discretion rather than the

stability and control of Control (hierarchy) and Compete

(market) organizations. With the success of many Japanese

firms in the late 1970s and 1980s, American corporations

began to take note of the different way they approached

business. Unlike American national culture, which is

founded upon individualism, Japanese firms had a more team-

centered approach. This basic understanding affected the

way that Japanese companies structured their companies and


49/113

approached problems. Their Collaborate (clan) organizations

operated more like families hence they valued cohesion, a

humane working environment, group commitment, and loyalty.

Companies were made up of semi-autonomous teams that had

the ability to hire and fire their own members and

employees were encouraged to participate in determining how

things would get done. A good example of a Collaborate

(clan) in American business is Toms of Maine, which

produces all natural toothpastes, soaps, and other hygiene

products. The founder, Tom Chappell, grew the company to

respect relationships with coworkers, customers, owners,

agents, suppliers, the community, and the environment.

According to their company statement of beliefs, they aim

to provide their employees with a safe and fulfilling

environment and an opportunity to grow and learn. Typical

of Collaborate (clan) cultures, Toms of Maine, is like an

extended family with high morale and Tom himself takes on

the role of mentor or parental figure.

2.4.4 Create (Adhocracy)

This is a dynamic and creative working environment.

Employees take risks. Leaders are innovators and risk

takers. Conducting experiments and originality are the

linking materials within the organization. Distinction is


50/113

emphasized. The long-term goal is to develop and treat new

resources. The availability of new products or services is

seen as an achievement. The organization encourages

individual ingenuity and freedom.

As the developed world shifted from the industrial age

to the information age, an ideal type of organizing

emerged. It is an organizational form that is most

responsive to the hyper turbulent, ever-accelerating

conditions that increasingly typify the organizational

world of the twenty-first century. With rapidly decreasing

half- life of product and service advantages, a set of

assumptions were developed that differed from those of the

other three forms of organization. These assumptions were

that innovative and pioneering initiatives arc what leads

to success, that organizations are mainly in the business

of developing new products and services and preparing for

the future, and that the major task of management is to

foster entrepreneurship, creativity, and activity on the

cutting edge. It was assumed that adaptation and

innovativeness lead to new resources and profitability, so

emphasis was placed on creating a vision of the future,

organized anarchy, and disciplined imagination.


51/113

The root of the word adhocracy is ad hoc- implying

something temporary, specialized, and dynamic. Most people

have served on an ad hoc task force or committee, which

disbands as soon as its task is completed. Adhocracies are

similarly temporary. They have been characterized as tents

rather than palaces in that they can reconfigure

themselves rapidly when new circumstances arise. A major

goal of an adhocracy is to foster adaptability flexibility,

and creativity where uncertainty, ambiguity, and

information overload arc typical.

The adhocracy organization may frequently be found in

industries such as aerospace, software development, think-

tank consulting, and filmmaking. An important challenge for

these organizations is to produce and services and products

and services and to adapt quickly to new opportunities.

Unlike markets or hierarchies, adhocracies do not have

centralized power or authority relationships. Instead,

power flows from individual to individual or from task team

to task team, depending on what problem is being addressed

at the time. Emphasis on individuality, risk taking, and

anticipating the future is high as almost everyone in an

adhocracy becomes involved with production, clients,

research and development, and other matters. For example,


52/113


53/113

organization operated with an adhocratic design and

reflected values typical of an adhocracy culture.

Sometimes adhocratic subunits exist in larger

organizations that have a dominant culture of a different

type.

In the values matrix Create (adhocracy) are similar to

Collaborate (clan) in that they emphasize flexibility and

discretion; however, they do not share the same inward

focus. Instead they are like Compete (market) in their

external focus and concern for differentiation.

2.5 Company Culture and Sub-Cultures

It is very important to note that all organizational

culture types focused on companies as a whole. Other

research being conducted around the same time as the

Competing Values Framework Martin and Siehl (1983), Louis

(1983), Gregory (1983) emphasizes that the company culture

is not homogeneous. Schein (1999) notes that this is not

necessarily dysfunctional, rather it allows the company to

perform effectively in different environments based on

function, product, market, location, etc. In order to get a

more accurate picture of the company, it is important to

understand not only the company organizational type, but


54/113

the cultures of departments or other important groups as

well. The same organizational culture types Control

(hierarchy), Compete (market), Collaborate (clan), Create

(adhocracy) apply at both levels(Organizational and

Departments). So, a Control (hierarchy) company may contain

a research group that is a Create (adhocracy), an

engineering department that is a Compete (market), and a

human resources department that is a Collaborate (clan).

2.6 Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction describes how content an individual

is with his or her job. The happier people are within their

job, the more satisfied they are said to be. Job

satisfaction is not the same as motivation, although it is

clearly linked. Job design aims to enhance job satisfaction

and performance, methods include job rotation, job

enlargement and job enrichment. Other influences on

satisfaction include the management style and culture,

employee involvement, empowerment and autonomous work

groups. Job satisfaction is a very important attribute

which is frequently measured by organizations. The most

common way of measurement is the use of rating scales where

employees report their reactions to their jobs. Questions

relate to rate of pay, work responsibilities, variety of


55/113

tasks, promotional opportunities the work itself and co-

workers.

Attitudes are significant because they influence

behavior at work either directly or indirectly. Few

concepts in the field of organizational behavior and human

resource management have attracted as much attention among

both managers and researchers as the specific employee

attitude called Job Satisfaction. Consequently, it is

acknowledged as the most well-known, frequently measured,

and extensively researched work attitude.

2.6.1 What Is Job Satisfaction?

If we were to invite views from people on how they

feel about their jobs, we would most probably find that

they have strong emotional reactions pertaining to their

jobs. This is not unexpected considering that employees

spend approximately one third of their lives at work.

Broadly speaking, we can define job satisfaction as an

individuals overall attitude toward his/her job. Locke

(1976) has given a comprehensive and universally popular

definition of job satisfaction. He defines job satisfaction

as a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting

from the appraisal of ones job or job experience. It is


56/113

an end state of feelings and consists of an employees

cognitive, affective, and evaluative reactions to his/her

job.

Pareek (198) in his integrated model of work

motivation states that the final psychological outcome of

the persons working in an organization is the satisfaction

he/she derives 1mm his/her work and role.

Job satisfaction has been regarded both as a general

attitude as well as satisfaction with specific dimensions

of the job such as pay. The work itself, promotion

opportunities, supervision, co-workers and so forth. These

may interact in different ways to create the feeling of

satisfaction with the job. The degree of satisfaction may

vary with how well outcomes fulfill or exceed expectations.

Mumford (199) analyzed job satisfaction in two ways. First,

in terms of the fit between what the organization requires

and what the employee is seeking and second, in terms of

the fit between what the employee is seeking and what

he/she is actually receiving.

Since an avenge employee spends almost one third of

his/her life in the organization. There are sonic concerns

that have to be addressed particularly in the context of

job satisfaction. These have to do with stability of


57/113

satisfaction, work context, and supervisory behavior. In an

intriguing research by Straw and Ross (1985), it was found

that job satisfaction is a comparatively stable disposition

and does not change overtime. In their survey of over 5000

men who changed jobs between 1969 and 1971, it was found

that the expressions of job satisfaction were relatively

stable. Although they had different type of jobs, employees

who were satisfied or dissatisfied in I 969 felt equally

satisfied or dissatisfied in 1971 too. Although some

researchers have challenged the disposition of stability of

job satisfaction, follow-up researches have, nevertheless,

supported it.

Work is inextricably bound with human existence .The

content and context of work should therefore promote,

rather than damage, human dignity. Kanungo (1992) pointed

out that managers have the moral obligation to empower

subordinates and thereby promote their growth and

development. He strongly emphasizes the need to analyze

work norms and conditions to see whether such practices

promote productive behaviour, high job satisfaction, and

overall improvement of work life and that they are

consistent with the dignity of the employees as human

beings. In an interesting study Page and Wiserman (1993)


58/113

asked workers from USA, Mexico, and Spain to indicate how

satisfied they were with their work and the behavior of

their superiors. Not only were their average responses to

both questions quite high but uniformly so in all three

countries. These studies show that job satisfaction is a

major concern of the employees. This is not surprising as

people do not select jobs randomly. They tend to be

attracted toward jobs that are compatible with their

interests, values, and abilities. Hence different people

join different jobs for different reasons, which make job

satisfaction a complex and multifaceted concept which can

mean various things to different people.

2.7 Measuring Job Satisfaction

Measuring job satisfaction has been a challenging

process to social scientists as it cannot be directly

observed nor accurately inferred. However several useful

techniques have been developed to measure job satisfaction.

However in our study we used five dimensions of job to

measure job satisfaction. These dimensions are pay, nature

of work, supervision, promotional prospects and

relationship with co-workers.

2.7.1 Two-factor Theory


59/113

Frederick Herzbergs two factor theory (also known as

Motivator Hygiene Theory) attempts to explain satisfaction

and motivation in the workplace. Herzberg suggested that

the opposite of satisfaction is no satisfaction and the

opposite of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction.

According to Herzbergs theory, therefore, motivators when

present at high levels contribute to job satisfaction,

however, when absent do not lead to job dissatisfaction

just less satisfaction. Similarly, hygiene factors only

contribute to dissatisfaction when present but not to

satisfaction when absent.

Figure 2.3 Herzbergs Two Factor Theory

Research testing Herzbergs theory has produced mixed

results: some studies have supported Herzbergs findings

while others documented that hygiene and motivators had


60/113

strong effects on both job satisfaction and

dissatisfaction. Herzbergs theory has attracted voluminous

research in India also with the attempt being mostly to

validate the theory in India using different samples and

measurement methods. The findings are again conflicting. In

some studies the Two-Factor theory holds good

(Sutaria.1980), while in others it does not (Sarveswara and

Rao, 1973)

This theory has been heavily criticized for its

methodology (Schwab and Cummings. 1970). Besides, while

Herzberg assumed a correlation between satisfaction and

productivity in his methodology, he measured only

satisfaction and not productivity. Nevertheless, Herzbergs

work is useful in illustrating the conditions of a job that

employees find satisfying and dissatisfying. His theory has

also stimulated considerable research and theory on job

enlargement and job enrichment, (Machungaws and Schmitt,

1983).

2.7.3 The Value Theory

A second significant theory of job satisfaction is the

Value Theory proposed by Locke (1984). He proposed that job

satisfaction occurs when the job outcomes or the reward

that the employee receives matches with outcomes that are


61/113

desired by him. The theory focuses on any outcome that

people value regardless of their quality or quantity. Thus

the value attached to outcome is more important. The better

the outcome that they get the more satisfied they will be;

and the less valuable outcome they receive, the less

satisfied they will be. Essential to Lockes theory is,

therefore, the discrepancy between the present aspects of

the job and those that an employee desires such as pay,

learning opportunities, promotion, and so on. Lockes Value

Theory has been substantiated by a study of McFarlin and

Rice, (1992). One of the valuable implications of the

theory is that it focuses attention on those aspects of the

jobs that need to be changed for employees to experience

satisfaction. People perceive serious discrepancies between

the job and job satisfaction. But it also suggests that

these factors may not be the same for all.

In addition to these two theories of job satisfaction,

there are quite a few others. Some of the significant ones

are briefly presented below:

2.7.4 The Met Expectations Theory

This approach is based on the expectations that new

employees have about the job and how far these expectations

are met. It suggests that the employees will work to


62/113

achieve the outcomes they expect to follow after successful

performance (Porter and Steen, 1973), Workers become

dissatisfied if their expectations about their job are not

met. Review of the theory suggests that the correlation

between job satisfaction and met expectations is around

0.39 (Wanous et al 1992). One of the implications of the

Met Expectations theory is that one way of reducing

potential dissatisfaction among employees is to bring their

expectations in line with the reality. The idea of Met

Expectations suggests that the processes undergoing within

the person influence job dissatisfaction. A critical

viewpoint of this notion is that it ignores the social

context of the individual, and this is the basis of the

Equity Theory.

2.7.4 The Equity Theory

Adams (1963) Equity Theory argues that people compare

the ratio of their outcome over input with the ratio of

others outcome over input. If their ratio is greater than

or lesser than that of the others, they feel dissatisfied

because inequity has occurred. However to feel satisfied

with the job, the ratio should be equal to that significant

others (what is called equity). Though the basis of their

comparison is ones perception, the fact remains that


63/113

organizations must attempt to bring about equity to avoid

the feeling of dissatisfaction. One of the criticisms of

the theory is that it is imprecise because there are

alternate ways of dealing with feelings of inequity.

However, an important implication of this theory is that

employees need to feel that they are fairly dealt with in

order to feel satisfied.

2.7.5 The Opponent Process Model of Job

Satisfaction

Initiating some change in the job may increase worker

satisfaction but it is not necessary that the increase in

satisfaction will remain the same over time. This is

because constant input does not result in constant output.

The process of adaptation implies that a constant input

will have a decreasing output. This notion was applied to

the concept of job satisfaction in the Opponent Process

Theory by Landy (1978). He applied this idea to the goal-

setting theory and asserted that in the beginning of

his/her career, an employee will resist goal-setting. But

as experience with goal-setting as well as goal-attainment

increases, resistance shall decrease. Consequently,

pleasure from goal-attainment must also increase. The broad

implication of this is that interventions intended to


64/113

increase job satisfaction may not necessary became popular

on their introduction (Chimel, 2000).

2.8 Determinants of Job Satisfaction

Over the past seven decades, researchers have

been active in conducting thousands of studies pertaining

to job satisfaction. In the Indian context too, job

satisfaction has consistently been one of the most heavily

researched topics as indicated in all the three major

reviews of OB researches in India (Sinha, 1972; Sinha 1981,

Khandwalla, 1988). All three reviewers have identified a

number of factors that cause people to become satisfied or

dissatisfied with their jobs.

A wide range of factors relating to individual,

social, cultural organizational and environmental factors

affect the level of job satisfaction. Specifically:

Individual Factors include personality, education,

intelligence and abilities, age, marital status,

orientation to work.


65/113

Social Factors include relationships with co-workers, group

working and norms, opportunities for interaction, informal

organization.

Cultural Factors include underlying attitudes, beliefs and

values.

Organizational Factors include nature and size, formal

structure, personnel policies and procedures, employee

relations, nature of the work, technology and work

organization, supervision and styles of leadership,

management systems, working conditions.

Environmental Factors include economic, social, technical

and governmental influences.

Some these factors are explained below that how they

influence job satisfaction.

2.8.1 Individual Determinants

Various personality and biosocial variables have been

linked to job satisfaction. The position of an individual

in the organization seems to be a good indicator of the

degree of job satisfaction.

There exists a differential opportunity to satisfy

various motivational needs within different levels in the


66/113

organization. Generally it has been found that the higher

is ones position in an organization the greater is the

level of job satisfaction. This could be explained by the

fact that the higher the status of the individual in the

organizational hierarchy the more he enjoys both relatively

better working conditions and rewards than lower level

employees. Further, people who are satisfied with their

jobs tend to remain in them longer than those who are

dissatisfied. Persons with more job experience are more

satisfied with their jobs when compared to those who are

less experienced.

Evidence generally indicates a direct linear

relationship between age and job satisfaction. However,

given the general scenario of downsizing and mergers, long-

term employees have started feeling a sense of insecurity

at being unwanted as well as a lower sense of loyalty and

belongingness. Studies indicate that younger people are

more satisfied with their jobs.

In a recent study Dhawan (2001) indexed job

satisfaction in terms of opportunity, learning and

challenge, influence over supervisors, work meaningfulness,

satisfaction with work group, and desirable future. Data

was collected on 110 blue collar and 50 white collar


67/113

workers. Comparisons by dividing them into below and above

30 years of age showed that blue collar employees of 30

years and below were more satisfied with work

meaningfulness as compared to those above 30 years.

Similarly white collar employees of 30 year and below were

more satisfied with opportunity, job satisfaction will not

necessarily lead to low absenteeism, and low job

satisfaction is inclined to bring about an increase in

absenteeism.

2.8.2 Reward System

There is ample evidence to suggest that pay and other

monetary benefits contribute significantly to job

satisfaction (Dhawan and Roy, 1993; Nazir, 1998; Panda.

200!). The organizational reward system has been found to

be related to job satisfaction. This pertains to how pay

benefits and promotions are distributed. Researches

uncovered that satisfaction increases when the pay is seen

as fair with respect to both level of compensation to

various ways to deal with it. A common way to cope with it

is displacement. This is a process of venting out

frustration on others who are not the cause for it (e.g.

after a frustrating day at the work place an individual may

go home and scream at his wife or children). A second


68/113

possibility is to strike back at the source of frustration

by making negative statements about the company, joining

informal groups that violate organizational rules, going on

strike, or indulging in acts of sabotage. In the wake of

downsizing, organizations have become sensitive to this

issue and the feelings of those affected. In order to deal

with the threats of violence, some organizations are

training managers to recognize and effectively deal with

aggressive behavior (Johnson, 1993).

2.8.3 Culture

The culture not only at notional level influence the

job satisfaction but the culture at organizational level

also effects job satisfaction. As in flexible working

environment workers experience more job satisfaction rather

than a tight, strict and rule oriented environment.

Organizational culture and job satisfaction has

relationship evidenced by the study of Daultram B Lund

(2003).

National Culture and Job Satisfaction

Employees expectations, behaviors and performance may

be different with the various national cultures (Redding,

1990). The influence of national culture on individual


69/113

behavior is well established and differences between

eastern and western cultures are rather significant.

National culture influences the way how organizations are

structured and managed. For example firms in Pakistan and

South Korea tend to be owned by the founders and families.

They tend to be paternalistic, promote values of higher

power distance and collectivism, and have bureaucratic

control and centralized decision making with the little

work empowerment. Position is often with the family ties

and network. By contrast Western firms tend to be owned by

public shareholder and run by professional manager. They

are flatter in structure, less bureaucratic, promote

individualism, decentralized decision making and more

empowering to their workers. Promotion is often linked with

personal competencies and merits. With the trend towards

globalization, organizations and managers need to have a

greater understanding of relative importance of

organizational variables such as organizational culture and

leadership style that determine levels of the commitment

and job satisfaction in different national context.

Organizational Culture and Job Satisfaction

Organizational culture can influence how people set

personal and professional goals, perform tasks and


70/113

administer resources to achieve them. Organizational

culture affects the way in which people consciously and

subconsciously thinks and makes decisions and ultimately

the way in which they perceive, feel and act. Deal Kennedy

(1982) amd petes Waterman (1982) have suggested that

organizational culture can exert considerable influence in

organizations particularly in areas such as job

satisfaction, performance and commitment. Since the

individuals bring their personal values, attitudes and

beliefs to the work place, their level of satisfaction and

commitment to organization may differ. Values, attitudes

and beliefs are reflected in different national cultures.

How the personal in with the existing organizational

culture and influence of the national culture on the

personal values could be a major difference in the

difference in how firms in the east and west are managed

2.8.4 Work itself

The nature of work contributes heavily to the feeling

of satisfaction. Flexibility, freedom, and discretion

available in the performance of ones job contribute

heavily to job satisfaction. On the other hand ambiguity in

task, confusing instructions, and unclear understanding of

the job leads to job dissatisfaction. Mehia (1989)


71/113

concluded in his study that one third of the senior

bureaucrats perceived the nature of the job itself as the

reason for low work satisfaction.

2.8.5 Supervisory behavior

Studies have also indicated that satisfaction

tends to be higher when employees believe their supervision

to be competent have their best interest in mind, and treat

them with dignity and respect (Sayeed. 1988). Suspensor

style that influences job satisfaction is the degree to

which the supervisor takes a personal interest in the

employees welfare, provides advice, and communicates at a

personal level (Dhawan 2001). Supervisory behavior has been

found to be the most important dimension of quality of work

life contributing 21% of the variance in the employees

role efficacy (Gupta and Khandelwal 1988).

2.8.6 Working Condition

In recent years because of the issue of managing

diversity at work place, working conditions have acquired a

special significance. Working condition is a broad-based


72/113

concept and includes not only the organizational policies

but the work environment as well. A number of studies have

focused on a wide variety of the components which

constitute the working conditions of an organization. A

group of studies have shown that job satisfaction of the

employees is directly proportionate to the degree of

participation in the process of decision making. Some have

built a strong case of increasing the aspiration for need

satisfaction from work and satisfying these aspirations

through participation .While satisfaction with supervisory

style has been found correlate significantly with job

satisfaction, others feel that satisfaction with co-workers

also plays a significant role in job satisfaction (Dhawan,

2001). In a study of 60 scientists Dhawan and Roy (1993)

found that Indian scientists identified 5 factors

contributing to job satisfaction. Of these five one was

relationship with co-workers. The other factors were

comfort, challenge, salary, and resource availability.

Training and development facilities offered to

employees go a long way in generating high levels of job

satisfaction. In an extensive study of 124 managers from

various departments and levels in a private sector

organization, Joshi and Sharma (1997) measured their


73/113


74/113


75/113

related to job characteristics and people will evaluate

their satisfaction level according to what they perceive as

being important and meaningful to them. The evaluation of

the different aspects of the job by employees is of a

subjective nature, and people will reflect different levels

of satisfaction around the same factors. Research studies

(Kerego & Mthupha, 1997; Robbins, 1993; Hutcheson, 1996)

supported the five main job satisfaction dimensions as pay,

nature of work, supervision, promotional prospects and

relations with co-workers. Since the job dimensions are

components of the organization, and represents its climate,

job satisfaction is an eval

Documents

Infulence of Organizational Culture on Job Satisfaction