You are on page 1of 6

JBR-09134; No of Pages 6

Journal of Business Research xxx (2016) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

Exploiting organizational culture: Congurations for value through knowledge


worker's motivation
Michael T. Lee a,, Robyn L. Raschke b, Robert St. Louis c
a
Accounting Department, Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA 24450, USA
b
Department of Accounting, University of Nevada Las Vegas, 4505 S. Maryland Pkwy, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA
c
Department of Information Systems, Arizona State University, 300 E. Lemon St., Tempe, AZ 85287, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In today's information-driven economy, business leaders agree that an organization's culture can motivate
Received 1 January 2016 workers to create organizational value. However, this relation between culture and value is expansive and has
Received in revised form 1 March 2016 no comprehensive theory. Furthermore, the research adopts mainly conventional analytical approaches that
Accepted 1 April 2016
use symmetric thinking, linear models, and net effects estimations, which are inadequate. To advance theory,
Available online xxxx
this study develops and tests causal recipes of culture, levers of worker motivation, and value in a congurational
Keywords:
approach that applies a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Using four types of culture and six or-
Culture ganizational levers, the results show that certain levers of motivation are more effective in creating value when
Motivation used in an appropriate cultural setting.
fsQCA 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction culture: team, innovation, bureaucratic, and competitive. In addition, the


HR and psychology literatures specify that compensation, work facilities,
Employers are paying more attention to their workplaces because workload, collegiality, a sense of accomplishment, and organizational jus-
companies like Facebook and Google provide amenities such as free tice in a well-designed job are primary levers that motivate workers to
food, recreational space, nap rooms, and other perks to help recruit create organizational value (e.g., Gu & Chi Sen Siu, 2009; Lund, 2003;
and cultivate a high performing workforce of knowledge workers (see Lawrence & Nohria, 2002). This study indicates that each type of culture
Wall Street Journal, 2015). However, the basketball courts, climbing involves different levers to support value. The objective of this study is
walls, and other perks are not what motivate workers and provide job to advance the theory on culture and value by acknowledging the existing
satisfaction, but rather what they represent does. The perks are organi- methodological limitations and adopting an alternative approach for un-
zational levers that help communicate the culture, the beliefs, and the derstanding this relation.
values of the organization. In the current information-driven economy, The research on organizational culture and value uses conventional
business leaders agree that culture in combination with organizational analyses of models with isolated components in a system of conditions
levers motivates knowledge workers to feel accomplished in their that are symmetric and linear by design (Ragin, 2008). This study argues
jobs, which creates organizational value (Stanford eCorner, 2008). that a congurational approach is necessary to better understand the pat-
However, the question remains that given a variety of organizational terns between the antecedent conditions and the organizational value
cultures, what levers best motivate knowledge workers to create organi- within a culture. The study applies a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative
zational value? This study takes a congurational approach by using the analysis (fsQCA) (Ragin, 2008) to provide causal recipes sufcient for
competing values framework (CVF) of culture (Quinn & Rohrbaugh, identifying the levers that create value under each of the CVF's four vari-
1983) to examine which organizational levers of motivation are sufcient eties of culture. Because universities provide a rich sample of knowledge
for organizational value. The study obtains the organizational levers from workers, the study collects survey data from academics (n = 554) at
the human resources (HRs) and psychology literatures (Lawrence & AACSB-accredited business colleges in the United States.
Nohria, 2002; Locke & Latham, 1990; Greenberg, 1987; Adams, 1963). This study responds to a call by Hartnell, Ou, and Kinicki (2011) for
Based on two sets of competing values, the CVF species four types of further empirical research on the CVF by providing insights into the
complementarities underlying the various congurations of cultures
and levers that support value. The main contribution of this research
The authors acknowledge the helpful comments and suggestions during the pilot
is that the resulting congurations support the propositions on knowl-
survey's research workshop at Arizona State University.
Corresponding author.
edge workers and the ndings demonstrate that the organizational le-
E-mail addresses: leem@wlu.edu (M.T. Lee), robyn.raschke@unlv.edu (R.L. Raschke), vers that lead to organizational value are not sufciently alike for each
st.louis@asu.edu (R.S. Louis). type of culture.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.152
0148-2963/ 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Lee, M.T., et al., Exploiting organizational culture: Congurations for value through knowledge worker's motivation,
Journal of Business Research (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.152
2 M.T. Lee et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2016) xxxxxx

Furthermore, this approach is unique in applying the fsQCA to derive den Berg, & Wiersma, 2012). Based on this research, this study suggests
cultural recipes of levers that support value. Management understand- that work motivation lies behind each of the current mediators or
ing of organizational levers best suited for a culture creates organiza- moderators.
tional value. Although management might nd difculty in changing
its culture, the ability to change the emphasis on the organizational le- 2.3. Organizational levers of worker motivation
vers that motivate workers is within their capability.
The paper has the following structure. Section 2 provides an over- Several prominent theories underlie a worker's motivation: motives
view of the theoretical background. Section 3 presents the propositions. and needs (Maslow, 1943), expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964), equity
Section 4 explains the survey method and the fsQCA. Section 5 contains theory (Adams, 1963), goal setting (Locke & Latham, 1990), cognitive
the results, and Section 6 offers a conclusion and implications of this evaluation theory (Deci, 1971), work design (Hackman & Oldham,
study. 1976), reinforcement theory (Skinner, 1953), and the human-drives
theory (Lawrence & Nohria, 2002). These theories inform researchers
2. Theoretical background and managers about the levers that motivate workers. For example,
Maslow (1943) species compensation as one of these levers. The equi-
2.1. Types of organizational culture ty theory emphasizes fair procedures to reduce dissonance, while the
human-drives theory suggests that rewards, culture, job design, and
The research typically denes organizational culture as a complex performance management are levers that fulll the four human drives
set of values, norms, and symbols that dene the way in which a rm to acquire, bond, comprehend, and defend.
conducts business (Barney, 1986). This culture encourages employees Based on these theories, the research provides an abundance of
to accept and embrace the goals and values of the leaders of the organi- models that incorporate compensation, workload, collegiality, work fa-
zation while promoting a sense of belonging (Peters & Waterman, cilities, a sense of accomplishment, and equity and justice as levers that
1982). When infused with individuals' personalities, a given type of cul- motivate workers to create value (e.g. Gu & Chi Sen Siu, 2009; Lund, 2003;
ture sets the tone, expectations, and accomplishments for the em- Lawrence & Nohria, 2002). However, much of this research uses a conven-
ployees by way of selective stimuli (Birnberg & Snodgrass, 1988). tional analytical approach that explains only isolated pieces of the broader
Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1983) discover that values, norms, and inter- holistic relation between the worker's motivation and value. These ap-
pretations cluster together via multidimensional scaling. Four types of proaches include meta-analytic methods (e.g., Chatman et al., 2014), mul-
culture exist to satisfy the need for exible and control values and to tiple regression analysis (e.g., Naranjo-Valencia, Jimnez-Jimnez, & Sanz-
manage people (internal) and organizational (external) focuses. The Valle, 2011), and structural equation modeling (e.g., Pinho et al., 2014).
human relations or team culture emphasize a human afliation in a The problem with theory development that uses conventional ap-
exible structure, an internal focus on cohesion and morale, and HR de- proaches is that the assessment of the net effects is dependent on
velopment to create team spirit (Cameron, Quinn, DeGraff, & Thakor, model specication, and this specication requires strong theory and
2014). The open system or innovation culture emphasizes change deep substantive knowledge, which is the very objective of research in
through a exible structure and an external focus that requires a readi- the rst place. Yet, researchers are generally unable to reconcile and
ness to grow through search, risk-taking, and discovery (Denison & nd common implications from these theories due to these methodolog-
Spreitzer, 1991). The internal process or bureaucratic culture empha- ical limitations (Rainlall, 2004).
sizes a structure of administrative mechanisms that provide clear roles
and procedures. A bureaucratic structure stresses the role of rules and
regulations for an orderly work environment that provides employees 2.4. Congurational approach
with a psychological sense of stability (Quinn & Kimberly, 1984). The ra-
tional goal or competitive culture emphasizes control mechanisms in an To minimize these limitations, this study takes a congurational ap-
externally focused structure. This culture values competition, compe- proach that recognizes culture, levers of motivation, and value as a com-
tence, and achievement (Hartnell et al., 2011) and rewards clear objec- plex whole rather than a one dimensional perspective of culture
tives, goal setting, productivity, and efciency (Cameron & Quinn, (Woodside, Hsu, & Marshall, 2011). This approach takes a systemic
1999). The CVF is a taxonomy that the research uses frequently to exam- and holistic view of the organization where patterns and proles have
ine culture (Cameron et al., 2014). a relation with the outcome (Fiss, 2007). A congurational approach
goes beyond using symmetric and linear models and provides a gestalt
2.2. Cultures and organizational value perspective for building and testing theory (Woodside, 2013).
Skarlicki and Folger (1997) recommend incorporation of the values
The relation between culture and organizational value is a broad one of distributional justice into compensation and workload. The study
that remains elusive despite a vast amount of research (Chatman, also incorporates the values of interactional justice into its specications
Caldwell, O'Reilly, & Doerr, 2014). In fact, Hartnell et al. (2011) report of collegiality, work facilities, and accomplishment. For completeness,
more than 4600 studies on the value effects of culture and conclude and in conjunction with the equity and justice theory, the study adds
that the link between culture and value lacks a comprehensive theory. procedural justice as a motivation lever.
The inconclusive ndings are likely a result of the various typologies
that these studies use to examine culture (e.g., CVF versus strong/ 3. Congurational propositions
weak culture versus national culture), and the multiple dimensions
they use to represent value (e.g., market versus operational versus - When a rm combines culture with personality, the rm sets the ac-
nancial performance), which makes summaries, interpretations and tion and decision premises for its workers (Birnberg & Snodgrass, 1988).
contributions challenging. The culture affects the worker's motivation through the choice of a stim-
Specically, the literature shows that culture can create value, albeit uli to which the worker attends. Culture is a lter that determines what
through numerous and diverse contingent variables. Researchers have and how workers might respond to or ignore various levers of motiva-
performed meta-analyses of culture types and value (e.g., Chatman, tion. Differences in culture are likely to affect the relevance, credibility,
Caldwell, O'Reilly, & Doerr, 2014; Jiang, Lepak, Hu, & Baer, 2012). They and effectiveness of the levers of motivation. This study develops prop-
have also linked culture to HR mediators and moderators such as com- ositions for the value-creating effects of four CVF cultures and six levers
mitment, leadership, job satisfaction, and turnover in order to explain of motivation by using the theoretical discussion above and tests the
value creation (e.g., Pinho, Rodrigues, & Dibb, 2014; Wilderom, van propositions with fsQCA.

Please cite this article as: Lee, M.T., et al., Exploiting organizational culture: Congurations for value through knowledge worker's motivation,
Journal of Business Research (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.152
M.T. Lee et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2016) xxxxxx 3

The team culture values collaboration, trust, and support (Quinn & 2002; Skarlicki & Folger, 1997; Greenberg, 1987). For the CVF questions,
Kimberly, 1984). These values manifest themselves in increased team- the survey uses a Q-sort (Moore & Benbasat, 1991) with seven aca-
work relative to the other three cultures. Workers share concern demics to sort the culture statements into the proper cultural deni-
about their team members as well as for the organization. Of all of the tions. The hit ratios of the Q-sort are between 83% and 100% for the
concerns, the team culture focuses the most on collegiality to develop cultural denitions and are well above the acceptable threshold of 65%
trust in, loyalty to, and membership in the organization (Quinn & (Jarvenpaa, 1989). In addition, two authors pilot tested the survey dur-
Kimberly, 1984). Because knowledge workers are likely to share other ing a research seminar with nine academics.
concerns, the extent to which the organization distributes the workload The study measures culture with a seven-point Likert scale with a
and compensation fairly also affects the team spirit. The general belief is range of 1 = very much lower than appropriate to 7 = very much
that these values foster committed and accomplished employees that in higher than appropriate. The appropriateness scale controls for the dif-
turn, produce organizational value. Therefore, this study proposes that: ferences in the value propositions of business colleges in the sample
P1: Collegiality, workload, and compensation are the organizational (Dillman, 2011). The six organizational levers of motivation discussed
levers for the value creation by knowledge workers in a predominantly in the previous section are the antecedent conditions: compensation,
team culture. workload, facilities, collegiality, accomplishment, and procedural justice
The innovation culture values behaviors such as creative pursuits for management evaluations. The study measures the antecedent condi-
and continuous adaptability to keep the organization relevant (Quinn tions with a seven-point Likert scale with a range 1 = very strongly dis-
& Kimberly, 1984). Recognition for creating the next best thing is usu- agree to 7 = very strongly agree or 1 = extremely unsatised to 7 =
ally the motivator independent of compensation. With this mindset, extremely satised. The study measures the outcome condition, educa-
workers require resources to satisfy their attitude to work. They are con- tional value delivered to students, with a seven-point Likert scale with a
cerned with having work facilities that are conducive to discovery. range 1 = extremely low value to 7 = extremely high value.
These workers value the importance of a fair trade-off between the ex- The survey sample frame selects every fth name from a list of
pectation to be creative and the appropriate time to create. Therefore, AACSB-accredited business college academics to derive a sample of
workers prioritize a fair workload and the appropriate work facilities 7217 academics across 517 colleges. The study distributes the survey
that are inspiring. These workers also seek collegiality to help them in online using Dillman's Tailored Design survey method (Dillman,
their process of search and discovery. They believe in the importance 2011). The data collection occurs over a three-month period with re-
of innovation for creating value and derive a sense of accomplishment minders sent every three weeks. The survey generates 757 responses
through invention. Therefore, this study proposes that: for a 10.5% overall response rate. The analysis uses 554 complete re-
P2: Workload, work facilities, collegiality, and a sense of accomplish- sponses. Prior to any analysis, multiple-item constructs satisfy the reli-
ment are the organizational levers for the value creation by knowledge ability and validity benchmarks (Nunnally, 1978). A one-way ANOVA
workers in a predominantly innovation culture. between the four predominant culture types and value shows a signi-
The bureaucratic culture values enforced roles, rules, and regula- cant difference exists, F = 8.203, p b .0001. Table 1 provides the demo-
tions, and this enforcement brings clarity, transparency, and stability graphic information on the sample of completed responses.
to workers (Hartnell et al., 2011). The general belief is that these mech- Each predominant culture type represents a fuzzy set. To determine
anisms foster efciency, timeliness, and smooth functioning (Denison & the culture set, culture statements are averaged based on each culture
Spreitzer, 1991). Therefore, the greatest concerns among knowledge type with the expectation that one culture type is predominant over
workers are the fairness of their compensation, workload, and work fa- the other three (highest average between the four culture types). The
cilities in relation to the expectations from the roles, rules, and regula- four culture sets comprise: competitive n = 309; team n = 103; innova-
tions that the organization formally denes and imposes on them. tive n = 61; and bureaucratic n = 81. The remaining antecedent condi-
Performance evaluation is an important process, and workers are tions are considered fuzzy sets and require calibration. Consistent with
under the assumption that the formally-dened evaluation process is Xu, Zheng, Xu, and Wang (2016), the median variable scale (e.g., four
one that is also transparent and equitable. Therefore, this study pro- on a seven-point Likert scale) is used as the cross-over point. For exam-
poses that: ple, two questions are used for the antecedent condition of compensa-
P3: Compensation, workload, work facilities, and procedural justice tion. Each question uses the seven-point scale, thus the calibration's
in evaluations are the organizational levers for the value creation by upper limit is 49 (7 7) and the cross-over point is 16 (the median of
knowledge workers in a predominantly bureaucratic culture. the scale for both questions 4 4).
The competitive culture values competition, competence, and
achievement (Quinn & Kimberly, 1984). Knowledge workers help in 5. Results of fsQCA analysis
gathering customer and competitor information, dening tasks, and set-
ting goals to compete aggressively with their rivals. Accordingly, the or- To test the four propositions, the analysis runs separate fsQCAs by
ganization rewards them for their achievements. The biggest concern to using the respective data set of each organizational culture and the re-
these workers is their reward for meeting goals. Compensation for their spective antecedent conditions for each proposition to understand if
assigned workload and a fair and equitable performance evaluation mo- the appropriate consistency and coverage exist that are sufcient to
tivates these workers. For a given set of goals, the workers can regularly support the conguration proposed. The consistency indicates how
monitor their compensation and workload. Because goal setting deter- closely a conguration of antecedent conditions approximates a perfect
mines the work atmosphere, workers do not concern themselves with subset relation of educational value (Ragin, 2008). The coverage as-
the appropriateness of work facilities or collegiality. Therefore, this sesses the degree to which a conguration accounts for instances of an
study proposes that: outcome (Ragin, 2008). The frequency and consistency threshold for
P4: Compensation, workload, and procedural justice for evaluations the truth table analysis of sufciency is 1 and 0.80 for team, innovation,
are the organizational levers for the value creation by knowledge and bureaucratic cultures. For competitive culture, the frequency is set
workers in a predominantly competitive culture. higher, 20, because of a larger sample size while the consistency thresh-
old remains at 0.80. The main aim is to achieve high consistency over
4. Method high coverage in the causal interpretations (Schneider & Wagemann,
2012). With theory and diligent use of the simplifying assumptions,
To test the propositions, this study creates a survey that adapts ques- the results in Tables 2 through 5 show intermediate solutions for
tions from the literature for use on a sample of academics (e.g., Cameron interpreting the results for each culture type (Schneider & Wagemann,
et al., 2014; Gu & Chi Sen Siu, 2009; Lund, 2003; Lawrence & Nohria, 2012; Ragin, 2008).

Please cite this article as: Lee, M.T., et al., Exploiting organizational culture: Congurations for value through knowledge worker's motivation,
Journal of Business Research (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.152
4 M.T. Lee et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2016) xxxxxx

Table 1 Table 3
Sample demographics. Innovation culture models.

Characteristics Frequency Percentage (%) Panel A: Proposed model

Gender Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency


Female 172 31.1
accompl* ~ facilit* ~ workload 0.272 0.020 0.916
Male 363 65.5
accompl* ~ facilit* ~ colleag 0.268 0.037 0.902
Missing 19 3.4
~accompl*facilit* ~ workload 0.263 0.036 0.881
Age accompl*facilit*colleag*workload 0.493 0.257 0.951
2029 years 2 0.3 ~facilit* ~ colleag* ~ workload 0.250 0.000 0.853
3039 year 64 11.6 ~accompl* ~ colleag* ~ workload 0.235 0.000 0.839
4049 years 122 22.0 Solution coverage: 0.712
5059 years 186 33.6 Solution consistency: 0.877
60 and over 158 28.5
Panel B: Full model
Missing 22 4.0
Raw Unique Consistency
Rank
coverage coverage
Professor 220 39.7
Associate professor 160 28.9 accompl*workload*colleag*facilit 0.493 0.272 0.951
Assistant professor 119 21.5 accompl*justice* ~ colleag* ~ facilit* ~ compens 0.189 0.032 0.927
Senior lecturer 15 2.7 ~accompl* ~ justice* ~ workload* ~ colleag* ~ 0.189 0.039 0.959
Lecturer 22 4.0 facilit* ~ compens
Missing 18 3.2 ~accompl* ~ justice* ~ 0.171 0.011 0.961
workload*colleag*facilit* ~ compens
Tenured 369 66.6 accompl* ~ justice* ~ workload*colleag* ~ 0.187 0.014 0.988
Non-tenured but tenure track 113 20.4 facilit*compens
Non-tenure track 61 11.0 ~accompl*justice* ~ 0.176 0.030 0.999
Missing 11 2.0 workload*colleag*facilit*compens
Solution coverage: 0.662
Full-time 532 96.0
Solution consistency: 0.931
Part-time 10 1.8
Missing 12 2.2

PhD program in business?


workload, or compensation is a path to educational value (Panel A),
Yes 193 34.8
No 346 62.5 using a recipe of collegiality, facilities, and compensation, for example,
Missing 15 2.7 increases the likelihood of educational value (Panel B). The results

In the team culture (Table 2), the overall solution consistency is 76%, Table 4
Bureaucratic culture models.
and the coverage is 93% for the proposed model (Panel A), while the full
model shows 84% and 74% respectively (Panel B). Therefore, the results Panel A: Proposed model
partially support P1 because the full model shows higher consistency of Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency
educational value. While the possibility exists that collegiality,
facilit* ~ compens 0.466 0.034 0.848
facilit*justice 0.540 0.014 0.863
~compens* ~ workload 0.438 0.018 0.756
~compens*justice 0.471 0.001 0.860
Table 2 workload*justice 0.565 0.022 0.855
Team culture models. ~facilit* ~ workload* ~ justice 0.280 0.001 0.777
~facilit*compens* ~ justice 0.246 0.000 0.862
Panel A: Proposed model ~facilit*compens*workload 0.293 0.004 0.896
Solution coverage: 0.863
Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency
Solution consistency: 0.748
colleag 0.789 0.084 0.812
compens 0.716 0.033 0.820 Panel B: Full model
workload 0.696 0.034 0.786 Raw Unique Consistency
Solution coverage: 0.926 coverage coverage
Solution consistency: 0.757
accompl*justice*workload*colleag 0.471 0.159 0.910
Panel B: Full model accompl* ~ justice* ~ workload* ~ colleag* 0.205 0.023 0.857
~ facilit
Raw Unique Consistency
~justice* ~ workload* ~ colleag* ~ 0.186 0.013 0.860
coverage coverage
facilit*compens
justice* ~ workload* ~ facilit* ~ compens 0.199 0.026 0.890 accompl*justice*workload* ~ facilit* ~ 0.273 0.014 0.950
accompl* ~ justice*workload*colleag 0.304 0.023 0.910 compens
~workload*colleag*facilit*compens 0.281 0.029 0.957 justice*workload*colleag* ~ facilit* ~ 0.253 0.000 0.921
accompl*workload*colleag*facilit 0.487 0.135 0.893 compens
~accompl* ~ workload*colleag* ~ facilit* ~ 0.215 0.024 0.830 accompl* ~ workload*colleag*facilit* ~ 0.278 0.048 0.945
compens compens
~accompl* ~ justice* ~ 0.225 0.018 0.944 accompl*justice* ~ 0.218 0.015 0.986
workload*facilit*compens workload*facilit*compens
accompl*justice*workload* ~ facilit*compens 0.239 0.022 0.956 ~accompl* ~ justice* ~ workload* ~ 0.180 0.024 0.857
~accompl* ~ justice*workload* ~ 0.162 0.012 0.890 colleag*facilit* ~ compens
colleag*facilit* ~ compens ~accompl* ~ 0.161 0.017 0.958
Solution coverage: 0.743 justice*workload*colleag*facilit* ~
Solution consistency: 0.843 compens
Solution coverage: 0.699
accompl sense of accomplishment; compens compensation; colleag collegiality;
Solution consistency: 0.847
facilit work facilities; justice procedural justice.

Please cite this article as: Lee, M.T., et al., Exploiting organizational culture: Congurations for value through knowledge worker's motivation,
Journal of Business Research (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.152
M.T. Lee et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2016) xxxxxx 5

Table 5 In the competitive culture (Table 5), the overall solution consistency
Competitive culture models. is 79%, and coverage is 65% for our proposed model (Panel A), while the
Panel A: Proposed model full model shows 79% and 72% respectively (Panel B). The consistency of
Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency
the two models are the same, but the full model has higher coverage.
Therefore, the results only partially support P4, and the full model is
compens* ~ justice 0.438 0.110 0.804
more useful for understanding educational value. Thus, the recipes
compens*workload 0.453 0.126 0.814
~compens*justice* ~ workload 0.258 0.072 0.885 with the highest consistencies involve at least three and up to ve
Solution coverage: 0.652 conditions. For example, accomplishment, justice, and collegiality but
Solution consistency: 0.785 not workload support education value. Justice, workload, collegiality, fa-
Panel B: Full model cilities, and compensation also support educational value with high
consistency.
Raw Unique Consistency
coverage coverage

accompl* ~ workload*facilit* ~ compens 0.309 0.017 0.838 6. Conclusions


~justice* ~ colleag*facilit*compens 0.319 0.005 0.845
accompl*justice* ~ workload*colleag 0.225 0.003 0.921 The fsQCA shows that different organizational levers of motivation
accompl*justice*colleag*facilit 0.312 0.016 0.897 are more effective in the appropriate organizational culture setting.
accompl*justice*colleag*compens 0.284 0.008 0.894
The study nds congurations from the full model of organizational le-
accompl*workload*facilit*compens 0.335 0.021 0.855
~accompl*justice* ~ workload* ~ colleag* ~ 0.193 0.006 0.878 vers of motivation achieves higher consistencies than the proposed
compens models, although the proposed models based on theory are still suf-
~accompl* ~ justice*workload* ~ colleag* ~ 0.226 0.009 0.864 cient. Therefore, the results only partially support the four theoretical
compens
propositions. Consequently, the results suggest that university adminis-
~accompl* ~ justice* ~ workload* ~ 0.274 0.016 0.835
colleag*compens trators consider the congurations from the full model that correspond
~accompl* ~ justice*colleag*facilit* ~ compens 0.292 0.002 0.882 to their predominant organizational culture.
accompl* ~ justice*workload* ~ 0.242 0.008 0.875 For a given culture, the results also show that administrators can use
colleag*compens motivational levers in different congurations to achieve educational
justice*workload*colleag*facilit*compens 0.270 0.014 0.899
value. The congurations in this study provide support to administra-
accompl* ~ justice*workload*colleag* ~ facilit* 0.179 0.006 0.869
~ compens tors for understanding the trade-off between the numbers of motivation
~justice* ~ workload*colleag*facilit 0.339 0.004 0.856 levers. Each additional lever of motivation requires implementation and
~justice* ~ workload*facilit*compens 0.307 0.002 0.852 monitoring that consumes organizational resources. This research is
~accompl*justice* ~ workload* ~ colleag*facilit 0.204 0.000 0.884
limited by a contextualization to an academic environment with a
~accompl* ~ workload* ~ 0.262 0.000 0.865
colleag*facilit*compens
slightly lower response rate than in most survey-based research. There-
Solution coverage: 0.719 fore, future research is needed to further rene understanding of the re-
Solution consistency: 0.785 lation between organizational cultures and value in other knowledge-
based contexts. In conclusion, a cultural paradigm can be difcult to
change, but managers can chose from a set of levers that will motivate
knowledge workers and create value with the available resources.

show that the recipes that incorporate at least one of the six levers of
References
motivation are sufcient for educational value. To create educational
value, the results indicate that administrators can use one of the recipes Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. The Journal of Abnormal and
among the highest consistencies in Panel B. Social Psychology, 67(5), 422436.
Barney, J. B. (1986). Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive
In the innovation culture (Table 3), the overall solution consistency advantage? Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656665.
is 88%, and the coverage is 71% for our proposed model (Panel A), Birnberg, J. G., & Snodgrass, C. (1988). Culture and control: A eld study. Accounting,
while the full model shows 93% and 66% respectively (Panel B). There- Organizations and Society, 13(5), 447464.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture:
fore, these results partially support P2. The full model is more useful
Based on the competing values framework. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
for paths of educational value with a higher consistency than in the pro- Cameron, K. S., Quinn, R. E., DeGraff, J., & Thakor, A. V. (2014). Competing values leadership.
posed model. The recipes in Panel B show very high consistencies and Edward Elgar Publishing.
the use of at least two levers to achieve educational value. For example, Chatman, J. A., Caldwell, D. F., O'Reilly, C. A., & Doerr, B. (2014). Parsing organizational cul-
ture: How the norm for adaptability inuences the relation between culture consen-
administrators might choose to use justice, collegiality, facilities, and sus and nancial performance in high-technology rms. Journal of Organizational
compensation but not accomplishment and workload or accomplish- Behavior, 35(6), 785808.
ment, collegiality, and compensation but not justice, workload, and Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 18(1), 105115.
facilities to motivate academics and create educational value. The for- Denison, D. R., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1991). Organizational culture and organizational devel-
mer recipe requires more conditions but has a higher consistency. The opment: A competing values approach. Research in Organizational Change and
results show that use of more conditions are congurations of educa- Development, 5(1), 121.
Dillman, D. A. (2011). Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method 2007 update
tional value more consistently. with new internet, visual, and mixed-mode guide. John Wiley & Sons.
In the bureaucratic culture (Table 4), the overall solution consistency Fiss, P. C. (2007). A set-theoretic approach to organizational congurations. Academy of
is 75%, and the coverage is 86% for our proposed model (Panel A), while Management Review, 32(4), 11801198.
Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of
the full model shows 85% and 70% respectively (Panel B). Therefore, the Management Review, 12(1), 922.
results partially support P3. The recipes with high consistencies in Panel Gu, Z., & Chi Sen Siu, R. (2009). Drivers of job satisfaction as related to work performance
B require at least three conditions for educational value. For example, in Macao casino hotels: An investigation based on employee survey. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 21(5), 561578.
accomplishment, justice, facilities, and compensation but not workload
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a
show the highest consistency. However, Panel A shows that congura- theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250279.
tions with workload and procedural justice, facilities, and procedural Hartnell, C. A., Ou, A. Y., & Kinicki, A. (2011). Organizational culture and organizational ef-
justice or compensation and workload are sufcient combinations fectiveness: A meta-analytic investigation of the competing values framework's the-
oretical suppositions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 677694.
for creating educational value. However, the trade-off is lower consis- Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1989). The effect of task demands and graphical format on information
tency in these cases. processing strategies. Management Science, 35(3), 285303.

Please cite this article as: Lee, M.T., et al., Exploiting organizational culture: Congurations for value through knowledge worker's motivation,
Journal of Business Research (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.152
6 M.T. Lee et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2016) xxxxxx

Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012). How does human resource management Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of
inuence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating Chicago Press.
mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 12641294. Rainlall, S. (2004). A review of employee motivation theories and their implications for
Lawrence, P. R., & Nohria, N. (2002). Driven: How human nature shapes our choices. San employee retention within organizations. The Journal of American Academy of Busi-
Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ness, 9, 2126.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance. New Jersey: Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2012). Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: A
Englewood cliffs. guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Lund, D. B. (2003). Organizational culture and job satisfaction. Journal of Business & Skarlicki, D. P., & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive,
Industrial Marketing, 18(3), 219236. procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 434443.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Simon and Schuster.
370396. Stanford eCorner. Culture trumps strategy (2008). (Retrieved 5 February 2016, from)
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the percep- http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=1965
tions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work motivation. New York: Wiley.
Research, 2(3), 192222. Wall Street Journal. Google-style ofce perks go mainstream (2015a). (Retrieved 5 Feb-
Naranjo-Valencia, J. C., Jimnez-Jimnez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation or imita- ruary 2016, from) http://on.wsj.com/1WXCT6O
tion? The role of organizational culture. Management Decision, 49(1), 5572. Wilderom, C. P., van den Berg, P. T., & Wiersma, U. J. (2012). A longitudinal study of the
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. effects of charismatic leadership and organizational culture on objective and per-
Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In search of excellence. New York: Harper and Row. ceived corporate performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 835848.
Pinho, J. C., Rodrigues, A. P., & Dibb, S. (2014). The role of corporate culture, market orien- Woodside, A. G. (2013). Moving beyond multiple regression analysis to algorithms: Call-
tation and organisational commitment in organisational performance: The case of ing for adoption of a paradigm shift from symmetric to asymmetric thinking in data
non-prot organisations. The Journal of Management Development, 33(4), 374398. analysis and crafting theory. Journal of Business Research, 66(4), 463472.
Quinn, R. E., & Kimberly, J. R. (1984). Managing organizational transitions. Homewood, IL: Woodside, A. G., Hsu, S. Y., & Marshall, R. (2011). General theory of cultures' conse-
Dow Jones-Irwin. quences on international tourism behavior. Journal of Business Research, 64(8),
Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a 785799.
competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3), Xu, B., Zheng, H., Xu, Y., & Wang, T. (2016). Congurational paths to sponsor satisfaction
363377. in crowdfunding. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 915927.

Please cite this article as: Lee, M.T., et al., Exploiting organizational culture: Congurations for value through knowledge worker's motivation,
Journal of Business Research (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.152

You might also like