dimensional model are equal to .99, indicating very good fit. In addition, the SRMR was
equal to .05 (< .10) and the RMSEA was equal to .02. All of the indicator factor loading
are significant at p< .001 and their paths were more than 2 times larger than the standard
errors (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). Using the available criteria for model fit, results
from the CFA suggested that the 2-factor model provided a good fit.
Culture strength. Culture strength is defined as the extent to which culture is
shared and reinforced in the organization (Martin, 1992). Here, I developed four 1-items
measures for the primary analysis uses. A sample item reads: “Strength is defined in
terms of the degree to which people in your organization collectively recognize and share
a common set of values and beliefs about what is valued that are reinforced via formal
and informal rewards, and work practices. Rate the culture strength on the following
dimension of culture: a. innovation and adaptability—emphasis on risk and being on the
cutting edge.”). The scale for culture strength was anchored on a 7-point scale from 1-
extremely weak to 7-extremely strong.
In addition, consistent with research on climate strength (Schneider et al., 2002),
an alternative way to measure culture “strength” or more precisely, agreement is by the
standard deviation of employee perceptions from each organization regarding the type of
culture. This analysis is somewhat secondary because the construct validity of the
standard deviation as a measure of strength has not been well established. Therefore, it is
difficult to assess the extent to which agreement between employees on a culture
dimension captures “strength”.