X hits on this document





85 / 185

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”.


Document info
Document views734
Page views734
Page last viewedSun Jan 22 10:28:03 UTC 2017