This article was downloaded by: [New York University]

On: 20 April 2015, At: 08:40

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The International Journal of Human

Resource Management
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rijh20

Multidimensional configurations of the

organizational climate construct
a b a
Roberto Coda , Dirceu da Silva & Isaias Custodio
a
Business Administration School, Universidade de São Paulo, São
Paulo, Brazil
b
Social Science Department, University of Campinas, Campinas,
Brazil
Published online: 07 Oct 2014.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Roberto Coda, Dirceu da Silva & Isaias Custodio (2014): Multidimensional
configurations of the organizational climate construct, The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2014.962561

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.962561

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.962561

Multidimensional configurations of the organizational

climate construct
Roberto Codaa†*, Dirceu da Silvab and Isaias Custodioa
a
Business Administration School, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil; bSocial Science
Department, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
This study describes the creation and validation of a multidimensional model which
assesses the level of employee satisfaction based on international theoretical models.
It utilizes data collected from a sample of 518 public and private company employees
during the year 2009 in the city/state of São Paulo, Brazil. In the first stage of the study,
15 independent dimensions were theoretically obtained. In the second stage, five
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

different multiple dimensions were confirmed using structure equation modeling

(SEM) technique, thus characterizing general configurations of the organizational
climate construct denominated motivation, management philosophy, leadership,
people management and nature of work. It is hoped that the model can contribute by
enhancing managerial best practices of an organization by attending a major demand
for those listed on stock markets, since these companies must periodically provide
information on job satisfaction of their employees to maintain or achieve higher levels
of corporate governance.
Keywords: casual analysis modeling; confirmatory factor analysis; corporate
governance; job satisfaction; organizational climate

Introduction
Of the prominent themes in the field of organizational behavior, organizational climate has
received special attention in Brazil and abroad. Evaluating employees’ perception of the
environment in which they develop their activities is a very common practice in
contemporary organizations. This kind of evaluation per se allows an organization to
diagnose and adopt measures that could, possibly, result in greater overall employee
satisfaction. However, to achieve a satisfactory diagnosis, a tool with an acceptable level
of validity and reliability is needed to measure variables that may interfere in the level of
employees’ work satisfaction. After assessing the organizational climate and applying
corrective measures to company problems, an increase in productivity, a lower rate of
absenteeism, reduced functional rotation and greater client satisfaction can be expected,
among other aspects that may impact results.
Organizational climate construct is basically defined as a variable for intervening
between an organization and the behavior of its professionals and is focused on how
employees experience their work environment. The concept of organizational climate has
rendered many definitions, descriptions and theoretical concepts. However, there are only
a few models and tools for assessing organizational climate that may be considered
adequate to measure the construct (Patterson et al., 2005).
Such a model could contribute to enhance managerial best practices of an organization
by attending a major demand for those listed on stock markets, since these companies must

*Corresponding author. Email: robcoda@usp.br

†Current address: Faculdade Campo Limpo Paulista, São Paulo, Brazil.

q 2014 Taylor & Francis

 2 R. Coda et al.

periodically provide information on their employees’ job satisfaction if they want to

maintain or achieve even higher levels of corporate governance.
Also, the Bolsa de Valores de São Paulo (Bovespa/BMF), the Stock Exchange of São
Paulo, Brazil, strongly recommends that businesses involve employees in the corporate
decision-making processes. Turning this into a sustained reality would necessarily include
establishing a line of communication with the employees such as regular surveys
involving organizational climate which reveal reliable information regarding employees’
levels of work satisfaction.

Objectives
This is an investigation into the meaning of the organizational climate concept for
professionals of companies in the metropolitan area of São Paulo, Brazil. In literature on
organizational behavior, organizational climate is a construct analyzed by using the
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

concept of job satisfaction. Most organizational climate surveys divide this construct
into factors or dimensions assessed by a set of correlated variables or assertives using a
scale that registers employees’ level of satisfaction for each item. Our presupposed
guideline is that these variables are perceptions of feelings and opinions whose
evaluation is often very complex. Thus, the methodological aspects take on an important
role due to the nature of the uncertainties that researchers have when conducting such
investigations. This gives rise to questions such as: is the organizational climate being
effectively measured? What aspects accurately characterize the climate in an
organization?
Such questions substantiate the need to accurately define and evaluate the variables or
dimensions of employee satisfaction and the indicators that constitute the organizational
climate construct so that the levels of satisfaction may be identified in order to propose
corrective actions, as well as to have a significant model applicable to different
organizations. This will enable a more effective comparison of results among companies,
besides accompanying the evolution of aspects over time that make up the organizational
climate. Multivariate statistical techniques have been applied, especially confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA), to systematize procedures and, particularly, to identify
organizational climate broader categories or dimensions (configurations) and their
respective components.
We define as specific objectives of this study:
. to build a model for organizational climate assessment that includes representative
dimensions;
. to provide valid indicators of the dimensions considered representative;
. to confer a higher level of reliability to surveys on organizational climate; and
. to assure a more accurate comparison of organizational climate survey results from
different companies by using indicators that are effectively common and have a
broad scope.
The central concern of this study is the creation of an organizational climate scale
which exploits its full dimension within the present state-of-the-art literature and will
bridge the gap between the present methods of evaluation regarding organizational climate
in Brazil and the need for a highly precise and rigorous methodology of evaluation.
Thus, this study describes and presents the development of organizational climate
measurement, which simultaneously results in a theoretically based and empirically
validated tool.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 3

The conceptual bases of the theories of job satisfaction and organizational climate
Job satisfaction
Since organizational climate surveys represent measurements of employee satisfaction,
our theoretical discussion starts with the concept of job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is
classically defined as a pleasant or positive emotional state that results from the assessment
that an employee makes about his/her work experience (Locke, 1976). It represents an
interpretation that involves job or work circumstances (salaries, promotions, recognition,
benefits, hours of work, work conditions, performance, abilities, knowledge utilized) and
produces a feeling of approval or disapproval, attachment or aversion that constitutes the
attitude of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the job (Corsini, 1999; Muchinsky, 2003).
Furthermore, a satisfactory job is considered to be one that offers the opportunity to
achieve the main goals desired by the worker (Tamayo, 2001).
It may, in a more timely sense, be identified by the two other relevant concepts of work
demand and work resources. Both have a motivational nature; the first has an intrinsic one
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

and the second has an extrinsic nature more associated to a high level of engagement and
excellence in professional performance (Bakker & Demerouti, 2006). In summary, job
satisfaction is an emotional response to one or more features of an individual’s job
(Kreitner & Kinicki, 2007).
In practice, survey results seeking the association between work satisfaction and
variables linked to organizational success are divergent. For instance, although it may
seem obvious that satisfied employees are more likely to give a better performance and be
more focused on the needs of clients, recent research seeking to confirm this hypothesis
has not been corroborated with results (Kilic & Dursun, 2008). However, another type of
investigation can establish, by a process of meta-analysis, a relation between employees’
satisfaction at work and the quality of services rendered to clients (Brown & Lam, 2008;
Whitman, Van Rooy, & Viswesvaran, 2010).
Levels of job satisfaction are analyzed by using the concept of organizational climate
and its most common indicator, the organizational climate survey. This type of research of
employees’ opinions characterizes a representation of the organizational reality, since it
portrays what people believe is happening at a determined time in their organization. Thus,
it is a mapping of perceptions about aspects or dimensions of the internal environment of a
company, constituting a diagnosis of the situation, almost with a clinical approach, that is
for the purpose of disclosing problems or dysfunctions deserving of correction (Coda,
1997).
While most motivational theories recognize that motivation is a phenomenon of
searching for needs at work, conversely, satisfaction configures attendance or accomplish-
ment of such needs, being presented as the antithesis of motivation (Archer, 1997).

Models of job satisfaction

Literature on the subject offers a significant number of models that can be divided into
three basic categories. The first category, situational models, presupposes that job
satisfaction is the role of the characteristics associated with the work itself. Other types of
models, denominated dispositional, recognize that the stable traits some individuals
possess influence their work satisfaction, regardless of the characteristics of their position
and the situation. Finally, there are also some interactive models that emphasize the
balance between the employee and his work environment as the determining factor of
work satisfaction (Franek & Vecera, 2008).
 4 R. Coda et al.

The construct of organizational climate

Organizational climate is frequently considered to be a summary of the perceptions shared
by organization’s employees about procedures, practices and occurrences, and, as a
concept, has, over the years, been subjected to conflicting definitions and inconsistencies
in terms of operationalization (Patterson et al., 2005).
While changes in the world’s climate, regarding environmental and ecological
conditions, have been increasingly drawing attention in weekly headlines, urging
intervention, another climate variable, according to Sopow (2007), is also attracting
attention everywhere. This author refers to the concept of organizational climate with its
inherent changes and challenges that are no less profound or influential than those which
are affecting the natural environment, in view of the constant changes, uncertainties and
crises that surround the organizational environment nowadays. Therefore, the
organizational climate is considered a relevant factor for management, particularly after
changes resulting from the globalization and internationalization processes of
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

organizations (Keller & Aguiar, 2004). Thus, it has become the necessity for all business
organizations to develop a persuasive and effective job and organizational climate to
maintain a motivated, passionate and appreciated workforce for their organizational
success (Malik, Danish, & Usman, 2010).
Table 1, according to several researchers, shows the evolution of the concepts of
organizational climate. Researchers have also found evidence linking Human resource
management (HRM) practices to units’ organizational climate that enhance overall
organizational results, especially when two different types of organizational climates are
taken into consideration: concern for customers and concern for employees (Chuang &
Liao, 2010).

Organizational climate and organizational culture

Organizational climate and culture were first addressed by Schneider (1990), using an
integrating approach. There are, however, differences in terms of the approaches used;
studies on climate prioritize quantitative methods, while those on culture tend to utilize
qualitative methods (Keller & Aguiar, 2004). Reichers and Schneider (1990) present
similarities and differences between the two approaches, stating that both organizational
climate and culture refer to the way by which members of an organization attribute
meaning to the environment in which they act. They are manifested by shared meanings
and provide a basis for action or decision-making. Furthermore, they are, concurrently,
monolithic and multidimensional concepts. Therefore, it is possible to refer to different
climates and cultures within the same organization. Organizational culture exists at a high
level of abstraction, whereas climate must be seen as a manifestation of the culture
(Reichers & Schneider, 1990).

Organizational climate dimensions and measures

An initial conception that seems to guide theories and research on the construct of
organizational climate is that social environments can be characterized by a restricted
number of dimensions (Patterson et al., 2005). A detailed analysis of the different scales of
organizational climate reveals a wide variety of dimensions. For example, the most
commonly found aspects usually refer to individual autonomy, the level of organizational
structuring, rewards, support and consideration, human warmth, leadership quality, team
cooperation and customer support, which indicates that organizational climate dimensions
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 5

Table 1. Synthesis of organizational climate concepts.

Definition of organizational climate Author

Characteristics that describe and distinguish an organization Forehand and Gilmer (1964)
from others and influence behavior of their members
Measurable features of the work environment, directly or Litwin and Stringer (1968)
indirectly perceived by those who live and work in this
environment and which influence their motivation and
behavior
Specific attributes of an organization that can be influenced Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler,
by the way it relates to members and the environment and Welck (1970)
Predominant system of values of an organization Katz and Kahn (1978)
Result of the combination of motives, leadership styles, Kolb, Rubin, and McIntyre (1986)
norms and values of an organization’s employees and
structure
Relatively enduring quality of an organization’s environment Tagiuri (1988)
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

that is experienced by its occupants, influences their behavior

and can be described in terms of values of a specific set of
characteristics
Status of the company or part of it at a given time, subject Oliveira (1996)
to alteration and deriving from decisions and actions intended
by the company and/or employees’ response to these actions
or to the perspective of these changes
Situation of the company, at a specific time, that reflects Resende and Benaiter (1997)
satisfaction, morale, interests, behaviors and employees’
commitment, and its positive or negative effects on the
results of the organization
Tendency or inclination regarding the extent to which the Coda (1997)
needs of the organization and its personnel are being fulfilled
Refers to motivational features of the work environment Rizzatti and Colossi (1998)
Synchronized cut or candid photograph that combines total Srour (1998)
opinions and conscious perceptions, translating stress and
desires of an organization’s employees
That which people are used to calling work environment Grac
a (1999)
or psychological atmosphere
Level of people’s material and emotional satisfaction at work Luz (2001)
Internal environment where organization members live, Tachizawa (2001)
influenced by the set of beliefs and values that govern
relations among those people
Form by which an organization operationalizes its culture, Wooldridge and
as well as its structure and processes that facilitate the Minsky (2003)
achievement of desired behaviors
Shared representations of the perceptions of members Puente-Palácios (2002)
regarding the organization’s actions
Individual reactions to their assessments of their daily work Bisvas and Varma (2007)
environment

will diverge in accordance with the purpose of the research and the criteria of interests held
by the organization conducting the survey (Schneider, 1990). A global and
multidimensional approach seems advantageous as it provides a broad view of how an
entire organization works, as well as illustrating possible aspects of subcultures that may
affect results such as productivity and innovation (Ashkanasy, Wilderom, & Peterson,
2000). On the other hand, difficulties in reaching relevant conclusions about aspects that
form the organizational climate are explained by the fact that most assessment tools do not
 6 R. Coda et al.

appear to be reliable or valid (Patterson et al., 2005), as well as lacking a pertinent

theoretical basis.
Table 2 describes the set of dimensions which have occupied the attention of
researchers in various works of different contexts. Notably relevant to this study are the
factors highlighted as climate constituents, obtained mostly through exploratory factor
analysis. They are the ones that have provided the starting point for the attempt to validate
a set of 100 assertives as indicators of organizational climate by CFA according to the
procedures described in the methodology of this study.
The general problem approached in field research, which is the basis of this study, may
be formulated by the following question: how to precisely assess the organizational
climate construct?
The development of a new scale on organizational climate for the Brazilian business
environment is specifically warranted for the following reasons: (1) although those
scales in present use are widely known and employed, the focus is restricted and of little
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

depth, hardly covering the richness and complexity inherent to organizational climate
and (2) most of the scales were developed by consulting firms and do not evaluate nor
validate psychometric and statistical techniques, resulting in a lack of reliable
indicators.
In specific terms, this comprehensive question is approached by the following
hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: Independent dimensions derived from theory can be confirmed as
organizational climate components.
Hypothesis 2: Indicators can be confirmed as representative of the independent
dimensions of the organizational climate.
Hypothesis 3: Independent dimensions of organizational climate may form sets of
multiple dimensions that represent an organizational climate model.

Methodology
Research design
The procedural methods adopted to conduct this research are as follows:

Review of organizational climate literature

A detailed review of literature on organizational climate was made for the purpose of
identifying the different definitions attributed to organizational climate construct by
Brazilian and international researchers, as well as to identify proposed models for
evaluation of this concept, together with formative dimensions and respective indicators
(assertives). Table 1 summarizes the different definitions of organizational climate in
chronological order. Table 2 presents the foremost models and formative dimensions,
adopting as criteria for choosing the model, despite the existence of measures of statistical
validity for each of them.

Creation of assertives
The literature review and a former data bank built based upon experience of the research
team formed by organizational climate variables represented the basis for the assertives
construction, helping to select key indicators to make up a pilot questionnaire and conduct
 Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

Table 2. Synthesis of organizational climate models.

Models of organizational climate
Hafer and Litwin and Kolb, Rubin, Kozlowski Laros and Patterson
Coda Ribeiro Gresham Stringer and McIntyre Sbragia, and Doherty GPTW, Puente-Palácios Sopow et al.
Dimensions (1992) (1990) (2008) (1968) (1986) 1983 (1989) 2001 (2004) (2007) (2005)
1 Compliance xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
2 Responsibility xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
3 Challenge/external focus xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
4 Rewards xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
5 Interpersonal relations xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
6 Cooperation xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
7 Conflict xxx xxx xxx xxx
8 Leadership/management xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
9 Organizational clarity xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
10 Participation xxx xxx xxx
11 Recognition xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
12 Identity /commitment xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
13 Justice xxx xxx
14 Career/growth xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
opportunity
15 Human consideration xxx xxx
16 Communication xxx xxx xxx xxx
17 Entrepreneurial xxx xxx xxx
maturity/tradition
18 Meaning/nature of xxx
the work
19 HR policy/training xxx
20 Work conditions xxx xxx
The International Journal of Human Resource Management

21 Work load xxx

22 Well-being xxx
23 Innovation and xxx
flexibility
(Continued)
7
 Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

Table 2 – Continued
Models of organizational climate
Hafer and Litwin and Kolb, Rubin, Kozlowski Laros and Patterson
Coda Ribeiro Gresham Stringer and McIntyre Sbragia, and Doherty GPTW, Puente-Palácios Sopow et al.
Dimensions (1992) (1990) (2008) (1968) (1986) 1983 (1989) 2001 (2004) (2007) (2005)
24 Reflectiveness xxx
25 Efficiency and effort xxx
26 Feedback on xxx
R. Coda et al.

performance
27 Quality xxx
28 Knowledge xxx
management
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 9

field research aimed at validating the indicators and range of organizational climate. This
stage generated a preliminary selection of 100 assertives that were analyzed by a panel of
six specialists, to obtain a preliminary categorization used as the basis for the research
conducted.

Panel of specialists
The next stage sought to use the experience of these specialists to classify the range of
assertives selected in the different dimensions of organizational climate proposed in the
various theoretical models surveyed in the first stage. Results of this stage allowed the
inclusion of the 100 assertives in the 15 dimensions to be validated. These 15 dimensions
are compatible with 18 of the 28 dimensions present in the theoretical models used.
A comparison of the dimensions of the models and those used in the research is shown in
Table 3.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

Preparation of the organizational climate questionnaire

Preparation of the pilot questionnaire for field research involved: (1) preparation of an
invitational letter outlining the work goals; (2) preparation of instructions for field
research participants; (3) definition of the assessment scale for the set of assertives and
adoption of a Likert-type scale of 10 points (1 ¼ maximum disagreement; 10 ¼ -
maximum agreement); (4) pretest of the pilot questionnaire; and (5) questionnaire
adjustments and final preparation of the version for field research. The choice of a 10-
point scale was made to maximize contrasts between measures and improve reliability
(Wittink & Bayer, 1994).

Definition of research parameters for the study

The chosen parameters were age, gender, hierarchical level of job position (managerial or
nonmanagerial) and type of company (national or multinational). However, results that
explore possible influences of these parameters are not presented in this study.

Table 3. Comparison between the theoretical dimensions of organizational climate and those
considered for validation of the model.

Theoretical dimensions Research dimensions

Compliance Structures, rules and compliance
Rewards Compensation
Cooperation Team work
Conflict Competition at work
Leadership/management Management style
Organizational clarity Organizational clarity
Recognition Recognition
Identity/commitment Commitment
Career Career perspectives
Growth opportunity Professional development
Communication Communication
Meaning/nature of the work Work content
HR policy Human resource department image
Training Training and development
Work load Work volume
 10 R. Coda et al.

Definition of type and size of field research sample

The procedures adopted for composition of the sample were: (1) intentional choice to
promote variety of those replying and the companies where they work and (2) minimum
sample size of 400 corresponding to the estimated value of the calculation of samples for
infinite populations, considering a confidence interval of 95.5% (two sigmas) and a 5%
margin of error. These criteria for sample composition resulted in a group of 518 subjects, a
number that corresponds to an even smaller margin of error, close to 4% (Tagliacarne, 1963).

Selection of participants
The criteria used for selecting the research target public were people: (1) formally
employed by an organization and (2) demonstrating an interest in participating in the study.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

Definition of the strategy for data strategy

The procedures selected were: (1) distribution to participants in postgraduate courses
(MBA’s and academic MS programs) and (2) distribution to spontaneous respondents,
indicated from both participants’ suggestions of these postgraduate courses and direct
distribution to employees working in organizations, by the research team.

Definition of the data analysis process

The steps were as follows: (1) application of CFA (Brown, 2006; Thompson, 2004) to the
sample obtained to verify the consistency of responses with the established structure of
organizational climate (15 independent dimensions); (2) application of structure equation
modeling (SEM) to verify the possibility of grouping the independent organizational
climate dimensions into multiple dimensions; and (3) refinement of the initial model to
improve adjustment of the internal consistency of assertives and distinction among the
latent dimensions of organizational climate.

Configurations of organizational climate

Identification of the final dimensions of the organizational climate as well as
corresponding assertives, characterizing the statistically valid model for measuring
different configurations of the organizational climate construct.

Results
Sample characterization
With respect to age, the sample shows homogeneous distribution within the age groups;
the interval up to 30 years of age includes 40% of the respondents, from 31 to 40 years of
age, 30%, and over 40, also 30%. For gender, a near balance was achieved with 56% male
and 44% female. Concerning job position and type of company, there was a predominance
of nonmanagement positions, 73.5%, and domestic companies, 75%. The possible
influences of these parameters on results have not yet been analyzed.
In terms of perceptions about organizational climate, we observed that the tendency
(positive evaluations) to job satisfaction was toward the dimensions of managerial style,
commitment, nature of work, team work, career perspectives, training and development
(T&D), work volume and competition at work. Regarding job dissatisfaction (negative
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 11

evaluations), the dimensions were HR department image, professional development,

recognition, compensation, organizational clarity, communication and, finally, structures,
rules and compliance. These results revealed parity between favorable and unfavorable
dimensions of organizational climate. They allow inferring that the changes being
implemented in organizations for the improvement of organizational climate in Brazil
have not yet produced the expected effect in enhancing job satisfaction.

Confirmation of theoretical independent dimensions and multiple dimensions

The theoretically identified 15-factor solution was tested with CFA using LISREL 8.72.
The items were hypothesized to load on latent variables using the structure identified in the
validated models presented in Table 2 and used as a framework for classification of the
assertives. For both stages of data analysis, the Unweighted Least Squares procedure
estimation was employed since the sample data did not reveal strong adherence to a
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

normally multivariate distribution (Garson, 2004). The 15-factor model presented values
of factor loading (li) below 0.70 in only three dimensions – work volume, competition at
work and T&D. This shows that even with values above or very close to 0.70, in principle,
the model has good validity of the constructs (15 dimensions researched), with Student
t-test values above 1.96 (with p , 0.05). Such a value is considered to have predictive
validity (Hayduk, 1987). Table 4 shows CFA statistical results for the 15 independent
dimensions of organizational climate. The quality of these results allows us to confirm
both Hypotheses (1) and (2) of this study.
The analysis of adjustment test values of the model (Table 4) should be carefully
examined because the referential values are not strict limiters and, thus, do not represent
constraints for acceptance of the CFA for the independent dimensions (Maruayama,
1998). The adjustment test values remain within those accepted as referential, except for
the GFI and AGFI test values, which are slightly below reference values.
To evaluate the unidimensionality of the model constructs, coefficients of reliability
were calculated as proposed by Hair, Anderson, Tathan, and Back (2006). Table 5 shows
the values of reliability of the constructs to be adequate because these values should be
greater than 0.70 (Hair et al., 2006). Only three of these constructs presented values very
close to those recognized in literature and, as criterion, were accepted. In view of the
values obtained, it may be said that the scale was validated. In this sense, the validation is
represented by the ability of a test or instrument to measure that which is proposed; it also
means a laborious process of analysis and correction of the measuring instrument
(Cronbach, 1996).

Table 4. CFA goodness of fit statistics for the 15 dimensions.

Goodness of fit statistics Calculated values Referential values

x /gl
2
2.9100 x 2/gl , 5
Root mean square error of approximation 0.0608 RMSEA , 0.08
Normed fit index 0.965 . 0.90
Nonnormed fit index 0.975 . 0.90
Comparative fit index 0.977 . 0.90
Goodness of fit 0.836 . 0.90
Adjusted goodness of fit 0.8131 . 0.90
Smallest standardized residuala 2 4.902 , 22.58
Largest standardized residuala 5.402 , 2.58
a
Only 3.4% of the residuals (smallest and largest) exceeded the referential values.
 12 R. Coda et al.

Table 5. Reliability of constructs.

Dimension Reliability of construct

Recognition 0.823
Organizacional clarity 0.739
Commitment 0.812
Management style 0.778
Comunication 0.756
Team work 0.734
Salary policy 0.802
Work content 0.806
Career perspective 0.762
Professional progress 0.730
Salary 0.723
Volume of work 0.699
Structures, rules and conformity 0.743
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

Image of HR area 0.719

Competition at work 0.683
Training and developement 0.679

Creation of the model OCMT (organizational climate measuring tool)

To achieve the objective of verifying the possibility of grouping the 15 independent
dimensions considered, we used the SEM model. The results indicated that five multiple
dimensions can in fact, be derived from the initial independent dimensions. Results are
shown in Figure 1.
The groupings of dimensions were termed ‘configurations of the organizational
climate construct’, thus characterizing the OCMT model. The first one was denominated
‘motivation’ and was composed of the recognition, commitment, and professional
development independent dimensions. The second configuration, ‘leadership’ was made
up of the Management Style, team work and competition at work independent dimensions.
The third, called ‘management philosophy’, included organizational clarity, communi-
cation and Structure, Rules and Compliance. The fourth was identified as ‘people
management’, with the compensation, HR department image, T&D and career
perspectives dimensions. The fifth and last configuration was named ‘nature of work’,
embracing the work content and work volume independent dimensions.
Justification for this approach rests on two different points of view. First, research on
organizational climate has tended to focus on only independent dimensions of climate
rather than studying the total social context as configurations of multiple climate
dimensions (Schulte, Ostroff, Shmulyian, & Kinicki, 2009). Second, most of the
confirmed independent dimensions are related to the management theoretical model
denominated human relations (Quinn, Faerman, Thompson, & McGrath, 2004).
Nevertheless, the remaining dimensions seemed to be linked to the other models defined
by Quinn et al. (2004). Although such an assumption was not part of the initial research
design, we considered this to be an instigating trend for future investigation.
Four assertives presented factor loading values lower than 0.60. To further improve the
adjustment of the obtained model, 12 other assertives were excluded due to presenting very
high residues as indicated in gray in Table 6. As the residues, preferably, should be within the
22.58 , residual , 2.58 interval (Hair et al., 2006; Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993a, 1993b), we
noted that only 2.6% of these residues extrapolated the interval considered. Thus, not being
significant they were accepted while taking into account the remaining measures.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 13

Recognition
0.88
Commitment
0.98
Professional Development
0.96
Motivation
Management Style
0.83
Team Work
0.99
Competition at Work
0.98
Leadership 1.00
1.00
Leadership
Organizational Clarity
0.98
0.94 Communication
0.98
Structures, Rules and
Compliance
Organizational Climate Management
Management 1.00
0.97
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

Philosophy
Philosophy
Work Content
0.57
0.57
Work Volume
0.92 1.00
1.00

Nature of Work
Nature of Work
Career Perspectives
0.93 0.70
0.70

HR Department Image
0.86
0.86
People
People
Management Training & Development
Management 0.83
0.83
0.95
0.95 Compensation

Figure 1. Visual representation of the causal relations and path coefficients – the OCMT model.

Table 7 shows the calculated tests for the OCMT model adjustment. The values
demonstrate that the multidimensional OCMT model is valid to measure organizational
climate dimensions proposed by theoretical models. So, to assess the unidimensionality of
the model constructs, the reliability index was also calculated as proposed by Hair et al.
(2006) as shown in Table 8.
Table 8 shows that the construct reliability and composite reliability values have
proven to be suitable, since they must be higher than 0.700 (Hair et al., 2006). In view of
the values obtained, Hypothesis (3) was confirmed indicating the feasibility of grouping
the independent dimensions of organizational climate into multiple ones, thus representing
a model of such a construct.
The results that validate the configurations of the OCMT model are presented in
Table 9, showing the path coefficients and t-test values for causal relations obtained by
SEM.
Also shown in Figure 1, the OMCT model has good fitness, since all path coefficients
are greater than 0.90.
The convergent validity of each factor was tested by examining the standardized factor
loadings. Hair et al. (2006) indicate that factor loadings should be 0.50 or higher, and
ideally even 0.70 or higher. This research obtained factor loadings higher than 0.70 for
almost all dimensions, with only 3 out of 15 slightly above 0.50, indicating good
convergent validity.
Discriminant validity was also verified by comparing the average variance extracted
(AVE) percentage for the five organizational climate configurations. The AVE motivation
 Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

14

Table 6. The OCMT model: configurations (multiple dimensions), independent dimensions and indicators (assertives).
Configurations/multiple dimensions Independent dimensions Indicators (assertives)
Motivation Recognition 9 18 26 31 34 71 75 85 88 97
Commitment 1 11 23 30 54 55 64 81 95
Professional development 15 58 62 68 96
Leadership Management style 2 5 14 53 56 67 77 92 94
Team work 12 16 21 45 72 74 98 99
Competition at work 33 91 93
Management philosophy Organizational clarity 24 29 39 42 47 63 79 80 100
Communication 6 10 49 50 66 78 82 90
Structures, rules and compliance 38 65 69 83
People management Compensation 13 17 27 32 36 44 46 86 8 51
R. Coda et al.

73 41 87
Human resource department image 22 35 84 89
Career perspectives 20 25 59 70 76
Training and development 4 43 61
Nature of work Work volume 3 19 48 52 60
Work content 7 28 37 40 57
Note: In gray: assertives excluded.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 15

Table 7. SEM goodness of fit statistics for five organizational climate configurations.

Goodness of fit statistics Calculated values Referential values

x 2/gl 3.943* x 2/gl , 5
Root mean square error of approximation 0.0754* RMSEA , 0.08
Normed fit index 0.963 . 0.90
Nonnormed fit index 0.973 . 0.90
Comparative fit index 0.974 . 0.90
Goodness of fit 0.924 . 0.90
Adjusted goodness of fit 0.905 . 0.90
Smallest standardized residuala 4.403 , 22.58
Largest standardized residuala 5.041 , 2.58
*p , 0.05.
a
Only 2.6% of the residuals (smallest and largest) exceeded the referential values.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

Table 8. Reliability of the OMCT model construct.

Configurations multiple
dimensions Construct reliability (Cronbach’s a test) Composite reliability
Motivation 0.812 0.903
Leadership 0.838 0.896
Management philosophy 0.797 0.879
People management 0.804 0.799
Nature of work 0.739 0.802

Table 9. The OMCT model path coefficients and t-test values of the causal relations.
a
Causal relation Path coefficient t-test value
Organizational Climate ! motivation 0.98 13.620*
Organizational Climate ! leadership 0.94 12.974*
Organizational Climate ! management philosophy 0.97 15.103*
Organizational climate ! nature of work 0.92 12.205*
Organizational Climate ! people management 0.93 14.920*
*p , 0.05.
a
Reference value t . 1.96 (Maruayama, 1998).

configuration value is 0.78; the AVE leadership configuration value is 0.82; the AVE
management philosophy configuration value is 0.74, the AVE nature of work
configuration value is 0.72 and, finally, the AVE people management configuration
value is 0.70. Values for the square correlations between the five configurations of
organizational climate were below 0.70, thus indicating that the test for discriminant
validity was fulfilled (Hair et al., 2006).

Conclusions
The OCMT model was developed and confirmed with a representative sample of
employees working in various companies in the metropolitan area of São Paulo. Results
make it clear that the tool used, composed of 84 indicators (assertives), has relevant
psychometric features with robust indicators to assess 15 dimensions of employees’
perceptions regarding their work environment. The research also enabled definition and
 16 R. Coda et al.

confirmation of configurations for organizational climate, motivation, people manage-

ment, leadership, management philosophy and nature of work, called the OCMT model
multiple dimensions (configurations), shown in Figure 1.
These configurations are an important subsidy to improve employees’ work satisfaction,
as they assist in characterizing variables that are effectively representative of the climate of an
organization. Consequently, they can be used to orient management practice with guidelines
focused on the constitution, respect and development of work teams. The configurations
identified in the OCMT model are classifiable in precedence as associated to the model of
administration human relations proposed by Quinn et al. (2004). This applies to the
motivation, people management and nature of work configurations. The management
philosophy configuration fits into the model of internal processes, and, finally, the leadership
configuration fits into both the open systems and human relations management models.
The OCMT model is anchored in theoretical models created over the last 40 years.
In creating the OCMT model as a measurement based on subjacent conceptual
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

foundations, the intention was to offer a tool that could not only be useful to adequately
assess levels of work satisfaction, but also to provide an approach that may motivate
researchers to test other central theoretical propositions, for example relations between
organizational climate and organizational efficiency or productiveness. It is comprehen-
sive, offering researchers the advantage of assessing employees’ experiences regarding a
number of dimensions of organizational climate. On the other hand, we should not assume
that any specific organization would be interested in all of the dimensions and
configurations presented in the model, making it necessary to select some in detriment of
others. Otherwise, attention may become focused on a dimension that has not been
contemplated by the model. In this case, we recommend that the same methodological
procedures be followed to identify and confirm other dimensions. Furthermore, a partial
application of the OCMT model should contribute to facilitate the survey, especially with
a reduction in the time needed to collect the data. Organizational climate models are not
rigid, enabling the OCMT model to continue to be expanded or reviewed.
Since the OCMT is a model that fits within the situational types, it could be useful in
studying company mergers and acquisitions by allowing the comparison of similarities or
differences in the organizational climates, before and after the process of incorporation.
Finally, the OCMT may also be applied to a wide variety of organizations within the
Brazilian context, and the model could possibly be used to seek and confirm other values
or dimensions of organizational climate, such as ethics, corporate governance, orientation
for results, citizenship and innovation. It is anticipated that company researchers,
consultants and those responsible for the areas of HRM use the measure developed in this
study to assist in building up their knowledge and understanding regarding the role of
climate in the administration of their organizations, as well as to initiate a line of
investigation that seeks to associate the effects of organizational climate to organizational
results, economic indicators and efficiency.
In summing up, this scale provides managers with the possibility of consistently
evaluating the five dimensions which make up the organizational climate concept:
motivation, leadership, management philosophy, nature of work and people management.
These dimensions were denominated configurations or multiple dimensions of
organizational climate since they are composed of a cast of 15 independent, specific
dimensions that permit putting the evaluation of the configurations into effect.
These 15 dimensions are also adherent to the theory of organizational climate and each
one is composed of a cast of 84 indicators which should be used by those in HRs not only
during application of the research as set forth here, but also for creating plans of action
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 17

aimed at improving those aspects classified as negative that, when amended, might raise
results as well as organizational strategy.
An appendix showing each configuration of the organizational climate construct, its
dimensions and related assertives for measurement is provided at the end in order to help
HRM specialists applying the OCMT model.

References
Archer, A. (1997). O Mito da Motivac
ão. In C. W. Bergamini & R. Coda (Eds.), Psicodinâmica da
Vida Organizacional: Lideranc
a e motivac
ão (pp. 23 – 46). São Paulo: Atlas.
Ashkanasy, N. M., Wilderom, C. P. M., & Peterson, M. F. (2000). Handbook of organizational
culture and climate. London: Sage.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2006). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal
of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309– 328.
Bisvas, S., & Varma, A. (2007). Psychological climate and individual performance in India: Test of a
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

mediated model. Employee Relations, 29, 664–676.

Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Brown, S. P., & Lam, S. K. (2008). A meta-analysis of relationships linking employee satisfaction to
customer responses. Journal of Retailing, 84, 243– 255.
Campbell, J., Dunnette, M. D., Lawler, E. E. III, & Welck, K. E. (1970). Managerial behavior,
performance and effectiveness. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Chuang, C.-H., & Liao, H. (2010). Strategic human resource management in service context: Taking
care of business by taking care of employees and customers. Personnel Psychology, 63, 153–196.
Coda, R. (1992). Clima Organizacional: Uma Contribuic
ão Metodológica. (Tese de livre-docência),
Faculdade de Economia, Administrac
ão e Contabilidade da Universidade de São Paulo, USP,
São Paulo.
Coda, R. (1997). Pesquisa de Clima Organizacional e Gestão Estratégica de Recursos Humanos.
In C. W. Bergamini & R. Coda (Eds.), Psicodinâmica da Vida Organizacional: Lideranc
a e
Motivac
ão (pp. 94 – 107). São Paulo: Atlas.
Corsini, R. J. (1999). The dictionary of psychology. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Cronbach, L. J. (1996). Fundamentos da Testagem Psicológica. São Paulo: Artes Médicas.
Forehand, G. A., & Gilmer, B. H. (1964). Climate variation in studies of organizational behavior.
Psychological Bulletin, 62, 361– 382.
Franek, M., & Vecera, J. (2008). Personal characteristics and job satisfaction. Ekonomika a
Management, 4, 63 – 76.
Garson, G. D. (2004). PA765-Statnotes: An online textbook. Retrieved from http://www2.chass.
ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/structur.htm
GPTW (Great Place to Work). (2001). Análise de Resultados da Pesquisa de Ambiente 2001 –
Copene. São Paulo: Author.
Grac
a, H. (1999). Clima Organizacional: Uma Abordagem Vivencial. Brası́lia: Fundac
ão Nacional
de Desenvolvimento do Ensino Superior Particular – FUNADESP.
Hafer, J., & Gresham, G. G. (2008). Organizational climate antecedents to the market orientation
of cross-functional new products development teams. Journal of Behavioral and Applied
Management, 8, 34 – 66.
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tathan, R. L., & Back, W. C. (2006). Multivariate data analysis.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hayduk, L. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL. Baltimore, MD: The John
Hopkins University Press.
Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1993a). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago, IL: Scientific
Software International.
Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1993b). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLISe
command language. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). Psicologia Social das Organizac
ões. São Paulo: Pioneira.
Keller, E., & Aguiar, M. A. F. (2004). Análise Crı́tica Teórica da Evoluc
ão do Conceito de Clima
Organizacional. Terra e Cultura, 20, 91 –113.
Kilic, C., & Dursun, T. (2008). Job-related antecedents and performance outcomes of individual:
Level customer orientation. The Business Review, 10, 39 – 46.
 18 R. Coda et al.

Kolb, D. A., Rubin, I. R., & McIntyre, J. M. (1986). Psicologia organizacional: Uma abordagem
vivencial. São Paulo: Atlas.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Doherty, M. L. (1989). Integration of climate leadership: Examination of a
neglected issue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 456– 464.
Kreitner, R., & Kinicki, A. (2007). Organizational behavior: Key concepts, skills and best practices.
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Laros, J. A., & Puente-Palácios, K. E. (2004). Validac
ão Cruzada de uma Escala de Clima
Organizacional. Estudos de Psicologia, 9, 113– 119.
Litwin, G. H., & Stringer, R. A. (1968). Motivation and organizational climate. Boston, MA: Havard
University Press.
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of
industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297– 1349). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Luz, J. P. (2001). Metodologia para Análise de Clima Organizacional: Um Estudo de Caso para o
Banco do Estado de Santa Catarina. Florianópolis: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.
Malik, M. E., Danish, R., & Usman, A. (2010). Impact of job climate and extrinsic rewards on job
satisfaction of banking executives: A case of Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Contemporary Research in Business, 12, 125–139.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

Maruayama, G. M. (1998). Basic of structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Muchinsky, P. M. (2003). Psychology applied to work. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Oliveira, W. M. (1996). Perfil Analı́tico-Descritivo da Pesquisa sobre Clima Organizacional em
Instituic
ões de Ensino Superior (1970 – 1995). Terra e Cultura, 20, 17 – 38.
Patterson, M. G., West, M. A., Shackleton, V. J., Dawson, J. F., Lawthom, R., Maitlis, S., . . .
Wallace, A. M. (2005). Validating the organizational climate measure: Links to managerial
practices, productivity and innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 379– 408.
Puente-Palácios, K. E. (2002). Abordagens Teóricas e Dimensões Empı́ricas do Conceito de Clima
Organizacional. Revista de Administrac
ão, 37, 96 – 104.
Quinn, R., Faerman, S. R., Thompson, M. E., & McGrath, M. R. (2004). Competências Gerenciais:
Princı́pios e Aplicac
ões. Rio de Janeiro: Campus.
Reichers, A. E., & Schneider, B. (1990). Climate and culture: An evolution of constructs.
In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational climate and culture (pp. 129–150). San Francisco, NC:
The Jossey-Bass.
Resende, E., & Benaiter, P. R. (1997). Gestão de Clima Organizacional: Uma Ferramenta de
Melhoria Contı́nua. São Paulo: Ênio Resende & Consultores Associados.
Ribeiro, N. (1990). Clima Organizacional na Embrapa. (Dissertac
ão de mestrado), Faculdade de
Economia, Administrac
ão e Contabilidade da Universidade de São Paulo, USP, São Paulo.
Rizzatti, G., & Colossi, N. (1998). Clima Organizacional da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
– UFSC: Uma Contribuic
ão para o Programa UFSC da Qualidade. In A. Silveira, N. Colossi, &
C. G. de Souza (Eds.), Administrac
ão Universitária: Estudos Brasileiros (pp. 182– 201).
Florianópolis: UFSC.
Sbragia, R. (1983). Um Estudo Empı́rico sobre o Clima Organizacional em Instituic
ões de Pesquisa.
Revista de Administrac
ão, 18, 30 – 39.
Schneider, B. (1990). Organizational climate and culture. San Francisco, NC: The Jossey-Bass.
Schulte, M., Ostroff, C., Shmulyian, S., & Kinicki, A. (2009). Organizational climate configurations:
Relationships to collective attitudes, customer satisfaction, and financial performance. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 94, 619– 634.
Sopow, E. (2007). The communication climate change at RCMP. Strategic Communication
Management, 12, 20 – 23.
Srour, R. H. (1998). Poder, Cultura e Ética nas Organizac
ões. Rio de Janeiro: Campus.
Tachizawa, K. (2001). On weighted dyadic Carleson’s inequalities. Journal of Inequalities and
Applications, 6, 415– 433.
Tagiuri, R. (1988). The concept of organizational climate. In R. Tagiuri & G. Litwin (Eds.),
Organizational climate: Exploration of a concept (pp. 11 – 32). Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Business School, Division of Research.
Tagliacarne, G. (1963). Técnica y Práctica de las Investigaciones de Mercado. Barcelona: Ariel.
Tamayo, A. (2001). Prioridades Axiológicas, Atividade Fı́sica e Estresse Ocupacional. Revista de
Administrac
ão Contemporânea, 5, 127– 147.
Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and
applications. Washington, DC: Americam Psycological Association.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 19

Whitman, D. S., Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2010). Satisfaction, citizenship behaviors and
performance in work units: A meta-analysis of collective construct relations. Personnel
Psychology, 63, 41 – 81.
Wittink, D. R., & Bayer, L. R. (1994). The measurement imperative. Marketing Research: A
Magazine of Management and Applications, 6, 14 – 22.
Wooldridge, B. R., & Minsky, B. D. (2003). The role of climate and socialization in developing
interfuncional coordination. The Learning Organization, 9, 29 – 38.

Appendix. Configurations, dimensions and indicators: the OCMT – organizational

climate measuring tool
Configuration: motivation
Dimension: recognition
A9. At this company, the existing recognition policies are applied to all employees in a
homogenous and professional manner.
A18. This company truly recognizes those professionals that make a difference.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

A26. The existing remuneration system is an excellent tool to give value to and recognize those
who reach their targets.
A31. The company recognizes and utilizes those who demonstrate leadership.
A34. In the company where I work, the acquisition of new competencies by employees is always
recognized.
A71. In my area, employees who perform their tasks well are recognized accordingly by their
superiors.
A75. The path to recognition is to achieve expected results.
A85. In the company that I work for, those who get more recognition are those who collaborate
more.
A88. At the company where I work, to be recognized it is not necessary to be closer to the manager
than on a daily basis.
A97. In the company that I work for, recognition is always monetary.

Dimension: commitment
A1. In the company that I work for, people strive to find the best alternatives to perform activities.
A11. I feel that I am essential in the area where I work in this company.
A23. Even if another opportunity came up, I would think for a long time about leaving my current job.
A54. I can assure you that most of my colleagues promptly react to work demands.
A55. The employees of the company where I work are very proud of being part of the organization.
A64. The majority of the employees in the company where I work are there just for the salary.
A81. The level of interest of the employees in the company that I work for is high, mainly to make
changes happen.
A95. I notice that the employees of the company where I work show a high level of fidelity toward
the organization.

Dimension: professional development

A15. Opportunities of professional growth are accessible to all employees.
A58. There are excellent opportunities for professional growth at the company where I work.
A62. My work offers the opportunity to learn new techniques and skills, contributing to my
professional growth.
A68. I am sure that expectations for professional growth are fulfilled at this company.
A96. The current job position structure is sufficient to allow professional growth.

Configuration: leadership
Dimension: Management Style
A5. The managerial presence in my area definitely contributes to the good development of
activities.
A14. Occasional divergences with my manager are discussed on a professional level and not on a
personal basis.
 20 R. Coda et al.

A53. Most of the time, I have autonomy to make decisions and solve problems, without appealing
to the management at each stage of the work.
A56. When a change is necessary, my manager makes sure my team and I are involved in the
process.
A67. I have enough orientation from my manager to overcome occasional difficulties at work.
A77. I think that my manager acknowledges and values my contributions by putting them into
practice.
A92. There coherence between what is said and what is done by management in my area of activity.
A94. My manager has an excellent ability to deal with people.

Dimension: team work

A16. The more experienced employees are always willing to provide help and orientation when
asked.
A21. There is no predilection whatsoever toward the members of my team.
A45. This company nurtures team work as one of its principles for success.
A98. Group work progresses very well at the company I work for.
A99. There is enough time to enhance relationships and exchange experiences among the work
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

teams.

Dimension: competition at work

A33. Competition among people or teams is healthy and valued as a means of motivating creativity
and improving professional performance.
A91. The level of competition among people is normal and never jeopardizes the progress of
activities.
A93. There is great harmony in my work environment.

Configuration: management philosophy

Dimension: organizational clarity
A24. Continuous search for professionalism in management is one of the main concerns at the
company where I work.
A29. The administration style adopted by the company where I work positively influences the
behavior of its employees regarding their work.
A39. Top management of the company where I work is mostly concerned with issues that are truly
strategic for the company.
A42. In the company that I work for, everything promised is carried out.
A47. The concern of the company for retaining the best talents is noteworthy where I work.
A63. People who work here are aware of the company’s main objectives, targets or plans.
A79. The attitude of the company where I work clearly demonstrates that people are the major
asset.
A80. Undoubtedly, one of goals of the company where I work is to grow respecting both the needs
and satisfaction levels of its clients.
A100. In this company there is great concern about disseminating and transferring knowledge
acquired during performance of activities among the work teams.

Dimension: communication
A6. Information required to perform my work is clearly and objectively conveyed.
A10. Changes are announced and explained in advance.
A49. The number of work meetings is adequate to keep people well informed about what occurs at
the company where I work.
A50. I spend little time selecting information received through the different formal communication
channels of the company where I work.
A66. Communication is truly reciprocal; there is no reason for apprehension about any surprises or
unexpected reactions.
A78. At the company where I work, information flows uniformly to all employees and areas.
A82. I easily obtain the information that I need from other areas of the company, to adequately
perform my activities.
A90. At the company where I work, the communications network is prompt and efficient.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 21

Dimension: structures, rules and compliance

A38. The organizational and functional structure of the company is consistent with its objectives.
A65. There is a clear and adequate division of roles and responsibilities among the areas of the
company where I work.
A69. The changes that occur at the company where I work are always planned.
A83. There is sufficient openness and flexibility to accept ideas and suggestions for perfection or
improvement in the company where I work.

Configuration: people management

Dimension: compensation
A27. The remuneration is balanced, including in addition to salary, benefits and other forms of
compensation.
A32. There is an extensive and wide variety of benefits which help retain the most competent.
A36. There is an internal balance among wages; more complex or more important jobs are better
remunerated.
A44. Promotions in the wage grades (horizontal promotion) are based on fair criteria.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 08:40 20 April 2015

A46. The salary range progression (horizontal promotion) occurs periodically at adequate intervals.
A86. Salary raises at this company exceed the cost of living increase of the period.
A8. The salary I receive is compatible with market levels.
A41. The salary I earn is sufficient to attend to my standard of living.
A51. Salaries paid reflect the value and quality of employees’ performance at the company where I
work.
A73. Salary differences reflect content and demand differences of job positions in the company.
A87. My salary is fair, with earnings that are compatible with my performance at this company.
Dimension: HR department image
A22. The HR department has tools to accomplish an effective appraisal of employees’ performance
in their activities.
A35. The HR practices demonstrate great concern with justice and ethics.
A84. The HR department is engaged in and concerned about defining the role and requirements for
the company’s different job positions.
Dimension: career perspectives
A25. I believe that qualifications and training background increase my chances for promotion.
A59. It is not necessary to have seniority to have a better work environment at this company.
Dimension: training and development
A4. The organization where I work is acknowledged for being concerned about developing its
professionals for the accomplishment of company activities.
A43. There is total support from the company to provide training sessions directly related to my
professional activity (technical training).
A61. Training is highly valued at the company where I work, even the type of training focused on
future stages of employees’ careers.

Configuration: nature of work

Dimension: work content
A7. I am making satisfactory progress toward my professional goals.
A37. My current job position is helping me attain my professional goals.
A57. My capacity, skills and potential are well utilized in the work I do.
Dimension: work volume
A48. I am tranquil and have all the time needed to perform my activities.
A52. The work processes and routines in my area satisfactorily attend the job requirements.