A number of survey instruments measuring organizational culture can be found in the literature. Many of these have been reported to suffer from construct and methodology related weaknesses. Specifically, these have been found to either have insufficient theoretical basis or result in a narrow depiction of the multidimensional construct of organizational culture. In this article, the authors report the construction of a scale for measuring organizational culture that starts with a sound theoretical model to identify dimensions that comprehensively cover the content domain of organizational culture. Exploratory factor analysis has been used to extract seven factors. When interpreted, these factors align well with the starting theoretical model. The scale thus developed has been found to be internally consistent and demonstrates construct validity.

PurposeUsing the knowledge-based view of the firm, dynamic capability literature and known dimensions of organizational innovativeness (OI), this article develops two testable models that attempt to explain: (1) how innovativeness functions as a source of capability dynamization and (2) how organizational culture (OC) critically determines this function of innovativeness.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses a cross-sectional design and maximum variation sampling to identify organizations from the population of formal Indian business firms with the aim of controlling the effects of moderating variables such as their size, age, nature of business and ownership. Measurement instruments are borrowed from the literature. The cleaned dataset (n = 453 cases from 13 organizations) is randomly split into two-halves, which are used separately for extracting and confirming underlying factors. Rigorous procedure for assessing scale psychometric properties has been followed. The hypotheses are tested using structural equation modelling (SEM).FindingsExcept for a couple of paths that turned out insignificant, the data by and large support the study hypotheses. While market innovativeness failed to emerge as a factor, the capability dynamizing dimensions of innovativeness significantly predict its outcome dimensions of product and process innovativeness. Barring the effect of “trust”, they also fully mediate the effect of the rest of the culture factors on these outcome dimensions. Importantly, they are substantively determined by the culture factors, suggesting that the capability dynamizing dimensions are embedded in culture.Originality/valueThe primary contribution of this study is that besides accounting for how firm innovativeness can possibly explain the dynamism in dynamic capabilities, the results indicate a critical influence of culture in determining the potency of the dynamizing mechanisms. This has important implications for theory and practice.

There is general agreement that organizational innovativeness is a multidimensional construct. The scale for organizational innovativeness developed and validated by Wang and Ahmed (2004) takes this multidimensionality into account. In this study, the authors investigate whether this scale is robust enough to be invariant across different cultures. Starting with the innovativeness construct of Wang and Ahmed, the article discusses its rescaling using data from Indian organizations. Exploratory factor analysis was performed on the data from 481 respondents from 14 diverse Indian organizations to obtain the underlying factor structure of the innovativeness construct. Four factors with strong internal consistency and clear loadings were extracted—behavioural, process, strategic and product–market innovativeness. Their close correspondence to the five factors of Wang and Ahmed demonstrates the robustness of the organizational innovativeness construct. The 22-item scale demonstrates high reliability and convergent validity.

What started as a potentially valuable initiative at Kings & Company was threatening to degenerate into a routine system of rewarding a handful of employees who were brave and lucky enough to get their suggestions pass through multiple gates of evaluation. The company is in the business of manufacturing and selling home appliances in the Indian market. Its financials bear evidence of its success as a business. The CEO, Prakash Parekh, believed in the creative potential of individual employees and wanted to harness it to create sustainable value for the company. He, therefore, conceived of and implemented an employee suggestion scheme (ESS) whereby each employee could give suggestions to improve aspects related to his/her area of work, operations and business. The case describes how the ESS at Kings & Company has evolved from 2013, when it was initiated, till 2017. These changes are juxtaposed with a steady decline in employee satisfaction during the same period. Worried with such a trend, Parekh asks Uday Gupta, GM Human Resources, to review the ESS and recommend further changes, including dropping it altogether.

<em>Business organizations that are based on strong relationship among employees across all organizational levels are known to demonstrate consistent performance in the areas of innovation and customer service. In affiliative societies, family relationships and child rearing practices lead to a strong need for belongingness, acceptance and dependence among people. This paper discusses how these attributes, deep rooted in the culture of affiliative societies, can manifest as strength rather than a weakness in organizations. The paper discusses the characteristics of such ‘family-like’ or affiliative organizations with live examples. It also identifies differences between these and those that are commonly referred to as employee-centered organizations.</em>