Organizational Culture and Effectiveness in Higher Education: A Test of the “Culture Type” and “Strong Culture” Hypotheses

Smart, John C.; John, Edward P. St.

doi:10.3102/01623737018003219

Cited by 93 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the research using the competing values framework there is support for the integration perspective (Fjortoft & Smart, 1994;Smart, 2003;Smart & St. John, 1996;Smart et al, 1997;Smart & Hamm, 1993a, 1993bZammuto & Krakower, 1991). The strength of the competing values model is that it allows researchers to compare across organizations and generalize about culture with high sample sizes.…”

Section: Summary Of Empirical Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research using the competing values model on a sample of 334 colleges and universities has been widely published (Cameron & Ettington, 1988;Cameron & Freeman, 1991;Fjortoft & Smart, 1994;Smart & St. John, 1996;Zammuto & Krakower, 1991). The national survey of 334 colleges and universities was conducted from 1984 to 1985 at the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.…”

Section: The Competing Values Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In using the competing values framework, Smart and St. John (1996) come to the conclusion that "some culture types have a stronger positive relationship with traditional measures of the organizational effectiveness of colleges and universities than other culture types, but irrespective of the specific culture type, it is critically important that the culture be 'strong' in order to achieve maximum effectiveness" (p. 220). They define strong cultures as those in which there is congruence between espoused beliefs and actual practices, whereas weak cultures are characterized by incongruence between espoused beliefs and actual practices.…”

Section: The Competing Values Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Schein says, "The 'strength' or 'amount' of culture can be defined in terms of (1) the homogeneity and stability of group membership and (2) the length and intensity of shared experiences of the group. If a stable group has had a long, varied, intense Chaffee and Tierney (1988) Clark (1970, 1972) Dill (1982 Hartley (2003) Masland (1985) Sporn ( ) Tierney (1988 Competing values research Adkinson (2005) Cameron and Ettington (1988) Cameron andFreeman (1991) Fjortoft andSmart (1994) Smart (2003) Smart and St. John (1996) Smart et al (1997) Smart and Hamm (1993a, 1993b) Zammuto and Krakower (1991 Faculty differentiation Becher (1989) Clark (1963a) Clark (1987 Goulder (1957) Lodahl and Gordon (1972) Snow (1959) Toma (1997 Administrative versus faculty subcultures Etzioni (1964) Feldman (1987 Lunsford (1968) Swenk (1999) Cohen and March (1974) Silver (2003) Weick (1983) Studies using multiple perspectives Harman (1989) Eisenberg et al (1998 history (i.e. if it has had to cope with many difficult survival problems and has succeeded), it will have strong and highly differentiated culture" (1984, p. 7).…”

Section: Summary Of Empirical Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Throughout the past 20 years cultural analysis has flourished as a means of studying higher education organizations (Cameron & Ettington, 1988;Kuh & Whitt, 1988;Peterson, Cameron, Jones, Mets, & Ettington, 1986;Peterson, Cameron, Knapp, Spencer, & White, 1991;Peterson & Spencer, 1990Silver, 2003;Smart, 2003;Smart & St. John, 1996;Smart, Kuh, & Tierney, 1997). Not only has it been of interest to organizational scholars but also to administrators for its potential to improve administrative action (Austin, 1990;Chaffee & Tierney, 1988;Dill, 1982;Tierney, 1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Cultural Perspectives of Academia: Toward a Model of Cultural Complexity

Smerek

2010

Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Summary Of Empirical Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Competing Values Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Competing Values Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Summary Of Empirical Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cultural Perspectives of Academia: Toward a Model of Cultural Complexity

Smerek

2010

Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organizational Culture and Climate

Ostroff

Kinicki

Muhammad

2003

Handbook of Psychology

422

392

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our focus is on organizational culture and climate and the role that these constructs play in understanding individual as well as collective attitudes, behavior, and performance. We begin with the assumption that both constructs rest upon the notion of shared meanings or a shared understanding of aspects of the organizational context. Climate is defined as a perceptually based description of the what the organization is like in terms of practices, policies, procedures, and routines while culture helps define the underlying reasons and mechanisms for why these things occur in an organization based on fundamental ideologies, assumptions, values, and artifacts. The first half of the chapter provides a comprehensive review of the culture and climate literatures. The second half is framed around a multilevel model that integrates culture and climate through the linking mechanism of organizational structure, practices, and policies. This discussion elucidates a set of mechanisms that foster the emergence of organizational culture and climate and highlights the impact of weak emergent processes on individual and organizational outcomes. We then discuss the topic of culture and climate change and conclude by reviewing directions for future research.

show abstract

2001

ASHE‐ERIC High. Edu. Rept.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding and Facilitating Organizational Change in the 21st Century: Recent Research and ConceptualizationsDistinctive ContributionFocus of the MonographAudienceTo Change or Not to Change?Providing a Common Language for Understanding Organizational ChangeWhat Is Organizational Change?Diffusion, Institutionalization, Adaptation, Innovation, and ReformForces and SourcesDegree of ChangeTiming of ChangeScale of ChangeFocus of ChangeAdaptive/GenerativeIntentionality: Planned Versus Unplanned ChangeResponse Time: Proactive and ReactiveActive and StaticTarget of Change: Change Process and OutcomesSummaryTheories and Models of Organizational ChangeTypology of Organizational Change ModelsEvolutionaryTeleologicalLife CycleDialecticalSocial CognitionCulturalMultiple ModelsSummaryAppendixUnderstanding the Nature of Higher Education Organizations: Key to Successful Organizational ChangeInterdependent OrganizationsRelatively Independent of EnvironmentUnique Organizational Cultures of the AcademyInstitutional StatusValues‐Driven: Complex and ContrastingMultiple Power and Authority StructuresLoosely Coupled StructureOrganized Anarchical Decision MakingProfessional and Administrative ValuesShared Governance SystemEmployee Commitment and TenureGoal AmbiguityImage and SuccessSummaryHigher Education Models of Change: Examination Through the Typology of Six ModelsEvolutionaryTeleologicalLife CycleDialecticalSocial CognitionCulturalMultiple ModelsSummaryResearch‐Based Principles of ChangePromote Organizational Self‐DiscoveryRealize That the Culture of the Institution (and Institutional Type) Affects ChangeBe Aware of PoliticsLay GroundworkFocus on AdaptabilityFacilitate Interaction to Develop New Mental Models and SensemakingStrive to Create Homeostasis and Balance External Forces with the Internal EnvironmentCombine Traditional Teleological Tools, Such As Establishing a Vision, Planning, or Strategy, With Social‐Cognition, Symbolic, and Political StrategiesRealize That Change Is a Disorderly ProcessPromote Shared Governance or Collective Decision MakingArticulate and Maintain Core Characteristics 120Be Aware of ImageConnect the Change Process to Individual and Institutional IdentityCreate a Culture of Risk and Help People to Change Belief SystemsRealize That Various Levels or Aspects of the Organization Will Need Different Change ModelsKnow That Strategies for Change Vary by Change InitiativeConsider Combining Models or Approaches, As Is Demonstrated Within the Multiple ModelsSummaryFuture Research on Organizational ChangeReferences

show abstract

Organizational Culture and Effectiveness in Higher Education: A Test of the “Culture Type” and “Strong Culture” Hypotheses

Cited by 93 publications

References 49 publications

Cultural Perspectives of Academia: Toward a Model of Cultural Complexity

Cultural Perspectives of Academia: Toward a Model of Cultural Complexity

Organizational Culture and Climate

Table of Contents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About