Validating the organizational climate measure: links to managerial practices, productivity and innovation

Patterson, Malcolm; West, Michael; Shackleton, V. J.; Dawson, Jeremy; Lawthom, Rebecca; Maitlis, Sally; Robinson, David L.; Wallace, Alison

doi:10.1002/job.312

Cited by 877 publications

(1,039 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

926

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Research often attempts either to describe a global organizational climate (Patterson, Warr and West 2004;Patterson, West, Shackleton, Dawson, Lawthom, Maitlis, Robinson, and Wallace, 2005;Schulte, Ostroff and Kinicki, 2006) or a local 'climate for' approach such as climates for innovation, safety and ethics, (May, Gilson and Harter, 2004;Mulki, et al, 2006). Perceptions of climate can also be taken at the individual or unit level.…”

Section: Climate Research and Worker Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The measurement of worker relations: the development of a three-component scale

Biggs

Swailes

Baker

2016

Leadership &Amp; Organization Development Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

DisclaimerThe University of Gloucestershire has obtained warranties from all depositors as to their title in the material deposited and as to their right to deposit such material.The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation or warranties of commercial utility, title, or fitness for a particular purpose or any other warranty, express or implied in respect of any material deposited.The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation that the use of the materials will not infringe any patent, copyright, trademark or other property or proprietary rights.The University of Gloucestershire accepts no liability for any infringement of intellectual property rights in any material deposited but will remove such material from public view pending investigation in the event of an allegation of any such infringement. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR TEXT.This is a peer-reviewed, post-print (final draft post-refereeing) version of the following published document: We recommend you cite the published (post-print) version. BiggsThe URL for the published version is http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-08-2012-0098 DisclaimerThe University of Gloucestershire has obtained warranties from all depositors as to their title in the material deposited and as to their right to deposit such material.The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation or warranties of commercial utility, title, or fitness for a particular purpose or any other warranty, express or implied in respect of any material deposited.The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation that the use of the materials will not infringe any patent, copyright, trademark or other property or proprietary rights.The University of Gloucestershire accepts no liability for any infringement of intellectual property rights in any material deposited but will remove such material from public view pending investigation in the event of an allegation of any such infringement.PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR TEXT. Design/methodology/approach A 20-item inventory was tested using data collected in a local authority (N=157) and led to the retention of nine items which were embodied in a scale for further evaluation. A second study using data using obtained in an Emergency Call Management Service (N=85) was used to further evaluate the factor structure of the scale and assess its predictive validity. A third study (N=70) provided further information on the measure. FindingsThe new nine item measure is a viable instrument with adequate reliability for assessing three levels of worker relations. In line with predictions, the three sub-scales (co-worker, supervisor and organisation) were positively correlated with job satisfaction and social relations. Practical implicationsThe new scale provides a freely available and parsimonious alternative to existing measures of worker relations. Originality/valueThe paper considers the component aspects of worker relations before defining, theorising and developing a general purpose short instrument capable of quantitatively measuring worker relatio...

show abstract

Section: Climate Research and Worker Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The measurement of worker relations: the development of a three-component scale

Biggs

Swailes

Baker

2016

Leadership &Amp; Organization Development Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are conflicting views regarding the notion of climate (Baer and Frese, 2003) since there are both theoretical and disciplinary differences in what climate represents (Patterson et al, 2005). For the purposes of this research the predominant approach was selected, which conceptualises climate as employees' shared perceptions of organisational policies, practices and procedures (Patterson et al, 2005).…”

Section: Definition Of Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the purposes of this research the predominant approach was selected, which conceptualises climate as employees' shared perceptions of organisational policies, practices and procedures (Patterson et al, 2005). The principle is that if people in an organisation share similar perceptions of a psychological climate dimension, it is legitimate to aggregate these individual perceptions into a composite indicator of climate (Baer and Frese, 2003).…”

Section: Definition Of Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Level of analysis. Researchers have studied climate at different levels of analysis, such as proximal work groups, departments or organisations (Patterson et al, 2005). This is commonly achieved by aggregating individual scores from psychometric questionnaires to the desired level, using the mean average to represent the climate at that level.…”

Section: Definition Of Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Key influences of innovation magnitude and mode

Shaw¹,

Bouchlaghem²,

Demian³

2010

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Management,

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is plenty of recognition of the need for more innovation in the construction sector. Increasing levels of competition, rapid technological and regulatory change, the current economic climate and environmental concern all accentuate this requirement. In response, many construction firms are seeking ways to manage innovation more actively and conscientiously in order to remain competitive. However, there is little practical guidance for construction professionals on how to make innovation flourish in their teams. Those who aspire to improve the management of innovation will need to understand how innovation happens, what are the driving forces and how can they be influenced. This paper reports on an empirical investigation that was undertaken to explore some of these questions, specifically the role of organisational climate, customers, risk and complexity on the levels of innovation in teams and the various modes of innovation that prevail – with the aim of providing practitioners with clearer guidance on where efforts should be focused. The findings suggest that there are a limited number of fundamental factors that significantly influence innovation magnitude and mode. For industry professionals it is hoped that this stimulates debate and assists in establishing a much needed foundation for improved innovation management in construction.

show abstract

“…Congruence between perceptions can only be defined at a higher level than the individual. This is related to organizational climate: the shared perceptions of its members on events, practices and procedures within an organization [20,21]. Recent studies show that organizational climate influences staff involvement and organizational performance [22,23].…”

Section: Modification By Leadership Climatementioning

confidence: 99%