Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:33:59.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Subculture by autonomy and group cohesion and its effect on job satisfaction of R&D professionals in an R&D organization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2015

Jaehwan Jung ,
Changi Nam ,
Euehun Lee  and
Seongcheol Kim
Jaehwan Jung
Affiliation:
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Department of Business and Technology Management, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
Changi Nam
Affiliation:
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Department of Business and Technology Management, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
Euehun Lee*
Affiliation:
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Department of Business and Technology Management, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
Seongcheol Kim
Affiliation:
School of Media and Communication, Research Institute for Information & Culture, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
*
Corresponding author: euehunlee@kaist.ac.kr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Professional research and development (R&D) organizations typically employ highly educated professionals to work on a range of creative, intellectual projects in their chosen fields. In these organizations, organizational culture and subculture are critical factors connected with project success. This paper explores the existence of subcultures and the factors that contribute to subcultures within a professional R&D organization, and examines subcultural effects on the job satisfaction of R&D professionals to suggest a suitable cultural type for professional R&D organizations. Autonomy and group cohesion are considered, so grid–group theory is applied to measure R&D culture. The subjects were 285 full-time researchers who had worked at the Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, an international IT institution, for over 5 years. Differences were found in organizational culture according to the research fields and types (applied and developmental research). The egalitarian culture type (low grid, high group) is found to be suitable for improving job satisfaction in R&D organizations.

Keywords

organizational subculturelocus of subculturegrid–group theoryjob satisfaction
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , March 2016 , pp. 154 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aronson, Z. H., & Lechler, T. G. (2009). Contributing beyond the call of duty: Examining the role of culture in fostering citizenship behavior and success in project-based work. R&D Management, 39(5), 444–460.Google Scholar
Asmawi, A., & Mohan, A. V. (2011). Unveiling dimensions of organizational culture: An exploratory study in Malaysian R&D organizations. R&D Management, 41(5), 509–523.Google Scholar
Bloor, G., & Dawson, P. (1994). Understanding professional culture in organizational context. Organizational Studies, 15(2), 275–295.Google Scholar
Boholm, Å. (1996). Risk perception and social anthropology: Critique of cultural theory. Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology, 61(1–2), 64–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, R. P., & Coughlin, R. M. (1994). Conceptualizing and operationalizing cultural theory. In D. J. Coyle & R. J. Ellis (Eds.), Politics, policy, and culture (pp. 191–218). Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2006). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Chai, S.-K., Liu, M., & Kim, M.-S. (2009). Cultural comparisons of beliefs and values: Applying the grid–group approach to the World Values Survey. Beliefs & Values, 1(2), 193–208.Google Scholar
Chang, M.-L., & Cheng, C.-F. (2014). How balance theory explains high-tech professionals’ solutions of enhancing job satisfaction. Journal of Business Research, 67(9), 2008–2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chastain, B. L. (2005). A grid and group description of improving schools and raising student achievement with six leadership strategies. Doctoral dissertation. Stillwater, Oklahoma: Oklahoma State University.Google Scholar
Cheng, C.-F., Lai, M.-K., & Wu, W.-Y. (2010). Exploring the impact of innovation strategy on R&D employees’ job satisfaction: A mathematical model and empirical research. Technovation, 30(7–8), 459–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coughlin, R. M., & Lockhart, C. (1998). Grid–group theory and political ideology: A consideration of their relative strengths and weaknesses for explaining the structure of mass belief systems. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 10(1), 33–58.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.Google Scholar
Denison, D. R. (1990). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. (1982). Cultural bias. In M. Douglas (Ed.), In the active voice (pp. 183–254). London, Boston, and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Dreher, G., & Dougherty, T. (2002). Human resource strategy: A behavioral perspective for the general manager. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.Google Scholar
Edgar, F., Gray, B., Browning, V., & Dwyer, K. (2014). Cultural drivers of high performing knowledge-intensive service organisations. Journal of Management & Organization, 20(1), 56–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, K. L. (1983). Native-view paradigms: Multiple cultures and culture conflicts in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 359–376.Google Scholar
Grendstad, G. (1999). A political cultural map of Europe: A survey approach. GeoJournal, 47(3), 463–475.Google Scholar
Grendstad, G., & Selle, P. (1999). The formation and transformation of preferences: Cultural theory and postmaterialism compared. In M. Thompson, G. Grendstad, & P. Selle (Eds.), Cultural theory as political science (pp. 43–58). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gross, J. L., & Rayner, S. (1985). Measuring culture: A paradigm for the analysis of social organization. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Guzman, I. R., Stanton, J. M., Stam, K. R., Vijayasri, V., Yamodo, I., Zakaria, N., & Caldera, C. (2004). A qualitative study of the occupational subculture of information systems employees in organizations. Proceedings of the 2004 SIGMIS Conference on Computer Personnel Research: Careers, culture, and ethics in a networked environment, New York: ACM, 74–80.Google Scholar
Hampton, J. (1982). Giving the grid/group dimensions an operational definition. In M. Douglas (Ed.), Essays in the sociology of perception (pp. 64–82). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1998). Identifying organizational subcultures: An empirical approach. Journal of Management Studies, 35(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
Hood, C. (1998). The art of the state: Culture, rhetoric, and public management. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-C. (2009). Knowledge sharing and group cohesiveness on performance: An empirical study of technology R&D teams in Taiwan. Technovation, 29(11), 786–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3), 376–407.Google Scholar
Kaiser, H. F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23(3), 187–200.Google Scholar
Kerr, S., Von Glinow, M., & Schriesheim, J. (1977). Issues in the study of “professionals” in organizations: The case of scientists and engineers. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18(2), 329–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotter, J. P., & Heskett, J. L. (1992). Corporate culture and performance. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Lattin, J. M., Carroll, J. D., & Green, P. E. (2003). Analyzing multivariate data. Toronto: Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
Li, M., Zhang, H., & Cai, L. A. (2013). A subcultural analysis of tourism motivations. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 1–29.Google Scholar
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: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Lok, P., Westwood, R., & Crawford, J. (2005). Perceptions of organisational subculture and their significance for organisational commitment. Applied Psychology, 54(4), 490–514.Google Scholar
Louis, M. R. (1985). An investigator’s guide to workplace culture. In P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M. R. Louis, C. C. Lundberg, & J. Martin (Eds.), Organizational culture (pp. 73–99). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Martin, J. (1992). Cultures in organizations: Three perspectives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Dubin, R. (1974). Unit performance, situational factors, and employee attitudes in spatially separated work units. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12(2), 231–248.Google Scholar
Müller, S. D., Krammergaard, P., & Mathiassen, L. (2009). Managing cultural variation in software process improvement: A comparison of methods for subculture assessment. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 56(4), 584–599.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, A. M. (1979). On studying organizational cultures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 570–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(5), 603–609.Google Scholar
Rehman, M., Mahmood, A. K., Salleh, R., & Amin, A. (2014). Job satisfaction and knowledge sharing among computer and information science faculty members: A case of Malaysian universities. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 7(4), 839–848.Google Scholar
Romi, I. (2014). Information systems specialists’ sub-culture: An empirical investigation. International Arab Journal of e-Technology, 3(4), 220–227.Google Scholar
Sabharwal, M. (2011). Job satisfaction patterns of scientists and engineers by status of birth. Research Policy, 40(6), 853–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schein, E. H. (1996). Three cultures of management: The key to organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, 38(1), 9–20.Google Scholar
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Schwarz, M., & Thompson, M. (1990). Divided we stand: Redefining politics, technology and social choice. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Sheldon, M. E. (1971). Investments and involvements as mechanisms producing commitment to the organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(2), 143–150.Google Scholar
Thompson, M., Ellis, R., & Wildavsky, A. (1990). Cultural theory. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Trice, H. M. (1993). Occupational subcultures in the workplace. Ithaca: ILR Press.Google Scholar
Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J. M. (1993). The cultures of work organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Trice, H., & Morand, D. (1991). Cultural diversity: Subcultures and countercultures in work organizations. In G. Miller (Ed.), Studies in organizational sociology (pp. 69–105). Greenwich, CT and London: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Van Mannen, J., & Barley, S. (1985). Cultural organization: Fragments of a theory. In P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M. R. Louis, C. C. Lundberg, & J. Martin (Eds.), Organizational culture (pp. 31–53). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Vollmer, H. M. (1972). Basic and applied research. In S. Z. Nagi & R. G. Corwin (Eds.), The social contexts of research (pp. 67–96). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
von Meier, A. (1999). Occupational cultures as a challenge to technological innovation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 46(1), 101–114.Google Scholar
Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, A. (1987). Choosing preferences by constructing institutions: A cultural theory of preference formation. The American Political Science Review, 81(1), 3–22.Google Scholar
Yeh, Q.-J. (1996). Relating management practices to job characteristics of R&D: The case of Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 13(1), 1–18.Google Scholar