Acta Oeconomica Pragensia 2010, 18(6):49-67 | DOI: 10.18267/j.aop.321

Impact of Work Culture on Motivation and Performance Level of Employees in Private Sector Companies

Smrita Sinha, Ajay Kr. Singh, Nisha Gupta, Rajul Dutt
Smrita Sinha,Amity University, Noida;Ajay Kr. Singh, Nisha Gupta, University of Delhi; Rajul Dutt, J.P. School of Business, Meerut (drajayksingh@gmail.com).

Work culture has the potential to enhance managerial performance. The objective of the present study is to examine the dominant work culture prevalent in the two private sector manufacturing organizations X and Y and to study its impact on the contextual performance and motivation level of the employees at the middle management level. The statistical tools used to test the hypothesis were the mean, standard deviation, t-test, correlation, one-way ANOVA, and regression. The findings show that the technocratic culture has the strongest partial correlation or the purest relationship with role motivation. Through a regression analysis, the technocratic culture emerges as a strong predictor of motivation while the entrepreneurial culture as a strong predictor for performance. The findings imply that when individuals are satisfied with their roles and feel that their supervisor or leader provides them with support, their contextual performance is expected to increase.

Keywords: Work culture, autocratic culture, bureaucratic culture, technocratic culture, entrepreneurial culture, dominant culture, contextual performance, role motivation
JEL classification: D2, J24, O15

Published: October 1, 2010  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Sinha, S., Singh, A.K., Gupta, N., & Dutt, R. (2010). Impact of Work Culture on Motivation and Performance Level of Employees in Private Sector Companies. Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, 18(6), 49-67. doi: 10.18267/j.aop.321
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. ASHKANASY N.; WILDERON, C.; PETERSON, M. F. 2000. Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage, 2000, s.1-18.
    2. BLACKLER, F H. M.; BROWN, C. A. 1981. A New Philosophy of Management: Shell Revisited. Personnel Review. 1981, vol. 10, s. 15-21. Go to original source...
    3. BORMAN, W. C.; MOTOWIDLO, S. J. 1993. Expanding the Criterion Domain to Include Elements of Contextual Performance. In SCHMITT, N.; BORMAN, W.C. and Associates (eds.). Personnel Selection in Organizations. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass, 1993, s.71-89.
    4. BODLEY 1994. Cultural Anthropology: Tribes, States and the Global System. Mayfield, CA : Mountain View, 1994.
    5. BORDENS, K. S.; ABBOTT, B. B. 1996. Research Designs and Method. Mayfield, USA, 1996.
    6. DENNISON, D. 1984. Bringing Corporate Culture to the Bottom Line. Organizational Dynamics. 1984, vol. 13, s. 4-22. Go to original source...
    7. DEAL, T; KENNEDY A. 1982. Corporate Culture: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life. Massachusetts : Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1982.
    8. EGAN, T M.; YANG, B.; BARTLETT, K. R. 2004. The Effects of Organizational Learning Culture and Job Satisfaction on Motivation to Transfer Learning and Turnover Intention. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 2004, vol. 15, s. 279-301. Go to original source...
    9. GORDON, G. G.; DITOMASSO, N.; 1992. Predicting Corporate Performance from Organizational Culture. Journal of Management Studies. 1992, vol. 29, s. 783-98. Go to original source...
    10. KHANNA, T 2010. Focus On Mid Level-Managers. Business World. 2010. www.businessworld.in/ bw/2010_08_13_Focus_On_Midlevel_Managers.html.
    11. PAREEK, U. 1997. Training Instruments for Human Resource Development. 2nd ed. New Delhi : Tata McGraw Hill, 1997, s. 671-683.
    12. PATTANAYAK, B. 1998. Corporate HRD. New Delhi : Excel Books, 1998, s. 26-40.
    13. PASCALE, R. T.; ATHOS, A. G. 1981. The Art of Japanese Management: Application for American Executives. New York : Simon & Schuster, 1981.
    14. PETERS, T; WATERMAN, R. 1982. In Search of Excellence. New York : Random House, 1982.
    15. REINEMER, M. 1995. Work Happy. American Demographics. 1995, vol. 17, s. 26-30.
    16. SLEDGE, S.; MILES, A.; COPPAGE, S. 2008. What Role Does Culture Play? A look at Motivation and Job Satisfaction among Hotel Workers in Brazil. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2008, vol. 19, s. 1667-1682. Go to original source...
    17. TAKADA, P W.; WESTBROOK, J. W. 2009. The Impact of Organization Culture on Satisfaction of Engineers in Technology. University of Alabama in Huntsville. 2009. [cit. 2009-02-27]. http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20020017756_2002010173.pdf.
    18. TABACHNICK, B. G.; FIDELL, L. S. 1983. Using Multivariate Statistics. New York : Harper & Row, 1983.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content