research topics on organizational culture

• Browse All Articles
• Newsletter Sign-Up

OrganizationalCulture →

No results found in working knowledge.

• Were any results found in one of the other content buckets on the left?
• Try removing some search filters.
• Use different search filters.

• Employee Success Platform Improve engagement, inspire performance, and build a magnetic culture.
• Engagement Survey
• Lifecycle Surveys
• Pulse Surveys
• Action Planning
• Recognition
• Talent Reviews
• Succession Planning
• Expert-Informed AI
• Seamless Integrations
• Award-Winning Service
• Robust Analytics
• Scale Employee Success with AI
• Drive Employee Retention
• Identify and Develop Top Talent
• Build High Performing Teams
• Increase Strategic Alignment
• Manage Remote Teams
• Improve Employee Engagement
• Customer Success Stories
• Customer Experience
• Customer Advisory Board
• Not Another Employee Engagement Trends Report
• Everyone Owns Employee Success
• Employee Success ROI Calculator
• Employee Retention Quiz
• Ebooks & Templates
• Leadership Team
• Partnerships
• Best Places to Work
• Request a Demo

The Importance of Organizational Culture

Research & advice for building a more magnetic culture.

65% of employees say their company culture has changed post-pandemic. Our research shows that employee perceptions of company culture have a direct impact on engagement and retention. This information can help leaders rethink their approach to culture and create a foundation for business success.

2022 Organizational Culture Research Report

Table of contents.

What is organizational culture

The top elements of organizational culture

What employees think about organizational culture

How culture impacts employee engagement & retention risk

Where organizational culture thrives

What employees want in an organizational culture

Who shapes organizational culture

5 tips for creating a strong, engaging culture

Make culture easier with quantum workplace.

Unpacking organizational culture 

Company culture has become a top priority for leaders across all industries. In fact, 66% of executives believe culture is more important than an organization's business strategy or operation model. 

The rise of remote and hybrid work has had a significant impact on the way we work. Our research shows 65% of employees say their company culture has changed since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. As the workplace has changed, culture has too—for better or for worse.

Those organizations that have adapted their approach to culture have fared well over the past few years. They've created an attractive value proposition for prospective talent and have kept current employees engaged—even through periods of significant change. Those who have been slower to evolve have seen consequences of disengagement, burnout, and unwanted turnover.

Our research shows disengaged employees are 3.8 times more likely than their engaged counterparts to cite organizational culture as a reason for leaving. 

While most leaders agree a strong culture is key to business success, many have different ideas about what culture really is. This lack of clarity makes it difficult to make changes that move the needle. Leaders need to take a good look at the role culture plays in attracting, retaining, engaging, and empowering talent. They need to focus on the aspects of culture that drive employee, team, and business success.

Our organizational culture research offers a fresh perspective on workplace culture. It helps make clear the most critical aspects of creating an engaging and successful culture. It shows the link between culture, employee engagement, and retention. And it will help organizational leaders rethink their approach to culture in order to shape a foundation for business success.

What is organizational culture?

Culture has been historically defined as organizational norms, rituals, and values. But organizational culture is so much more than that. It’s about the day-to-day attitudes, actions, and behaviors at an organization. Essentially, it’s how work gets done within a business, including:

• The way you make decisions
• The way you communicate
• The way you celebrate employees
• The way you behave 
• The way you reward and recognize others 

Employees experience culture through many aspects of your organization. But our research shows that some aspects are felt much more powerfully than others. Culture is really about the day-to-day details of how work gets done. Here are the top ways that employees feel the culture at their organization.

50% of employees experience culture most strongly in their organization's approach to employee performance. 

The way you manage performance has a strong impact on engagement and organizational culture. How managers create alignment, communicate, recognize, and give feedback all shape an employee’s experience. Focus on performance management approaches that drive employee success and wellbeing. Read our research on creating an engaging performance management approach here >>

53% of employees feel culture most strongly through recognition and celebrations.

Employees want to feel valued for their contributions. How you recognize individuals and teams says a lot about your culture and what you value. When you publicly recognize employees for behaviors that align with your culture and values, it helps bring culture to life. 

54% of employees experience culture most strongly through their organization's mission and values. 

Your mission and values set the tone for how work gets done. If your mission is to help others, your culture might be more collaborative. If innovation is a core value, put systems in place that encourage innovation. To create a strong culture, leverage your mission and values to guide everyday initiatives.

What employees think about organizational culture 

Company culture is changing across all industries. Our research shows that while some employees believe this change is positive, others think differently. As culture continues to evolve, it impacts the employee experience in different ways than before. 

65% of employees say their company's culture has changed post-pandemic. 

35% say their culture has changed dramatically. As the workplace has changed, culture has changed too—for better or worse. Whether or not you’re actively investing in your culture, someone or something is shaping it. Leaders must keep a pulse on culture to ensure they’re driving the right changes at the right times.

2 in 3 employees say their organizational culture is "very positive." 

66% of employees say their culture positively impacts their work and behavior everyday.

Culture is a day by day, moment by moment experience. It’s key to create a culture that promotes the right outcomes and behaviors. Listen to what your employees have to say about the day to day happenings inside your organization—and make adjustments that improve their experience.

Culture—or “how work gets done”—is going to look different in your unique workplace. The way you communicate, treat each other, and make decisions can either positively impact engagement and retention, negatively impact it, or not impact it at all. 

Employees who say their culture is positive are 3.8x more likely to be engaged.

A positive culture strengthens employee engagement. When employees agree that their organizational cultures are positive, they are more likely to be highly engaged, (84%) than those who do not agree (22%).

Employees who say their culture has improved since the pandemic are 2.9x more likely to be highly engaged.

When employees say their culture has improved over the past two years, they are more likely to be highly engaged (81%) than employees who say it has declined (28%). This illustrates the link between culture and engagement. A strong culture drives employee engagement, whereas a weak culture can boost disengagement.

Disengaged employees are 2.6x more likely to leave their company for a better culture.

Roughly 60% of disengaged employees—and only 23% of engaged employees—would leave their company for a better culture. This suggests that employee engagement is the motivating factor behind retention. One of the ways to drive engagement? A positive workplace culture.

Where organizational culture thrives 

Remote and hybrid work environments are becoming the norm. While many leaders believe that culture suffers outside of the physical workplace, our research provides a different perspective. Those offered flexibility in the workplace are likely to see culture more favorably. 

Remote/hybrid employees are more likely to report a strong and positive company culture.

Only 65% of on-site employees believe their company has a strong culture, compared to over 70% of remote and hybrid workers. Only 58% of onsite employees say their culture is positive, compared to roughly 70% of remote and hybrid employees. Company culture isn’t attached to the physical workplace. In fact, it can be strengthened in a remote/hybrid environment. Giving employees the option to choose where they work fosters a culture of mutual trust and respect.

Remote/hybrid employees are more likely to say their culture has improved.

While remote (45%) and hybrid (44%) say their cultures have improved, only 37% of on-site employees say the same. Flexible work arrangements promote employee wellbeing, autonomy, work-life balance, inclusion and productivity.

Workplace employees are most likely to say their culture has declined.

28% of on-site workers say their culture has declined since the start of the pandemic. Now more than ever, employees expect flexibility, autonomy, and trust. When you can’t give your employees the option to work from home, try to find other ways for them to decide how their work gets done.

A Note on Industry Impact There are some industries and roles that are inherently less conducive to remote/hybrid work arrangements. Therefore, we explored whether other factors, like industry or company size, influence employees' perceptions of culture. While industry and company size can impact these perceptions, we found that where and how employees work has a stronger influence on their perceptions of culture. Regardless of the type of work you do, employees want a culture of flexibility and trust. That's why culture doesn't fizzle out in flexible or non-traditional work environments. 

Engaged and disengaged employees describe their cultures in different ways. But both engaged and disengaged employees know what they want—and don’t want—when it comes to culture.

No surprises here. Engaging cultures have a better reputation with talent.

It’s no surprise that engaged employees value their culture. After all, culture is a key factor behind engagement. The top words engaged employees use to describe their culture are:

• Inclusive 
• Caring 
• Collaborative

But disengaged employees have different thoughts. A few words disengaged employees use to describe their culture include:

• Disorganized
• Professional 

How employees describe an ideal culture

Regardless of engagement level, employees know what they want when it comes to culture. The top 5 words employees used to describe an ideal culture are:

1. Flexible 2. Inclusive 3. Supportive 4. Collaborative 5. Caring

To engage your employees, give them the flexibility to decide how, when, and where their work gets done. You should also prioritize inclusivity and give everyone the opportunity to succeed regardless of role, tenure or background. Regular check-ins, growth-focused coaching, and collaboration will support employee success further. Finally, ensure you show your people that you care about them as humans—not just employees. 

Who shapes organizational culture?

According to our research, employees believe leaders, managers, and HR are responsible for company culture. But to create a great culture, everyone needs to play a part. Culture should grow and evolve in a way that resonates with each employee, regardless of role. 

Employees believe that leaders and managers are responsible for culture.  

Culture starts at the top. In fact,  Leaders should clearly define culture, communicate about it regularly, set a good example, and tie business outcomes to company values. This will empower employees to practice, develop, and evolve cultural norms.   

57% of employees believe HR is responsible for creating company culture. 

Many employees expect HR to shape company culture. But while HR is probably trying to create culture, they need leadership and employees to support their efforts. Without company-wide adoption, you won’t see the culture change you want. 

57% of employees believe individual contributors are responsible for shaping culture. 

Each individual plays a part in culture. To create a strong culture, employees must understand and live out their culture, mission, and values. They must collaborate, recognize, communicate, and behave in a way that aligns with cultural norms. 

Everyone plays a part in culture. The healthiest cultures are shaped by every person within an organization. And the job of creating culture is never done. As your organization changes, it’s important to be intentional about how those changes impact culture.

A healthy culture looks different for everyone. Leaders should keep their unique business problems and opportunities in mind when creating a culture strategy. Shape your approach with these tips to foster a culture of engagement, performance, and long-term success.

1. Aim your culture strategies at engagement. 

A healthy culture drives employee engagement first and foremost. When you evaluate “how work gets done” at your organization, try to understand how each aspect could impact employee engagement. Engagement is all about connecting employees to their work, team, and organization—ensure your culture strategies do the same. 

2. Evolve your approach to employee performance. 

Employees say performance management is a key component of culture. With the right practices, you can drive alignment, motivation, growth, and engagement. With the wrong approach, you risk toxicity, distrust, and burnout. Use performance management as a tool to strengthen culture with continuous feedback, effective communication, company-wide alignment, and fairness and transparency.  

3. Focus on driving trust-building leadership practices.

To create a culture of trust , clearly outline your organization’s vision, strategy, progress, and goals. Leaders should communicate frequently and transparently to prevent employee confusion or resentment when change happens. Continue this communication when you gather employee feedback too, explaining how feedback was used—or why it wasn’t. Finally, allow employees to see leaders as real people—genuine relationships are needed to foster genuine trust. 

4. Weave employee recognition into all that you do.

Recognition happens in the way you communicate, promote, compensate, assign work, and provide opportunities. Build a system that recognizes behaviors critical to your organizational culture. You should prioritize authenticity when you recognize employees and tailor your communication to each individual. Employee recognition should happen every day—a simple thank you goes a long way. 

5. Invest in tech that helps you see, understand, and act on culture. 

A robust employee engagement, performance, and people analytics platform will outline the big picture behind your culture and help you understand where to focus and when. With the right tools, you can uncover deep insights, measure employee perceptions, and create a thriving culture. 

Every employee in the company builds culture. That's why it's crucial for every aspect of your business to intentionally reflect the culture you want your organization to have. 

Employee success tools and technology make it easy for your employees to contribute positively to your culture in their day-to-day tasks, goals, communication, and celebrations.

We make it easy to grow, develop, and retain your best talent.

Lack of career growth and development is one of the primary reasons employees leave their organization. Employees don’t want to feel stagnant. If they do, the result is a lack of engagement and impact. It is crucial to leverage tools that help managers and employees map and track development together.

We make it easy to connect and celebrate meaningfully. 

Your culture comes to life through the ways you celebrate and recognize your employees. Building a culture of connection and appreciation centered around your organization’s core values not only boosts employee morale, but also engagement and impact.

We make it easy to predict and prevent turnover.

You need to take a targeted approach to analyzing turnover and retention. To move from reacting to turnover to proactively addressing it, you have to understand what drives top talent to leave and continuously implement strategies to retain your best employees.

We make it easy to stand out and compete for talent.

Employees are your most vital asset. You need to have a dynamic strategy in place to stand out against your competitors and attract top talent. Benchmarking can help you understand the strengths and opportunities of your employee value proposition compared to your competitors. Transform your EVP into one that cannot be imitated.

Survey Methodology

The research from this report was derived from the   Best Places to Work   contest—powered by Quantum Workplace. This nationwide contest measures the employee experience of over 1 million voices across thousands of the most successful organizations in the United States.

From this respondent pool, we conduct an opt-in, independent research panel with over 32,000 individuals who share their workplace experiences. This unique vantage point gives us the ability to understand workplace trends to supply insights that help other organizations succeed.

Learn how to build a magnetic culture by making culture easier for you and your teams!

Published August 22, 2023 | Written By Kristin Ryba

Related Content

14 One on One Meeting Topics You Should Be Discussing With Employees

Quick links.

• Performance
• Intelligence

Subscribe to Our Blog

View more resources on Company Culture

The Ultimate Guide to Company Culture [2022 Edition]

10 minute read

15 Diversity and Inclusion Best Practices for Bridging the D&I Gap

6 minute read

Culture Change in the Workplace [Infographic]

Less than 1 minute read

• All Resources
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Terms of Service

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

The Leader’s Guide to Corporate Culture

• Boris Groysberg,
• Jeremiah Lee,
• Jesse Price,
• J. Yo-Jud Cheng

Executives are often confounded by culture, because much of it is anchored in unspoken behaviors, mindsets, and social patterns. Many leaders either let it go unmanaged or relegate it to HR, where it becomes a secondary concern for the business. This is a mistake, because properly managed, culture can help them achieve change and build organizations that will thrive in even the most trying times.

The authors have reviewed the literature on culture and distilled eight distinct culture styles: caring, focused on relationships and mutual trust; purpose, exemplified by idealism and altruism; learning, characterized by exploration, expansiveness, and creativity; enjoyment, expressed through fun and excitement; results, characterized by achievement and winning; authority, defined by strength, decisiveness, and boldness; safety, defined by planning, caution, and preparedness; and order, focused on respect, structure, and shared norms.

These eight styles fit into an “integrated culture framework” according to the degree to which they reflect independence or interdependence (people interactions) and flexibility or stability (response to change). They can be used to diagnose and describe highly complex and diverse behavioral patterns in a culture and to model how likely an individual leader is to align with and shape that culture.

Through research and practical experience, the authors have arrived at five insights regarding culture’s effect on companies’ success: (1) When aligned with strategy and leadership, a strong culture drives positive organizational outcomes. (2) Selecting or developing leaders for the future requires a forward-looking strategy and culture. (3) In a merger, designing a new culture on the basis of complementary strengths can speed up integration and create more value over time. (4) In a dynamic, uncertain environment, in which organizations must be more agile, learning gains importance. (5) A strong culture can be a significant liability when it is misaligned with strategy.

How to manage the eight critical elements of organizational life

Strategy and culture are among the primary levers at top leaders’ disposal in their never-ending quest to maintain organizational viability and effectiveness. Strategy offers a formal logic for the company’s goals and orients people around them. Culture expresses goals through values and beliefs and guides activity through shared assumptions and group norms.

A survey to get the conversation started

• BG Boris Groysberg is a professor of business administration in the Organizational Behavior unit at Harvard Business School and a faculty affiliate at the school’s Race, Gender & Equity Initiative. He is the coauthor, with Colleen Ammerman, of Glass Half-Broken: Shattering the Barriers That Still Hold Women Back at Work (Harvard Business Review Press, 2021). bgroysberg
• JL Jeremiah Lee leads innovation for advisory services at Spencer Stuart. He and Jesse Price are cofounders of two culture-related businesses.
• JP Jesse Price is a leader in organizational culture services at Spencer Stuart. He and Jeremiah Lee are cofounders of two culture-related businesses.
• JC J. Yo-Jud Cheng  is an Assistant Professor of Business Administration in the Strategy, Ethics and Entrepreneurship area at Darden.

Partner Center

Smart. Open. Grounded. Inventive. Read our Ideas Made to Matter.

Which program is right for you?

Through intellectual rigor and experiential learning, this full-time, two-year MBA program develops leaders who make a difference in the world.

A rigorous, hands-on program that prepares adaptive problem solvers for premier finance careers.

A 12-month program focused on applying the tools of modern data science, optimization and machine learning to solve real-world business problems.

Earn your MBA and SM in engineering with this transformative two-year program.

Combine an international MBA with a deep dive into management science. A special opportunity for partner and affiliate schools only.

A doctoral program that produces outstanding scholars who are leading in their fields of research.

Bring a business perspective to your technical and quantitative expertise with a bachelor’s degree in management, business analytics, or finance.

A joint program for mid-career professionals that integrates engineering and systems thinking. Earn your master’s degree in engineering and management.

An interdisciplinary program that combines engineering, management, and design, leading to a master’s degree in engineering and management.

Executive Programs

A full-time MBA program for mid-career leaders eager to dedicate one year of discovery for a lifetime of impact.

This 20-month MBA program equips experienced executives to enhance their impact on their organizations and the world.

Non-degree programs for senior executives and high-potential managers.

A non-degree, customizable program for mid-career professionals.

Categorical thinking can lead to investing errors

How storytelling helps data-driven teams succeed

Financial services’ deliberate approach to AI

Credit: zhikun sun / iStock

Ideas Made to Matter

Organizational Culture

MIT Sloan research on organizational culture

Kara Baskin

Jul 25, 2022

COVID-19 has upended traditional working arrangements: Remote and hybrid work have expanded geographic possibilities, while abbreviated work weeks and flex time have changed the parameters of the traditional workday and workers’ expectations.

In this new era, leaders at every level of the enterprise are struggling to articulate an organizational culture that’s right for this new moment.

Here’s what MIT Sloan experts and researchers think are the key steps to building an organizational culture that works now and into the future.

Embrace distributed leadership

Smart organizations are shifting from command-and-control leadership to distributed leadership, which MIT Sloan professor Deborah Ancona defines as collaborative, autonomous practices managed by a network of formal and informal leaders across an organization.

The practice gives people autonomy to innovate and uses noncoercive means to align them around a common goal, a structure that’s highly appealing to employees who are used to being autonomous and empowered.

“Top leaders are flipping the hierarchy upside down,” said MIT Sloan lecturer Kate Isaacs,  who collaborates with Ancona on research about teams and nimble leadership.

“Their job isn't to be the smartest people in the room who have all the answers,” Isaacs said, “but rather to architect the gameboard where as many people as possible have permission to contribute the best of their expertise, their knowledge, their skills, and their ideas.”

Nurture a digital workforce …

To transform a traditional workforce into one that is future-ready, leaders should equip workers with the technologies they need and give them the accountability and capabilities to fully exploit those tools, according to Kristine Dery, an academic research fellow with the MIT Center for Information Systems Research .

Companies should aim to make their employees empowered problem solvers, Dery said, by creating a supportive environment of continual and rapid learning where they can leverage technologies to solve unpredictable problems. These employees need to have confidence to solve problems, and the skills to work effectively in a digital world. 

This isn’t just a nice idea in theory: Companies that invest in the right experience for their people, and make sure they are ready for the future, tend to outperform their competitors. On average they deliver 19% more growth in revenue than their competitors and have 15% more profit. These companies are also more innovative, better at cross-selling, and deliver a significantly better customer experience, Dery said.

… but don’t ignore employee hierarchies

The ascension of junior employees needs to be handled with care. In a tech-first world, younger workers often possess more savvy than older colleagues — but quickly promoting them could create friction with senior co-workers, noted MIT Sloan work and organization studies professor Kate Kellogg.  She recommends creating peer-training programs that rotate both senior and junior employees through the role of trainer.

Strive for managers who understand nimble leadership

Nimble organizations are filled with people who feel free to step forward, propose new ideas, and translate them into action. Isaacs, Ancona, and co-researcher Elaine Backman have identified three types of leaders in a nimble organization:

• Entrepreneurial — lower- to mid-level idea generators who inspire trust through technical expertise and reputational credibility.
• Enabling — often middle managers who are good connectors and communicators and who remove obstacles for entrepreneurial leaders.
• Architecting — often high-level leaders who shape culture, structure, and values.

“In a lot of companies ‘purpose’ becomes a motto on the wall, it's not really lived, it’s just lip service,” Isaacs said during an MIT Sloan Executive Education webinar on nimble leadership . “In nimble organizations, [managers] are good at bringing the purpose down off the wall and into daily decision making.”

Turn to middle managers to help promote DEI

Nearly all companies have increased their efforts around diversity, equity, and inclusion. Research from Stephanie Creary , an assistant professor at The Wharton School, shows middle managers will be especially important when promoting diversity and inclusion within a workforce.

Speaking last year at the MIT Sloan Management Review Work/22  event, Creary explained that executives and senior managers are often motivated by market position and competition, but middle managers are typically focused on their team and its performance, making them ideal champions of DEI efforts.

Build a culture that supports remote teams

In their book “ Remote, Inc. ,” MIT Sloan senior lecturer Robert Pozen and  co-author Alexandra Samuel, offer ways for managers to effectively communicate with and encourage productivity in their remote employees.

The authors recommend four tools: ground rules, team meetings, one-on-ones, and performance reviews.

“Even experienced managers face new challenges when they first start managing an all or partially remote team,” the authors write. “You need to ensure your team gets its work done, but you also need to put some extra thought and TLC into managing the issues that crop up for remote workers, like personal isolation and trouble communicating with colleagues.”

Strengthen the link between worker well-being and company goals

Research by MIT Sloan professor Erin Kelly, co-author of  “ Overload: How Good Jobs Went Bad and What We Can Do about It ,” finds that happier employees are more likely to be engaged, enthusiastic about work, and likely to stay at their jobs.

To promote employee satisfaction, companies should consider pursuing a dual-agenda work redesign — that is, an action plan that links employees’ well-being and experience with a company’s priorities and goals.

A dual-agenda design prompts employees and managers to look at how work can be changed in ways that benefit employees and their families, and also the organization.

“Work redesign is not a change in company policy, it is an effort to construct a new normal, to reconsider and revamp how a team does its work,” Kelly said. “Dual agenda refers to the fact that these changes address both organizational concerns (working effectively) and employee concerns (working in ways that are more sustainable and reflect their personal and family priorities and protect their health).”

Related Articles

About Stanford GSB

• The Leadership
• Dean’s Updates
• School News & History
• Commencement
• Business, Government & Society
• Centers & Institutes
• Center for Entrepreneurial Studies
• Center for Social Innovation
• Stanford Seed

About the Experience

• Learning at Stanford GSB
• Experiential Learning
• Guest Speakers
• Entrepreneurship
• Social Innovation
• Communication
• Life at Stanford GSB
• Collaborative Environment
• Activities & Organizations
• Student Services
• Housing Options
• International Students

Full-Time Degree Programs

• Why Stanford MBA
• Academic Experience
• Financial Aid
• Why Stanford MSx
• Research Fellows Program
• See All Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

• Executive Education
• Stanford Executive Program
• Programs for Organizations
• The Difference
• Online Programs
• Stanford LEAD
• Seed Transformation Program
• Aspire Program
• Seed Spark Program
• Faculty Profiles
• Academic Areas
• Awards & Honors
• Conferences

Faculty Research

• Publications
• Working Papers
• Case Studies

Research Hub

• Research Labs & Initiatives
• Business Library
• Data, Analytics & Research Computing
• Behavioral Lab

Research Labs

• Cities, Housing & Society Lab
• Golub Capital Social Impact Lab

Research Initiatives

• Corporate Governance Research Initiative
• Corporations and Society Initiative
• Policy and Innovation Initiative
• Rapid Decarbonization Initiative
• Stanford Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative
• Value Chain Innovation Initiative
• Venture Capital Initiative
• Career & Success
• Climate & Sustainability
• Corporate Governance
• Culture & Society
• Finance & Investing
• Government & Politics
• Leadership & Management
• Markets & Trade
• Operations & Logistics
• Opportunity & Access
• Organizational Behavior
• Political Economy
• Social Impact
• Technology & AI
• Opinion & Analysis
• Email Newsletter

Welcome, Alumni

• Communities
• Digital Communities & Tools
• Regional Chapters
• Women’s Programs
• Identity Chapters
• Find Your Reunion
• Career Resources
• Job Search Resources
• Career & Life Transitions
• Programs & Services
• Career Video Library
• Alumni Education
• Research Resources
• Volunteering
• Alumni News
• Class Notes
• Alumni Voices
• Contact Alumni Relations
• Upcoming Events

Admission Events & Information Sessions

• MBA Program
• MSx Program
• PhD Program
• Alumni Events
• All Other Events
• Operations, Information & Technology
• Classical Liberalism
• The Eddie Lunch
• Accounting Summer Camp
• Videos, Code & Data
• California Econometrics Conference
• California Quantitative Marketing PhD Conference
• California School Conference
• China India Insights Conference
• Homo economicus, Evolving
• Political Economics (2023–24)
• Scaling Geologic Storage of CO2 (2023–24)
• A Resilient Pacific: Building Connections, Envisioning Solutions
• Adaptation and Innovation
• Changing Climate
• Civil Society
• Climate Impact Summit
• Climate Science
• Corporate Carbon Disclosures
• Earth’s Seafloor
• Environmental Justice
• Operations and Information Technology
• Organizations
• Sustainability Reporting and Control
• Taking the Pulse of the Planet
• Urban Infrastructure
• Watershed Restoration
• Junior Faculty Workshop on Financial Regulation and Banking
• Ken Singleton Celebration
• Marketing Camp
• Quantitative Marketing PhD Alumni Conference
• Presentations
• Theory and Inference in Accounting Research
• Stanford Closer Look Series
• Quick Guides
• Core Concepts
• Journal Articles
• Glossary of Terms
• Faculty & Staff
• Researchers & Students
• Research Approach
• Charitable Giving
• Financial Health
• Government Services
• Workers & Careers
• Short Course
• Adaptive & Iterative Experimentation
• Incentive Design
• Social Sciences & Behavioral Nudges
• Bandit Experiment Application
• Conferences & Events
• Get Involved
• Reading Materials
• Teaching & Curriculum
• Energy Entrepreneurship
• Faculty & Affiliates
• SOLE Report
• Responsible Supply Chains
• Current Study Usage
• Pre-Registration Information
• Participate in a Study

Organizational Culture

Organizational culture Organizational culture is embedded in the everyday working lives of all cultural members. Manifestations of cultures in organizations include formal practices (such as pay levels, structure of the HIERARCHY,JOB DESCRIPTIONS, and other written policies); informal practices (such as behavioral norms); the organizational stories employees tell to explain “how things are done around here;” RITUALS (such as Christmas parties and retirement dinners); humor (jokes about work and fellow employees); jargon (the special language of organizational initiates); and physical arrangements (including interior decor, dress norms, and architecture). Cultural manifestations also include values, sometimes referred to more abstractly as content themes. It is essential to distinguish values/content themes that are espoused by employees from values/content themes that are seen to be enacted in behavior. All of these cultural manifestations are interpreted, evaluated, and enacted in varying ways because cultural members have differing interests, experiences, responsibilities and values.

• Priorities for the GSB's Future
• See the Current DEI Report
• Supporting Data
• Research & Insights
• Share Your Thoughts
• Search Fund Primer
• Affiliated Faculty
• Faculty Advisors
• Louis W. Foster Resource Center
• Defining Social Innovation
• Impact Compass
• Global Health Innovation Insights
• Faculty Affiliates
• Student Awards & Certificates
• Changemakers
• Dean Jonathan Levin
• Dean Garth Saloner
• Dean Robert Joss
• Dean Michael Spence
• Dean Robert Jaedicke
• Dean Rene McPherson
• Dean Arjay Miller
• Dean Ernest Arbuckle
• Dean Jacob Hugh Jackson
• Dean Willard Hotchkiss
• Faculty in Memoriam
• Stanford GSB Firsts
• Certificate & Award Recipients
• Teaching Approach
• Analysis and Measurement of Impact
• The Corporate Entrepreneur: Startup in a Grown-Up Enterprise
• Data-Driven Impact
• Designing Experiments for Impact
• Digital Business Transformation
• The Founder’s Right Hand
• Marketing for Measurable Change
• Product Management
• Public Policy Lab: Financial Challenges Facing US Cities
• Public Policy Lab: Homelessness in California
• Lab Features
• Curricular Integration
• View From The Top
• Formation of New Ventures
• Managing Growing Enterprises
• Startup Garage
• Explore Beyond the Classroom
• Stanford Venture Studio
• Summer Program
• Workshops & Events
• The Five Lenses of Entrepreneurship
• Leadership Labs
• Executive Challenge
• Arbuckle Leadership Fellows Program
• Selection Process
• Training Schedule
• Time Commitment
• Learning Expectations
• Post-Training Opportunities
• Who Should Apply
• Introductory T-Groups
• Leadership for Society Program
• Certificate
• 2023 Awardees
• 2022 Awardees
• 2021 Awardees
• 2020 Awardees
• 2019 Awardees
• 2018 Awardees
• Social Management Immersion Fund
• Stanford Impact Founder Fellowships and Prizes
• Stanford Impact Leader Prizes
• Social Entrepreneurship
• Stanford GSB Impact Fund
• Economic Development
• Energy & Environment
• Stanford GSB Residences
• Environmental Leadership
• Stanford GSB Artwork
• A Closer Look
• California & the Bay Area
• Voices of Stanford GSB
• Business & Beneficial Technology
• Business & Sustainability
• Business & Free Markets
• Business, Government, and Society Forum
• Second Year
• Global Experiences
• JD/MBA Joint Degree
• MA Education/MBA Joint Degree
• MD/MBA Dual Degree
• MPP/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Computer Science/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Electrical Engineering/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Environment and Resources (E-IPER)/MBA Joint Degree
• Academic Calendar
• Clubs & Activities
• LGBTQ+ Students
• Military Veterans
• Minorities & People of Color
• Partners & Families
• Students with Disabilities
• Student Support
• Residential Life
• Student Voices
• MBA Alumni Voices
• A Week in the Life
• Career Support
• Employment Outcomes
• Cost of Attendance
• Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program
• Yellow Ribbon Program
• BOLD Fellows Fund
• Application Process
• Loan Forgiveness
• Contact the Financial Aid Office
• Evaluation Criteria
• GMAT & GRE
• English Language Proficiency
• Personal Information, Activities & Awards
• Professional Experience
• Letters of Recommendation
• Optional Short Answer Questions
• Application Fee
• Reapplication
• Deferred Enrollment
• Joint & Dual Degrees
• Entering Class Profile
• Event Schedule
• Ambassadors
• New & Noteworthy
• Ask a Question
• See Why Stanford MSx
• Is MSx Right for You?
• MSx Stories
• Leadership Development
• Career Advancement
• Career Change
• How You Will Learn
• Admission Events
• Personal Information
• Information for Recommenders
• GMAT, GRE & EA
• English Proficiency Tests
• After You’re Admitted
• Daycare, Schools & Camps
• U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents
• Requirements
• Requirements: Behavioral
• Requirements: Quantitative
• Requirements: Macro
• Requirements: Micro
• Annual Evaluations
• Field Examination
• Research Activities
• Research Papers
• Dissertation
• Oral Examination
• Current Students
• Education & CV
• International Applicants
• Statement of Purpose
• Reapplicants
• Application Fee Waiver
• Deadline & Decisions
• Job Market Candidates
• Academic Placements
• Stay in Touch
• Faculty Mentors
• Current Fellows
• Standard Track
• Fellowship & Benefits
• Group Enrollment
• Program Formats
• Developing a Program
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Strategic Transformation
• Program Experience
• Contact Client Services
• Campus Experience
• Live Online Experience
• Silicon Valley & Bay Area
• Digital Credentials
• Faculty Spotlights
• Participant Spotlights
• Eligibility
• International Participants
• Stanford Ignite
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Founding Donors
• Location Information
• Participant Profile
• Network Membership
• Program Impact
• Collaborators
• Entrepreneur Profiles
• Company Spotlights
• Seed Transformation Network
• Responsibilities
• Current Coaches
• How to Apply
• Meet the Consultants
• Meet the Interns
• Intern Profiles
• Collaborate
• Research Library
• News & Insights
• Program Contacts
• Databases & Datasets
• Research Guides
• Consultations
• Research Workshops
• Career Research
• Research Data Services
• Course Reserves
• Course Research Guides
• Material Loan Periods
• Fines & Other Charges
• Document Delivery
• Interlibrary Loan
• Equipment Checkout
• Print & Scan
• MBA & MSx Students
• PhD Students
• Other Stanford Students
• Faculty Assistants
• Research Assistants
• Stanford GSB Alumni
• Telling Our Story
• Staff Directory
• Site Registration
• Alumni Directory
• Alumni Email
• Privacy Settings & My Profile
• Success Stories
• The Story of Circles
• Support Women’s Circles
• Stanford Women on Boards Initiative
• Alumnae Spotlights
• Insights & Research
• Industry & Professional
• Entrepreneurial Commitment Group
• Recent Alumni
• Half-Century Club
• Fall Reunions
• Spring Reunions
• MBA 25th Reunion
• Half-Century Club Reunion
• Faculty Lectures
• Ernest C. Arbuckle Award
• Alison Elliott Exceptional Achievement Award
• ENCORE Award
• Excellence in Leadership Award
• John W. Gardner Volunteer Leadership Award
• Robert K. Jaedicke Faculty Award
• Jack McDonald Military Service Appreciation Award
• Jerry I. Porras Latino Leadership Award
• Tapestry Award
• Student & Alumni Events
• Executive Recruiters
• Interviewing
• Land the Perfect Job with LinkedIn
• Negotiating
• Elevator Pitch
• Email Best Practices
• Resumes & Cover Letters
• Self-Assessment
• Whitney Birdwell Ball
• Margaret Brooks
• Bryn Panee Burkhart
• Margaret Chan
• Ricki Frankel
• Peter Gandolfo
• Cindy W. Greig
• Natalie Guillen
• Carly Janson
• Sloan Klein
• Sherri Appel Lassila
• Stuart Meyer
• Tanisha Parrish
• Virginia Roberson
• Philippe Taieb
• Michael Takagawa
• Terra Winston
• Johanna Wise
• Debbie Wolter
• Rebecca Zucker
• Complimentary Coaching
• Changing Careers
• Work-Life Integration
• Career Breaks
• Flexible Work
• Encore Careers
• Join a Board
• D&B Hoovers
• Data Axle (ReferenceUSA)
• EBSCO Business Source
• Global Newsstream
• Market Share Reporter
• ProQuest One Business
• Student Clubs
• Entrepreneurial Students
• Stanford GSB Trust
• Alumni Community
• How to Volunteer
• Springboard Sessions
• Consulting Projects
• 2020 – 2029
• 2010 – 2019
• 2000 – 2009
• 1990 – 1999
• 1980 – 1989
• 1970 – 1979
• 1960 – 1969
• 1950 – 1959
• 1940 – 1949
• Service Areas
• ACT History
• ACT Awards Celebration
• ACT Governance Structure
• Building Leadership for ACT
• Individual Leadership Positions
• Leadership Role Overview
• Purpose of the ACT Management Board
• Contact ACT
• Business & Nonprofit Communities
• Reunion Volunteers
• Ways to Give
• Fiscal Year Report
• Business School Fund Leadership Council
• Planned Giving Options
• Planned Giving Benefits
• Planned Gifts and Reunions
• Legacy Partners
• Giving News & Stories
• Giving Deadlines
• Development Staff
• Submit Class Notes
• Class Secretaries
• Board of Directors
• Health Care
• Sustainability
• Class Takeaways
• All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions
• If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society
• Grit & Growth
• Think Fast, Talk Smart
• Spring 2022
• Spring 2021
• Autumn 2020
• Summer 2020
• Winter 2020
• In the Media
• For Journalists
• DCI Fellows
• Other Auditors
• Academic Calendar & Deadlines
• Course Materials
• Entrepreneurial Resources
• Campus Drive Grove
• Campus Drive Lawn
• CEMEX Auditorium
• King Community Court
• Seawell Family Boardroom
• Stanford GSB Bowl
• Stanford Investors Common
• Town Square
• Vidalakis Courtyard
• Vidalakis Dining Hall
• Catering Services
• Policies & Guidelines
• Reservations
• Contact Faculty Recruiting
• Lecturer Positions
• Postdoctoral Positions
• Accommodations
• CMC-Managed Interviews
• Recruiter-Managed Interviews
• Virtual Interviews
• Campus & Virtual
• Search for Candidates
• Think Globally
• Recruiting Calendar
• Recruiting Policies
• Full-Time Employment
• Summer Employment
• Entrepreneurial Summer Program
• Global Management Immersion Experience
• Social-Purpose Summer Internships
• Process Overview
• Project Types
• Client Eligibility Criteria
• Client Screening
• ACT Leadership
• Social Innovation & Nonprofit Management Resources
• Develop Your Organization’s Talent
• Centers & Initiatives
• Student Fellowships

Organizational Culture and Climate: New Perspectives and Challenges

Loading... Editorial 15 September 2023 Editorial: Organizational culture and climate: new perspectives and challenges Thais González-Torres , Vera Gelashvili , Juan Gabriel Martínez-Navalón  and  Giovanni Herrera-Enríquez 2,926 views 0 citations

Systematic Review 13 July 2023 Dynamics of organizational climate and job satisfaction in healthcare service practice and research: a protocol for a systematic review Silvina Santana  and  Cristina Pérez-Rico 2,425 views 1 citations

Original Research 05 June 2023 Organizational health climate as a precondition for health-oriented leadership: expanding the link between leadership and employee well-being Friederike Teetzen ,  2 more  and  Sabine Gregersen 3,149 views 1 citations

Original Research 25 April 2023 Gender and organizational culture in the European Union: situation and prospects Nuria Alonso Gallo  and  Irene Gutiérrez López 2,501 views 2 citations

Original Research 09 March 2023 Factors that favor or hinder the acquisition of a digital culture in large organizations in Chile Carolina Busco ,  1 more  and  Michelle Aránguiz 2,946 views 2 citations

Original Research 10 February 2023 Implementation model of data analytics as a tool for improving internal audit processes Rubén Álvarez-Foronda ,  1 more  and  José-Luis Rodríguez-Sánchez 3,085 views 1 citations

Original Research 17 January 2023 The Impact of Team Learning Climate on Innovation Performance – Mediating role of knowledge integration capability Ming-Shun Li ,  3 more  and  Xin-Tao Deng 1,999 views 1 citations

Loading... Original Research 11 January 2023 The relation between Self-Esteem and Productivity: An analysis in higher education institutions Fabiola Gómez-Jorge  and  Eloísa Díaz-Garrido 6,138 views 2 citations

Original Research 23 December 2022 Validating the evaluation capacity scale among practitioners in non-governmental organizations Steven Sek-yum Ngai ,  6 more  and  Elly Nga-hin Yu 1,362 views 1 citations

Loading... Original Research 02 December 2022 Digitalization and digital transformation in higher education: A bibliometric analysis Vicente Díaz-García ,  2 more  and  Rocío Gallego-Losada 8,706 views 9 citations

Loading... Original Research 21 October 2022 A multi-level study on whether ethical climate influences the affective well-being of millennial employees Wei Su  and  Juhee Hahn 3,054 views 6 citations

Review Frontiers in Psychology Solvency and Profitability: The duality of the large Spanish banks between the two economic-financial crises of the 21st century 1,806 views 0 citations

Conceptualizing organizational culture and business-IT alignment: a systematic literature review

• Original Article
• Open access
• Published: 08 August 2022
• Volume 2 , article number  120 , ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Marcel R. Sieber   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2282-6164 1 ,
• Milan Malý   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5812-918X 2 &
• Radek Liška   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4639-7026 2  

3024 Accesses

Explore all metrics

For decades, business and information technology alignment has fascinated scholars and practitioners. However, understanding these alignment mechanisms is challenging. The significant role of information technology (IT) in digitalization and agile transformation calls for targeted management of the readiness and capability of IT as an enabler and strategic business partner. This paper assumes that organizational culture is a success factor for business-IT alignment. Therefore, it aims to explore the culture-alignment relationship by the following research questions: What are typical IT management organizational culture characteristics, and how do they contribute to business-IT alignment? The study conducts a systematic literature review. First, after defining the critical terms, it searches the databases indexed in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Then, the study uses bibliometrics to get quantitative insights into the research topic. Finally, it investigates the key arguments and findings of the selected papers. The analyzed literature depicts the relationship between an IT management culture and business-IT alignment elements. However, the research lacks concrete modeling and conception. This article contributes to a better culture-alignment relationship interpretation and closes a gap in the body of knowledge by combining quantitative and qualitative literature review methods.

Similar content being viewed by others

Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research

Reactions towards organizational change: a systematic literature review

Competitiveness Through Development of Strategic Talent Management and Agile Management Ecosystems

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The growing economic importance of information technology (IT) leads to an increased significance of the alignment of business and IT (Chan and Reich 2007 , p. 298; Hiekkanen et al. 2015 ; Jonathan 2018 ; Kappelman et al. 2013 ; Luftman and Brier 1999 ). Especially when industries and businesses encounter agile and digital transformation challenges, IT departments and their alignment to the business play a crucial role (Gajardo and Ariel 2019 ). Furthermore, IT supports the business in realizing digitalization opportunities as a provider of dedicated digital infrastructure, products, services, and solutions (Kahre et al. 2017 ).

Although regularly on top of the practitioners’ and scientists’ agendas, business-IT alignment remains challenging (Jonathan and Hailemariam 2020 ; Luftman et al. 2013 , p. 357). Business and IT need a mutual understanding , strategically aligned as one, founded on IT governance (Chew and Gottschalk 2013 , pp. 186–190). As part of corporate governance, IT governance ensures that IT supports and enlarges the organizations’ strategies and objectives, including the alignment of IT to realize business gains (IT Governance Institute 2003 , pp. 10–11). It also helps prioritize and allocate the needed resources (Luftman and Brier 1999 , p. 119). However, traditionally, IT primarily remains in a strategically executive role, functional and essentially subordinate to the business (Hiekkanen et al. 2012 , Kahre et al. 2017 , p. 4706). This perspective roots in the senior executives’ perceptions of IT as a cost factor in a historical context because it has not achieved the expected competitive advantage in the 1980s and 1990s (Chew and Gottschalk 2013 , p. 327; Peppard and Ward 1999 , p. 32). Practitioners regularly report shortcomings of IT realizations in time, cost, and quality; this is mainly an issue of the critical relationship between cost-efficiency and effectiveness, including the role of IT strategy and culture (Aitken 2003 ). Critics about a hindering IT culture because of its stability and security tendencies call for entrepreneurial, or at least commercial behaviors in IT functions, welcoming change and risks (Aitken 2003 ).

Many organizations still struggle with the cultural separation of IT and business , which results in a “us” vs. “them” and a lack of synchronized governance of decisions and strategies (Chew and Gottschalk 2013 , p. 186; Mithas and McFarlan 2017 , p. 6). As a result, the relationship between business and IT remains potentially conflictual (Leidner and Kayworth 2006 ). Besides the biased attitude towards IT, such conflicts concern the user groups of information systems and their often contradictory vision (Leidner and Kayworth 2006 , pp. 374–375). Although they found only a few studies about the managerial’s role, Leidner and Kayworth ( 2006 , p. 380) proposed that managers could reduce conflicts by shaping and promoting shared values in business and IT. Such values would be part of a shared organizational culture, fostering the relationship between business and IT. However, the business-IT partnership also depends on the IT department’s business orientation, managerial knowledge, and perceived IT value. Accordingly, although to a relatively small magnitude, a significantly technology-oriented IT negatively impacts the relationship between business and IT (Manfreda and Indihar Štemberger 2019 , p. 962). These findings are consistent with the research of 20 years ago, where the examined organizations’ IT management acknowledged that they need to increase their business knowledge (Peppard and Ward 1999 , p. 50).

Before this background, this paper aims to explore the influence of organizational culture on business-IT alignment, i.e., if particular organizational culture dimensions help IT management leaders or teams suitably align to the business. It investigates the following research questions:

What are the information technology management’s typical organizational culture characteristics?

How do these characteristics contribute to the alignment of business and information technology?

Therefore, it employs a systematic literature review and follows a hybrid approach by integrating a bibliometric and structured review (Paul and Criado 2020 , p. 2). As a result, the study presents a comprehensive and extended overview of the knowledge base about the relationship between organizational culture and business-IT alignment. Furthermore, it discusses the implications of research strategies, bibliometric analyses, and qualitative aspects of the literature review in this paper.

The remainder of the paper starts with the theoretical background and then explains the methodology, including the search procedure and strategy, bibliometrics, and paper selection. Then follow the results with quantitative and qualitative analyses of the references, which reflect the relevance and relation of the critical research topics and the studies relating to this paper’s research questions. After the discussion of the results with summarizing them before the theoretical background, the paper finally closes in the conclusions by considering this paper’s contributions and limitations and answering the research questions.

Theoretical background

The concept of alignment is only vaguely defined (Hiekkanen et al. 2012 , p. 219). This study takes a decent strategic management point of view. From this perspective, the common goal to deliver the best value and service to the information system’s user denotes the relationship between business and IT strategy (Buchta et al. 2010 ). Different models and frameworks for business-IT alignment exist in the literature (El-Mekawy 2016 ). The strategic alignment model (SAM) of Henderson and Venkatraman ( 1993 ) and the strategic alignment maturity model (SAMM), published by Luftman ( 2000 ), are probably the most cited and widely used works. This paper relies on Henderson and Venkatraman’s ( 1993 , p. 472) model and its definition of business-IT alignment as “four fundamental domains of strategic choice: business strategy, information technology strategy, organizational infrastructure and processes, and information technology infrastructure and processes,” see Fig.  1 . Along with these traits, business and IT align in a mutual “process of continuous adaptation and change” (Henderson and Venkatraman 1993 , p. 473).

Strategic alignment model (adapted from Henderson and Venkatraman 1993 )

The SAMM focuses on maturity levels, measured by six criteria (Luftman 2000 , p. 10): Communications, competency/value, governance, partnership, scope & architecture, and skills. The last criterium contains an organization’s cultural and social environment (Luftman 2000 , p. 20). This overlapping with organizational culture is the most important reason not to include the SAMM in this paper’s analyses.

Organizational culture is multi-faceted, and no widely shared definition exists. Table 1 provides a brief classification of organizational culture perspectives. The first authors emphasize culture as a variable or out of a functional view (Baetge et al. 2007 , p. 186). They argue that an organization has a specific culture that can be managed, measured, and compared. The second group of scholars states that an organization is a culture, with its uniqueness and perceptions of practices (Hofstede et al.), values (Sagiv et al.), and underlying assumptions (Schein). These perspectives are more subjective than the above noted; they are harder to compare. The third theory evolved as a combination of those mentioned above and questions the deterministic, taken-for-granted, and simply assessable view of organizational culture (Alvesson 2013 , pp. 31–32). Alvessonn ( 2013 , p. 65) advises studying the specific cultural manifestations and their consequences rather than the entire corporate culture and its impact on organizational performance.

This paper takes a functional perspective and focuses on culture as “the norms and values that guide behavior within organizations” (Chatman and O’Reilly 2016 , p. 218). Culture is responsible for adapting organizations to their societal and economic environment, and it integrates structures and processes for the alignment of conjoint activities (Herget and Strobl 2018 , p. 6). That functional view also holds Cameron and Quinn’s ( 2011 , p. 168) Competing Values Framework (CVF). It emphasizes culture as a variable that can be managed and measured at the corporate level. This paper defines organizational culture before the background of the CVF as “a potential predictor of other organizational outcomes (such as effectiveness),” which “includes core values and consensual interpretations about how things are” (Cameron and Quinn 2011 , p. 169).

Figure  2 depicts the framework with its four quadrants and characteristics. It spans two dimensions: the y-axis contrasts effectiveness between flexibility/freedom to act and stability vs. control , the x-axis internal focus and integration , and external focus and differentiation . The dimensions’ properties result in the four ideal-typical quadrants Clan , Adhocracy , Market , and Hierarchy .

Competing values framework (adapted from Cameron and Quinn ( 2011 , p.53))

Prior research shows an influence of business-IT alignment on various outcomes, such as competitive advantage (Kearns and Lederer 2003 ), business/organizational performance (Chan and Reich 2007 , p. 298; Charoensuk et al. 2014 ; Hiekkanen et al. 2012 ; Kahre et al. 2017 , p. 4707), process performance (Cleven 2011 ); organizational agility (Koçu 2018 ; Lemrabet et al. 2011 ), organizational change (Wattel 2012 ), and information security (El Mekawy et al. 2014 ).

However, there is a shortcoming of studies about the relationship between organizational culture and business-IT alignment (El-Mekawy et al. 2016 ); culture is just one among other factors of business-IT alignment (Hiekkanen et al. 2012 , p. 221). We know a lot about organizational culture and effectiveness (Denison and Mishra 1995 ; Hartnell et al. 2011 ; Quinn and Rohrbaugh 1983 ; Wallach 1983 ), performance (Dasgupta 2014 ; Deshpandé and Farley 2004 ; Henri 2006 ; Heskett 2012 ; Kotter and Heskett 1992 ; Wilkins and Ouchi 1983 ), and (organizational) agility (Felipe et al. 2017 ; Iivari and Iivari 2011 ; Ravichandran 2018 ; Sambamurthy et al. 2003 ; Tallon et al. 2019 ) but not in direct relation to business-IT alignment.

Methodology

This study conducted a systematic literature review. As a guideline and intention to structure the review procedure, the paper applied the  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement (Moher et al. 2009 ; Jackson et al. 2015 , p. 41). That framework helps scholars improve the review’s reporting and consists of a checklist with different items, which reflect the iterative process of reviews, and a proposed flow diagram for screening and selecting the literature (Moher et al. 2009 , pp. 5–6; 8).

The paper followed a hybrid approach, as described in (Paul and Criado 2020 , p. 2). After a domain-based systematic literature search, it conducted a bibliometric analysis with the found references and selected the full-text articles and conference papers. Finally, the analysis structured and discussed the selected studies’ contributions to the body of knowledge.

Search procedure

Table 2 summarizes the approach for getting the relevant search terms. The main aspects in column one reflect the keywords regarding the research questions. For example, the terms IT , short for information technology , and different business and IT alignment writings, such as business-IT or IT-business alignment – with or without the hyphen–, company alignment , or just alignment , are challenging.

Columns two and three of Table 2 present the binding and related terms, i.e., synonyms, derived from the key terms. Bold terms or parts of the terms indicate possible truncations for the search procedure to find words with different typings, such as organization, organizational, the British organisation, organisational, and the German Organisation, or Organisations-. Emphasized words with an asterisk are terms out of the scope of this literature review. This study followed a strategic and socio-institutional organizational culture and business-IT alignment approach. This institutional perspective excluded psychological concepts such as identity and climate or operational and process concepts such as operations and maturity . Also out of scope were emerging investigations relating to data and data science as special information systems topics.

The research strategy considered databases of the Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science (WoS), Elsevier’s Scopus, and Google Scholar, as, for example, Yang and Meho ( 2007 , p. 12) and Paul and Criado ( 2020 , p. 3) recommend. The search procedure from May 2022 needed appropriate adaptation since these providers use different forms, syntaxes, and filters.

For the Web of Science , this study applied the following steps:

Select the suitable indexes,

Use the search field Topic, which searches the documents’ title , abstracts , author keywords , and Keywords Plus , i.e., the keywords attributed automatically by the indexing database,

Apply truncations, for example, organi?ati* , corpor* , or enterpr* , and connect the terms by the boolean operator OR,

Use the particular operator NEAR/50 with culture, truncated as *ultur* , which enables the finding of, for example, organizational and culture within a distance of 50 words,

Add rows with the boolean AND and the terms of the other main aspects of Table 2 ,

Add rows with the boolean NOT with all terms out of the scope of the research field,

Search and refine the results by the document types articles, conference papers, books, book chapters (if apparent), and Web of Science categories.

For Scopus , the steps were similar:

Search within article title , abstract , and keywords ,

Connect the truncated terms with OR and culture with W/50, similar to the Web of Science operator NEAR/50,

Add main aspect terms with AND,

Exclude terms out of focus with AND NOT ,

Exclude subject areas irrelevant to the research field, such as Arts and Humanities , Environmental Science , Mathematics , or Medicine ,

Limit to document type, i.e., article, conference paper, book chapter, and book,

Exclude most apparent keywords not relevant to the search terms, such as Knowledge Management , Societies and Institutions , Project Management , Marketing , Personnel , or Human Resource Management .

Since Google Scholar is less standardized than Web of Science and Scopus, the search procedure differs. A similar search strategy in Google Scholar would have given too many results. Therefore, we used the exact terms, such as organizational culture or corporate culture and business-IT alignment . The results must be sorted by relevance, and the box named “include citations” unticked. Finally, it tooks a manual effort by ticking the star to include the references with the terms in the title and description in the personal library.

This review protocol aligns with Moher et al. ( 2009 ) checklist items five and eight. Appendix A of the supplementary material summarizes and refers to the checklist’s items in this study, Appendix B depicts the review protocol with further details of the search procedure.

Bibliometric analysis

Bibliometrics helps the researcher quantitatively overview the publications’ citation trends and the state-of-the-art of a research field or topic (Paul and Criado 2020 , p. 2; Aria et al. 2020 , p. 805). By using statistical tools, bibliometric analysis knows mainly two branches. First, the bibliometric performance analysis measures scholars’ publication activity and productivity over time and how often they get cited (Aria et al. 2020 , p. 805). Second, the science mapping analyzes and visualizes a specific domain’s structural and knowledge linkages (Aria et al. 2020 , p. 806). In order to answer the research questions, we focused on the afore-mentioned second purpose of bibliometrics.

For this purpose, we applied the regularly updated R-package bibliometrix , explained and maintained by Aria and Cuccurullo ( 2017 ), who propose a science mapping workflow. For bibliometric analysis, other software tools are available, such as CitNetExplorer (van and Waltman 2014 ), HistCite (HistCite - Research HUB n.d.), Pajek (Mrvar and Batagelj 2016 ), or SciMAT (Cobo et al. 2012 ). However, the evaluation of different tools is out of the scope of this paper. Since we are used to R as a convenient statistical tool, and bibliometrix is fully integrated and reasonable for our purpose, we consequently applied it in this study.

The first step of the science mapping workflow was loading the data and converting it into an R data frame (Aria and Cuccurullo 2017 , p. 963). Therefore, the bibliometrix package provides a particular function for Web of Science and Scopus data. Next, the Scopus data frame needed additional fields and a change of sorting for the later merge with the Web of Science data. For Google Scholar, we applied the R-function ReadBib of the RefManageR package (McLean 2014 ). Again, with additional fields, a renaming of columns, and new sorting, we adapted the Google Scholar data to the Web of Science format. Finally, we eliminated duplicate entries by title after combining the three files. The remaining records were the final sample for the bibliometric analysis.

This approach corresponds to the checklist item seven of Moher et al. ( 2009 ).

Paper selection

According to Moher et al. ( 2009 , p. 2), the paper selection’s first step identified the records through database searching. After removing duplicates and filtering by publication date, this study applied the following eligibility criteria:

The sources are open access or available through the lookup engines of this paper’s authors’ affiliation libraries.

In the full-text papers, the key terms notably appear. However, it is insufficient to mention them in the references without citation, and it needs arguing about considering them for further examination.

The key terms are properties in the studies’ research model, methodology, propositions, hypotheses, or findings.

These steps correspond to items six and nine of Moher et al.’s ( 2009 ) checklist.

Quantitative analyses

Although the Web of Science quality assurance is the highest reported (Aria et al. 2020 , p. 807), the addition of Scopus and Google Scholar resulted in a more general picture of the body of knowledge (Yang and Meho 2007 , p. 12). The study counted 345 records on the Web of Science, 307 references on Scopus, and 42 entries on Google Scholar. After eliminating duplicates, there remained 660 records. The bibliometrix algorithm filters the records by publication year spanning 1984 to 2022, document type, and average citation per year. As Fig. 6 depicts, the filtering by the period from 1984 to 2022 led to a reduced sample of 631 records.

Table 3 depicts the primary information regarding this collection.

This compilation and the following analyses stem from applying the R tool bibliometrix (Aria and Cuccurullo 2017 ). The collection contains 631 documents published in 501 sources. Furthermore, it shows the number of document contents (keywords), authors, authors’ collaboration indexes, and document types.

With an annual growth rate of 7.57%, the annual scientific production of Fig.  3 , i.e., the number of articles published per year, shows a growing trend over the last 20 years.

Annual scientific production

The ten most relevant sources in Table 4 are of considerable validity for the research topic. They consist of high-quality journals, such as Organization Science , Industrial Marketing Management , or Long Range Planning .

Next, we used the words’ analysis section in the documents part of bibliometrix . The options for counting the most frequent words are the fields keywords , titles , or abstracts . We chose abstracts with bigrams , i.e., two-word terms, and the 50 most apparent words. Another important option is to load a list of terms to remove . This list contains regularly used methodological terms, such as empirical research , structural equation , equation modeling , or more general ones, like success factors or future research .

Figure  4 depicts the most frequent bigrams in the paper abstracts with a treemap.

Treemap of the most frequent bigrams in the abstracts

It shows that organizational culture counts 108 and is the third most mentioned after knowledge management with 145 and information technology with 138. However, if we include corporate and organisational , the term  organizational culture is with 166 the most mentioned. The terms regarding business-IT alignment are indirect, strategical topics, such as competitive advantage , business strategy , strategic alignment , and strategic management . Added up, they occur 148 times.

The study can then draw a conceptional framework picture of the research field with a so-called co-occurrence network or co-word analysis (Aria and Cuccurullo 2017 , p. 969). This analysis mapped and clustered the data collection terms from the abstracts. Figure  5 depicts that the node of organizational culture has a strong emphasis beside information technology where strategic alignment occurs, although to a lower extent.

Co-occurrence network of the bigrams in the abstracts

Qualitative analysis

As the study reports and depicts in Fig.  6 , the first step of the literature selection was removing duplicates and filtering the search results by the timespan 1984–2022.

Literature selection scheme, adapted from Moher et al. ( 2009 , p. 8)

This step resulted in 631 studies and excluded 63 records. Second, after screening the results with culture / cultural and align / alignment in the abstract, 92 records remained, eliminating 539 entries. Third, from these 92 records, 37 papers were assessed for eligibility by filtering the full texts. The records were deleted if the key terms were not substantially mentioned in the papers and did not appear in the research model, methodology, propositions, hypotheses, or findings. Finally, the fourth step assembled 15 articles and conference papers from these 37 records for further analyses. The selected literature had to contribute to the research questions of this paper.

The relationship between organizational culture and business-IT alignment lacks broad examination (Silvius et al. 2009 ; El-Mekawy et al. 2016 ). There were few literature review studies in the business-IT alignment research field in the reference sample. Moreover, they scarcely investigate organizational or corporate culture properties.

Based on Chan and Reich’s ( 2007 , pp. 300–301) alignment dimensions, Spósito et al. ( 2016 , p. 554) found that less than two-thirds of the papers consider culture. Nevertheless, they do not discuss the papers’ findings and organizational culture properties further. Therefore, the study is not eligible for this analysis. In her thesis, Aasi ( 2016 , pp. 56–57) discusses six papers with an organizational culture influence on the IT governance’s strategic alignment area. Part of them also found entrance in the paper. However, Aasi does not explicitly further examine the relationship, why her thesis is not part of the literature analysis at hand. Also, M. S. A. El-Mekawy ( 2016 , pp. 7–8) only cites a few papers. Finally, Rusu and Jonathan ( 2017 , p. 38) only cite two studies with organizational culture as an influencing factor for the alignment in public organizations. Nevertheless, both papers lack transparent culture or alignment concepts and will not be further analyzed here.

Table 5 shows the compiled studies about the relationships between culture and alignment sorted by type of study, author, and publication year. The collection consists of two literature reviews, one single case study, three multiple case studies, one focus group paper, and nine surveys. This differentiation is notable for the generalization purposes of the studies’ findings.

The table gathers the papers with their organizational culture dimensions, alignment concepts, and critical arguments and findings.

The following discussion reflects the findings of the quantitative and qualitative analyses regarding this paper’s research questions.

Results of the quantitative analyses

The research on organizational culture and strategic alignment in information technology depicted a growing interest over time (Fig.  3 ). This finding confirms the most crucial IT management concerns (Kappelman et al. 2013 , p. 228; Luftman et al. 2013 , p. 357). Furthermore, the quality of the sources (Table 4 ), the most apparent terms (Fig.  4 ), and their co-occurrences (Fig.  5 ) reveal the relevance of the research topics . However, the co-occurrence network (Fig.  5 ) shows that strategic alignment and organizational culture are not tightly related. This finding indicates a knowledge and research gap in the literature.

Findings of the qualitative analysis of the selected literature

The findings of the analyzed studies about organizational culture and alignment vary in characteristics and magnitudes (Table 5 ). We discuss the papers regarding the types of studies in the following.

Chan and Reich’s ( 2007 ) review is still valid and an often-cited work that gives an overview of the most common alignment concepts and discusses culture. Aasi and her colleagues ( 2017 ) present another literature review ten years later. They assessed the references on the relationship between culture and the IT governance’s five focus areas, of which strategic alignment is one of them. Aasi et al. ( 2017 , p. 22) confirm this study’s assumptions that organizational culture and alignment examinations are rare; their questions declare that the investigated papers lack decent knowledge about how different culture dimensions affect IT governance.

Most of the case studies examined information systems implementations. Thereby, Ravishankar et al. ( 2011 ) come to this study’s research questions the nearest. Although with a specific subcultural focus, they found an influence of organizational culture on a system’s alignment and implementation in a large Indian, globally active IT services and consulting company. Boekhoff ( 1999 ) refers to Schein’s three levels of culture (Schein and Schein 2017 ). The study is one of the earlier papers that acknowledges that the success of IT implementation and business-IT alignment is also a function of organizational culture, not only technology. Jing-hua et al. ( 2010 ) describe even more robust relationships between business-IT alignment and organizational culture regarding the acceptance of IT applications. Finally, Campbell et al. ( 2005 ) emphasize that business and IT management leaders and teams should encourage communication and collaboration to achieve strategic alignment.

The survey studies apply an adoption of Cameron and Quinn’s ( 2011 ) Competing Values Framework (Amar and Ben Romdhane 2019 ; Wang et al. 2021 ), the antecedent theory of Quinn and Spreitzer ( 1991 ) (Shao 2017 , 2019 ), or comparable culture models (Bi et al. 2013 , 2017 ). On the strategic alignment side, the concepts vary more. Amar and Ben Romdhane ( 2019 ) succeeded in answering their research questions, like those in this study. By measuring alignment with various adapted scales, they state that organizational culture, especially the clan culture type, potentially determines the information systems’ strategic alignment. Other studies reveal the influence of market-oriented (Bi et al. 2013 , 2017 ) and hierarchical culture (Wang et al. 2021 ) on business process alignment .

Table  6 gathers the studies with a particular emphasis on organizational culture characteristics. Again, the papers use the organizational culture constructs as independent variables, except for Shao ( 2017 ,  2019 ) and Wang et al. ( 2021 ), in which organizational culture is in a moderating position.

Most investigations argue that culture is flexible while maintaining employee or human relationships , communication and information , personnel empowerment , and team orientation . Column a of Table 6 reveals these notions and assignments. In terms of the Competing Values Framework (Cameron and Quinn 2011 ), this matches the organizational culture type of a clan . With considerable flexibility and discretion, the clan is like an extended family, where people share a lot of themselves (Cameron and Quinn 2011 , p. 48).

Also often are change readiness , innovation , or risk-taking , in studies assigned to b , and market orientation with achievement , power , competition dominance , and growth-accent in column c . The first words under b match the adhocracy culture as an entrepreneurial environment that welcomes venturing and readiness for change (Cameron and Quinn 2011 , p. 51). The second under c fits the market culture type with stability and control and the core values of competitiveness and productivity (Cameron and Quinn 2011 , p. 44).

To a lesser magnitude, follow (un)certainty , consistency , and efficiency orientation ( d ), and top management leadership ( e ). Regarding the Competing Values Framework, the first notions under d meet the hierarchy culture with the aim of a smooth running and coordinated organization (Cameron and Quinn 2011 , p. 42).

So, the organizational culture characteristic variables and constructs fit the Competing Values Framework (Cameron and Quinn 2011 ), also presented by Chtourou Ben Amar and Ben Romdhane ( 2019 , pp. 98–99).

Conclusions

This study systematically reviewed information technology management’s typical organizational culture and business-IT alignment. Therefore, it applied the PRISMA statement (Jackson et al. 2015 ; Moher et al. 2009 ). This method helped screen, select, and illuminate the eligibility process of the literature for further examination. After refining the search results with appropriate document types, research categories, subject areas, and keywords, the study analyzed the references. The bibliometrics’ science mapping showed the research topic’s relevance and possible gaps. The quantitative analyses told us nothing about the IT management’s organizational culture characteristics, i.e., this paper’s first research question. However, since the meaningful terms organizational or corporate culture and strategic alignment were not tightly related, this result indicated a research gap regarding the contribution of culture to business-IT alignment. The full-text analysis of a few eligible papers revealed that a relationship between IT management culture and business-IT alignment exists. This finding appeared in the case and survey studies about implementing information systems. For example, those studies reported a clan—in terms of Cameron and Quinn’s ( 2011 ) Competing Values Framework (CVF), people in IT see themselves as belonging to an extended family— a market-oriented or a hierarchical organizational culture. Such IT management culture characteristics significantly influence the alignment of business and IT. However, most studies used general alignment definitions and did not apply decent models, such as Henderson and Venkatraman’s ( 1993 ) Strategic Alignment Model (SAM).

Besides these theoretical implications, this paper contributes methodologically to the conduction of literature reviews. Notably, the choice of the search databases is delicate. The Web of Science collection is of the highest reported quality (Aria et al. 2020 , p. 807), but the results are somehow restricted. If the research questions are concrete and the research gap apparent, the Web of Science is suitable. For exploratory studies as the paper at hand, the addition of Scopus and Google Scholar is beneficial, considering their specific limitations. However, the researcher’s most significant challenges are combining the search terms, i.e., the appropriate application of Boolean operators and the innovative refining of the relevant literature.

This article has certain limitations . Although highly systematic, the research procedure with the included/excluded search terms and the refining of the search results are subjective. Reliability and validity would improve if this article relied on similar studies or called for the support of other scholars or experts. Nevertheless, we provided the reader with a transparent search strategy and review protocol. Then, the bibliometric analyses relied on one particular software solution. Although the applied tool is regularly maintained and builds upon open-source statistical packages, the procedure needed manual interventions. Finally, the qualitative analysis of the eligible papers provided only a snapshot of the relationship between organizational culture and business-IT alignment and would require further examination.

What are the learnings since Chan and Reich ( 2007 )? Fifteen years later, business-IT alignment still fascinates scholars to a large extent. As Table 5 depicts, the research subjects range from IT governance, strategic alignment, and strategic planning to social elements, such as communication and relationship management. On the organizational culture’s side, the properties vary as well. Nevertheless, the dimensions and scales often rely on examined constructs and models, such as Schein’s culture levels ( 2017 , p. 18), Denison and Mishra’s ( 1995 , p. 216) cultural traits, or Cameron and Quinn’s ( 2011 ) CVF. This paper finds a mixture, not a one-fits-all solution regarding the first research question about typical IT organizational culture characteristics. However, most examined studies use terms and notions that best match the CVF.

The relationship between organizational culture and business-IT alignment is more complicated than the individual business-IT alignment and organizational culture characteristics on their own. The literature review shows for this study’s second research question that the cultural influences on business-IT alignment achievements are weak, punctual, very situational, and lack distinct theoretical and empirical underpinnings. Future research will benefit from systematically applying established models, such as the CVF and SAM. Although the examined studies repeatedly focus on information technology issues at the management and firm level, only a few are about the concrete relationship between organizational culture and business-IT alignment.

So, the contribution of this paper to the body of knowledge is merely incremental but scientifically valuable (Corley and Gioia 2011 ). Hence, the article calls for further investigations in explaining and measuring the research questions. It proposes to apply the CVF and SAM systematically. The two orthogonal models give a comprehensive picture of their respective research topics of organizational culture and business-IT alignment (see Figs.  1 and 2 ). Moreover, their juxtaposition implies that both models and corresponding dimensions relate to each other.

Consequently, the CVF influences the SAM, and the CVF culture types affect the SAM perspectives. First, the market culture with its external focus and the need for stability and control fits the business strategy with its external orientation and functional integration. Second, the adhocracy culture type and the IT strategy strategic alignment perspective are both outward- and differentiation-oriented. The adhocracy culture highlights flexibility and discretion and equals the IT strategy, which helps the business acquire new IT competencies and technologies. This matching is quite similar to the tightrope walk of IT management, which simultaneously supports IT innovation and business transformation (Chan and Reich 2007 , p. 312). Third, the clan ’s internal and integrative perspective suits the IS infrastructure and processes with an internal IT focus. For example, managers of small and medium enterprises should support their IT and its strategy and actively seek strategic alignment (Chan and Reich 2007 , p. 312). Finally, the internal- and stability-oriented hierarchy culture harmonizes with the organizational infrastructure and processes , which align IT services to the business. So, further qualitative and quantitative analyses of these relationships can enlighten this paper’s research focus.

Data availability

The authors provide the data on request.

Code availability

The authors provide the R  code on request.

Aasi P (2016) Organizational culture and structure influence on information technology governance (Doctoral dissertation, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Sweden)

Aasi P, Rusu L, Vieru D (2017) The role of culture in IT governance five focus areas: a literature review. Int J ITBusiness Alignment Gov 8(2):42–61. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJITBAG.2017070103

Article   Google Scholar  

Abdolvand N, Sepehri MM (2016) Antecedents of strategic information systems alignment in Iran. J Glob Inf Technol Manag 19(2):80–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2016.1172953

Aitken I (2003) Value-Driven IT Management (First). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080474717

Al-Majali D, Dahalin ZM (2011) IT - BUSINESS STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT IN INFLUENCING SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN JORDAN: STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING (SEM) APPROACH. Int. J. Manag. Stud. 18(1):155–172

Google Scholar  

Alvesson M (2011) Organizational Culture: Meaning, Discourse, and Identity. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. P. M. Wilderom, M. F. Peterson (Eds.), The Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate (pp. 11–28). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483307961.n2

Alvesson M (2013) Understanding organizational culture, 2nd edn. SAGE, Los Angeles

Aria M, Cuccurullo C (2017) Bibliometrix: an R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informet 11(4):959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007

Aria M, Misuraca M, Spano M (2020) Mapping the evolution of social research and data science on 30 years of social indicators research. Soc Indic Res 149(3):803–831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-020-02281-3

Baetge J, Schewe G, Schulz R, Solmecke H (2007) Unternehmenskultur und Unternehmenserfolg: Stand der empirischen Forschung und Konsequenzen für die Entwicklung eines Messkonzeptes. Journal für Betriebswirtschaft 57(3–4):183–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-007-0027-x

Ben Amar Chtourou N, Ben Romdhane R (2019) Organizational culture and information systems strategic alignment: exploring the influence through an empirical study from Tunisia. J Enterp Inf Manag 33(1):95–119. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-03-2019-0072

Bi R, Davison RM, Smyrnios KX (2013) The effect of it complementary resources on fast growth small-to-medium enterprise performance: A resource-based view. In PACIS 2013 (pp 112–127)

Bi R, Davison RM, Smyrnios KX (2017) E-business and fast growth SMEs. Small Bus Econ 48(3):559–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9788-8

Boekhoff H (1999). The delta model: A framework for the effective implementation of information technology to enable organizational change. In N. Callaos, N. Nada, A. Cherif, M. Aveledo (Eds.), INFORMATION SYSTEMS (Vol. 1, pp. 252-259). INT INST INFORMATICS AND SYSTEMICS

Buchta D, Eul M, Schulte-Croonenberg H (2010) Strategic IT management: increase value, control performance, reduce costs. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-8823-2

Cameron KS, Quinn RE (2011) Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework, 3rd edn. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA

Campbell B, Kay R, Avison D (2005) Strategic alignment: A practitioner’s perspective. J Enterp Inf Manag. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410390510628364

Chan YE (2002) Why Haven’t We Mastered Alignment? The Importance of the Informal Organization Structure, MIS Q Exec

Chan YE, Reich BH (2007) IT alignment: What have we learned? J Inf Technol 22(4):297–315. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000109

Charoensuk S, Wongsurawat W, Khang DB (2014) Business-IT Alignment: A practical research approach. J High Technol Managem Res 25(2):132–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2014.07.002

Chatman JA, O’Reilly CA (2016) Paradigm lost: Reinvigorating the study of organizational culture. Res. Organ. Behav. 36:199–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2016.11.004

Chew EK, Gottschalk P (2013) Knowledge Driven Service Innovation and Management: IT Strategies for Business Alignment and Value Creation. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-2512-9

Cleven A (2011) Exploring patterns of business-IT alignment for the purpose of process performance measurement. In 19th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2011, Helsinki, Finland, June 9-11, 2011 (p. 19)

Cobo M, López-Herrera A, Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F (2012) SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 63(8):1609–1630. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22688

Corley KG, Gioia DA (2011) Building Theory about Theory Building: What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution? AMR 36(1):12–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0486

Dasgupta M (2014) Organizational Culture and Firm Performance: A Reflection of Theory, Research and Practice (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 2435528). Social Science Research Network. Rochester, NY

Denison DR, Mishra AK (1995) Toward a Theory of Organizational Culture and Effectiveness. Organ Sci 6(2):204–223. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.2.204

Deshpandé R, Farley JU (2004) Organizational culture, market orientation, innovativeness, and firm performance: An international research odyssey. Int J Res Mark 21(1):3–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2003.04.002

El-Mekawy MSA (2016) From theory to practice of business-it alignment: Barriers, an evaluation framework and relationships with organisational culture (Doctoral dissertation, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University)

El Mekawy, M., AlSabbagh, B., Kowalski, S. (2014) The impact of business-it alignment on information security process. In International conference on HCI in business (pp. 25-36). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07293-73

El-Mekawy M , Rusu L, Perjons E (2016) Business-IT Alignment and organisational Culture Relationships: Towards an Integrated View. In 24th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2016, Istanbul, Turkey, June 12-15, 2016 (Research Paper 117)

Felipe CM, Roldán JL, Leal-Rodríguez AL (2017) Impact of Organizational Culture Values on Organizational Agility. In I. K. W. Lai & Y. Liu (Eds.), Modern Statistical Techniques and Sustainability Studies (Vol. 9, pp. 1-23). Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122354

Gajardo P, Ariel LP (2019) THE BUSINESS-IT ALIGNMENT IN THE DIGITAL AGE. In The 13th mediterranean conference on information systems (ITAIS and MCIS), Naples, Italy (pp. 1-12)

Hartnell CA, Ou AY, Kinicki A (2011) Organizational culture and organizational effectiveness: A meta-analytic investigation of the competing values framework’stheoretical suppositions. J Appl Psychol 96(4):677–694. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021987

Hatch MJ, Cunliffe AL (2013) Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives (3rd edition). Oxford]: Oxford University Press

Henderson JC, Venkatraman H (1993) Strategic alignment: Leveraging information technology for transforming organizations. IBM Syst J 32(1):472–484. https://doi.org/10.1147/sj.382.0472

Henri J-F (2006) Organizational culture and performance measurement systems. Acc Organ Soc 31(1):77–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2004.10.003

Herget J, Strobl H (eds) (2018) Unternehmenskultur in der Praxis: Grundlagen - Methoden - Best Practices. SpringerLink Bücher, Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

Heskett JL (2012) The culture cycle: How to shape the unseen force that transforms performance (This book ist the paperback version of an original hardcover book) Always Learning. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc

Hiekkanen K, Helenius M, Korhonen JJ, Patricio E(2012) Business and IT: Beyond alignment. In 5th european conference of management, leadership and governance 2012, pafos, cyprus, november 2012 (pp. 217-224)

Hiekkanen K, Pekkala A, Collin J (2015) Improving Strategic Alignment: A Case Study. Inf Resour Manag J 28(4):19–37. https://doi.org/10.4018/IRMJ.2015100102

HistCite - Research HUB. (n.d.)

Hofstede G, Hofstede GJ, Minkov M (2010) Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind; intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival (Rev. and expanded, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

Iivari J, Iivari N (2011) The relationship between organizational culture and the deployment of agile methods. Inf Softw Technol 53(5):509–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2010.10.008

IT Governance Institute (2003) Board briefing on IT governance. IT Governance Institute, Rolling Meadows, IL

Jackson PR, Easterby-Smith M, Thorpe R (2015) Management and Business Research (Fifth) Sage Publications Ltd, United Kingdom

Jing-hua X, Kang X, Xiao-wei W (2010) Key factors influencing enterprise to improve IT application level: Stage difference research -An empirical research on 165 enterprises through field study. In 2010 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING (ICMSE) (pp. 9-23). International Conference on Management Science and Engineering-Annual Conference Proceedings. Natl Nat Sci Fdn China (NSFC); Harbin Inst Technol; IEEE Technol Management Council. 345 E 47TH ST, NEW YORK, NY 10017 USA: IEEE

Jonathan GM (2018) Influence of organizational structure on business-IT alignment: What we do (not) know. In BIR Short Papers, Workshops and Doctoral Consortium : Proceedings (pp. 375-386). CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS. org. CEURWS. org

Jonathan GM, Hailemariam KS (2020) Intra-Organisational Barriers to Business-IT Alignment: Int. J. Innov. Digit. Econ. 11(3):22–36. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJIDE.2020070102

Kahre C, Hoffmann D, Ahlemann F (2017) Beyond Business-IT Alignment - Digital Business Strategies as a Paradigmatic Shift: A Review and Research Agenda. In Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 4706-4715). https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2017.574

Kappelman L, McLean E, Luftman J, Johnson V (2013) Key issues of IT organizations and their leadership: The 2013 SIM IT trends study. MIS Q Exec 12:227–240

Kearns GS, Lederer AL (2003) A Resource-Based View of Strategic IT Alignment: How Knowledge Sharing Creates Competitive Advantage. Decis Sci 34(1):1–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5915.02289

Koçu L (2018) Business-IT Alignment Effects on Business Agility. Int. J. Commer. Finance 4(2):60–93

Kotter JP, Heskett JL (1992) Corporate culture and performance. New York: Free Press [u.a.]

Leidner DE, Kayworth T (2006) Review: A Review of Culture in Information Systems Research: Toward a Theory of Information Technology Culture Conflict. MIS Q 30(2):357–399. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148735

Lemrabet Y, Liu H, Benkeltoum N, Bigand M, Bourey J-P (2011) Business-IT Alignment and Organisation Agility Enabled by BPM and SOA Approaches Interplay. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2011) (Vol. 4, pp. 241-246) 10/bk8g5j

Luftman J (2000) Assessing Business-IT Alignment Maturity. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 4. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.00414

Luftman J, Brier T (1999) Achieving and Sustaining Business-IT Alignment. Calif Manage Rev 42(1):109–122. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166021

Luftman J, Zadeh HS, Derksen B, Santana M, Rigoni EH, Huang Z (2013) Key Information Technology and Management Issues 2012–2013: An International Study. J Inf Technol 28(4):354–366. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2013.22

Manfreda A, Indihar Štemberger M (2019) Establishing a partnership between top and IT managers: A necessity in an era of digital transformation. ITP 32(4):948–972. https://doi.org/10.1108/itp-01-2017-0001

Martin J, Siehl C (1983) Organizational culture and counterculture: An uneasy symbiosis. Organ. Dyn. 12(2), 52-64. 10/b6zxvt

McLean MW (2014) Straightforward Bibliography Management in R with the RefManageR Package. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1403.2036

Mithas S, McFarlan FW (2017) What Is Digital Intelligence? IT Prof. 19(4):3–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITP.2017.3051329

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ, 339. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535

Mrvar A, Batagelj V (2016) Analysis and visualization of large networks with program package Pajek. Complex Adaptive Systems Modeling 4(1):6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40294-016-0017-8

Narver JC, Slater SF (1990) The Effect of a Market Orientation on Business Profitability. J Mark 54(4):20–35. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251757

Nickels DW, Janz BD (2010) Organizational culture: Another piece of the IT-business alignment puzzle. J. Inf. Technol. Manag. 21(3):1–14

Paul J, Criado AR (2020) The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to know? Int Bus Rev 29(4):101717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717

Peppard J, Ward J (1999) ‘Mind the Gap’: Diagnosing the relationship between the IT organisation and the rest of the business. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0963-8687(99)00013-X

Quinn RE, Rohrbaugh J (1983) A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards a Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis. Manage Sci 29(3):363–377. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.3.363

Quinn RE, Spreitzer GM (1991) The psychometrics of the competing values culture instrument and an analysis of the impact of organizational culture on quality of life. Emerald

Ravichandran T (2018) Exploring the relationships between IT competence, innovation capacity and organizational agility. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 27(1), 22-42. 10/gdghcn

Ravishankar M, Pan SL, Leidner DE (2011) Examining the strategic alignment and implementation success of a KMS: A subculture-based multilevel analysis. Inf Syst Res 22(1):39–59. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1080.0214

Reich BH, Benbasat I (2000) Factors That Influence the Social Dimension of Alignment between Business and Information Technology Objectives. MIS Q 24(1):81–113. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250980

Rusu L, Jonathan GM (2017) IT alignment in public organizations: A systematic literature review. In Information technology governance in public organizations (Vol. 38, pp. 27-57). Integrated Series in Information Systems. Cham: Springer

Sackmann SA (2011) Culture and Performance. In N. M. Ashkanasy (Ed.), The Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate (pp. 188-224). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483307961.n12

Sagiv L, Schwartz SH, Arieli S (2011) Personal Values, National Culture, and Organizations: Insights Applying the Schwartz Value Framework. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. P. M. Wilderom, M. F. Peterson (Eds.), The Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate (pp. 515-537). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483307961.n29

Sambamurthy V, Bharadwaj A, Grover V (2003) Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms. MIS Q 27(2):237. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036530

Schein EH (1984) Coming to a New Awareness of Organizational Culture. Sloan Manag. Rev. Pre-1986 Camb. 25(2), 3

Schein EH, Schein PA (2017) Organizational culture and leadership, 5th edn. Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey

Shao Z (2017) Leadership behaviors and IS-business strategic alignment: The moderating effect of development culture. In Proceedings of the 21th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS 2017) (Vol. 266), Langkawi Island, Malaysia

Shao Z (2019) Interaction effect of strategic leadership behaviors and organizational culture on IS-Business strategic alignment and Enterprise Systems assimilation. Int J Inf Manage 44:96–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.09.010

Silvius A, De Waal B, Smit J (2009) Business and IT alignment; answers and remaining questions. In PACIS 2009 Proceedings (p. 44)

Smircich L (1983) Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis. Adm Sci Q 28(3):339–358. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392246

Spósito MAF, Neto ACD, da Silva Barreto R (2016) Business-IT Alignment Research Field: A Systematic Literature Review. In International conference on enterprise information systems (Vol. 2, pp. 549-558). SCITEPRESS

Tallon PP, Queiroz M, Coltman T, Sharma R (2019) Information technology and the search for organizational agility: A systematic review with future research possibilities. J Strateg Inf Syst 28(2):218–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2018.12.002

Trompenaars F, Hampden-Turner C (2015) Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business (revised and updated 3rd ed., Reprinted 2015). London: Nicholas Brealey

van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2014) Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. In Y. Ding, R. Rousseau, & D. Wolfram (Eds.), Measuring Scholarly Impact (pp. 285-320). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-813

Wallach EJ (1983) Individuals and organizations: The cultural match. Train Dev J 37(2):8

Wang Y, Toseef M, Gong Y (2021) IT Process Alignment in Business Strategy: Examining the Role of Transactional Leadership and Organization Culture. INFORMATION, 12(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/info12060237

Wattel T (2012) Antecedents to business-IT alignment in a healtcare environment: Diagnosting readiness to change (Master of Science in Business Administration, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen)

Wilkins AL, Ouchi WG (1983) Efficient Cultures: Exploring the Relationship Between Culture and Organizational Performance. Adm. Sci. Q. 28(3), 468. 10/ bw8pcv

Yang K, Meho LI (2007) Citation Analysis: A Comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Proc. Am. Soc. Info. Sci. Tech. 43(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14504301185

Download references

Open access funding provided by ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Business Information Technology, ZHAW School of Management and Law, Theaterstrasse 17, P.O. Box, 8401, Winterthur, Switzerland

Marcel R. Sieber

Department of Management, Prague University of Economics and Business, W. Churchill Sq. 1938/4, 130 67, Prague 3, Czech Republic

Milan Malý & Radek Liška

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcel R. Sieber .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The first author receives financial support from his affiliation for his ongoing dissertation project. Besides that, the authors have no further relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 89 kb)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Sieber, M.R., Malý, M. & Liška, R. Conceptualizing organizational culture and business-IT alignment: a systematic literature review. SN Bus Econ 2 , 120 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43546-022-00282-7

Download citation

Received : 16 August 2021

Accepted : 06 July 2022

Published : 08 August 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43546-022-00282-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Organizational culture
• IT management
• Business-IT alignment
• Literature review
• Bibliometrics

JEL Classification

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Organizational culture and project management methodology: research in the financial industry

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business

ISSN : 1753-8378

Article publication date: 30 March 2021

Issue publication date: 9 August 2021

Organizational culture has an impact on various activities in organizations, including project management (PM). The aim of the study is to answer the following research questions: RQ1: what significance is attributed to organizational culture compared to the objective project characteristics when choosing the dominant PM methodology in organizations? RQ2: which type of organizational culture is preferred for successful implementation of different PM methodologies? RQ3: what kind (if any) of relationship exists between the dominant type of organizational culture in organizations and the dominant PM methodology?

Design/methodology/approach

The author surveyed 100 project managers working in the financial industry in Poland with the use of personal structured interviews. The competing values framework (CVF) concept authored by Cameron and Quinn was used.

Project managers find organizational culture more important than objective project characteristics when choosing the dominant PM methodology in an organization. Although statistical analysis revealed a significant relationship between the preferred type of organizational culture and PM methodology, there is no significant relationship between the existing type of organizational culture and the PM methodology which prevails in the company.

Research limitations/implications

Future research should investigate other industries and other typologies of organizational culture.

Practical implications

The paper provides recommendations for management practice on how to shape organizational culture in the context of successful PM with the application of different PM methodologies.

Originality/value

This study fills a gap in the theory of PM by identifying and empirically verifying the theoretical linkage between the type of organizational culture and PM methodology.

• Human resource management
• Management approach
• Corporate culture
• Project success
• Organizational behavior
• Project competencies
• Eople in project-based organizations

Piwowar-Sulej, K. (2021), "Organizational culture and project management methodology: research in the financial industry", International Journal of Managing Projects in Business , Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 1270-1289. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-08-2020-0252

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2021, Katarzyna Piwowar-Sulej

Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Introduction

The interest of researchers and practitioners in intangible management factors increased in the 1980s. Other types of noneconomic reasons which can affect the success or failure of an enterprise were investigated ( Webster and Jensen, 2006 ). Among these factors, organizational culture was of particular interest ( Alvesson, 1990 ).

Organizational culture represents the collection of beliefs, values, norms, attitudes and assumptions which dominate in a company and which do not have to be formulated. This set of elements influences people's behavior and the accomplishment of their tasks ( Schein, 1990 ). The culture which connects people in an organization remains very closely linked to the organization's performance ( Denison and Mishra, 1995 ; Martins and Terblanche, 2003 ; Mathew, 2007 ; Lucas, 2006 ; Hartog and Verburg, 2004 ). This is the key factor in fulfilling the company's mission and implementing its strategy while improving organizational efficiency and managing transformations.

Radical changes in the functioning of organizations have occurred within the last few decades. The increasingly uncertain and competitive environment and the growing expectations of customers and employees have forced companies to introduce changes. Repetitive, routine operations are gradually losing importance in favor of unique and complex activities – i.e. projects ( Piwowar-Sulej, 2020 ). In the 1990s, Drucker wrote that in 20 years, a typical large company would have half as many managerial levels and particular tasks would be performed by specialists focused on specific projects, functioning alongside traditional departments ( Drucker, 1992 ). Today, even in those industries where traditionally repetitive activities have been the basis of their operations, projects are beginning to play an increasingly important role.

One example of such an organization is a financial company. Every day, the main processes related to sales, e.g. loans and after-sales service, are carried out. Ancillary processes include administrative activities. The purpose of subsequent projects is, e.g. to open a new branch, to launch a new product or to develop an advertising campaign. Project initiation in organizations based on traditional structures involves the need to mobilize resources which belong to multiple organizational units, for the objectives to be carried out in a specific time frame and to be managed by project managers. An employee frequently performs a dual role: as a specialist in his/her line department and as a project team member.

A project can be defined as an “endeavor in which human, material, and financial resources are organized in an innovative way to carry out an extraordinary scope of work, in line with the defined specifications, within cost and time constraints, to achieve a positive change determined by quantitative and qualitative goals” ( Turner, 1993 , p. 8). Project management (PM), in turn, is the “application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques in relation to project activities in order to meet or exceed the needs and expectations of stakeholders associated with the project” ( Ward, 2000 , p. 468).

Projects can be managed in accordance with guidelines presented in PM methodologies. These methodologies are referred to as guides to the types of documentation and eligibilities necessary to complete particular project stages. The literature on the subject offers two general approaches toward running projects: traditional (managerial) and modern (agile, adaptive, dynamic or light). The traditional approach has its roots in the 1950s, while the modern one is from the 1990s. Traditional methodologies describe major processes and present, in a systematized way, a set of verified management techniques. Moreover, they imply that each stage of the project can only be initiated when the previous one has been fully completed. They also stress the completeness of documentation. Such an approach has become insufficient over the years, especially for software development projects ( Berger and Beynon-Davies, 2009 ). In the agile approach, the actions are adapted on an ongoing basis. The differences between these two approaches to PM should be also expressed in organizational culture because one of the main causes of project failure presented in the literature on the subject is that the organizational culture in which projects have to be delivered is not suitable for projects ( Larson and Gray, 2011 ).

The aim of the study is to present the significance of organizational culture as a factor which determines the choice of PM methodologies and the relationships between the two. In the first section of the paper, previous research in the literature on the linkages between organizational culture and PM issues is presented. This was the basis of the research questions. The second section, i.e. the empirical part of the paper, presents original research with its methodology, results and discussion. The paper ends with conclusions, limitations and directions for further research. It contributes to the scientific knowledge by (1) identifying and describing the linkages between the type of organizational culture and the type of PM methodology, (2) verifying the assumption through original research findings and (3) presenting directions for future research.

Literature background

Organizational culture and successful project management.

Organizational culture – like the subconscious – affects the aspirations, attitudes and behavior of employees. It focuses their actions along routine tracks in a nonverbal, imperceptible manner. Therefore, culture can be used to encapsulate all that is omitted from a written contract, offering it up as an all-encompassing psychological contract to address different situations ( Camerer and Vepsalainen, 1988 ). By influencing and consolidating certain attitudes and behaviors of employees, it may not be conducive of effective actions – it may even counteract them. Obviously, it can also support the functioning of an organization by facilitating human interactions.

Organizational culture is a concept which combines all of the various activities undertaken in an enterprise (including PM). This means that the implementation of PM can result in transformations in organizational culture. In turn, attributing the proper characteristics to an organizational culture beforehand can lead to favorable circumstances for the implementation of PM. The Organizational Competence Baseline ( International Project Management Association, 2016 ), as a guideline for setting up an appropriate organization for PM, emphasizes organizational alignment, which includes processes, structures and culture. Kerzner (2000) states that PM is more similar to a culture than policy or procedures. Finally, Cleland states that “project management meets the need for providing an organizational focus not found in the traditional form of organization. However justified, project management should not be used until the leaders of the organization are committed to its use and are willing to prepare a suitable culture for project management to germinate and grow” ( Cleland, 1994 , cited in Du Plessis and Hoole, 2002 ).

The literature on PM presents the issue of a specific culture, which covers strictly defined features that support the implementation of changes in an organization or in teamwork. At this point, however, it is worth emphasizing that in papers addressing the problem of PM, such terms as “project culture,” “project management culture,” “project climate” and “project environment” function interchangeably ( Du Plessis and Hoole, 2006 ). The climate, in turn, is only an external, easily observable layer of culture and stands for the subjective feelings of employees when referring to the atmosphere in the workplace ( Ostroff et al ., 2012 ).

The review conducted by Henrie and Sousa-Poza (2005) spanning the years 1993–2003 indicated that culture was not a widely reported or discussed topic in PM literature (journals specializing in PM). Today, we can say that various cultural aspects of PM are a popular research topic. A total of 557 documents were returned in a search of the Scopus database on February 28, 2020, with the following combination of queries: TITLE-ABS-KEY (“project management” AND “culture”) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ar”) AND (LIMIT-TO (SUBJAREA, “BUSI”) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “English”). Another situation is when we search using more detailed terms like “project management culture” or “project culture”. The query “TITLE-ABS-KEY (‘project culture’) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, ‘ar’) AND (LIMIT-TO (SUBJAREA, ‘BUSI’) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, ‘English’)” resulted in 33 documents and “TITLE-ABS-KEY (‘project management culture’) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, ‘ar’) AND (LIMIT-TO (SUBJAREA, ‘BUSI’) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, ‘English’)” resulted in only in seven articles.

For example, Belassi et al . (2007) found a significant relationship between culture, a positive work environment with strong leadership and the success of projects for developing new products. A “positive work environment” refers to the perception of employees that it is their performance which matters most to their organization and that they feel free to open dialogues with their bosses. “Strong Leadership” means that long-term goals are the focus of all of top management's decisions and that employees are encouraged to keep trying if they fail in the process of creating something. Data for this research were collected from 95 manufacturing companies in the USA.

Ajmal and Koskinen (2008) discussed the impact of organizational culture on knowledge transfer in “non-project businesses” who adopt a “project-style” approach. The problem of such organizations is that knowledge created in one project is not transferred to future projects. The authors stated that for effective knowledge transfer in project-based businesses, it is the organizational culture must be ready to accept and adopt new ways to transfer knowledge. The role of project managers is to form one project culture out of differing organizational and professional cultures and to promote effective knowledge management.

The findings of Nguyen and Watanabe (2017) in the construction industry show that alignment of goals, the commitment of contractors and a focus on workers all lead to better performance and satisfaction among those involved. Labor productivity can be predicted using only two indicators of culture: contractor commitment and a cooperative attitude. In order to predict learning performance, goal alignment, trust and contractor commitment are key.

Morrison et al . (2008) provided evidence that organizational culture correlates with the effectiveness of PM. In particular, one should look to the relatively strong link between effective PM and such values as respect and interfunctional integration. Their study was conducted among matrix organizations representing a wide variety of industries. The majority were civil engineering consultancy firms (28%), while the other participating organizations were from the defense industry (17%), the government sector (14%), the industrial engineering and manufacturing sector (14%) and the finance and insurance industry (10%); the remaining participants (17%) came from the mining, national parastatal, telecommunications and information technology (IT) industries.

In turn, Graham and Englund (1997) outlined their eight factors which lead to successful projects: strategic emphasis, upper management support, project planning support, customer/end-user input, project team development, project execution support, communication and information system and organizational support. With these factors in place, teamwork and interfunctional tasks are emphasized, conflicts are identified and resolved and perfection is the driving force ( Larson and Gray, 2011 ).

In addition, project culture is based on values such as mutual trust, respect, open communication and risk and conflict tolerance of the disciplines, combined with a flexible, results-based approach and support and faith in making the right decisions, kindness and adherence to professional ethics ( Pinto and Slevin, 1987 ).

Some researchers have addressed the issue of national culture's influence on project outcomes. Building on Hofstede's work ( Hofstede, 1998 ), they feel that national culture shapes organizational culture, which, in turn, affects the execution of projects. Hofstede delineated such cultural dimensions as power distance, the degree of uncertainty avoidance, individualism and collectivism and long- or short-term orientation. Attention is primarily drawn to projects carried out by international teams and the fact that education in cultural differences can be necessary for them to be successful ( Shore and Cross, 2005 ). For example, the high power distance typical of people from Hong Kong can lead to the acceptance of inequality and the legitimacy of power groups within a project ( Rowlinson and Root, 1996 ). The impact of national differences on the specific tasks which make up PM, e.g. risk management, has also been analyzed. Risk is perceived and dealt with differently in different cultures. For example, one commonly held notion about Polish culture is the avoidance of uncertainty. This cultural trait can result in many rigorous terms and conditions being included in agreements with contractors ( Liu et al ., 2015 ).

National culture is also thought to play a role in the use of PM, in terms of the level of knowledge in this field and the extent of staff involvement in project work, as well as the adaptation of project discipline by individuals and groups. There is evidence that this deployment negatively correlates with both power distance and uncertainty avoidance but does not correlate with measures of individuality or masculinity ( Bredillet et al ., 2010 ).

There are many typologies of organizational cultures. Some of these locate organizational culture within the intensity scale of one feature (e.g. Hall's concept, ( Hall, 1976 )). Others are more complex, based on more than one dimension (e.g. the typology of Cameron and Quinn (2011) ). For example, Kivrak et al. (2014) used Hall's typology ( Hall, 1976 ) to illustrate how national culture determines knowledge sharing in an international project team. This typology distinguishes high- and low-context cultures. The messages in a low-context culture are unambiguous and fairly accurately reflect the speaker's intentions, requiring little additional context and leaving little room for interpretation. In the case of high-context communication, the message can be ambiguous and can constitute a strong barrier in the process of tacit knowledge sharing, according to some studies. Such cultural features as hierarchy and competition can also be an obstacle to knowledge sharing in international project teams. Kivrak et al. (2014) also showed that collectivism is conducive to knowledge sharing, though only within a project team (not with outsiders).

Silva and Gomes (2015) conducted research focusing on the typology of cultures proposed by Handy (1983) , who identified four characteristic types of organizational culture: power-, role-, goal- and people-oriented cultures. It is worth noting here that the goal culture is directly referred to as the task or project-oriented one. Organizations oriented toward goals treat tasks and their implementation as the most important issue. Individual competences and their contributions to specific actions are what matters most. Teams which follow these principles are able to easily adapt to the requirements of the situation. Groups and task teams are formed for specific purposes which determine the point behind their existence. Such a team works fast and makes decisions quickly. Individual team members enjoy flexibility and freedom but also face the responsibility for their work. The effects matter. Mutual relationships are usually quite loose, based more on the value of skills and input than age and formal status. The focus on action allows problems to be solved through discussions and negotiations, which provides a sense that solutions are created together. Such teams usually thrive in a dynamic and highly competitive environment. The qualitative research based on surveys with 12 respondents carried out by the abovementioned authors shows that diverse cultural types are present in different organizations which implement projects. The characteristics of the particular industry (e.g. energy, government or university) are important here. In addition, projects can be successful when other factors – apart from culture – also affect this success (e.g. selection of an appropriate PM methodology).

Although the studies presented above were focused on the cultural typologies by Hall and Handy, the hypothesis can be formulated that the typology of organizational cultures by Cameron and Quinn (2011) is most often discussed in studies addressing PM problems, although the output of management sciences includes numerous classifications of organizational cultures. The assessment tool proposed by these authors, the competing values framework (CVF), allows a company to identify a dominant cultural type across six key characteristics: dominant characteristics, leadership, human resources management (HRM), organizational glue, strategic emphasis and criteria of success. The CVF explains the complex nature of culture according to two dimensions: internal/external focus and stability/flexibility structure. These two dimensions create four quadrants, which represent four culture types: clan, adhocracy, hierarchy and market.

Clan culture is connected with a friendly, almost family-like atmosphere. A manager is treated as a mentor. The glue of an organization is loyalty and tradition. The key to success is usually taking care of the needs of clients and employees. The values are teamwork, participation and consensus.

Adhocracy comes from the Latin term “ad hoc,” which means “for this special purpose” and by extension and improvised. Adhocracy is a corporate culture which is based on the ability to adapt quickly to changing conditions – which can we define as agility. Organizations with such culture are characterized by flexibility, creativity, employee empowerment and an emphasis on individual initiative (with risk-taking). Although corporate levels exist in an adhocracy, they are less strictly defined than in more hierarchical environments. In a more general sense, adhocracy contrasts with bureaucracy, which is characterized by inflexibility and a rigid adherence to rules.

Hierarchy culture means a working environment which is structured and formalized. Employees use defined procedures in carrying out their everyday tasks. The values are effective coordination and order. The primary goal is to maintain effective functioning and stability, and the results are achieved by performing tasks efficiently. Success is defined by good planning and low costs.

Finally, market culture focuses on customer satisfaction and shareholder value. It emphasizes targets and deadlines. People are competitive and focused on goals. Leaders are hard drivers, producers and rivals. They can be tough with high expectations. The emphasis on winning keeps the organization together. Reputation and success are the most important. Long-term focus is on rival activities and reaching goals. Market dominance, achieving goals and great metrics are the definitions of success. Competitive prices and market leadership are important. The organizational style is based on competition.

For example, the research conducted by Yazici (2009) in the USA involving 86 project managers in 76 companies indicated a strong correlation between clan culture and high project effectiveness and overall organization performance. It appears that this type of culture – one focused on employee participation, social cohesion, shared values, commitment and high morale – guarantees that project goals will be achieved, client expectations will be met within the adopted time frame and satisfaction among team members will be high. Among the hypotheses presented by Yazici, attention should be paid to one in particular: “Project maturity and organizational culture have a joint impact on project implementation.” This joint impact, however, was not confirmed by the study. In total, 56% of the respondents were from the service sector (IT, banking, education, healthcare, consulting, retail and utility); 34% were from the manufacturing sector and only 10% were from government or construction.

Adhocracy and clan cultures have positive effects on tacit-oriented knowledge management strategy ( Keskin et al. , 2005 ). Wiewióra et al. (2012) in their research focused on knowledge management in projects. It was confirmed that clan culture – which promotes a collaborative environment in which people are encouraged to communicate – facilitates knowledge sharing between project team members. In turn, market culture, centered around such values as competitiveness, achievements and the focus on performance measurements, will probably hamper knowledge and skill sharing within the project. However, according to a study by Piwowar-Sulej (2014) , projects can be also successfully completed in organizational cultures with dominant “hierarchical-market” features.

Similar conclusions were drawn by Mashiane (2013) , who conducted research in a division of telecommunications company. The questionnaire was based on the management skills assessment instrument (MSAI) developed by Cameron et al. (2006) and on the project management culture assessment tool (PMCAT) developed by Du Plessis (2005) . A market-oriented culture was identified as the dominant one in the organization under study. This was not surprising for the researcher because the organization provides infrastructure hosting solutions and technical support to external clients. The strategy of the organization focuses on the market or on clients, and success is defined in terms of client satisfaction and retention. The second most dominant type of culture was adhocracy.

Finally, according to 50 human resources (HR) specialists from medium-sized and large companies, the most suitable culture for PM is adhocracy ( Piwowar-Sulej, 2016 ). These results are surprising in the context of new developing HRM concepts, such as sustainable HRM, which promotes long-term orientation and HR development ( Stankevičiūtė and Savanevičienė, 2019 ; Piwowar-Sulej, 2021 ). It should be mentioned that in the long run, adhocracies can turn out to be effective organizations, though they do not offer stable workplace environments.

Project management methodologies

As mentioned before, there are two main types of PM methodologies, i.e. the traditional one (Project Management Body of Knowledge – PMBoK – or Prince2) and the modern/agile one (which is more flexible, e.g. Scrum). Table 1 presents a comparison of these two approaches to PM.

The traditional methodology involves the mechanistic division of work, with an underlying assumption of manageability and predictability ( Saynisch, 2010 ). This approach is synonymous with the waterfall methodology. It was first outlined in 1970 by Royce, an American computer scientist and director at Lockheed Software Technology Center in Texas, as a response to managing the increasingly complex nature of software development. This approach takes the perspective that rigorous, hierarchical control best manages complexity.

The waterfall methodology is sequential. One phase continues downstream into the next stage. Each stage in this process is self-contained. The project work starts by collecting and analyzing requirements, designing a solution, implementing the solution and fixing any issues. The initial phases of the project are intended to set the stage for all project work, as well as establishing the project's scope and the requirements that are necessary to deliver it ( Thomas and Fernández, 2008 ). It is also heavily focused on requirements. One needs to have a crystal clear idea of what the project will demand before proceeding further. There is no room for correction once the project is underway.

Agile is a term which formally came into being in 2001 when several IT representatives released the “Agile Manifesto” during a meeting of 17 major players of new software development methodologies in Snowbird, Utah. Agile means “able to move quickly and easily” or “able to think quickly, mentally acute, or aware” ( Dictionary.com, 2020 ). Agile is used as a term which characterizes a given way of thinking (mindset) about complex task management (from projects to entire organizations), including openness toward change and high flexibility. The notion is also used in relation to all agile PM methodologies (e.g. Scrum, Extreme Programming or the dynamic systems development method), which are based on principles outlined in the Agile Manifesto ( Agilemanifesto.org, 2020 ).

The reason for declaring the Agile Manifesto was the increasing number of failed software development projects which were based on the waterfall approach. The inefficiency of the waterfall approach was and is connected with one of the basic assumptions of this model, i.e. focusing on delivering an IT project in the form which was specified in the first stage. Moreover, a project is carried out in organized, distinct and – in most cases – lengthy stages which makes it difficult to verify results in the course of the project. This way of working is not conducive to a culture of cooperation and ongoing communication, and it has a negative impact on the end result of a project.

The essence of agile PM lies in the fact that a project's goals are defined in less detail at the start of the project. The project schedule is also prepared approximately. The work is divided into equal iterations with assigned parts of the project scope. “In the beginning a team undertakes the most important functions, while leaving the least important ones for the end. Less important demands can later be omitted on the basis of the results of already finished iterations, the client's changed wishes/requests, the performers' proposals, or changes in the environment. A detailed specification of the iterations' products and precise scheduling of the iterations (the way of implementing, tasks, hours of work, performers, etc.) is created at the beginning of each iteration, taking into account the current results, new insights, the client's new wishes, or the ideas of developers, as well as changes to the original assumptions and requirements” ( Stare, 2014 , p. 297). The project team – not the formal project manager – is responsible for the execution plan and making the iterations.

Scrum is one of the agile PM methodologies. It implements working in “sprints” of 30 days and also focuses heavily on daily meetings (“daily scrum”) which are typically held in the same location and at the same time of day (preferably in the morning). The formal role of a project manager does not exist. There is a role of Scrum Master: a person who helps the team perform at the highest level. He/she also protects the team from both internal and external distractions and tries to fulfill Scrum values. The ideal size for a development team is between three and nine people, not including the Scrum Master and product owner. The team is self-organizing, cross-functional and as a team has all the skills necessary to create a product increment. There is no formal hierarchy within the teams. Scrum recognizes no titles for development team members, regardless of the work being performed by the person. Team members choose the project tasks themselves according to collective agreements, their skills and other factors (e.g. time). People who work on a team cannot be involved in other projects ( Schwaber and Sutherland, 2017 ).

Andersen (2006) states that an organization should apply methodologies assigned to specific types of projects. According to Cohen (2019) , traditional PM methodologies are best for short, simple projects, projects with clear and fixed requirements and projects with changing resources that depend on in-depth documentation, while the agile approach is appropriate for projects with no fixed end (with only a general idea of a product), when the project needs to accommodate quick changes and if collaboration and communication are more important than planning. Cohen emphasizes not only objective project characteristics, e.g. duration or complexity (with its many dimensions, see ( San Cristóbal et al. , 2018 )), but also organizational values (bureaucracy vs collaboration). The significance of organizational culture in comparison to objective project characteristics seems to be an interesting research topic.

Taking into account the objective project characteristics, it is worth noting that there is no common agreement on this issue. For example, Jovanović and Berić (2018) found that general characteristics of traditional methodologies (e.g. Project Management Institute [PMI] or International Project Management Association [IPMA]) make them more suitable for larger and more complex projects, such as investment or manufacturing, while agile methodologies are more appropriate for use in IT projects and some smaller and less complex projects, such as devising various studies, project reports, etc. Stare (2014) noted that almost all research studies published between 1999 and 2009 and focused on the agile approach referred to IT projects.

Špundak (2014) states that there are factors other than the characteristics of projects which determine the choice of PM methodology. Traditional PM methodologies are recommended if there is a lack of agreement between project team members or a huge fluctuation of project team members during the course of the project or if the contact between team members is more virtual. It is also possible that the nature of cooperation with external partners (contractors or suppliers) will be an important criterion in the selection of an appropriate PM methodology.

The relationship between specific features of organizational culture and PM methodology is an interesting research problem, as well. The features of “project management culture” presented above, such as trust or open communication, are so general that they will stimulate projects regardless of the PM methodology used. When trying to assess a relationship between a culture and a methodology, it is worth taking into account cultural differences – which are highlighted in organizational culture typologies.

Llanos et al . (2017) found that adhocracy culture has more positive impact on organizational agility than clan culture. On the basis of above-presented characteristics of agile PM, one can state that they are similar to clan culture or adhocracy culture, while the features of traditional PM are similar to hierarchy culture. However, at this point, it is worth highlighting the fact that the hybrid PM approach is currently being implemented as a combination of traditional and agile PM methodologies. In general, this new approach takes the best parts of both waterfall (e.g. a work breakdown structure) and agile (speed and leanness) and combines them in a flexible but structured approach. In hybrid, the planning is done using the waterfall approach, while the execution and delivery are handled by the agile method ( Cooper, 2016 ).

What significance is attributed to organizational culture compared to the objective project characteristics when choosing the dominant PM methodology in organizations?

Which type of organizational culture is preferred for successful implementation of different PM methodologies?

What kind (if any) of relationship exists between the dominant type of organizational culture in organizations and the dominant PM methodology?

Research methodology

This study investigates a subject that is rooted in two academic disciplines: HRM (and/or organizational behavior) and PM. Figure 1 presents the stages of the research process used for the purposes of this study. An exploratory and descriptive research design was chosen in order to identify the determinants of the choice of PM methodology and the abovementioned relationships between different factors and PM methodologies. The interpretative approach was used in this study, which means that the perceptions of the cultural factor from the viewpoint of practicing project managers were recognized as important ( Du Plessis and Hoole, 2006 ).

In order to eliminate biases, one should take into account the significant differences in organizational environment and types of projects. Thus, the research included 100 project managers working in different companies from the same industry. Companies from a given sector are influenced by the same external factors (the industry macroculture) – legal regulations – for example.

The respondents were employed in medium-sized and large enterprises (i.e. those which employ over 50 people) of the financial sector in Poland (banking, financial services, leasing and factoring). This industry implements many technological innovations in the form of projects. Important projects are aimed at developing security and risk management. The convenience for customers using financial services is also changing. Around 7–8 years ago, new-generation IT systems began to appear, replacing the previous ones which were based on a tabular approach. It was understood that the client not only needs accounting statements but also wants to learn how to spend and invest their money. Personalized solutions are also important. New products and services are constantly emerging. In addition, due to the changing and very restrictive legal regulations (e.g. regarding protection of personal data), companies are forced to implement changes in processes and IT systems. One can state that these regulatory projects take top priority and are often selected at the expense of other nonregulatory projects. The PM maturity level in the financial industry is high – in comparison with other industries in Poland ( Wyrozębski et al ., 2012 ).

According to data from the Central Statistical Office, in 2018, this sector consisted of main players such as 15 banks with private capital, 13 insurance companies, 47 companies specializing in credit intermediation or lending from their own funds, 11 factoring companies and 38 leasing companies ( Statistics Poland, 2019 ). It is worth noting that many companies run more than one business activity at the same tame (e.g. credit and leasing intermediation or leasing and factoring).

In order to collect the contact information of respondents, companies were selected from a list created from information accessible in secondary sources (listings of companies, websites, industry newsletters, etc.). The research, based on a quantitative approach, was conducted in December 2019 and January 2020. In the process of gathering information in the survey, the personal structured interviews (paper-and-pencil interview [PAPI]) method was used. The direct contact with respondents helped to avoid misunderstandings about the questions. Interviews with each of the respondents lasted about three hours. The interview questionnaire was designed for the purposes of a larger research project. This paper presents only the results which are pertinent to the chosen research questions and cultural typology, based on the CVF.

Statistical analyses were conducted with the use of IBM SPSS software. For the purpose of this paper, Pearson's chi-squared test and the Kruskal–Wallis test were used. These tests examine the relationship between two variables when at least one is qualitative. The chi-squared test allows the researcher to examine the significance of differences in percentage structures. It is based on comparing observed values (i.e. those obtained in the study) with expected values (i.e. those assumed by the test if there were no relationship between the variables). If the difference between the observed and expected values is large (statistically significant), it can be stated that there is a relationship between the two variables.

For the correct interpretation of the findings of the quantitative research, the in-depth interview method was used. Such interviews can provide much more information which builds a context to previous outcome data. They offer a more complete picture of the state and causes of a research problem. In total, three direct, unstructured interviews with project managers (from a bank, a leasing company and a credit provider) were used. Each of them lasted about one hour.

Results and discussion

At first, it is worth presenting the general characteristics of the industry in question. The CVF has already been discussed in relation to organizational culture in banking by Thakor (2015) , though the author did not conduct any empirical research on this topic. He only presented the assumptions of the CVF concept and implications for managers in banking. In turn, Barth (2015) showed that different types of organizational culture have different preferences for risk-taking. He found that banks with a market-oriented organizational culture have higher excess returns. Finally, Joseph and Kibera (2019) found that clan and hierarchy are the dominant cultural types in the microfinance industry in Kenya.

During the interviews conducted for this study, the dominant and secondary cultural types in the companies were identified. Table 2 shows the three cultural types which were indicated as being the dominant cultural type in the respondents' organizations as well as the dominant PM methodology used in the companies under study. Analysis revealed similar findings to above-presented resulted from research by Joseph and Kibera (2019) .

Clan culture – emphasizing development of shared understanding and commitment instead of a formalized communication process – is the most popular cultural type. At the same time, the cultural type most often indicated as a secondary one was market culture (54 responses). This type of culture is a results-oriented one. The “second” culture type in the survey was defined as one which simultaneously coexists with the first but is less expressed. The commonality between hierarchy culture and market culture is that both focus on stability and control. The difference lies in the fact that market culture promotes fast changes, while hierarchy lends itself more to incremental changes. In turn, adhocracy and market cultures have an external focus in common. The most interesting result is the combination of clan and market cultures because they are focused on completely different issues. The latter is focused on the outside of an organization, differentiation and fast changes, while the former focuses on flexibility, integration and long-term changes. These contrasting cultural types are combined in the form of employee participation (clan) linked with costumer focus (market). They can be also found together in hybrid PM methodology, which was the most popular one in the companies under study ( Table 2 ).

The in-depth interviews demonstrated that hybrid methodology was implemented because of problems with other, previously used PM approaches. At the beginning, the waterfall approach was used. A few years ago, agile PM methodology was implemented as a trendy new approach. However, numerous barriers have been noticed in the successful development of projects. Despite many years of working together, the employees had significant problems carrying out their new roles or even problems transferring their current roles to the new model. Other barriers were the unavailability or insufficient availability of internal clients and communication problems. The dominant position of traditional methodologies in the organization is associated with certain employee habits. The implementation of novelty in the form of agile moved them out of their comfort zone. The hybrid approach provided compliance with employee expectations, which is a characteristic of clan culture.

In addition, the priorities in some organizations change quite often (adhocracy culture) because of changes in legal regulations and – in the case of leasing companies – changes in the operations of the banks which finance the assets. The agile approach seems to be the most suitable in such situation. In turn, “hierarchical” banks had to meet the challenges in terms of ensuring the agile model's compliance with legal requirements. Official legal regulations emphasize a strong and active role of the bank's management board in the decision-making process and in the organization of day-to-day operations (hierarchy). The agile model assumes a limited role of the managing body. The management board is supposed to set the strategic goals but without interfering or supervising – choosing the way the goals are met. The hybrid approach allowed organizations to reconcile the business and legal requirements.

Respondents were asked about which factor has a greater impact on the project methodology used in the organization. They had the three following options to choose from: organizational culture (OC), project characteristics (e.g. duration, complexity, innovativeness and scope of cooperation with external partners) (P) and equal importance of organizational culture and project characteristics (OC + P). The results are shown in Table 3 .

The findings are partially in line with Špundak's (2014) statement that there are other factors than projects' characteristics which influence the choice of PM methodology. Organizational culture is seen to be a more important factor ( n  = 41) than objective project characteristics ( n  = 27) in the context of choosing the dominant PM methodology in organizations; however, a chi-squared test did not reveal any significant relationships between the factors taken into account ( χ 2 [4, N  = 100] = 5.40; p  = 0.249).

The research therefore shows that other factors or a bundle of factors should be taken into account when analyzing the basics of decision-making on the choice of a particular PM methodology. Špundak (2014) believes that the company size can play a role. He hypothesizes that large organizations are more likely to use the traditional approach because it helps them to control the work. However, the respondents who participated in this study worked in medium-sized and large companies, and the most frequently reported PM methodology was a hybrid one. As indicated in the in-depth interviews, such factors as the vogue for new PM approaches and the need to reconcile employees' needs (maintaining of tradition), business requirements (implementing innovations) and legal regulations are of great importance.

Results of previous research which utilized the CVF emphasized relationships between clan culture and project effectiveness ( Yazici, 2009 ) and clan culture and knowledge sharing in a project team ( Wiewiora et al. , 2012 ). The presented research shows clan culture in a slightly different context. Table 4 presents the types of organizational culture that are preferred for successful implementation of different PM methodologies.

Within the traditional PM methodology, hierarchy culture (70%) was considered to be the most appropriate environment; clan culture followed by adhocracy is considered being the most appropriate environment for agile approach. The results are reverse in relation to findings obtained by Llanos et al . (2017) in their research on the impact of organizational culture on the organizational agility. Contrary to expectations, this research also revealed a positive link between hierarchy culture and agile Approach. As Llanos et al . (2017) stated, such findings may suggest that certain features inherent to hierarchy culture lead to more agile management. Finally, according to the respondents, a successful implementation of hybrid PM methodology requires an adhocracy culture. The relationship between preferred cultural types in the context of different PM methodologies is statistically significant ( χ 2 [4, N  = 100] = 81.47; p  < 0.001).

These findings were compared with the cultural types indicated as dominant in the respondents' organizations. Due to the low number of indications of the “Market culture” variant ( Table 2 ) as the dominant cultural type, a reliable measurement with the chi-squared test of the relationships between all cultural types and PM methodologies in the organizations studied was not possible. However, focusing on only the three most popular types of organizational culture, it can be stated that there is no significant relationship between existing dominant cultural types and existing dominant PM methodology ( χ 2 [4, N  = 91] = 1.02; p  = 0.907).

Next, a series of Kruskal–Wallis tests was conducted in order to examine whether there is a relationship between the dominant culture and the indicators of project effectiveness (see Table 5 ). The respondents noted the percentage of successful projects, taking into account criteria such as time, budget and scope requirements and achieving client, team member and supplier satisfaction.

Project success strictly depends on team members commitment ( Araujo and Pedron, 2014 ), and Acar (2012) found that clan and adhocracy cultures have positive effects on employees' commitment. This study did not confirm previous findings that only clan culture ensures high project effectiveness ( Yazici, 2009 ). The analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between the types of dominant cultural type and “Project completed within the project scope requirements” ( X 2 [3] = 10.75; p  = 0.013). The follow-up pairwise comparison showed that the project managers who chose hierarchy as the dominant cultural type (mean = 93.94; median = 100) regarded project completion to be more successful than those who chose clan as the dominant culture (mean = 87.77; median = 90; p  = 0.030). No other statistically significant differences were found. The reason for these discrepancies can be a national culture and composition of team members related to their individual values. Yazici (2009) conducted research in the USA, while this paper presents research conducted in Poland. For respondents – project team members – the best cultural environment for traditional PM can be hierarchy; however, people working in projects can represent individual values congruent with adhocracy-specific values. This congruency contributes to organizational performance outcomes ( Titov and Umarova, 2017 ).

As was highlighted during the in-depth interviews, measuring the impact that culture may have on project outcomes is difficult. The level of project success is influenced by many factors, both endogenous and exogenous. Internal factors include the competencies of the project team and individual values of team members. The competences – according to the respondents – seem to be the most important factor since highly skilled project managers and project team members can deliver high-quality project outcomes, despite an unfavorable organizational culture.

Conclusions, implications and directions for further research

This research contributes to knowledge by showing a linkage between the type of organizational culture and the type of PM methodology. In answer to RQ1 , it can be said that organizational culture is seen as the most important factor which determines the PM methodology used as the standard in organizations. When it comes to RQ2 , the results of both theoretical studies and empirical research show that the most appropriate cultural type for traditional PM is hierarchy. Clan culture is most suitable for agile PM approach, while adhocracy is best for hybrid PM methodology. Nevertheless, in practice, there is no relationship between the dominant type of organizational culture and the dominant PM methodology ( RQ3 ). Moreover, projects – taking into account five out of the six project success indicators – are equally likely to be successfully completed, despite differences in organizational cultures.

There are several recommendations for management practice based on this research. Firstly, organizational culture can be developed intentionally ( Gagliardi, 1986 ; Bendak et al. , 2020 ). There is still room for improvement in the field of project effectiveness. The missing percentage of successfully completed projects could be made up with a more suitable organizational culture. Therefore, it is worth determining both current and expected cultural types by the use of survey and/or interviews among project team members and other employees. On this basis, managers should take up actions which will stimulate a cultural transformation of the company. They have to play a role of ambassadors of changes ( Kane-Urrabazo, 2006 ).

If, for example, organizational culture should have more clan features, managers should turn to their employees, find what people value, use open feedback in order to collect employees' ideas and allow them to act. Inspirational motivation (by, e.g. trust and pushing decisions to the lowest levels, allowance for mistakes) and individualized consideration effects clan culture ( Chan, 1997 ; Acar, 2012 ). Design of the workspace is also important. In clan culture, teams have to interact effectively with one another. Therefore, smaller footprints should be allocated to the individual than the team and workstation panel heights should be lower, if not nonexistent ( ISS, 2020 ). In turn, transformation into more hierarchical culture requires buttoning up processes, ensuring clear goals for teams and individuals and a workspace which provides a sense of stability. Management-by-exceptions also effects hierarchy culture ( Acar, 2012 ).

Secondly, human competencies are of the utmost value. A good understanding of the cultural aspects of PM is also emphasized. Conscious project managers and highly skilled team members will be able to deliver a high-quality product despite an unfavorable organizational culture. There is a need to develop not only technical but also cultural competences. The importance of these competencies has been so far discussed but mainly in the context of multinational projects ( Isern, 2015 ; Vlahov et al ., 2016 ). Training in this issue is a developmental field for educational institutions.

This paper has two main shortcomings, though it nevertheless provides directions for future research. Firstly, the sample population in this study was collected from project managers working for companies in the financial industry in Poland. In order to extend the applicability of the findings, more samples from different industries – and even from different countries – should be studied. Secondly, all respondents were project managers who volunteered to participate in this research. They subjectively assessed the dominant and coexisting cultural types of their companies. Since the companies were of medium and large size, their organizational culture may be fragmented. This means that different divisions of the organizations can represent slightly different cultural types. Future studies could overcome such a limitation. Further triangulation of the methods and the involvement of more respondents from a single company can be used in order to achieve more objective measures and to identify the mechanism of choosing the PM standards. Further research can also adopt different cultural typologies than those presented by Cameron and Quinn.

The research process

Traditional vs agile project management – own study based on Špundak (2014) , Cohen (2019) , Piwowar-Sulej (2020 )

Cultural types regarded as dominant and the popularity of different PM methodologies in respondents' companies

Factors taken into account in the decision-making process about appropriate PM methodology – frequency distribution

Cultural types matched with PM methodology – frequency distribution

Dominant cultural type and project success – results of Kruskal–Wallis test

Acar , A.Z. ( 2012 ), “ Organizational culture, leadership styles and organizational commitment in Turkish logistics industry ”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences , Vol. 58 , pp. 217 - 226 , doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.995 .

Agilemanifesto.org ( 2020 ), “ Agile Manifesto ”, available at: https://agilemanifesto.org/ .

Ajmal , M.M. and Koskinen , K.U. ( 2008 ), “ Knowledge transfer in project-based organizations: an organizational culture perspective ”, Project Management Journal , Vol. 39 No. 1 , pp. 7 - 15 , doi: 10.1002/pmj.20031 .

Alvesson , M. ( 1990 ), “ On the popularity of organizational culture ”, Acta Sociologica , Vol. 33 No. 1 , pp. 31 - 49 , doi: 10.1177/000169939003300103 .

Andersen , E.S. ( 2006 ), “ Toward a project management theory for renewal projects ”, Project Management Journal , Vol. 37 No. 4 , pp. 15 - 30 , doi: 10.1177/875697280603700403 .

Araujo , C.C.S.D. and Pedron , C.D. ( 2014 ), “ IT project management success: the influence of project manager competencies and team commitment ”, Proceedings of the 11th CONTECSI International Conference on Information Systems and Technology Management , TECSI . doi: 10.5748/9788599693100-11CONTECSI/PS-588 .

Barth , A. ( 2015 ), “ The role of corporate culture in the financial industry ”, Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development – Theory and Policy 112922 , Frankfurt , German Economic Association , available at: https://farapaper.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/The-Role-of-Corporate-Culture-in-the-Financial-Industry.pdf .

Belassi , W. , Kondra , A.Z. and Tukel , O.I. ( 2007 ), “ New product development projects: the effects of organizational culture ”, Project Management Journal , Vol. 38 No. 4 , pp. 12 - 24 , doi: 10.1002/pmj.20017 .

Bendak , S. , Shikhli , A.M. and Abdel-Razek , R.H. ( 2020 ), “ How changing organizational culture can enhance innovation: development of the innovative culture enhancement framework ”, Cogent Business and Management , Vol. 7 No. 1 , 1712125 , doi: 10.1080/23311975.2020.1712125 .

Berger , H. and Beynon-Davies , P. ( 2009 ), “ The utility of rapid application development in large-scale, complex projects ”, Information Systems Journal , Vol. 19 No. 6 , pp. 549 - 570 , doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2009.00329.x .

Bredillet , C. , Yatim , F. and Ruiz , P. ( 2010 ), “ Project management deployment: the role of cultural factors ”, International Journal of Project Management , Vol. 28 No. 2 , pp. 183 - 193 , doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.10.007 .

Camerer , C. and Vepsalainen , A. ( 1988 ), “ The economic efficiency of corporate culture ”, Strategic Management Journal , Vol. 9 No. S1 , pp. 115 - 126 , doi: 10.1002/smj.4250090712 .

Cameron , K.S. and Quinn , R.E. ( 2011 ), Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture , Based on the Competing Values Framework , 3rd ed. , Jossey-Bass , San Francisco .

Cameron , K.S. , Quinn , R.E. , DeGraff , J. and Thakor , A.V. ( 2006 ), Competing Values Leadership: Creating Value in Organizations , Edward Elgar Publishing , Northampton .

Chan , A. ( 1997 ), “ Corporate culture of a clan organization ”, Management Decision , Vol. 35 No. 2 , pp. 94 - 99 , doi: 10.1108/00251749710160232 .

Cleland , D.I. ( 1994 ), Project Management – Strategic Design and Implementation , 2nd ed. , McGraw-Hill , New York .

Cohen , E. ( 2019 ), “ The definitive guide to project management methodologies ”, available at: https://www.workamajig.com/blog/project-management-methodologies .

Cooper , R.G. ( 2016 ), “ Agile–stage-gate hybrids ”, Research-Technology Management , Vol. 59 No. 1 , pp. 21 - 29 , doi: 10.1080/08956308.2016.1117317 .

Denison , D.R. and Mishra , A.K. ( 1995 ), “ Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness ”, Organization Science , Vol. 6 No. 2 , pp. 204 - 223 , doi: 10.1287/orsc.6.2.204 .

Dictionary.com ( 2020 ), “ Agile ”, available at: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/agile?s=t .

Drucker , P. ( 1992 ), “ The new society of organizations ”, Harvard Business Review , Vol. 70 No. 5 , pp. 95 - 104 .

Du Plessis , Y. ( 2005 ), The Development of an Assessment Tool for Measuring Project Management Culture in Organisations , University of Pretoria , available at: http://hdl.handle.net/2263/25349 .

Du Plessis , Y. and Hoole , C. ( 2002 ), “ The development of a project management culture assessment framework ”, PMI® Research Conference 2002: Frontiers of Project Management Research and Applications , Washington , Poject Management Institute , available at: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/development-pm-culture-assessment-framework-1938 .

Du Plessis , Y. and Hoole , C. ( 2006 ), “ An operational ‘project management culture’ framework (Part 1) ”, SA Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 4 No. 1 , doi: 10.4102/sajhrm.v4i1.79 .

Englund , R.L. and Graham , R.J. ( 1997 ), Creating an Environment for Successful Projects , Jossey-Bass Publishers , San Francisco .

Gagliardi , P. ( 1986 ), “ The creation and change of organizational cultures: a conceptual framework ”, Organization Studies , Vol. 7 No. 2 , pp. 117 - 134 , doi: 10.1177/017084068600700203 .

Hall , E.T. ( 1976 ), Beyond Culture , Doubleday , New York .

Handy , C. ( 1983 ), Understanding Organizations , Oxford University Press , New York .

Hartog , D.N. and Verburg , R.M. ( 2004 ), “ High performance work systems, organisational culture and firm effectiveness ”, Human Resource Management Journal , Vol. 14 No. 1 , pp. 55 - 78 , doi: 10.1111/j.1748-8583.2004.tb00112.x .

Henrie , M. and Sousa-Poza , A. ( 2005 ), “ Project management: a cultural literary review ”, Project Management Journal , Vol. 36 No. 2 , pp. 5 - 14 , doi: 10.1177/875697280503600202 .

Hofstede , G. ( 1998 ), “ Attitudes, values and organizational culture: disentangling the concepts ”, Organization Studies , Vol. 19 No. 3 , pp. 477 - 493 , doi: 10.1177/017084069801900305 .

International Project Management Association ( 2016 ), Organizational Competence Baseline for Developing Competence in Managing by Projects , IPMA , Amsterdam .

Isern , G. ( 2015 ), “ Intercultural project management for IT: issues and challenges ”, Journal of Intercultural Management , Vol. 7 No. 3 , pp. 53 - 67 , doi: 10.1515/joim-2015-0021 .

ISS ( 2020 ), “ How office design can shape your company culture ”, available at: https://www.servicefutures.com/office-design-can-shape-company-culture .

Joseph , O.O. and Kibera , F. ( 2019 ), “ Organizational culture and performance: evidence from microfinance institutions in Kenya ”, SAGE Open , Vol. 9 No. 1 , doi: 10.1177/2158244019835934 .

Jovanovic , P. and Beric , I. ( 2018 ), “ Analysis of the available project management methodologies ”, Management:Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies , Vol. 23 No. 3 , p. 1 , doi: 10.7595/management.fon.2018.0027 .

Kane-Urrabazo , C. ( 2006 ), “ Management's role in shaping organizational culture ”, Journal of Nursing Management , Vol. 14 No. 3 , pp. 188 - 194 , doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2934.2006.00590.x .

Kerzner , H. ( 2000 ), Applied Project Management. Best Practices on Implementation , John Willey and Sons , New York .

Keskin , H. , Akgün , AE. , Günsel , A. and İmamoğlu , S.Z. ( 2005 ), “ The relationships between adhocracy and clan cultures and tacit oriented KM strategy ”, Journal of Transnational Management , Vol. 10 No. 3 , pp. 39 - 53 , doi: 10.1300/J482v10n03_04 .

Kivrak , S. , Arslan , G. , Tuncan , M. and Birgonul , M.T. ( 2014 ), “ Impact of national culture on knowledge sharing in international construction projects ”, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering , Vol. 41 No. 7 , pp. 642 - 649 , doi: 10.1139/cjce-2013-0408 .

Larson , E.W. and Gray , C.F. ( 2011 ), Project Management – The Managerial Process , 11th ed. , McGraw-Hill Hills , New York .

Liu , J. , Meng , F. and Fellows , R. ( 2015 ), “ An exploratory study of understanding project risk management from the perspective of national culture ”, International Journal of Project Management , Vol. 33 No. 3 , pp. 564 - 575 , doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.08.004 .

Llanos , C.M.F. , Roldán , J.L. and Leal-Rodriguez , A.L. ( 2017 ), “ Impact of organizational culture values on organizational agility ”, Sustainability , Vol. 9 No. 12 , p. 2354 , doi: 10.3390/su9122354 .

Lucas , L.M. ( 2006 ), “ The role of culture on knowledge transfer: the case of the multinational corporation ”, The Learning Organization , Vol. 13 No. 3 , pp. 257 - 275 , doi: 10.1108/09696470610661117 .

Martins , E.C. and Terblanche , F. ( 2003 ), “ Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation ”, European Journal of Innovation Management , Vol. 6 No. 1 , pp. 64 - 74 , doi: 10.1108/14601060310456337 .

Mashiane , L. ( 2013 ), “ Investigating an organisational culture conducive to project management, Essays Innovate ”, available at: https://www.up.ac.za/media/shared/Legacy/sitefiles/file/44/1026/2163/8121/innovate8/9195investigating_an_organisational_culture_conducive_to_project_managementbyloriummashiane.pdf .

Mathew , J. ( 2007 ), “ The relationship of organisational culture with productivity and quality ”, in Budhwar, P.S. (Ed.) , Employee Relations , Vol. 29 , No. 6 , pp. 677 - 695 , doi: 10.1108/01425450710826140 .

Morrison , J.M. , Brown , C.J. and Smit , E.V.D.M. ( 2008 ), “ The impact of organizational culture on project management in matrix organizations ”, South African Journal of Business Management , Vol. 39 No. 4 , pp. 27 - 36 , doi: 10.4102/sajbm.v39i4.569 .

Nguyen , L. and Watanabe , T. ( 2017 ), “ The impact of project organizational culture on the performance of construction projects ”, Sustainability , Vol. 9 No. 5 , p. 781 , doi: 10.3390/su9050781 .

Ostroff , C. , Kinicki , A.J. and Muhammad , R.S. ( 2012 ), “ Organizational culture and climate ”, Handbook of Psychology , 2nd ed. , John Wiley and Sons , Hoboken, New Jersey . doi: 10.1002/9781118133880.hop212024 .

Pinto , J.K. and Slevin , D.P. ( 1987 ), “ Critical factors in successful project implementation ”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management , Vols EM-34 No. 1 , pp. 22 - 27 , doi: 10.1109/TEM.1987.6498856 .

Piwowar-Sulej , K. ( 2014 ), “ Kultura organizacyjna i jej wpływ na działalność projektową – studium przypadku ”, Marketing i Rynek , Vol. 5 , pp. 143 - 148 , doi: 10.13140/2.1.1346.1769 .

Piwowar-Sulej , K. ( 2016 ), “ Kultura organizacyjna jako determinanta sukcesu organizacji zorientowanych na projekty – optyka specjalistów HR ”, Zarządzanie i Finanse , Vol. 2 No. 2 , pp. 275 - 284 .

Piwowar-Sulej , K. ( 2020 ), “ Types of organizational culture in the context of project management methodologies ”, in Soliman Khalid , S. (Ed.), Education Excellence and Innovation Management: A 2025 Vision to Sustain Economic Development during Global Challenges , International Business Information Management Association (IBIMA) , Sevilla .

Piwowar‐Sulej , K. ( 2021 ), “ Core functions of sustainable human resource management. A hybrid literature review with the use of H‐classics methodology ”, Sustainable Development , sd.2166 , doi: 10.1002/sd.2166 .

Rowlinson , S. and Root , D. ( 1996 ), “ The impact of culture on project management ”, available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305397606 .

San Cristóbal , J.R. , Carral , R. , Diaz , E. , Fraguela , J.A. and Iglesias , G. ( 2018 ), “ Complexity and project management, a general overview ”, Complexity , Vol. 2018 , pp. 1 - 10 , doi: 10.1155/2018/4891286 .

Saynisch , M. ( 2010 ), “ Beyond frontiers of traditional project management: an approach to evolutionary, self-organizational principles and the complexity theory – results of the research program ”, Project Management Journal , Vol. 41 No. 2 , pp. 21 - 37 , doi: 10.1002/pmj.20159 .

Schein , E.H. ( 1990 ), “ Organizational culture ”, American Psychologist , Vol. 45 No. 2 , pp. 109 - 119 , doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.45.2.109 .

Schwaber , K. and Sutherland , J. ( 2017 ), “ The scrum guide, the definitive guide to scrum: the rules of the game ”, available at: https://www.scrumguides.org/docs/scrumguide/v2017/2017-Scrum-Guide-US.pdf .

Shore , B. and Cross , B.J. ( 2005 ), “ Exploring the role of national culture in the management of large-scale international science projects ”, International Journal of Project Management , Vol. 23 No. 1 , pp. 55 - 64 , doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.05.009 .

Silva , M.D.C. and Gomes , C.F.S. ( 2015 ), “ Practices in project management according to Charles Handy's organizational culture typologies ”, Procedia Computer Science , Vol. 55 , pp. 678 - 687 , doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2015.07.074 .

Špundak , M. ( 2014 ), “ Mixed agile/traditional project management methodology – reality or illusion? ”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences , Vol. 119 , pp. 939 - 948 , doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.105 .

Stankevičiūtė , Ž. and Savanevičienė , A. ( 2019 ), “ Can sustainable HRM reduce work-related stress, work-family conflict, and burnout? ”, International Studies of Management and Organization , Routledge , Vol. 49 , No. 1 , pp. 79 - 98 , doi: 10.1080/00208825.2019.1565095 .

Stare , A. ( 2014 ), “ Agile project management in product development projects ”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences , Vol. 119 , pp. 295 - 304 , doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.034 .

Statistics Poland ( 2019 ), Specialized Segments of Financial Market 2018 , Central Statistical Office , Warsaw .

Thakor , A.V. ( 2015 ), “ Corporate culture in banking ”, SSRN Electronic Journal . doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2565514 .

Thomas , G. and Fernández , W. ( 2008 ), “ Success in IT projects: a matter of definition? ”, International Journal of Project Management , Vol. 26 No. 7 , pp. 733 - 742 , doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.06.003 .

Titov , E. and Umarova , L. ( 2017 ), “ Impact of real and propagated values on organisational success ”, Congruence of Personal and Organizational Values , InTech . doi: 10.5772/intechopen.69460 .

Turner , R.J. ( 1993 ), The Handbook of Project-Based Management – Improving the Processes for Achieving Strategic Objectives , MCGraw-Hill , London .

Vlahov , R.D. , Mišić , S. and Radujković , M. ( 2016 ), “ The influence of cultural diversity on project management competence development – the Mediterranean experience ”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences , Vol. 226 , pp. 463 - 469 , doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.06.212 .

Ward , L.J. ( 2000 ), Dictionary of Project Management Terms , ESI International , Darlington Virginia .

Webster , E. and Jensen , P.H. ( 2006 ), “ Investment in intangible capital: an enterprise perspective* ”, The Economic Record , Vol. 82 No. 256 , pp. 82 - 96 , doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4932.2006.00296.x .

Wiewióra , A. , Murphy , G.D. , Trigunarsyah , B. and Coffey , V. ( 2012 ), “ Uncovering the impact of organisational culture types on the willingness to share knowledge between projects ”, in Williams , J. (Ed.), Proceedings of the PMI Research and Education Conference 2012 , Project Management Institute , pp. 1 - 16 .

Wyrozębski , P. , Juchniewicz , M. and Metelski , W. ( 2012 ), Wiedza, dojrzałość, ryzyko w zarządzaniu projektami , Warsaw School of Economics , Warsaw .

Yazici , H.J. ( 2009 ), “ The role of project management maturity and organizational culture in perceived performance ”, Project Management Journal , Vol. 40 No. 3 , pp. 14 - 33 , doi: 10.1002/pmj.20121 .

Acknowledgements

The project is financed by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland under the program “Regional Initiative of Excellence” 2019–2022 project number 015/RID/2018/19 total funding amount 10,721,040.00 PLN.

Corresponding author

Related articles, we’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

• Book a Speaker

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vivamus convallis sem tellus, vitae egestas felis vestibule ut.

Error message details.

Reuse Permissions

Request permission to republish or redistribute SHRM content and materials.

Understanding and Developing Organizational Culture

The key to a successful organization is to have a culture based on a strongly held and widely shared set of beliefs that are supported by strategy and structure. When an organization has a strong culture, three things happen: Employees know how top management wants them to respond to any situation, employees believe that the expected response is the proper one, and employees know that they will be rewarded for demonstrating the organization's values.

Overview Background Business Case What Is Organizational Culture? Factors That Shape an Organization's Culture Creating and Managing Organizational Culture Practices to Develop Culture Communications Metrics Legal Issues Global Issues

Employers have a vital role in perpetuating a strong culture, starting with recruiting and selecting applicants who will share the organization's beliefs and thrive in that culture, developing orientation, training and performance management programs that outline and reinforce the organization's core values and ensuring that appropriate rewards and recognition go to employees who truly embody the values.

This toolkit covers the following topics:

• The importance of having a strong organizational culture.
• The employer's role in fostering a high-performance culture.
• Definitions of organizational culture.
• Factors that shape an organization's culture.
• Considerations in creating and managing organizational culture.
• Practices to ensure the continuity and success of an organization's culture.
• Communications, metrics, legal, technology and global issues pertaining to organizational culture.

See  SHRM Resource Hub Page: Organizational Culture . 

An organization's culture defines the proper way to behave within the organization. This culture consists of shared beliefs and values established by leaders and then communicated and reinforced through various methods, ultimately shaping employee perceptions, behaviors and understanding. Organizational culture sets the context for everything an enterprise does. Because industries and situations vary significantly, there is not a one-size-fits-all culture template that meets the needs of all organizations.

A strong culture is a common denominator among the most successful companies. All have consensus at the top regarding cultural priorities, and those values focus not on individuals but on the organization and its goals. Leaders in successful companies live their cultures every day and go out of their way to communicate their cultural identities to employees as well as prospective new hires. They are clear about their values and how those values define their organizations and determine how the organizations run. See  What does it mean to be a values-based organization?

Conversely, an ineffective culture can bring down the organization and its leadership. Disengaged employees, high turnover, poor customer relations and lower profits are examples of how the wrong culture can negatively impact the bottom line. See  Toxic Culture Top Reason People Quit .

Mergers and acquisitions are fraught with culture issues. Even organizational cultures that have worked well may develop into a dysfunctional culture after a merger. Research has shown that two out of three mergers fail because of cultural problems. Blending and redefining the cultures, and reconciling the differences between them, build a common platform for the future. In recent years, the fast pace of mergers and acquisitions has changed the way businesses now meld. The focus in mergers has shifted away from blending cultures and has moved toward meeting specific business objectives. Some experts believe that if the right business plan and agenda are in place during a merger, a strong corporate culture will develop naturally. See  Managing Organizational Change and Managing Human Resources in Mergers and Acquisitions.

Business Case

If an organization's culture is going to improve the organization's overall performance, the culture must provide a strategic competitive advantage, and beliefs and values must be widely shared and firmly upheld. A strong culture can bring benefits such as enhanced trust and cooperation, fewer disagreements and more-efficient decision-making. Culture also provides an informal control mechanism, a strong sense of identification with the organization and shared understanding among employees about what is important. Employees whose organizations have strongly defined cultures can also justify their behaviors at work because those behaviors fit the culture. See  Toxic Workplace Cultures Hurt Workers and Company Profits .

Company leaders play an instrumental role in shaping and sustaining organizational culture. If the executives themselves do not fit into an organization's culture, they often fail in their jobs or quit due to poor fit. Consequently, when organizations hire C-suite executives, these individuals should have both the requisite skills and the ability to fit into the company culture.

See  SHRM Inclusive Workplace Culture Specialty Credential

What Is Organizational Culture?

An employer must begin with a thorough understanding of what culture is in a general sense and what their organization's specific culture is. At the deepest level, an organization's culture is based on values derived from basic assumptions about the following:

• Human nature. Are people inherently good or bad, mutable or immutable, proactive or reactive? These basic assumptions lead to beliefs about how employees, customers and suppliers should interact and how they should be managed.
• The organization's relationship to its environment. How does the organization define its business and its constituencies?
• Appropriate emotions. Which emotions should people be encouraged to express, and which ones should be suppressed?
• Effectiveness. What metrics show whether the organization and its individual components are doing well? An organization will be effective only when the culture is supported by an appropriate business strategy and a structure that is appropriate for both the business and the desired culture.

Culture is a nebulous concept and is often an undefined aspect of an organization. Although extensive academic literature exists relating to the topic of organizational culture, there is no generally accepted definition of culture. Instead, the literature expresses many different views as to what organizational culture is.

Organizational culture can manifest itself in a variety of ways, including leadership behaviors, communication styles, internally distributed messages and corporate celebrations. Given that culture comprises so many elements, it is not surprising that terms for describing specific cultures vary widely. Some commonly used terms for describing cultures include aggressive, customer-focused, innovative, fun, ethical, research-driven, technology-driven, process-oriented, hierarchical, family-friendly and risk-taking. See  6 Ways to Become a More Empathetic Organization .

Because culture is difficult to define, organizations may have trouble maintaining consistency in their messages about culture. Employees may also find it difficult to identify and communicate about perceived cultural inconsistencies. See  Defining Organizational Culture and Culture Conversation Starters .

Factors That Shape an Organization's Culture

Organizational leaders often speak about the unusual natures of their company cultures, seeing their domains as special places to work. But organizations such as Disney and Nordstrom, which are well-known for their unique cultures, are rare.

Most company cultures are not that different from one another. Even organizations in disparate industries such as manufacturing and health care tend to share a common core of cultural values. For example, most private-sector companies want to grow and increase revenues. Most strive to be team-oriented and to demonstrate concern for others. Most are driven, rather than relaxed, because they are competing for dollars and market share. Some of the cultural characteristics that distinguish most organizations include the following.

At the heart of organizations' cultures are commonly shared values. None is right or wrong, but organizations need to decide which values they will emphasize. These common values include:

• Outcome orientation. Emphasizing achievements and results.
• People orientation. Insisting on fairness, tolerance and respect for the individual.
• Team orientation. Emphasizing and rewarding collaboration.
• Attention to detail. Valuing precision and approaching situations and problems analytically.
• Stability. Providing security and following a predictable course.
• Innovation. Encouraging experimentation and risk-taking.
• Aggressiveness. Stimulating a fiercely competitive spirit.

Degree of hierarchy

The degree of hierarchy is the extent to which the organization values traditional channels of authority. The three distinct levels of hierarchy are "high"—having a well-defined organizational structure and an expectation that people will work through official channels; "moderate"—having a defined structure but an acceptance that people often work outside formal channels; and "low" —having loosely defined job descriptions and accepting that people challenge authority.

An organization with a high level of hierarchy tends to be more formal and moves more slowly than an organization with a low level of hierarchy.

Degree of urgency

The degree of urgency defines how quickly the organization wants or needs to drive decision-making and innovation. Some organizations choose their degree of urgency, but others have it thrust on them by the marketplace.

A culture with high levels of urgency has a need to push projects through quickly and a high need to respond to a changing marketplace. A moderate level of urgency moves projects at a reasonable pace. A low level of urgency means people work slowly and consistently, valuing quality over efficiency. An organization with high urgency tends to be fast-paced and supports a decisive management style. An organization with low urgency tends to be more methodical and supports a more considered management style.

People orientation or task orientation

Organizations usually have a dominant way of valuing people and tasks. An organization with a strong people orientation tends to put people first when making decisions and believes that people drive the organization's performance and productivity. An organization with a strong task orientation tends to put tasks and processes first when making decisions and believes that efficiency and quality drive organization performance and productivity.

Some organizations may get to choose their people and task orientations. But others may have to fit their orientation to the nature of their industry, historical issues or operational processes.

Functional orientation

Every organization puts an emphasis on certain functional areas. Examples of functional orientations may include marketing, operations, research and development, engineering or service. For example, an innovative organization known for its research and development may have at its core a functional orientation toward R&D. A hospitality company may focus on operations or service, depending on its historical choices and its definition in the marketplace.

Employees from different functions in the company may think that their functional areas are the ones that drive the organization. Organizational leaders must understand what most employees perceive to be the company's functional orientation. 

Organizational subcultures

Any organization can have a mix of subcultures in addition to the dominant culture. Subcultures exist among groups or individuals who may have their own rituals and traditions that, although not shared by the rest of the organization, can deepen and underscore the organization's core values. Subcultures can also cause serious problems.

For example, regional cultures often differ from the overall culture that top leadership tries to instill. Perhaps aggressiveness that is common in one area may not mesh with a culture emphasizing team building. Or an organization with a culture built around equality may have trouble if the national culture emphasizes hierarchy and expects people to bow to authority. Employers must recognize those differences and address them directly.

Creating and Managing Organizational Culture

An organizational culture tends to emerge over time, shaped by the organization's leadership and by actions and values perceived to have contributed to earlier successes. A company culture can be managed through the cultural awareness of organizational leaders and management. Managing a culture takes focused efforts to sustain elements of the culture that support organizational effectiveness. See  Addressing the Six Sources of Workplace Cultural Conflicts .

How culture develops

An organization's customs, traditions, rituals, behavioral norms, symbols and general way of doing things are the visible manifestation of its culture; they are what one sees when walking into the organization. The current organizational culture is usually due to factors that have worked well for the organization in the past. See  How to Create a Culture of Civility .

Founders typically have a significant impact on an organization's early culture. Over time, behavioral norms develop that are consistent with the organization's values. For example, in some organizations, resolution of conflicts is hashed out openly and noisily to create widespread consensus, whereas in other places disputes are settled hierarchically and quietly behind closed doors.

Though culture emerges naturally in most organizations, strong cultures often begin with a process called "values blueprinting," which involves a candid conversation with leaders from across the organization. Once the culture is framed, an organization may establish a values committee that has a direct link to leadership. This group makes sure the desired culture is alive and well. For values blueprinting to work, organizations must first hire people who live the values and have the competency needed to perform the job.

Sustaining a culture

The management of organizational culture starts with identifying a company's organizational culture traits or "artifacts." Artifacts are the core business activities, processes and philosophies that characterize how an organization does business day-to-day.

Identifying these traits—and assessing their importance in light of current business objectives—is a way to start managing culture. Three broad concepts help identify the traits specific to a culture:

• Social culture. This refers to group members' roles and responsibilities. It is the study of class distinctions and the distribution of power that exists in any group.
• Material culture. This involves examining everything that people in a group make or achieve and the ways people work with and support one another in exchanging required goods and services.
• Ideological culture. This is tied to a group's values, beliefs and ideals—the things people view as fundamental. It includes the emotional and intellectual guidelines that govern people's daily existence and interactions.

Leaders and managers within an organization should approach culture management by initially gaining an understanding of the common traits found in all businesses. Then, they should take the following steps to manage their organization's culture:

• Identify common artifacts or traits, including those from the standpoint of an organization's social, material and ideological culture.
• Convene groups of employees—representatives from all levels, functions and locations of the organization—to assess the validity, significance and currency of key artifacts.
• Subject those traits to a rigorous assessment of their underlying shared assumptions, values and beliefs.
• Summarize findings and share them with all participants to solicit additional insights.
• Create a culture management action plan. The plan should enhance traits that support corporate growth or organizational effectiveness and correct traits that might hinder a company's advancement.

Typically, shared assumptions and beliefs originate with an organization's founders and leaders. Because those beliefs proved successful (otherwise the company would not exist and the leaders would not be in their positions), often they go unchallenged; however, those assumptions and beliefs might be outdated and may hinder future success. See 6 Steps for Building an Inclusive Workplace and The Relationship Between Culture and DE&I .

Practices to Develop Culture

When an organization does a good job assessing its culture, it can then go on to establish policies, programs and strategies that support and strengthen its core purpose and values. In aligned organizations, the same core characteristics or beliefs motivate and unite everyone, cascading down from the C-suite to individual contributors.

There are many tools for developing and sustaining a high-performance organizational culture, including hiring practices, onboarding efforts, recognition programs and performance management programs. The biggest challenge is deciding how to use these tools and how to allocate resources appropriately.

Hiring practices

Effective hiring practices can help an organization capitalize on its culture. Traditionally, hiring focuses primarily on an applicant's skills, but when a hire's personality also fits with the organization's culture, the employee will be more likely to deliver superior performance.

On the other hand, ill-fitting hires and subsequent rapid departures cost approximately 50 percent to 150 percent of the position's annual salary. Unfortunately, nearly one in three newly hired employees' leaves voluntarily or involuntarily within a year of hiring, and this number has been increasing steadily in recent years.

Some hiring practices to ensure cultural fit include:

• Looking at each piece of the organization's vision, mission and values statements.  Interview questions  should hone in on behaviors that complement these areas. For example, if the organization works with a lot of intensity, then job applicants should display that natural intensity to be considered for hire.
• Conducting a cultural fit interview. Ask questions that elicit comments about organizational values such as honesty or integrity. If a candidate's description of the worst place he or she ever worked sounds just like the organization where he or she is interviewing, the candidate probably will not be successful.
• Leaving discussion of company culture for later. Do not tell candidates about culture up front. First, listen to what they have to say about their experiences and beliefs. This tactic will reveal more candid responses to help determine whether they are a fit for the organization.
• Making sure at least three people are involved in the hiring process. Different people will see and hear different things. These varied perspectives give a clearer understanding of the person being considered for hire.

Searching for employees who will fit in seamlessly can have drawbacks. The biggest mistake an organization can make is to paint an inaccurate picture of itself as it tries to attract candidates. If new hires discover they have been sold a bill of goods, they will not be happy; they will probably not stick around, and, while they are around, morale will decline.

Another possible drawback is that people are more reluctant to take negative actions against people like themselves. As a result, mediocre workers are more likely to stay employed if they share the cultural values. Similarly, although an organization's comfort level is palpable when the culture is aligned, experts say, too much comfort can result in groupthink and complacency.

Onboarding programs

Onboarding teaches newcomers the employer's value system, norms and desired organizational behaviors. Employers must help newcomers become part of social networks in the organization and make sure that they have early job experiences that reinforce the culture. See  Understanding Employee Onboarding .

Reward and recognition programs

These programs are key mechanisms employers can use to motivate employees to act in accordance with the organization's culture and values. For example, if teamwork is a core value, bonuses should value teamwork and not be based on individual performance. Employers should also put the spotlight on those who personify the company's values. See  Employee Recognition Tech Must Align with Company Culture .

Performance management programs

Employees who share values and aspirations tend to outperform those in environments that lack cohesiveness and common purposes. Performance management programs can greatly affect corporate culture by clearly outlining what is expected from employees as well as by providing a feedback tool that informs employees about proper behavior. See  Performance Management That Makes a Difference: An Evidence-Based Approach .

Communications

Conflicting messages regarding corporate culture may create distrust and cynicism, which can prompt, or help employees justify, actions as deleterious as embezzlement. Experts say that cultural inconsistencies may also cause workers to grow discouraged, to believe management is disingenuous, to doubt statements from higher-ups and to be less inclined to give their best effort.

Organizations may be investing significant time and money in creating a culture but may not be reaping the commensurate rewards—especially if executives, supervisors and rank-and-file employees have differing perceptions of the company's culture. Employers must therefore ensure that the organization clearly and consistently communicates its culture to all employees. See  HR's Role in Creating a Culture of High Trust: Q&A with Richard Fagerlin.

Assessing organizational culture is a crucial step in developing sound strategies that support enterprise objectives and goals. But how do you measure something as potentially tough to describe as culture? After identifying the key dimensions of culture such as values, degree of hierarchy, and people and task orientations, performing these next steps will help organizations assess culture:

• Develop a cultural assessment instrument. This instrument should enable members of the organization to rate the organization on the key cultural dimensions, as well as on aspects of the organization not covered on the assessment.
• Administer the assessment. Survey respondents should include individuals at all levels, functions, divisions and geographical units of the organization.
• Analyze and communicate about assessment results. Leaders and managers should discuss areas of agreement and disagreement about the organization's culture.
• Conduct employee focus groups. Just because top management leaders agree on organizational culture does not mean that all employees see things that way.
• Discuss culture until consensus forms around key issues. Focus on "Who are we?" and "What makes us who we are?" Organizations that decide that where they are now is not where they want to be may need to look at moving the organization to embrace a different culture.

Cultural assessments, and other activities such as cultural audits and 360-degree feedback, may also help uncover cultural inconsistencies. Then leaders can eliminate the inconsistencies. For example, if customer service is a focus of the company's culture, evaluate how much time employees spend visiting customer sites, how much interaction they have with customers, what customer service training they receive and other indicators of a customer service focus. See  The New Analytics of Workplace Culture and Building a Data-Driven Culture Health Index .

Legal Issues

Employers that emphasize cultural fit in their recruitment and selection process can be vulnerable to discrimination claims if they are not careful. Employers should ensure that hiring practices and selection decisions based on a cultural fit rationale do not result in discriminating against any applicants who may not be "just like" the selectors.

Employers should also be aware that certain types of organizational cultures (for example, cultures that are highly paternalistic or male-dominated) may tend to perpetuate disparities in promotions, compensation and other terms of employment. Those disparities may violate anti-discrimination laws. 

Global Issues

Research suggests that national culture has a greater effect on employees than the culture of their organization. Organizational leaders should understand the national cultural values in the countries in which the organization operates to ensure that management and company practices are appropriate and will be effective in operations in those countries. National cultural differences should be considered when implementing organizational culture management initiatives in global businesses.

Managers must be able to respond to nuances in communication styles, as well as deal with different expectations that employees have of their leaders across national cultures. Not meeting those expectations may doom the global organization's chance for success in particular countries.

These issues become even more complex in global business mergers. Success in international mergers depends on the merged organization's willingness to enable people with different cultural perspectives to engage in meaningful and valuable discussions about the new business.

Helping Expatriate Employees Deal with Culture Shock

3 Steps in Aligning Culture Across the Globe

Related Articles

A 4-Day Workweek? AI-Fueled Efficiencies Could Make It Happen

The proliferation of artificial intelligence in the workplace, and the ensuing expected increase in productivity and efficiency, could help usher in the four-day workweek, some experts predict.

How One Company Uses Digital Tools to Boost Employee Well-Being

Learn how Marsh McLennan successfully boosts staff well-being with digital tools, improving productivity and work satisfaction for more than 20,000 employees.

Employers Want New Grads with AI Experience, Knowledge

A vast majority of U.S. professionals say students entering the workforce should have experience using AI and be prepared to use it in the workplace, and they expect higher education to play a critical role in that preparation.

HR Daily Newsletter

New, trends and analysis, as well as breaking news alerts, to help HR professionals do their jobs better each business day.

Success title

Success caption

Organizational Development Research Paper Topics

This guide aims to provide students with a comprehensive list of organizational development research paper topics divided into 10 categories, expert advice on how to choose the best topics, and tips on how to write a successful research paper. Organizational development is a critical aspect of modern workplaces, and students studying this field often need to write research papers to explore various aspects of it. Additionally, iResearchNet offers custom writing services designed to help students produce high-quality, well-researched papers on any organizational development topic. By following the steps outlined in this guide and utilizing iResearchNet’s services, students can produce research papers that contribute to the field and provide valuable insights for academics, policymakers, and industry professionals.

Introduction to Organizational Development Research Paper Topics

In modern workplaces, organizational development plays a critical role in creating a healthy and productive work environment. Students who study organizational development often need to write research papers to explore various aspects of this field, ranging from leadership and change management to employee motivation and performance.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

The purpose of this guide is to provide students with a comprehensive list of organizational development research paper topics divided into 10 categories, expert advice on how to choose the best topics, and tips on how to write a successful research paper. Additionally, iResearchNet offers custom writing services designed to help students produce high-quality, well-researched papers on any organizational development topic.

By following the steps outlined in this guide and utilizing iResearchNet’s services, students can produce research papers that contribute to the field and provide valuable insights for academics, policymakers, and industry professionals. Whether you are just beginning your research or are well underway, this guide will provide you with the tools and resources you need to succeed in your research paper on organizational development.

100 Organizational Development Research Paper Topics

Organizational development research paper topics can cover a wide range of issues and areas within the field. To help students choose a topic that aligns with their interests and research goals, we have compiled a list of 10 categories of organizational development research paper topics.

Leadership and Management:

• The impact of leadership style on organizational culture
• Cross-cultural leadership: Challenges and opportunities
• The role of emotional intelligence in effective leadership
• Effective strategies for managing remote teams
• The impact of gender on leadership styles and practices
• Leadership and innovation: Strategies for fostering creativity in the workplace
• Transformational leadership: An analysis of its impact on employee motivation
• The relationship between ethical leadership and employee well-being
• The role of shared leadership in team performance
• The impact of leader-member exchange on employee job satisfaction

Organizational Change:

• Managing organizational change: Best practices and strategies
• Overcoming resistance to change: A case study analysis
• The impact of organizational change on employee motivation and job satisfaction
• Change management in the public sector: Challenges and solutions
• The role of communication in change management
• Change management in mergers and acquisitions: Lessons learned
• Change management in healthcare organizations: A case study analysis
• The role of leadership in successful change management
• Change management in non-profit organizations: Strategies for success
• The impact of technology on change management in organizations

Employee Motivation and Performance:

• The impact of job design on employee motivation and performance
• Employee engagement: Best practices for fostering a motivated workforce
• The role of rewards and recognition in employee motivation
• The impact of organizational culture on employee motivation and performance
• The relationship between job satisfaction and employee turnover
• The impact of work-life balance on employee motivation and performance
• Performance management: Best practices for setting and measuring employee goals
• The role of leadership in employee motivation and performance
• The impact of workplace diversity on employee motivation and performance
• The relationship between employee motivation and organizational performance

Organizational Culture and Climate:

• The impact of organizational culture on employee behavior
• Building a positive organizational culture: Best practices and strategies
• The role of communication in shaping organizational culture
• The impact of organizational culture on customer satisfaction
• The impact of leadership on organizational culture and climate
• Organizational climate: A conceptual framework for analysis
• The role of conflict resolution in shaping organizational culture
• The impact of employee diversity on organizational culture and climate
• The impact of job design on organizational culture and climate
• The impact of technological change on organizational culture and climate

Human Resource Management:

• The impact of HR practices on employee performance and job satisfaction
• Talent management: Strategies for identifying and retaining top talent
• The impact of training and development on employee performance
• The role of HR in managing workplace diversity and inclusion
• The impact of HR technology on employee recruitment and retention
• Employee benefits and compensation: Best practices for designing and implementing programs
• The impact of performance management systems on employee engagement and performance
• HR policies and procedures: Best practices for designing and implementing effective programs
• The role of HR in managing employee health and wellness
• The impact of employee engagement on organizational performance

Organizational Communication:

• Communication and leadership in organizations
• Effective communication strategies for remote teams
• The role of communication in conflict resolution in organizations
• Cross-cultural communication in multinational organizations
• Communication and organizational change
• Communication and employee engagement
• Communication and decision-making in organizations
• Communication and knowledge management in organizations
• Communication and organizational culture
• Communication and ethical issues in organizations

Organizational Culture:

• Developing a strong organizational culture for improved productivity
• The role of leadership in shaping organizational culture
• Measuring and assessing organizational culture
• The impact of mergers and acquisitions on organizational culture
• The influence of national culture on organizational culture
• Managing culture change in organizations
• Creating an inclusive organizational culture
• Culture and diversity in the workplace
• The impact of organizational culture on customer experience

Human Resource Development:

• Employee training and development programs
• Talent management and succession planning
• The role of HRD in organizational change management
• Strategies for developing a diverse and inclusive workforce
• The impact of technology on HRD practices
• The role of HRD in performance management
• Employee retention strategies
• HRD and knowledge management
• The role of HRD in career development
• HRD and employee engagement

Organizational Leadership:

• Leadership styles and their impact on organizational culture and performance
• Developing effective leadership skills in organizations
• Gender and leadership in organizations
• Leadership development programs
• Ethical leadership in organizations
• The impact of transformational leadership on organizational change
• Authentic leadership and employee engagement
• The role of leadership in promoting innovation in organizations
• Distributed leadership in organizations

Organizational Change Management:

• The process of organizational change
• Resistance to change and how to overcome it
• Change management strategies for successful implementation
• The role of leadership in managing organizational change
• The impact of technology on organizational change management
• Managing change in a global context
• Change management and employee engagement
• Communicating change in organizations
• The role of organizational culture in change management
• The impact of mergers and acquisitions on organizational change management

The categories of organizational development research paper topics discussed above are just a few of the many areas that can be explored. Students can use these topics as a starting point to identify research areas that interest them the most, and they can then tailor the research paper to their specific academic and professional interests. It is also important to remember that organizational development is a constantly evolving field, and new topics are emerging all the time. Therefore, it is crucial for students to stay up-to-date on the latest trends and developments in the field to identify new and relevant research topics.

Choosing an Organizational Development Topic

Choosing a research paper topic can be a challenging task for students, particularly in a complex and evolving field like organizational development. Here are some expert tips to help students choose an appropriate topic for their research paper:

• Identify Your Area of Interest : The first step in choosing a research paper topic is to identify your area of interest. Organizational development is a vast field, and there are many areas to explore. It is essential to choose a topic that aligns with your academic and professional interests.
• Read Widely : The next step is to read widely to identify the latest trends and research gaps in the field. Academic journals, books, and conference proceedings are good sources of information for students to keep abreast of the latest research.
• Consult with Your Professor : It is advisable to consult with your professor or academic advisor for guidance on choosing a research topic. They can offer insights and recommendations on suitable topics based on your academic background and interests.
• Narrow Down Your Topic : Once you have identified an area of interest and read widely, narrow down your topic to a specific research question. A specific research question will help you focus your research and keep it within manageable limits.
• Consider Practical Implications : Organizational development is an applied field, and research should have practical implications. Students should choose a research topic that has practical implications for organizations and can contribute to the development of effective organizational practices.
• Ensure Feasibility : It is essential to ensure that the research topic is feasible within the given time and resources. Students should consider the availability of data, access to research participants, and research methods when choosing a topic.
• Seek Inspiration : Inspiration for a research topic can come from a variety of sources, such as current events, case studies, and personal experience. Students should look for real-world problems and challenges facing organizations to identify relevant research topics.
• Be Creative : Finally, students should be creative when choosing a research topic. The field of organizational development is constantly evolving, and there is always room for innovative research ideas. Students should not be afraid to explore new and exciting areas of research.

In conclusion, choosing a research paper topic is an important step in the research process, and students should take the time to carefully consider their options. By following the expert advice outlined above, students can choose a research topic that aligns with their interests and has practical implications for organizations.

How to Write an Organizational Development Research Paper

Organizational development is an interdisciplinary field that requires both theoretical and practical knowledge. To write a successful research paper in this field, students need to have a clear understanding of the theoretical foundations of organizational development, as well as the practical tools and methods used to implement change within organizations. In this section, we will provide expert advice on how to write an effective organizational development research paper.

• Choose a topic : The first step in writing a research paper in organizational development is to choose a topic that is both interesting and relevant to the field. This can be a challenging task, as there are numerous topics to choose from within the field of organizational development. To narrow down your topic, consider the following questions: What are the current issues facing organizations today? What are the areas of organizational development that need improvement? What are the latest trends in the field of organizational development? Once you have identified a topic, make sure it is specific enough to be manageable, but broad enough to allow for sufficient research.
• Conduct research : The next step is to conduct research on your chosen topic. This can involve reading academic journals, books, and other sources related to organizational development. It is important to keep track of the sources you use, as you will need to reference them in your paper. In addition to academic sources, it can also be useful to conduct interviews with experts in the field or to observe real-world examples of organizational development in action.
• Develop a thesis statement : Once you have conducted your research, it is important to develop a thesis statement that summarizes the main point of your paper. This should be a clear and concise statement that outlines the argument you will be making in your paper. Your thesis statement should be based on your research and should be supported by evidence.
• Outline your paper : Before you start writing your paper, it can be useful to create an outline. This will help you organize your thoughts and ensure that your paper is structured logically. Your outline should include an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Each paragraph should have a clear topic sentence, supporting evidence, and a concluding sentence.
• Write your paper : Once you have created an outline, it is time to start writing your paper. Your introduction should provide background information on your topic and should end with your thesis statement. The body of your paper should present your argument and should be supported by evidence from your research. Each paragraph should focus on a single point and should be structured logically. Your conclusion should summarize your main points and restate your thesis statement in a new way.
• Revise and edit : After you have written your paper, it is important to revise and edit it. This can involve checking for grammar and spelling errors, as well as ensuring that your paper is structured logically and makes sense. It can also be useful to have someone else read your paper and provide feedback.

In summary, writing a successful organizational development research paper requires careful planning and attention to detail. By following the steps outlined above, students can produce a well-researched and well-written paper that demonstrates their knowledge of the field.

iResearchNet Writing Services for Organizational Development Research Papers

At iResearchNet, we understand that writing a research paper on organizational development can be a challenging and time-consuming task for students. That’s why we offer custom writing services to help students complete their assignments with ease. Our team of expert writers with advanced degrees in organizational development can provide you with a high-quality custom paper on any topic related to organizational development.

We offer a wide range of features to ensure that your paper meets your needs and exceeds your expectations. Here are some of the benefits you can enjoy when you choose iResearchNet for your organizational development research paper:

• Expert degree-holding writers : Our writers hold advanced degrees in organizational development, and they have years of experience in writing research papers on a variety of topics related to the field.
• Custom written works : We create every paper from scratch, and we follow your instructions to ensure that the paper meets your specific requirements.
• In-depth research : Our writers conduct extensive research to gather relevant and up-to-date information for your paper.
• Custom formatting : We can format your paper in any style you require, including APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, and Harvard.
• Top quality, customized solutions : We guarantee that the paper you receive will be of the highest quality and tailored to your specific needs.
• Flexible pricing : We offer flexible pricing options to fit your budget, and we never compromise on quality.
• Short deadlines : We can accommodate even the tightest deadlines and still deliver a high-quality paper.
• Timely delivery : We understand the importance of meeting deadlines, and we always deliver papers on time.
• 24/7 support : Our customer support team is available 24/7 to answer your questions and address any concerns you may have.
• Absolute Privacy : We guarantee complete confidentiality and privacy of your personal information and order details.
• Easy order tracking : You can easily track the progress of your order and communicate with your writer through our user-friendly platform.
• Money-back guarantee : We offer a money-back guarantee if you’re not satisfied with the quality of our work.

Whether you’re struggling to come up with a topic for your organizational development research paper or you simply don’t have the time to complete the assignment, iResearchNet is here to help. Our custom writing services are designed to provide you with high-quality, customized solutions that meet your specific needs. Contact us today to learn more about our services and how we can help you succeed in your academic endeavors.

Order Custom Research Paper Today!

Choosing the right organizational development research paper topic is critical for producing a high-quality research paper that will earn you good grades. We hope that this guide has provided you with insights on various organizational development research paper topics that you can explore in your research. Remember that choosing the right topic is the first step, and you must also follow the appropriate research paper writing guidelines to produce an excellent paper.

At iResearchNet, we understand that students face numerous challenges when writing research papers. These challenges range from selecting the right topic to conducting in-depth research and writing a high-quality paper. As a result, we offer custom research paper writing services to help students overcome these challenges and produce high-quality papers.

Our writing services are tailored to meet the needs of students pursuing organizational development studies. Our team comprises expert degree-holding writers who are highly experienced in writing research papers on various organizational development topics. We provide custom written works that are unique, well-researched, and written in adherence to the required formatting style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard). Additionally, we guarantee top quality, customized solutions, flexible pricing, short deadlines up to 3 hours, timely delivery, 24/7 support, absolute privacy, easy order tracking, and a money-back guarantee.

In conclusion, do not let the challenges of writing an organizational development research paper hinder you from achieving your academic goals. Seek professional help from iResearchNet, and we will ensure that you get a high-quality paper that meets your expectations. Place your order today and enjoy our professional writing services!

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

The Costs and Benefits of Clan Culture: Elite Control versus Cooperation in China

Kinship ties are a common institution that may facilitate in-group coordination and cooperation. Yet their benefits – or lack thereof – depend crucially on the broader institutional environment. We study how the prevalence of clan ties affect how communities confronted two well-studied historical episodes from the early years of the People's Republic of China, utilizing four distinct proxies for county clan strength: the presence of recognized ancestral halls; genealogical records; rice suitability; and geographic latitude. We show that the loss of livestock associated with 1955-56 collectivization (which mandated that farmers surrender livestock for little compensation) documented by Chen and Lan (2017) was much less pronounced in strong-clan areas. By contrast, we show that the 1959-61 Great Famine was associated with higher mortality in areas with stronger clan ties. We argue that reconciling these two conflicting patterns requires that we take a broader view of how kinship groups interact with other governance institutions, in particular the role of kinship as a means of elite control.

Chen would like to acknowledge the support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71933002; 72121002), Zhuoyue Talent Project, Theoretical Economics Peak Program and Legendary Project on Humanities and Social Sciences (XM04221238) at Fudan University. Wang would like to thank National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant No. 72172090) for financial support. Qing Ye would like to thank the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant No. 72172060, 72132004) and the Major Project of Philosophy and Social Science Research Funds for Jiangsu University (grant No. 2020SJZDA068) for financial support. We thank Rui Rong for excellent RA work, all remaining errors are our own. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

Working Groups

More from nber.

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship  — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .