the PSYCHESPACEVol. 1, No.1, 27-36, December 2007.

Dimensions of Organisational Climate

M. Balachandran * & Immanuel Thomas **

Abstract The steady increase in the publicationof climate research is a reasonable indication that it isbecoming a major concern for managements and appliedbehavioural scientists. However, considerable diversityexists in definitions, approaches and dimensions as wellas the methodologies employed for research in the area.This indicates that still more studies are required forarriving at a consensus. The different tools available toassessorganisational climate vary in the different aspectsstressed as important in organisational climate. In thiscontext, the present study attempts to identify the variousdimensions involved in perceived organisational climate

using a foctor analytical technique.

KEYWORDS: Dimensions, Organisational Climate

* Head, Department of Psychology, Tagore ArtsCollege, Pondicherry.Head, Department of Psychology, University ofKerala.

**

INTRODUCTIONOrganisational climate has been one of the

major construct used for comparing organisations andis jointly determined by the procedures, strategies,and physical environment, and the psychologicalproperties of its employees (Dunnette & Hough,1998). However climate researchers have establishedhow the inherent variables of organisational climateis related to factors like interpersonal relations(Misra, 1983; Laldas, 1985; Bartlome & Laurant,1986; Kumar & Anita, 1989), Participativemanagement (Ahuja, 1986; Virginia, Robert, &James 1987; McCabe & Lewin, 1992), recognitionand encouragement (Grunberg & Oborne, 1992),Grievance handling (Monappa & Saiyadain, 1990),financial benefits (Trivedi & Mookerjee, 1989;Barber, Dunham, & Formisano, 1992), degree offormalisation (Gregary & Burroughs, 1989),communication (Hellweg & Philips, 1980), risktaking (Aakar & Jacobson, 1987), Training (Blum& Naylor, 1984), Recruitment and selection decision(Mullins, 1982) etc.

Among the distinct theoretical approachesresearchers developed to study the concept oforganisational climate, the subjectivist approachregard organisational climate as a perceptual andcognitive structuring of the organisational situationcommon to the organisational members. Accordingly,in the organisation there is a continual flow of eventsand actions, of routines and processes. Individualencounter those various phenomena and try tointerpret them so that the surrounding world becomecomprehensible. They create a "cognitive map"for themselves; with its help they can placewhat they see and hear, thus becoming able to see

the PSYCHESPACE

more meaning in it. When the members of theorganisation interact with one another, there is anexchange of experiences and apperceptions; theremany personal cognitive maps confront one anotherand are modified. In this way, common ways ofperceiving and interpreting what happens inorganisational settings arise (Padaki, 1982).

Researchers construct special instrumentsfor measuring those aspects of climate that arerelevant to their question. Taguiri (1968) identifiedfive factors to explain climate: (1) Practices relatedto providing a sense of direction or purpose to theirjobs-setting of objectives, planning and feedback (2)Opportunities for individual initiative (3) Workingwith competitive and competent supervisor, (4) co-operative and pleasant people (5) being with a profitminded and sales-oriented company. Schneider andBartlett (1968) reported that management support,management structure, concern for new employees,intra-agency conflict, agent independence generalsatisfaction are the five factors of climate. WhileKhan, Wolfe, Quinn, Snock, & Rosenthal (1964)'sfactor analysis yielded five factors such as rules andorientation, nurturance of subordinates, closeness ofsupervision, universalism or the degree to which theindividual should identify with the organisation as awhole, and promotion of achievement orientation.Litwin & Stringer (1967) identified structure,responsibility, reward, warmth, support, identity, risk,standard and conflict as the organisational climatedimensions.

In climate research the tendency seemsamong researchers is to adopt a more general climatequestionnaire. Several of these are described in theIiterature, and the individual researcher usually choseone of them. But even these broad climateinstruments must have stemmed from certain goalsand values. More or less consciously, the constructorwould have selected questions and variables with aparticular organisational effect in mind.Consequently, the questions and variables were notimmediately relevant to other more specific criteria.The climate concept acquires greater theoretical andpractical importance when the link between thestudied climate dimensions and the effect variables

Dimensions of Organisationai Climate

is more direct. Therefore it is expected that as wemove from general to more specific dimensions, weare better able to understand and predict behaviourin organisations on a basis of the climate concept.

Although articles treating climate as a multi-dimensional concept are numerous and haveaddressed a variety of variables and settings, theyappear to lack commonness. This is because, to alarge extent, the context and the shelf of informationavailable about the organisation vary amongmembers and the number and types of dimensionsrequired vary among researchers.

Though researchers differ in definingorganisational climate, this study drew a generalagreement on four points before conceptulising, viz.,(1) organisational climate is multi-dimensional innature, (2) is mostly a function of managerial policiesand practices, (3) is the collective perception of theorganisational members regarding the various aspectsof the organisation based on "the way that theorganisation deals with its members and itsenvironment", and (4) the collective perception ofthe organisational members reflect various aspectsof the organisation and the interaction of personaland organisational characteristics.

Development of a new scale to measure theorganisational climate in the present study wasnecessitated by the fact that suitable scales,standardised on the present socio-cultural context,was not readily available. Another consideration,which prompted the investigators to go for a newmeasure, was that the present study envisaged inidentifying the different dimensions of theorganisational climate in the context of the peculiarindustrial environment in Kerala. The different stepsfollowed in the development of the scale are givenbelow:

Item Preparation

In the first phase of the developmentof the scale an attempt was made to have acorrect conceptualisation of organisational climateand its different dimensions. This was madepossible through:

28

M. Balachandran & Immanuel Thomas

1. An exhaustive review of literature relatedto the organisational climate factors;

2. The dimension of organisational climatewere decided through a pre-pilot study inwhich a few executives and workers wereasked to describe the relevant internal workenvironment of their organisations; and

3. discussions and informal interviews withexperts.

The next step in the construction of theOrganisational Climate Questionnaire waspreparation of items for the test. A large number ofitems were written in accordance with the dimensionsidentified.

Many items were adopted from variouspublished sources which conveyed the idea of therelevant organisational characteristics. Care wastaken to include both positively worded (favourableclimate) and negatively worded (unfavourableclimate) items in the draft scale. The final test itemswere selected from a large pool of items afterscrutinising and checking out irrelevant, redundantor ambiguous items. Expert suggestions were alsosolicited while finalising the test items.

In the final form, the draft OCQ consistedof a total of 68 items which represented differentaspects of organisational climate. Each item had fiveresponse categories, viz., Strongly agree (A); Agree(B); Undecided (C); Disagree (D); and Stronglydisagree (E). Of the total 68 items, 38 were 'truekeyed' and 30 were 'false keyed'.

Administration and ScoringOrganisational Climate Questionnaire is a

self-administering one. However, the investigatormay assist those who have difficulty in understandingthe items, or mode of responding to them. Instructionsare printed at the beginning. Response space, '[ ]'are provided against each item, and the respondentis required to write the appropriate letter representinghis response inside the bracket. The scores of theresponses were 5, 4, 3, 2, & 1 for the response A, B,C, D & E, for a positive item. The scores were inreverse order for a negative item. Sum of the scoresof all the different items constituted the total scoreon the scale.

the PSYCHESPACE

Table 1: The 't' values of the 68 items of theOrganisational CLimate Draft Scale

Rank No. Item No. 't' - value

I 18 20.672 24 19.953 31 17.284 44 16.885 25 16.876 51 16.557 37 15.568 17 15.459 28 15.38

10 66 15.05II 36 14.7812 22 14.4213 16 13.4114 32 13.1215 10 13.0416 52 12.6017 8 12.4318 30 11.8119 7 11.6320 9 11.6121 65 11.6122 11 11.5723 61 11.5624 42 11.5125 2 11.2826 5 11.0627 60 10.6428 35 10.4229 68 10.1930 14 10.1831 21 9.8032 20 9.7933 13 9.7334 49 9.6735 27 9.4736 19 9.0237 48 8.9838 56 8.9839 41 8.9340 38 8.6241 6 8.3842 55 8.3443 64 8.0944 29 8.0845 62 8.0546 43 7.9647 34 7.8448 15 7.6449 53 7 .4550 39 7.4151 46 7.3252 26 7.2253 3 6.9954 50 6.6655 23 6.4656 57 6.3257 4 6.3258 45 6.2359 54 6.2360 I 5.8661 12 5.6462 59 4.7963 58 4.5364 33 4.5065 63 3.2966 67 3.0567 40 3.0168 47 1.54

29

the PSYCHESPACE

Indian situation, it seems difficult toidentify, assess and describe the actual status ofthework environment because (a) organisationsgenerally disagree in permitting researchers to carryon research during or after the work periods proceeds,(b) management is sensitive in publishing the stateof their employees to the public and (c) as it interferesthe natural rhythm of work. However precautionsand remedies were planned and adopted to tacklethis situation.

Item AnalysesItem analyses of the scale was done using

Likert's method (Edwards, 1969). For this purpose,a pilot study was conducted in which the scale(together with a few other scales to be mentionedlater) was administered to a representative sampleof 300 subjects. The subjects were rank ordered onthe basis of the total scores in the draft-scale, andthe upper and lower one third of the subjects wereselected as the high and the low groups respectively.The 't' values relating to the items are given in theabove Table 1. It is evident from the table that 67out of 68 items differentiated between high and lowgroups significantly. All the items (including the onenon-significant item) were retained in the final scale,as the investigator intended to carry out a factoranalysis of the items in the scale and hence reductionin the total number of items in the initial stage wasnot very advisable.

Identification of FactorsInitial statistics relating to the analysis of

the items on the organisational climate questionnaireshowed that 18 factors had eigen values above 1.0.together they accounted for 57.54 percentage of thetotal variance. Though all these factors could beconsidered significant, a closer scrutiny.revealed thatit would be more convenient to retain a fewermember of factors, for reasons of parsimony andinterpretability of the factors obtained. Accordingly,it was decided to retain the first 10 factors, whichtogether accounted for 44.17 percent of the totalvariance. Important loadings on these factors (afterbeing subjected to varimax rotation) are described

Dimensions of Organisational Climate

-, .below. It may be noted here that the factors, arenumbered in the order of percentage of varianceaccounted for by them after rotation.

The rotated factor matrix of the itemsfrom which the factors are extracted are given inAppendix A.

Factor I: Welfare ConcernThe items which had the highest loadings

on factor 1 were the following: (Factor loadings aregiven in the brackets at the end and the serial numberof the item in the inventory at the beginning afterserial number).

1. (5) We are adequately compen-sated for the occupationalhazards like accidents andhealth problems (0.711)

2. (28) All the mandatory healthfacilities are available here(0.676).

3. (25) This institution provides allwelfare facilities to the emplo-yees and theirfarnilies (0.659).

4. (32) The welfare facilities providedby this institution are no lessthan that of the otherinstitutions (0.647).

5. (42) Elaborate facilities for mainte-nance of health are providedto the employees here (0.616).

6. (35) This institution provides theemployees with adequateamount of fresh air, water,lighting etc. (0.594).

7. (18) Management does everythingto ensure the well-being of theemployees (0.569).

8. (24) The management is alwaysready to solve problems andgrievances of employees(0.568).

9. (66) All the important decisionsnecessary for the smooth runningof the institution are taken withthe knowledge and consent ofthe employees (0.565).

10. (60) The workers have the freedomto interact directly with themanagement and express theiropinions (0.562).

30

M. Balachandran & Immanuel Thomas

11. (31) The management has always asympathetic attitude towardsemployee problems (0.498).

] 2. (16) The employees haverepresentation in severalcommittees where decisionsare to be taken by consensus(0.458).

13. (17) The company has enoughfacilities to deal with theemployees' grievances (0.440).

14. (19) This institution offers severalattractive benefits atsuperannuation (0.423).

15. (30) In all the major decisions thathad an impact on the growthand development of theinstitution, the opinions of theemployees too were taken intoconsideration (0.385).

16. (2) Before taking a decision, themanagement always looks intothe opinion of the employees(0.283).

It may be seen that the items which loadhighly on this factor are all related to themanagements' interest and involvement in variousaspects of employee welfare, health facilities, extrabenefits, sympathetic attitude towards employeeproblems, etc. Hence the investigator feels it properto label the factor as 'Welfare Concern'. This factorcould account for 9.31 % of the total variance.

Factor II: Norms and StandardsItems which load highly on the second factor

are given below:

1. (64) This institution have plans todevelop stage by stage (0.636).

2. (4) The duties to be undertaken byeach of the employees aremeticulously defined andlogically classified (0.632).

3. (65) The secret of success of thiscompany lies in its welldefined policies and discipline(0.611).

the PSYCHESPACE

4. (59) The company has clear rulesand regulations regarding thework of each and everyemployee (0.575)

5. (7) By employing scientificplanning, this institution triesto maximize the use of humanpotential (0.573).

6. (21) Well set out supervisioncontributes greatly to thesuccess of this institution(0.543).

7. (56) Strict enforcement ofdiscipline without fear orfavour has improved theefficiency of this organisation(0.537).

8. (11) Our institution has clear rulesand regulations for the earlysolution of day to day problems(0.490).

9. (61) The management is ready totake any measure that lead toprogress and growth incompetition with other rivalinstitutions (0.451).

10. (10) My supervisors give everyencouragement they can, in mywork (0.420).

11. (68) Instead of being influenced bythe opinion of a few, ourmanagement takes decisionsonly after evaluating allaspects properly (0.356).

12. (27) This institution selects fullyqualified candidates throughfair and unbiased evaluation(0.317).

13. (39) The management believes thatproduction will automaticallyincrease if the employees aresatisfied (0.307).

An examination of the items which loadhighly on this factor indicate that the underlyingfeature of the factor is the clarity of vision, properplanning, and maintenance of proper norms andstandards by the management. This has prompted theinvestigator to label it as 'Norms and Standards'. Thefactor accounted for 7.16 per cent of the total variance.

31

the PSYCHESPACE

Factor III: Interpersonal RelationsThe items with high loadings on this factor

are given below:1. (15) Since the employees of our

institution are divided amongthemselves on the basis ofpolitical affiliation and otherconsiderations, mutual helpand co-operation is very low(0.669).

2. (29) Other than on the officialplane, the management doesnot maintain any relation withthe employees (0.657).

3. (22) The relationship between theemployees and executives ofour institution is strained(0.628).

4. (36) The management always keepsa distance in its relations withthe employees (0.625).

5. (8) The power struggle among thetop executives is a big problemin this institution (0.574).

6. (53) Nobody tries to draw theattention of the authoritiestowards our problems andneeds (0.410).

It is evident from the content of theitems which loads highly in this factor that it isconcerned with various aspects of interactionamong the members of the organisation. The itemcover uch aspects as co-operation, informalrelationships between management and employeesetc. hence the factor is named as 'InterpersonalRelations'. Factor III accounted for 4.87 per cent ofthe total variance.

Factor IV Recruitment and Training

There were seven items with high loadingson the fourth factor. These items and their loadingsare given below:

1. (41) Employees of this institutionare often faced with problemsresulting from lack of jobtraining (0.689).

Dimensions of Organisationai Climate

2. (48) There is no provision forscientific job training byexperts in this institution(0.612).

3. (34) Majority of the employees ofthis institution have got inthrough bribary and undueinfluence (0.594).

4. (55) If the employees had beengiven sufficient training,production would haveincreased (0.565).

5. (20) The methods that thisinstitution uses to recruit itsemployees are outdated(0.556).

6. (14) Lot of manpower is wastedhere due to heedless activities(0.468).

7. (62) The management considerseach and everyone, only on thebasis of one's position in thejob hierarchy (0.350).

This factor could be identified based on theabove variables with the highest loadings on it. Thecontent of all these items relates to the organisation'spractices in the selection of employees and impartingtraining to the selected ones. This justified namingthe factor as 'Recruitment and Training'. The factoraccounts for 4.79 per cent of the total variance.

Factor V Recognition and EncouragementItems that represent this factor are given

below, with factor loadings in brackets.1. (12) Our allowances are very poor

in the case of housing loans,treatment facilities, pension,etc. (0.532).

2. (51) Development of efficiency andexpertise is the major goal ofthe management (0.482).

3. (37) Those who can bring aboutachievements are always givendue recognition (0.477).

4. (44) Knowledge and expertise aregiven due recognition andreward (0.464).

32

M. Balachandran & Immanuel Thomas

5. (49) Management often makes useof disciplinary procedures totake vengeance at theemployees (0.367).

6. (54) The fear of loss inhibits thecompany from diversifying(0.364).

7. (46) The policies and instructions ofthe company are neverefficiency communicated to allthe workers (0.319).

It may be seen that the underlying theme ofthe different items which load highly on this factoris the amount of encouragement and recognition themanagement extends to the employees. This led tothe labeling of the factor as 'Recognition andEncouragement'. It may also be noted here that theitems contain the implied idea that the managementkeeps a watchful eye on the performance of theworkers. The factor explains 3.59 per cent of thetotal variance.

Factor VI: Fair RewardsFive variables loaded highly on the 6th

factor, which could explain 3.26 per cent of the totalvariance. The loadings ranged between 0.756 and0.316. Items and their loadings are cited below:

1. (38) My salary is very lowcompared to my labour(0.748).

2. (45) My salary is lower whencompared to the salary of otherhaving the same qualification(0.748).

3. (13) The work gets stalled waitingfor the approval of decisions bythe senior manager (0.368).

4. (6) Even in small matters, one hasto depend on the superiors forfinal decision (0.357).

5. (52) Sincere and satisfactory workis properly rewarded (0.316).

It may be seen that the items generallyreflect the employee's concern about the fairness ofdealings ofthe management, especially with regardto salary and rewards. Discrimination and

the PSYCHESPACE

administrative bottlenecks are also implied by someof the items. Considering all these, the factor isnamed as 'Fair Rewards'.

Factor VII: Job SecurityItems that constituted the factor are given

below, with factor loadings in brackets.1. (40) There exists no fear of losing

the job for some reasons(0.624).

2. (9) The worker take an active rolein the discussions and meetingsthat are held regularly to sortout the daily problems (0.415).

3. (26) I have anxiety about thesecurity of my tenure (0.358).

The first 3 items which load highly on thisfactor directly or indirectly related to the stabilityand security of the job or perceived by the employee.Hence the label 'Job Security' is believed to beappropriate for this factor. The factor accounts for3.19 per cent of the total variance.

Factor VIII: Job AutonomyThe four items that constituted this factor

and their factor loadings are given below:1. (57) If the responsibility for the

work were to rest solely uponme, I could have performedbetter (0.664).

2. (50) Unnecessary interference fromthe part of executives makesmy work disorderly (0.640).

3. (43) I have no autonomy in my job(0.423).

4. (23) The views of the employees getno place in the policy decisions(0.381).

An examination of the items which havehighest loadings on this factor indicates that all ofthem are related to the degree of autonomy andfreedom the employee have with regard to their work.Hence the factor is identified as 'Job Autonomy'.This factor accounts for 3.11 per cent of the totalvanance.

33

the PSYCHESPACE

Factor IX: Freedom and ControlThe four items that comprised this factor are

given below:I. (33)

2. (63)

Due to strict disciplinaryactions, the employees of thisinstitution are in constant fearof losing their job (0.536).Each and every member hasthe freedom to determine thequantum of work to becompleted in a day (-0.451).Before taking every step theemployees are bound to takeorders from their superiors(0.448).All the staff of this institutionbehave like members of asingle family (-0.384).

3. (67)

4. (I)

The ninth factor in the order of eigen valueaccount for 2.80 per cent of total variance, and couldbe identified mainly on the basis of the four variableswith loadings ranging from 0.536 to 0.384. Of thefour items two were negatively loaded. The patternof positive and negative loadings pose somedifficulty in identifying and interpreting this factor.The two items with positive loadings indicate that itrelates to the sense of security and freedom of theemployees. At the same time, the negative loadingson the other two items indicate that a high score onhe factor is also associated with a low score on theseitems. In other words the freedom do not imply acomplete freedom to choose one's own daily workload. Negative loadings on the fourth item furtherindicate that some amount of formal atmosphere isalso associated the factor. Thus, the picture thatemerges is that of a setup where the employee enjoysa sense of security and freedom and at the same timethere is full control by the management with regardto the quantum of work to be done and also inmaintaining a formal atmosphere. Conversely, in aset up where there is no sense of freedom and jobsecurity, there is not control and monitoring of thework by the atmosphere. Taking into considerationall these, the factor is labelled as 'Freedom andControl' .

Dimensions of Organisational Climate

Factor X: Red TapismThe last factor of the organisational climate

retained for the study explains 2.08 per cent of thetotal variance. The items of this factor are givenbelow, with factor loadings in brackets.

1. (47) This institution does nothesitate to experiment withideas that does not give fullguarantee of success (0.644).

2. (58) Due to the complexity of thelegal and administrativeframework, new and originalideas are not given therecognition (0.423).

3. (3) My abilities are givensufficient recognition by thesuperiors and co-workers(0.309).

When one examines the content of the itemsit becomes clear that the factor is related toinefficiency in functioning due to details ofadministrative procedure. Hence the factor is namedas 'Red Tapism'.

Reliability and ValidityThe retest reliability of the test (with an

interval of 6 weeks) was found to be 0.96 (N = 75).The split-half reliability of the test (after correctionusing Spearman-Brown Formula) was foundto be 0.94 (N = 300), and the Cronbach alpha 0.92(N = 300).

As the items in the inventory wasmeticulously prepared after a thorough review of theavailable literature and a pre-pilot study, theinvestigator was able to make sure that all the relevantcontent areas were adequately represented in the scale.An examination of the items included in the scalemay justify the claim for content validity of it.

References

Aaker, D. A. & Jacobson, R. (1987). The Role of Risk in

Explaining Differences in Profitability, Academy of

Management Journal, 30,277-296.Ahuja, K. K. (1986). Personnel Management, New Delhi:

Kalyani Publishers.

34

M. Balachandran & Immanuel Thomas

Barber, A. E., Dunham, R. M., & Formisano, R. A. (1992).

The Impact of Flexible Benefits on Employee

Satisfaction: A Field Study, Personnel Journal, 45: I,

55-75.

Bartolome, F. & Laurent, A. (1986). The Manager: Master

and Servant of Power, Harward Business Review, Nov.

Dec., 77-81.

Blum, M. L. & Naylor, J. C. (1984). Industrial Psychology:

Its Theoretical and Social Foundations, New Delhi:

CBS Publishes.

Dunnette, M. D. & Hough, L. M. (1998). Handbook of

Industrial and Organisational Psychology (Eds.), Vol.

4, Delhi: Jaico Publishing House.

Edwards, A. L. (1969). Techniques of Attitude Scale

Construction, Bombay: Valdis, Feffer and Simons.

Gregory, W. L. & Burroughs, W. J. (1989). Introduction to

Applied Psychology, London: Scott, Foresman and

Company.

Grunberg, M. M. & Oborne, D. J. (1992). Industrial

Productivity: A Psychological Perspective, London:

McMillan Press.

Hellweg, S. A. & Philips, S. L. (1980). Communication

and Productivity in Organisations: A State of the

Art Review, In Proceeding of the 4(Jh Annual Academy

of Management Conference, Detriot, Michigan,

188-92.

Khan, R. L., Wolfe, D., Quinn, R., Snock, J., & Rosenthal, R.

(1964). Organisational Stress Studies in Role Conflict

and Role Ambiguity, New York: Wiley.

Kumar, G. M. & Anita, R. C. (1989). A Study of the Effect of

Organisational Structure, Personality and Climate on

Interpersonal Relations, Journal of the Indian

Academy of Applied Psychology, 12:2, 69-76.

Laldas, D. K. (1985). Change in Interpersonal Relations of

Industrial Employees: An Analysis, Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations, 20:3, 333-340.

Litwin, G. & Stringer, R. (1967). Motivation and Organisational

Climate, Boston: Harward University Press.

McCabe, D. M. & Lewin, D. (1992). Employee Voice: A

Human Resource Management Perspective, California

Management Review, Spring, 112-123.

Misra, V. (1983). Job Satisfaction in Peaceful and Disturbed

Textile Industries, Indian Journal of Industrial

Relations, 18:4, 619-628.

Monappa, A. & Saiyadain, M. S. (1990). Personnel

Management, New Delhi: Tata McGraw-HilI.

the PSYCHESPACE

Mullins, T. W. (1982). Interviewer Decisions as a function of

Applicant Race, Applicant Quality and Interviewer

Prejudice, Personnel Psychology, 35, 163-174.

Padald, R. (1982). A Study of Organisational Climate and

Work Behaviour, Ph. D. Thesis, Gujarat University:

Ahmedabad.

Padaki, R. (1982). A Study of Organisational Climate and

Work Behaviour, Ph. D. Thesis, Gujarat University:

Ahmedabad.

Schneider, B. & Bartlett, C. J. (1968). Individual differences

and Organisational Climate, I: The research plan and

questionnaire development, Personnel Psychology, 21,

323-333.

Trivedi, P. & Mookerjee, R. (1989).Comparative Impact of

Monetary Incentives in Productivity in Public and

Private Enterprises: A Case Study of the Indian

Economy, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations,

25:1, I-II.

Virginia, V. J., Robert, R. W., & James, J. W. (1987).

Participation in Decision Making on Worker

Satisfaction and Productivity: An Organisational

Simulation, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,

17:2, 158-170.

Received September 8, 2007Accepted October3, 2007

35

the PSYCHESPACE Dimensions of Organisational Climate

Appendix A: Rotated Factor Matrix of the Items in the Organisational Climate Questionnaire

FACTORS Commu-SI. No. Item No. ality (h2)

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

1 (5) 0.7108 0.0126 0.0492 0.1311 0.0333 -0.0725 0.0070 -0.0271 0.0605 -0.0641 0.54002 (28) 0.6759 0.1397 0.0426 0.1472 0.1528 -0.0344 -0.1186 0.0551 -0.0197 0.1611 0.5678

3 (25) 0.6593 0.1553 0.1424 0.1212 0.1223 0.2170 -0.0542 -0.0352 -0.0378 -0.1234 0.5766

4 (32) 0.6474 0.0945 0.0972 0.1837 0.1612 0.2307 -0.0469 -0.0436 -0.0683 -0.1988 0.57205 . (42) 0.6164 0.0599 0.0342 0.1532 0.1805 0.0966 -0.1570 0.0662 -0.0062 0.0380 0.45966 (35) -0.5936 0.1232 -0.0457 0.0407 0.0282 0.0814 -0.0370 0.0229 0.1259 0.2402 0.45417 ( 18) 0.5692 0.2918 0.1842 0.1140 0.0816 0.1589 0.0708 0.0988 -0.1121 -0.0394 0.5168

8 (24) 0.5679 0.2909 0.1869 0.1141 0.0591 -0.0181 0.2963 0.1800 -0.0324 -0.1302 0.5971

9 (66) 0.5650 0.1003 0.1311 0.0720 0.1608 -0.0305 0.2347 0.2040 -0.1810 0.0910 0.5162

10 (60) 0.5615 0.0663 0.1295 0.0874 -0.1782 0.1014 0.2785 0.0229 0.0811 0.0276 0.4715

II (31) 0.4975 0.1482 0.2896 0.0380 0.1114 -0.0143 0.2366 0.1305 -0.0599 0.0033 0.4440

12 ( 16) 0.4581 0.1393 0.0612 0.0358 0.0773 0.0230 0.4406 0.0655 0.1391 -0.0956 0.4676

13 ( 17) 0.4399 0.3320 0.1509 0.1647 -0.0190 -0.0427 0.3161 0.1862 0.0101 -0.1074 0.5021

14 (19) 0.4226 0.1224 0.1053 0.0653 -0.0053 0.0653 0.0546 -0.0749 0.0238 0.2457 0.2827IS (30) 0.3846 0.1207 0.0830 -0.0850 0.1794 0.0517 0.3251 0.2881 -0.0635 0.0297 0.4051

16 (2) 0.2830 0.2006 0.1505 0.0785 0.2413 0.0022 0.2478 0.0958 -0.1384 -0.1380 0.316117 (64) 0.0908 0.6361 0.0251 -0.0648 0.0839 -0.0257 0.0226 -0.0837 0.0817 -0.0286 0.440418 (4) 0.0485 0.6322 -0.1187 0.1298 -0.1906 0.0441 0.0368 -0.0474 0.0595 0.0992 0.488219 (65) 0.1257 0.6105 0.0698 0.0866 0.1049 -0.0333 0.1664 0.0465 -0.2209 -0.0481 0.4940

20 (59) -0.0918 0.5752 -0.0056 -0.0398 -0.1270 0.0200 0.1610 0.0554 0.1518 0.0128 0.4096

21 (7) 0.1655 0.5732 0.0989 0.1058 0.1785 -0.0474 -0.0513 0.0182 -0.1519 0.0630 0.441022 (21) 0.1538 0.5428 0.0992 0.0587 0.0454 0.0401 -0.1152 0.1029 -0.1175 0.1694 0.4015

23 (56) 0.1561 0.5365 0.0736 0.0399 0.1881 0.0263 -0.1149 0.0794 -0.0707 -0.1225 0.394724 (II) 0.3267 0.4901 -0.0437 0.0714 -0.1136 0.1071 0.2184 0.1929 -0.0045 -0.0877 0.4710

25 (61) 0.2395 0.4508 0.1503 0.1865 0.2531 -0.0738 -0.0868 -0.1716 -0.0741 0.0732 0.4353

26 (10) 0.3182 0.4204 0.0585 -0.0195 0.0421 0.0138 0.2246 0.2509 0.0584 -0.1272 0.4167

27 (68) 0.2361 0.3558 0.0548 0.1382 0.1244 0.0011 0.0750 0.2258 -0.1971 0.0333 0.3165

28 (27) 0.1408 0.3173 0.0188 0.3091 0.0737 -0.0863 0.1223 0.0802 -0.2476 0.0143 0.3121

29 (39) 0.2736 0.3066 0.0230 0.0339 -0.2234 0.1949 0.1362 0.1220 -0.1811 0.0183 0.3250

30 (IS) 0.1385 0.0529 0.6691 0.0960 0.0048 0.0190 -0.0270 -0.0393 -0.0514 -0.0330 0.4852

31 (29) 0.1973 -0.0450 0.6567 -0.0151 0.0570 0.1015 0.0025 0.0695 0.0154 -0.0195 0.4914

32 (22) 0.1736 0.1784 0.6284 0.1572 0.3690 0.0458 0.1030 0.1342 0.1122 0.0428 0.5280

33 (36) 0.2658 0.0230 0.6249 0.1024 0.1366 0.0701 0.0566 0.1776 -0.0067 0.0308 0.5374

34 (8) 0.0291 0.2505 0.5740 0.2212 0.1457 0.0154 -0.0407 0.1248 -0.0323 0.0981 0.4914

35 (53) -0.0644 0.1036 0.4100 0.1113 0.0745 0.1415 01576 0.1107 0.1398 0.0435 0.2579

36 (41) 0.0950 0.0522 0.1300 0.6890 -0.0370 0.0082 0.0259 0.0487 0.0673 -0.1590 0.5377

37 (48) 0.1383 0.1353 0.0983 0.6124 0.0941 -0.0201 0.0367 0.0073 -0.0091 0.0148 0.4331

38 (34) 0.1070 0.0492 0.1190 0.5940 0.0683 0.1314 0.0636 -0.0416 0.0477 0.1161 0.4243

39 (55) 0.1627 0.0777 0.0230 0.5654 -0.0039 0.0965 -0.1231 0.0021 0.0899 -0.0846 0.3923

40 (20) 0.0375 0.1255 0.0732 0.5559 0.0765 0.0511 0.1494 0.2323 0.0247 0.0092 0.4170

41 (14) 0.0982 0.0143 0.0141 0.4677 0.2135 0.2106 0.0076 0.2175 -0.0540 0.1302 0.3860

42 (62) 0.1323 -0.0789 0.1714 0.3498 0.2119 0.2867 0.0087 0.0381 0.1789 -0.0449 0.338143 (12) 0.0997 0.0418 0.1243 0.0935 0.5321 0.0241 -0.1143 -0.0571 -0.0029 -0.0176 0.336244 (5 I) 0.2825 0.3822 0.1084 0.0370 0.4821 0.0441 0.1216 0.1428 -0.1281 0.0782 0.5611

45 (37) 0.2484 0.3830 0.1128 -0.0075 0.4768 0.0423 0.2235 0.2043 -0.0837 -0.0199 0.549446 (44) 0.2856 0.3887 0.0846 0.0574 0.4639 0.1017 0.2335 0.1021 -0.0734 0.0496 0.541547 (49) 0.2097 -0.0321 0.2651 0.2019 0.3671 -0.0462 0.1790 -0.0424 0.1177 0.1094 0.3526

48 (54) 0.0005 0.2007 -0.0497 0.2603 0.3636 0.1401 0.0634 -0.1543 0.2956 0.0575 0.3808

49 (46) 0.0019 -0.0248 0.3175 0.0978 0.3185 0.1960 0.1474 0.1298 -0.0252 -0.1621 0.3163

SO (38) 0.1467 0.0317 0.1601 0.1226 -0.0112 0.7561 0.2665 0.0513 -0.0088 -0.0285 0.639251 (45) 0.0737 0.0156 0.0843 0.1047 0.0134 0.7481 0.0564 0.0407 -0.0130 0.0285 0.589452 (13) 0.1711 -0.0765 0.1285 0.2629 0.3135 0.3680 0.0174 0.1424 0.1426 0.1253 0.411153 (6) 0.1701 -0.0898 0.0826 0.1455 0.2746 0.3572 0.0063 0.2215 0.2205 0.2252 0.416554 (52) 0.2481 0.2429 0.1799 0.1673 0.1934 0.3162 0.1538 -0.0219 -0.0063 -0.0576 0.3459

55 (40) -0.0616 0.1047 0.0054 0.0800 -0.0496 0.0365 0.6235 -0.0637 0.0691 0.2933 0.508656 (9) 0.3658 0.0991 0.0646 0.0672 0.1935 0.1047 0.4153 0.0616 -0.1123 -0.1144 0.402757 (26) 0.0540 0.0137 0.2008 0.2370 0.1287 0.1719 0.3584 -0.1165 0.2884 0.0003 0.128758 (57) -0.0114 0.1476 0.1289 0.1278 0.0028 0.0314 -0.0439 0.6637 0.0768 -0.0329 0.505359 (SO) 0.0849 0.1385 0.2498 0.0797 -0.0706 0.0474 -0.0399 0.6401 0.2595 0.0774 0.587060 (43) 0.1183 0.0885 0.3214 0.0699 -0.9980 0.0240 0.0668 0.4226 0.3656 0.0800 0.462961 (23) 0.1378 -0.0482 0.2050 0.0614 0.1598 0.1265 0.0810 0.3812 -0.2222 -0.1291 0.326562 (33) 0.0563 -0.0680 0.1870 0.2128 -0.0519 0.0056 0.2979 -0.0303 0.5355 0.0054 0.467663 (63) 0.1541 0.9250 0.0330 0.0187 0.0593 0.0680 0.0129 0.1732 -0.4512 0.0267 0.276364 (67) 0.1523 -0.1734 0.0745 0.0631 0.1866 0.1776 -0.0066 0.0957 0.4484 -0.1398 0.359065 (I) 0.0390 0.3612 0.2588 -0.0281 -0.0861 0.0414 0.1530 -0.0236 -0.3838 0.0277 0.381066 (47) 0.0273 0.1882 0.0052 -0.2029 -0.0483 0.0095 -0.0036 -0.0622 0.0108 0.6443 0.498967 (58) 0.0558 -0.1541 0.1136 0.3085 0.1129 0.0187 0.1112 0.1097 -0.1689 0.4228 0.379768 (3) 0.0173 -0.0365 0.0830 0.2557 0.1329 0.1211 0.1127 0.3080 -0.0612 0.3092 0.3131% of variance 9.3108 7.1584 4.8703 4.7917 3.5921 3.2551 3.1944 3.1149 2.8031 2.0774 44.1682

36