2013 IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications and IEEE Internet of Things and IEEE Cyber,

Physical and Social Computing

An Exploration of the Impact of Organizational

Culture on the Adoption of Green IT
William M. Campbell Martyn Ratcliffe Philip Moore
School of Computing, School of Computing, School of Computing,
Telecommunications and Telecommunications and Telecommunications and
Networks Networks Networks
Birmingham City University Birmingham City University Birmingham City University
Birmingham, UK Birmingham, UK Birmingham, UK
B4 7XG B4 7XG B4 7XG
Email: william.campbell@bcu.ac.uk Email: martyn.ratcliffe@bcu.ac.uk Email: ptmbcu@gmail.com

Abstract—This paper investigates the impact of organizational
culture on the degree of adoption of Green IT initiatives and
on their success. It starts by exploring organizational culture,
looks at the nature of culture within IT and then analyses the
effect of culture on sustainable use of IT. It considers both
sustainable uses of IT and the development of IT systems that
promote sustainability. Cameron and Quinn’s Competing Values
Framework is used as a tool to explore organizational culture.
Finally some recommendations on working with culture to
promote sustainability within IT are provided.
Keywords—Green, Sustainability, Information Technology,
Organizational culture, IT culture
I. I NTRODUCTION
There has been increasing awareness in recent years that
the sustainable use of resources, the so-called ‘green’ agenda,
is one of the key issues facing the human race in the early
21st Century. It is widely accepted that the emission of
Greenhouse gases resulting from industrialisation has already
had a significant effect on the climate and that, without a
concerted international effort to use resources in a sustainable
way, further climate changes may have serious consequences.
It is also recognised that, since the onset of industrialisation in
the late 18th century, finite natural resources have been used at
an unsustainable rate and the disposal of waste has often been
undertaken, without regard to the effect on human health.
There have been a number of laws and concordats address-
ing sustainability at both international and national level. At
international level, an important early treaty was the Kyoto
Protocol [1], which required signatories to commit to reducing
Greenhouse gases. The UN 2003 World Summit on Sustain-
able Development established a range of environmental ob-
jectives, including ones to increase access to energy services,
energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy and to
promote sustainable patterns of production and consumption.
Individual companies have come under growing pressure to
address environmental concerns [2]. This pressure has come
from the need to comply with environmental legislation, but
also from environmentally engaged consumers and the need to
promote a positive corporate reputation. An increasing number
of companies recognise that they should be judged not only
on economic success and have adopted a ‘Triple Bottom Line’
of environment, society and economic performance [3] [4].
Information Technology makes a significant contribution to
Greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for around 2% of global
carbon dioxide emissions, on a par with the aviation industry
[5]. But IT can also contribute to reducing pollution through
technologies such as ‘intelligent buildings’ and teleconferenc-
ing.
Organizational Culture has long been recognized as an issue
of great importance within the business literature and, in recent
years, substantial attention has been devoted to its impact on
the adoption of green initiatives. It has been argued that for
companies systematically to incorporate environmental con-
cerns into their activities requires a major change of corporate
culture [6] [7]. However, there has been limited consideration
of the impact of organizational culture on the adoption of green
IT. The central theme of this paper is to explore the role of
culture within IT, and the extent to which particular types
of culture facilitate green initiatives. Cameron and Quinn’s
Competing Values Framework is used as a tool to explore
organizational culture.
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: Section
2 looks at the green agenda, focusing in particular on green
IT. Section 3 explores the nature of organizational culture,
and the role of culture within IT. Section 4 investigates the
impact of organizational culture, especially within IT, on the
adoption of green measures. Recommendations are provided
for taking note of organizational culture when launching green
IT initiatives. Finally, there are some concluding observations.
II. T HE G REEN AGENDA
A. Sustainability and Green Issues
The Brundtland Commission provided a definition of sus-
tainability that has been widely accepted: “Development that
meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their needs”[8]. It has
become widely accepted that current industrial development
is not sustainable and will leave future generations with

978-0-7695-5046-6/13 $26.00 © 2013 IEEE 126

DOI 10.1109/GreenCom-iThings-CPSCom.2013.44

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Liverpool. Downloaded on July 03,2020 at 17:05:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
insufficient resources and, in large part due to the effect of
Greenhouse gases, with an unviable climate.
Sustainability must ultimately, in large part, be delivered
by companies. However, the company has traditionally been
regarded as a primarily economic entity, with a responsibility
to maximize profits, return to shareholders and market share.
Carroll [9] argued that companies also had a duty to take note
of matters such as poverty and the health of consumers; this
became known as ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ (CSR).
Elkington [3] [4] made a number of highly influential contribu-
tions in which he argued that companies had a responsibility to
behave in a sustainable way and introduced the ‘triple bottom
line’. This has become widely referred to as the ‘TBL’ and,
in common parlance, as ‘People, Profit and Planet’.
A key concept has been that of ‘stakeholder’. Historically,
companies have considered their key stakeholders to be share-
holders, customers and employees. There has been a growing
acceptance that companies, in addition to economic consider-
ations, must take account of the long-term consequences of
their actions on the environment and on the wider society,
including future generations. As of 2011, 68% of the top global
companies in the Fortune 500 included TBL reporting in their
annual accounts [10].
At first glance, focusing on the TBL would seem to threaten
the economic performance of companies. However, it has been
argued that including social and environmental considerations
amongst a company’s goals is actually beneficial to long-term
profitability [11]. The theoretical framework underpinning
this analysis is the ‘Resource Based View’ of the company
(RBV) [12]. The RBV contends that a company’s competitive
advantage resides in its ownership of a set of resources that
are not easily duplicated by a competitor. These resources can
be physical, organizational or social. They include employ-
ees’ tacit (causally ambiguous) skills developed through long
practice, together with socially complex skills arising from
complex interaction within groups. Hart [13] extends this to
the ‘Natural Resource Based View’ (NRBV), by including
resources and capabilities particularly relating to sustainability.
The NRBV argues that environmental concerns will be a
key driver of industry in the coming decades and possession
of the relevant resources and capabilities will confer a major
competitive advantage upon companies, which will lead to
long-term profitability. At the simplest level, it is likely that
the attempt to produce goods in a more sustainable way will
lead to more efficient production techniques.
But there are other benefits. In legal terms, environmental
capacity will reduce the chance of falling foul of the in-
creasing body of environmental law. Examples include the
UK Climate Change Act (2008), which requires companies
to continually reduce their carbon footprint; and the Sarbanes
Oxley Act (2002) in the USA, which requires corporations
to undertake environmental accounting. In reputational terms,
environmental capacity will enhance the reputation of the
company in the eyes of the growing number of consumers
who care about sustainability. The ability of the social media
to spread opinions has made the reputation of companies an
127
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Liverpool. Downloaded on July 03,2020 at 17:05:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ever more valuable and fragile asset.
The NRBV has been widely used as a tool to analyse the
relationship between environmental orientation and company
performance. Menguc and Ozanne [2] introduce the higher
order construct of ‘natural environmental orientation’ (NEO),
comprising entrepreneurship, CSR and commitment to the
natural environment. They found that NEO was positively
and significantly related to profit after tax and market share,
but negatively related to sales growth. Peng and Lin [14]
investigated multinational companies and found a positive
link between the autonomy granted to subsidiaries and en-
vironmental performance. Journeault [15] looked at NRBV
from the perspective of environmental management accounting
(EMA) and argued that the use of environmental performance
measurement systems was positively linked to economic per-
formance.
B. Green IT
Jenkin et al.[16] draw a distinction between ‘Green IT’ and
‘Green IS’. They define ‘Green IT’ as the attempt to reduce
energy consumption and waste associated with the use of both
hardware and software. ‘Green IS’ they define as the use of
information systems to support environmental sustainability
initiatives, such as the use of collaborative work software to cut
down the need for travel. In this paper, we use ‘Green IT’ as a
generic term covering all efforts to reduce the environmental
damage caused by the use of IT, or to use IT in a positive way
to assist in the delivery of environmental objectives.
IT has played an increasingly important role in industry
and commerce and makes a substantial contribution to the
environmental footprints of companies, through both the use
of IT and the construction and disposal of IT equipment
[17]. It is estimated that IT is responsible for around 2% of
worldwide carbon dioxide emissions [5]. Energy and resources
are consumed throughout the IT lifecycle. A typical PC and
monitor contain over 27 materials, including precious metals.
Companies frequently buy unnecessarily powerful hardware
and it is common for PCs to be left switched on all the time. IT
products have short life spans. Many companies have a policy
of replacing PCs after 3-4 years and networks after 5-7 years.
The Basel Action Network estimates that 80% of electronic
waste (e-waste) is sent to the developing world for recycling
[18]. Computing equipment contains chemicals which pose a
major threat to health.
A range of national and international laws have been intro-
duced to tackle the rising problem of e-waste. The European
Union Waste and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) directive
(2003) imposes legal obligations on producers, importers and
resellers of electronic equipment to dispose of, refurbish or
recycle equipment in an environmentally sound manner. The
Japanese Home Electronics Recycling Law (1998) imposed
similar requirements to WEEE with respect to domestic elec-
tronic equipment.
IT data centres make a major contribution to the carbon
footprint of many corporations. Data centres worldwide pro-
duce around 150 million tonnes of carbon each year. Data
centres are often run inefficiently; they have tended to grow
organically, with companies purchasing dedicated servers for
individual applications and using them at a fraction of their
capacity. In recent years, server virtualization has provided the
opportunity for servers to be used more efficiently, allowing
several servers to be consolidated as virtual servers on one
physical server running at close to capacity.
Software as a Service (SAAS) and Cloud Computing offer
another avenue for using IT resources more efficiently. In this
model, companies purchase data storage and rent software, as
required, from external providers, which can be accessed using
‘thin client’ computers. However, lingering concerns about
security have impeded the adoption of this technology.
As noted above, the application of IT can make a positive
contribution to sustainability. Environmental information sys-
tems allow variables such as water consumption and pollution Fig. 1. Cameron and Quinn [25]
to be monitored; ‘intelligent buildings’ help to reduce energy
wastage; supply chain information systems optimize routing
and transportation [19]. Indeed, Dao et al. [10] argue for an have a high degree of validity [26]. However, the findings of
integrated sustainability framework, combining IT resources the meta-analytic investigation of the CVF by Hartnell et al.
with supply chain management and human resource manage- [27], while supporting the contention that culture has a major
ment. impact on organizational effectiveness, provided only mixed
III. O RGANIZATIONAL C ULTURE support for the CVF’s underlying suppositions.
The four key culture types identified by the CVF are
A. The Impact of Organizational Culture
illustrated in Figure 1 and may be summarized as follows
The concept of organizational culture has its roots in two (Adapted from [25]):
separate disciplines: anthropology, which takes the view that Hierarchy (Control) – Bureaucratic - The long-term goals
organisations are cultures; and sociology, which takes the of the organization are stability, predictability and efficiency,
view that organizations have cultures [20]. Most organizational Formal rules and policies hold the organization together.
theory adopts the sociological perspective, regarding culture as Government agencies are typically governed by a hierarchy
an attribute of an organisation that can be objectively analysed culture. Market (Compete) – A results-oriented workplace.
and measured. Schein [21], one of the most influential organi- Leaders are aggressive and demanding. The glue that holds
zational scholars, defined organizational culture as: “A pattern the organization together is an emphasis on winning. Suc-
of shared basic assumptions that the group learned as it solved cess is defined in terms of market share and beating the
its problems of external adaptation and internal integration that competition. Clan (Collaborate) – A friendly place to work
has worked well enough to be considered valid and hence to where people share a lot of themselves. Leaders are thought
be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think of as mentors and coaches. The organization is held together
and feel in relation to those problems.” by loyalty, tradition, and collaboration. Success is defined
Schein identified three levels of culture: Artifacts, those as- in terms of internal climate and concern for people. The
pects which are on the surface such as dress and can be easily organization places a premium on teamwork, participation, and
discerned; Espoused Values, i.e. conscious goals, strategies consensus. Adhocracy (Create) – A dynamic, entrepreneurial,
and philosophies; and Basic Assumptions and Values, which risk-oriented creative workplace. The glue that holds the
exist at a largely unconscious level, are hard to discern and organization together is commitment to experimentation and
form the inner core of culture. The latter level is the most innovation. The emphasis is on being at the leading edge
important and the most difficult to change. Many attempts at of new knowledge, products, and/or services. Success means
organizational change, such as TQM initiatives, fail, because producing unique and original products and services.
of a failure to change the underlying culture [22].
The Organizational Culture Assessment Tool (OCAI) con-
Many dimensions of organizational culture have been pro-
sists of a questionnaire requiring employees to assess their or-
posed, for example Hofstede [23]: power distance, uncer-
ganization, using an ipsative scale, on six characteristics: Dom-
tainty avoidance, individualism, and masculinity. Cameron and
inant Characteristics, Organizational Leadership, Management
Quinn’s ‘Competing Values Framework’ (CVF) was born of
of Employees, Organization Glue, Strategic Emphases and
a cluster analysis of the various dimension schemes, which
Criteria for Success. Based on the results, a culture profile
identified two key dimensions: Internal Focus and Integration
diagram can be produced. The results can be used in various
versus External Focus and Differentiation; and Stability and
ways, e.g.: to calculate the average profile of an organization
Control versus Flexibility and Discretion [24] [25]. The CVF
and identify the main culture types(s); to identify the degree
has been used in many research studies and has been shown to
of congruence between results produced by different groups of

128

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Liverpool. Downloaded on July 03,2020 at 17:05:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Fig. 2. Cameron and Quinn [25]
employees; and to identify discrepancies between current and
preferred culture. Cameron and Quinn averaged the results for
over one thousand companies, to produce the average profile
in Figure 2.
There has been much research on the relationship between
types of organizational culture and effectiveness. In the US
health industry, Gregory et al. [28] found a positive link
between group (clan) culture and patient and physician sat-
isfaction; also a slight link between balanced cultures and
satisfaction. They also found that employee attitudes mediated
the culture-effectiveness relationship. Richard et al. [29] also
found a positive link between clan cultures and outcomes.
They applied social exchange theory and transaction cost
analysis to analyse the type of psychological contract between
employer and employee. They argued that hierarchical cultures
gave rise to transactional contracts and clan cultures to rela-
tional contracts. They conducted a survey of US firms, finding
that clan cultures resulted in higher earnings and employee
satisfaction, with the type of psychological contact mediating
the relationship. Yang [30] investigated knowledge sharing,
applying the CVF to the hotel industry in Taiwan. He found
that group (clan) culture facilitated knowledge sharing, but that
it was also important for managers to encourage innovation.
Another topic that has attracted much attention is cultural
congruence: between different parts of an organization; be-
tween organizational culture and leadership style; and between
a company and the typical profile for its sector. Cameron
and Quinn’s research indicated that congruence across an
organization and between the dominant company culture and
leadership styles contributed to higher levels of performance.
Gupta [31] undertook a comparative study of Indian industry,
using the CVF to assess culture and the Miles and Snow
framework to assess strategy. She found a range of cultures
with, for example the construction industry having a bias
toward a hierarchy culture and IT towards a clan culture. She
argued that different cultures were appropriate for different
industries and it was important to have congruence between
129
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Liverpool. Downloaded on July 03,2020 at 17:05:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
strategy and culture.
B. IT Culture
IT culture has been widely studied from various perspec-
tives, user, manager, developer; and at various levels, national,
organizational and individual. Leidner and Kayworth [32]
provide a detailed survey of the terrain, identifying six key
themes: (1) culture and information systems development; (2)
culture, IT adoption, and diffusion; (3) culture, IT use, and
outcomes; (4) culture, IT management, and strategy; (5) IT’s
influence on culture; and (6) IT culture. They proposed that
there are 3 major types of IT culture conflict: System Conflict,
between the values embedded in a specific IT system and the
values held by a group using the system; Contribution Conflict,
between the IT values held by members of a group and the
group’s general values; and Vision Conflict, between the values
embedded in a specific system and a group’s general IT values.
Each of these conflicts can occur at national, organizational
or subunit level. They argued for the importance of avoiding
conflict, by seeking alignment between the values of groups,
in particular by involving users in the design of systems.
Walsh et al. [33] investigated individual user culture, iden-
tifying three key user cultural archetypes: Pro-active, Passive,
and Refusal. They argued that managers can improve user
acceptance of systems, by tailoring the ‘culture migration’ of
users to their cultural archetypes.
Iivari and Huisman [34] explored the impact of the culture
of development teams on the deployment of ‘traditional’
waterfall systems development methodologies (SDMs). They
used the OCAI with a number of companies and found
that information systems development groups tended to have
one of the following cultures: a moderate rationally oriented
culture; a moderate non-hierarchical culture; a weak group-
oriented culture, or a strong comprehensive culture. They
found a positive association between hierarchical cultures and
successful deployment of SDMs and a negative associative
between rational (market) cultures and successful deployment.
They argue that managers need to take account of culture when
introducing SDMs, by, for example, in development groups
with an adhocracy culture, emphasizing support for creativity
within SDMs.
However, different types of culture are suited to different
development methodologies. Iivari and Iivari [35] looked at
the impact of culture on the deployment of agile system
development methodologies. They found that an adhocracy
culture was most suited to agile methodologies.
Müller et al. [36] also looked at the importance of congru-
ence between the culture of development teams and method-
ologies. Like Iivari and Huisman, they applied the OCAI
to development teams, but they also applied OCAI to the
Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) methodology,
via a textual analysis of CMMI documentation. Unlike Iivari
and Huisman and the majority of researchers in this area, they
found that congruence between the methodology deployed and
the culture of development teams was not clearly linked to
successful outcomes.
 Gupta, who was mentioned above, found that Indian IT
companies were most likely to have a clan culture, followed
by an adhocracy culture [31].
Nickels and Janz [37] used OCAI to investigate the impact
of organizational culture on the alignment of business strategy
and IT strategy. They found that an overall strong corporate
culture, i.e. a culture where there was a high degree of
congruence between different areas and levels of the company,
supported alignment of business and IT strategy.
Lopez-Nicolas and Merono-Cerdan [38] looked at the im-
pact of organizational culture on the use of ICT for knowl-
edge management (e.g. computer supported cooperative work).
They found (in common with Yang’s work on knowledge shar-
ing mentioned above) that a clan culture was most supportive,
but that an adhocracy culture also provided an element of
support.
It is clear from the above discussion that IT culture has
many facets and there is no consensus on its nature or
the importance of aligning it with other areas of business.
Cameron and Quinn [25] found that High Tech IT companies
such as Microsoft tended to evolve from an emphasis on
adhocracy and clan cultures in their early days to an emphasis
on hierarchy and market cultures in their maturity, as they
became large corporations with stock market listings.
IV. I MPACT OF O RGANIZATIONAL C ULTURE ON THE
A DOPTION OF G REEN M EASURES
A. Organizational Culture and Sustainability
The key role of organizational culture in successful
change management has already been discussed. Developing
a sustainability-oriented corporate culture usually represents
a major change. Baumgartner [39] argues that by consider-
ing and developing organizational culture as part of sustain-
ability efforts, companies are able to better integrate these
sustainability-related initiatives into daily business activities.
Linnenluecke and Griffiths [40] used the CVF as a frame-
work for investigating the likely emphases which will be
adopted by companies with different types of culture, in pursu-
ing corporate sustainability. They argued that companies would
favour initiatives that were congruent with their dominant
culture.
Accordingly, companies with a hierarchy culture would
place greater emphasis on economic performance and long-
term growth. For them the obstacle would be that they would
only pursue corporate sustainability initiatives if these gave
them a clear competitive advantage. Companies with a clan
culture would emphasize internal staff development. For them
the problem would be that ‘social entrepreneurs’ within the
company might pursue social purposes without regard to
business objectives. Companies with a market culture would
place greater emphasis on resource efficiencies. Companies
with an adhocracy culture would place greater emphasis on
innovation and visionary ideas in their pursuit of corporate
sustainability.
Abbett et al. [41] undertook a survey of 23 companies across
a range of industries using the OCAI, exploring the link be-
130
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Liverpool. Downloaded on July 03,2020 at 17:05:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
tween organizational culture and the success of sustainability
initiatives. They found that initiatives were more likely to be
successful if the culture embedded in the initiative was similar
to the company culture. They found this to be particularly
important with regard to the level of collaboration required.
Übius and Alas [42] carried out a large survey across eight
countries, investigating the link between culture and the level
of corporate social responsibility (including environmental
issues). They found that the adhocracy culture favoured CSR,
followed by clan culture, with the market culture being least
favourable. They also found similar organizational culture
types dominated in countries with similar historical, cultural
or economic backgrounds, with, for example, the hierarchy
culture dominating in the Czech Republic and Slovakia.
Overall, the research in this area tends to indicate that
adhocracy and clan cultures favour sustainability, adhocracy
cultures because they support innovation and clan cultures
because the relational psychological contracts (see above dis-
cussion) between employer and employee support the level
of collaborative effort required. However, Figure 2 indicates
that companies tend, on average, to be dominated by market
and hierarchy cultures. As noted above, Cameron and Quinn
also found a tendency for companies to drift towards a greater
emphasis on market and hierarchy as they matured. Both of
these factors suggest a tendency for corporate culture to be
inimical to sustainability initiatives.
The above analysis essentially takes an ‘integration per-
spective’ of company culture, assuming the existence of a
broadly shared set of values and beliefs [43]. An alternative
perspective is the ‘differentiation perspective’, which assumes
the existence of subunits, with different cultures. Such a
culture creates challenge for senior managers, who must take
note of the differing values and agendas of subunits.
B. Impact of Organizational Culture on the Adoption of Green
IT
IT has, perhaps, a uniquely pervasive role in modern busi-
ness; there are few areas which escape its influence. As such, it
has a major role in delivering sustainability and organizational
culture can be either a help or a hindrance. As discussed, there
are two key areas of Green IT: the attempt to reduce wastage
and the use of computer systems to support environmental
sustainability. There are many perspectives to consider: user,
manager, developer; and various levels, national, organiza-
tional and individual. There is no clear consensus on the
definition of culture, let alone organizational culture. It is
clearly a complex area in which many aspects remain the
subject of active debate.
Perhaps the only area on which there is general agree-
ment is that it is important for those who are introducing
environmental initiatives to understand the cultural context
within which they operate. Beyond that, there seem to be
two key approaches: the first being to attempt to change
the culture and the second to tailor the initiative to suit the
prevailing culture. The first is a difficult and long-term project,
especially at national and international level. The tacit areas
of culture identified by Schein [21] are deeply ingrained and
intractable to change. Perhaps the most practical way forward
is a concentration on the second approach, while seeking to
‘nudge’ the culture in a desirable direction [44]. The other
general piece of advice seems to be that companies with strong
cultures, that is cultures where there is congruence between
different areas and levels of the company, are more effective
at achieving their objectives.
Nickel and Janz’s research on the alignment of business
and IT strategy, mentioned above, suggests that an attempt to
extend a ‘green corporate’ culture into the IT area, would be
more likely to succeed in the context of a cohesive corporate
culture [37].
We consider first the development of computer systems to
support sustainability. Huang [45] argues that sustainability
needs to become an integral part of the software development
lifecycle. He proposes a revised ‘Sustainable Systems Devel-
opment Lifecycle’, where sustainability issues are systemati-
cally considered at each stage of the lifecycle and there is a
new ‘Disposal’ stage at the end.
As discussed above, there is some tendency for IT com-
panies to have adhocracy or clan cultures. This is particularly
true of small, recently formed, software houses. These cultures
are suited to developing software to support sustainability
initiatives. Designing software in areas such as eco-monitoring
and cloud computing requires an innovative, collaborative
culture, where people are not afraid to challenge received
wisdom.
An important issue in the development of green IT systems
is the involvement of users. Leidner and Kayworth [32]
suggest that a gap between the values embedded in a system
and the values of users can result in a conflict which can
impede adoption and successful use. This gap can be reduced
by extensive consultation of users.
However, there is great diversity within IT system develop-
ment (see discussion above of the ‘integration and differen-
tiation perspectives’). The culture in IT development groups
located within large corporations is likely to reflect, to some
extent, the overall culture of the company and tend towards a
hierarchy and/or market culture. One approach managers could
adopt would be to seek to nudge their group culture towards
an adhocracy and/or clan culture. In the case of clan culture,
they could, for example, establish a 360 degree evaluation
system, where all staff are evaluated by their superior, peers
and subordinates. In the case of adhocracy culture, they could
ensure that human resource management practices encourage
innovation [25].
The successful adoption and diffusion of green IT systems is
also affected by the organizational culture of companies. Green
IT systems are likely to be ‘disruptive technologies’, which
are regarded as risky. For example, attempts to reduce energy
use associated with data storage through the employment
of ‘cloud computing’ may raise fears about security. Green
IT systems are, therefore, more likely to be favoured by
companies with clan or adhocracy cultures, which are non-
hierarchical, entrepreneurial and can embrace change.
131
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Liverpool. Downloaded on July 03,2020 at 17:05:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
However, comapanies cannot readily change their culture in
the short term. One possibility is initially to seek to change
company culture at a superficial ‘Artifact’ level (see discussion
above of [21]). An example would be the introduction of an
energy use monitoring system. An ‘early win’ of this sort can
stimulate change at a deeper level. Another possibility would
be to follow the advice of Abbett et al. [41], who found that
sustainability initiatives were more likely to succeed if they
worked with the grain of a company’s culture. The challenge
then for managers, in choosing green IT to adopt, would
be to ensure that the culture embedded in the system was
suited to their corporate culture. For example, in the case of
hierarchy cultures, they might choose green IT initiatives that
emphasize system optimization, coordination, structure, and
smooth-running efficiency [41].
We noted above the proposal for an integrated sustainabil-
ity framework, combining IT resources with supply chain
management and human resource management [10]. Such
IT systems would only work effectively, in the context of
a culture where there was effective knowledge management
and willingness to share tacit knowledge [38] [30]. Managers
much seek to develop a culture where people do not ‘hoard’
information.
Reducing wastage, by for example ensuring that hardware is
appropriate and used efficiently is likely, in the first instance,
to be the responsibility of the IT Support Department, which
might have some tendency towards a hierarchical, ‘silo’, men-
tality. For them, the challenge is to develop a more collabora-
tive and flexible approach and engage with IT users throughout
the organization to encourage a sustainable approach to IT use.
The investigation of user archetypes by Walsh discussed above
provides valuable advice for Heads of IT Support seeking to
encourage users to adopt more sustainable practices. They
need to understand the user profile of IT users within the
company and tailor the ‘cultural migration’ to sustainability
in an appropriate fashion. For example, ‘Refusal’ users may
not need technical training, but ‘organizational socialization’
centered on IT.
Increasing globalization represents a challenge to the suc-
cessful use of green IT. Different countries have different
cultures, some of which are more amenable to green IT than
others [42]. For example, IT systems to support more efficient
supply chain management in multi-national companies will
only work effectively if there is a transnational clan culture
spanning all areas of the company. The national culture in
some countries may work against this. Parker [46] provides
a detailed analysis of the impact of national, linguistic and
religious cultures on economic factors, which suggests that
culture has a major influence.
So far we have considered the effect of culture on the
adoption of green IT. But IT is increasingly having an effect on
culture [32]. The web and social media have cultures that, in
some measure, are inherently of a clan and adhocracy nature.
This may be nudging the world towards a global culture that
is more favourable to the spread and successful use of green
IT.
 V. C ONCLUSION
This paper has investigated the impact of culture, in partic-
ular organisational culture, on the success of green initiatives.
It has explored the types of culture common within IT at
both user and developer level. We discussed how the ‘Natural
Resource Based View’ of the company indicated that pursuit
of the Triple Bottom Line would be in the long term interest
of companies. Companies need to develop a culture which
supports a long-term approach to strategy, since the benefits
of adopting green IT will not be immediate.
The key finding is that culture has a major impact on the
success of sustainability initiatives and managers introducing
sustainability initiatives must seek to understand the culture
both within their organisation and, in the case of developers,
among likely users of systems. They can seek to nudge
culture in a direction more amenable to sustainability, or more
achievably, tailor initiatives to the current prevailing culture.
There are at least two major gaps in the current literature:
the limited amount of empirical data on the culture within IT
and consideration of the international dimension. However, it
may be difficult to gain accurate results from using Cameron
and Quinn’s Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument in
an international setting. The Competing Values Framework
is located within the Anglo-American business tradition and
there is a deep link between culture and language. Translating
the OCAI into foreign languages will pose complex problems.
R EFERENCES
[1] UN, “Kyoto protocol,” United Nations Convention on Climate Change,
2009.
[2] M. Menguc and L. Ozanne, “Challenges of the green imperative: a natu-
ral resource-based approach to the environmental-business performance
relationship,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 58, pp. 430–438, 2005.
[3] J. Elkington, “Towards the sustainable corporation.” California Manage-
ment Review, vol. Winter, pp. 90–100, 1994.
[4] ——, “Enter the triple bottom line,” in The Triple Bottom Line: Does It
All Add up?, A. Henriques and J. Richardson, Eds. Earthscan, London,
2004, pp. 1–16.
[5] M. O’Neill, Green IT for Sustainable Business Practice. British
Computer Society, 2010.
[6] W. E. Stead and J. G. Stead, Management for a small planet: Strategic
decision making and the environment. Newberry Park, CA: Sage, 1992.
[7] J. E. Post and B. W. Altman, “Managing the environmental change
process: Barriers and opportunities,” Journal of Organizational Change
Management, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 64–81, 1994.
[8] G. H. Brundtland, “Our common future,” in Report of the World
Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford University
Press, 1987.
[9] A. Carroll, “A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate per-
formance,” Academic Managment Review, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 497–505,
1979.
[10] V. Dao, I. Langella, and J. Carbo, “From green to sustainability:
Information technology and an integrated sustainability framework,”
Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 20, pp. 63–79, 2011.
[11] M. Porter and M. Kramer, “Strategy and society: The link between
competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility,” Harvard
Business Review, Dec 2006.
[12] B. Wernenfelt, “A resource based view of the firm,” Strategic Manage-
ment Journal, vol. 5, pp. 171–180, 1984.
[13] S. L. Hart, “A natural-resource based view of the firm,” Academy of
Management Review, vol. 20, no. 4, 1995.
[14] Y. Peng and S. Lin, “Local responsiveness pressure, subsidiary resources,
green management adoption and subsidiary’s performance,” Journal of
Business Ethics, vol. 79, pp. 199–212, 2007.
132
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Liverpool. Downloaded on July 03,2020 at 17:05:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[15] M. Journeault, “The influence of eco-control on environmental and
economic performance: a natural resource-based approach,” in Crises
et nouvelles problématiques de la valeur, 2010.
[16] T. Jenkin, J. Webster, and L. McShane, “An agenda for ’green’ informa-
tion technology and systems research,” Information and Organization,
vol. 21, pp. 17–140, 2011.
[17] K. Siegler and B. Gaughan, “A practical approach to green IT,” Webinar.
[18] T. Velte, A. Velte, and R. Elsenpeter, Green IT: Reduce your Information
System’s Environmental Impact While Adding to the Bottom Line.
McGraw Hill, 2008.
[19] R. T. Watson, M. C. Boudreau, A. Chen, and M. H. Huber, “Green
is: Building sustainable business practices,” in Information Systems.
Athens, GA, USA: Global Text Project, 2008.
[20] K. Cameron and D. R. Ettington, “The conceptual foundations of
organizational culture,” in Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and
Research, J. C. Smart, Ed. Norwell, Mass.: Kluwer, 1988, vol. 4.
[21] E. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass, 1992.
[22] K. Cameron, D. Bright, and A. Caza, “Exploring the relationship
between organizational virtuousness and performance,” American Be-
havioral Scientist, vol. 47, pp. 766–790, 2004.
[23] G. Hofstede, Culture’s Consequences. SAGE, 1980.
[24] R. Quinn and J. Rohrbaugh, “A spatial model of effectiveness criteria:
Toward a competing values approach to organizational analysis,” Man-
agement Science, vol. 29, 1983.
[25] K. Cameron and R. Quinn, Diagnosing and Changing Organizational
Culture Based on the Competing Values Framework. Wiley, 2011.
[26] R. Quinn and G. Spreitzer, “The psychometrics of the competing values
culture instrument and an analysis of the impact of organizational
culture on quality of life,” in Research in Organizational Change and
Development, R. W. Woodman and W. A. Passmore, Eds. Greenwich
Conn.: JAI Press, 1991, vol. 5.
[27] C. A. Hartnell, A. Y. Ou, and A. Kinicki, “Organizational culture
and organizational effectiveness: A meta-analytic investigation of the
competing values framework’s theoretical suppositions,” Journal of
Applied Psychology, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 677–694, 2011.
[28] B. T. Gregory, S. G. Harris, A. A. Armenakis, and C. L. Shook,
“Organizational culture and effectiveness: A study of values, attitudes
and organizational outcomes,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 62,
pp. 673–679, 2009.
[29] O. Richard, A. McMillan-Capehart, S. N. Bhuian, and E. C. Taylor,
“Antecedents and consequences of psychological contracts: Does orga-
nizational culture really matter,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 62,
pp. 818–825, 2009.
[30] J. Yang, “Knowledge sharing: Investigating appropriate leadership roles
and collaborative culture,” Tourism Management, vol. 28, pp. 530–543,
2007.
[31] B. Gupta, “A comparative study of organizational strategy and culture
across industry,” Benchmarking: An International Journal, vol. 18, no. 4,
pp. 510–528, 2011.
[32] D. Leidner and T. Kayworth, “A review of culture in information systems
research: Toward a theory of information technology conflict,” MIS
Quarterly, pp. 357–399, 2006.
[33] I. Walsh, H. Kefi, and R. Baskervile, “Managing culture creep: Toward
a strategic model of user it culture,” Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, vol. 19, pp. 257–280, 2010.
[34] J. Iivari and M. Huisman, “The relationship between organizational
culture and the deployment of systems development methodologies,”
in CAiSE, 2001, pp. 234–250.
[35] J. Iivari and N. Iivari, “The relationship between organizational culture
and the deployment of agile methods,” Information and Software Tech-
nology, vol. 53, pp. 509–520, 2011.
[36] S. Müller, P. Nielsen, and M. Boldsen, “An examination of culture pro-
files in a software organization implementing SPI,” in ECIS Proceedings,
no. 235, 2008.
[37] D. Nickels and B. Janz, “Organizational culture: Another piece of
the IT-business alignment puzzle,” Journal of Information Technology
Management, vol. XXI, no. 3, 2010.
[38] C. Lopez-Nicolas and A. Merono-Cerdan, “The impact of organizational
culture on the use of ICT for knowledge management,” Electron
Markets, vol. 19, pp. 211–219, 2009.
[39] R. J. Baumgartner, “Organizational culture and leadership: Preconditions
for the development of a sustainable corporation,” Sustainable Develop-
ment, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 102–113, 2009.
[40] M. Linnenluecke and A. Griffiths, “Corporate sustainability and orga-
nizational culture,” Journal of World Business, vol. 45, pp. 357–366,
2010.
[41] L. Abbett, “Organizational culture and the success of corporate sus-
tainability initiatives: An empirical analysis using the competing values
framework,” Master’s thesis, University of Michigan, 2010.
[42] Ülle Übius and R. Alas, “Organizational culture types as predictors of
corporate social responsibilty,” ISSN 1392-2785 Engineering Economics,
vol. 1, no. 61, p. pages, 2009.
[43] J. Martin, Organizational culture: Mapping the terrain. Thousand Oaks:
Sage, 2002.
[44] R. H. Thaler and C. R. Sunstein, Nudge: Improving Decisions About
Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Penguin Books, 2009.
[45] A. H. Huang, “A model for environmentally sustainability software de-
velopment,” The journal of Computer Information Systems, vol. Summer,
2009.
[46] P. Parker, Cross-Cultural Statistical Encyclopedia of the World. Green-
wood Press, 1997.

133

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Liverpool. Downloaded on July 03,2020 at 17:05:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.