See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/272793409

Dimensions of Organisational Climate

Article · January 2007

CITATIONS READS
3 7,011

2 authors, including:

Immanuel Thomas
University of Kerala
33 PUBLICATIONS   182 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Immanuel Thomas on 26 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

the PSYCHESPACE
Vol. 1, No.1, 27-36, December 2007.
Dimensions of Organisational Climate
M. Balachandran
Abstract The steady increase in the publication
of climate research is a reasonable indication that it is
becoming a major concern for managements and applied
behavioural scientists. However, considerable diversity
exists in definitions, approaches and dimensions as well
as the methodologies employed for research in the area.
This indicates that still more studies are required for
arriving at a consensus. The different tools available to
assessorganisational climate vary in the different aspects
stressed as important in organisational climate. In this
context, the present study attempts to identify the various
dimensions involved in perceived organisational climate
using a foctor analytical technique.
KEYWORDS: Dimensions, Organisational Climate
* Head, Department of Psychology, Tagore Arts
College, Pondicherry.
** Head, Department of Psychology, University of
Kerala.
* & Immanuel Thomas **
INTRODUCTION
Organisational climate has been one of the
major construct used for comparing organisations and
is jointly determined by the procedures, strategies,
and physical environment, and the psychological
properties of its employees (Dunnette & Hough,
1998). However climate researchers have established
how the inherent variables of organisational climate
is related to factors like interpersonal relations
(Misra, 1983; Laldas, 1985; Bartlome & Laurant,
1986; Kumar & Anita, 1989), Participative
management (Ahuja, 1986; Virginia, Robert, &
James 1987; McCabe & Lewin, 1992), recognition
and encouragement (Grunberg & Oborne, 1992),
Grievance handling (Monappa & Saiyadain, 1990),
financial benefits (Trivedi & Mookerjee, 1989;
Barber, Dunham, & Formisano, 1992), degree of
formalisation (Gregary & Burroughs, 1989),
communication (Hellweg & Philips, 1980), risk
taking (Aakar & Jacobson, 1987), Training (Blum
& Naylor, 1984), Recruitment and selection decision
(Mullins, 1982) etc.
Among the distinct theoretical approaches
researchers developed to study the concept of
organisational climate, the subjectivist approach
regard organisational climate as a perceptual and
cognitive structuring of the organisational situation
common to the organisational members. Accordingly,
in the organisation there is a continual flow of events
and actions, of routines and processes. Individual
encounter those various phenomena and try to
interpret them so that the surrounding world become
comprehensible. They create a "cognitive map"
for themselves; with its help they can place
what they see and hear, thus becoming able to see
 the PSYCHESPACE
more meaning in it. When the members of the
organisation interact with one another, there is an
exchange of experiences and apperceptions; there
many personal cognitive maps confront one another
and are modified. In this way, common ways of
perceiving and interpreting what happens in
organisational settings arise (Padaki, 1982).
Researchers construct special instruments
for measuring those aspects of climate that are
relevant to their question. Taguiri (1968) identified
five factors to explain climate: (1) Practices related
to providing a sense of direction or purpose to their
jobs-setting of objectives, planning and feedback (2)
Opportunities for individual initiative (3) Working
with competitive and competent supervisor, (4) co-
operative and pleasant people (5) being with a profit
minded and sales-oriented company. Schneider and
Bartlett (1968) reported that management support,
management structure, concern for new employees,
intra-agency conflict, agent independence general
satisfaction are the five factors of climate. While
Khan, Wolfe, Quinn, Snock, & Rosenthal (1964)'s
factor analysis yielded five factors such as rules and
orientation, nurturance of subordinates, closeness of
supervision, universalism or the degree to which the
individual should identify with the organisation as a
whole, and promotion of achievement orientation.
Litwin & Stringer (1967) identified structure,
responsibility, reward, warmth, support, identity, risk,
standard and conflict as the organisational climate
dimensions.
In climate research the tendency seems
among researchers is to adopt a more general climate
questionnaire. Several of these are described in the
Iiterature, and the individual researcher usually chose
one of them. But even these broad climate
instruments must have stemmed from certain goals
and values. More or less consciously, the constructor
would have selected questions and variables with a
particular organisational effect in mind.
Consequently, the questions and variables were not
immediately relevant to other more specific criteria.
The climate concept acquires greater theoretical and
practical importance when the link between the
studied climate dimensions and the effect variables
28
Dimensions of Organisationai Climate
is more direct. Therefore it is expected that as we
move from general to more specific dimensions, we
are better able to understand and predict behaviour
in organisations on a basis of the climate concept.
Although articles treating climate as a multi-
dimensional concept are numerous and have
addressed a variety of variables and settings, they
appear to lack commonness. This is because, to a
large extent, the context and the shelf of information
available about the organisation vary among
members and the number and types of dimensions
required vary among researchers.
Though researchers differ in defining
organisational climate, this study drew a general
agreement on four points before conceptulising, viz.,
(1) organisational climate is multi-dimensional in
nature, (2) is mostly a function of managerial policies
and practices, (3) is the collective perception of the
organisational members regarding the various aspects
of the organisation based on "the way that the
organisation deals with its members and its
environment", and (4) the collective perception of
the organisational members reflect various aspects
of the organisation and the interaction of personal
and organisational characteristics.
Development of a new scale to measure the
organisational climate in the present study was
necessitated 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 new
measure, was that the present study envisaged in
identifying the different dimensions of the
organisational climate in the context of the peculiar
industrial environment in Kerala. The different steps
followed in the development of the scale are given
below:
Item Preparation
In the first phase of the development
of the scale an attempt was made to have a
correct conceptualisation of organisational climate
and its different dimensions. This was made
possible through:
 M. Balachandran & Immanuel Thomas the PSYCHESPACE

1. An exhaustive review of literature related Table 1: The 't' values of the 68 items of the
to the organisational climate factors; Organisational CLimate Draft Scale
2. The dimension of organisational climate Rank No. Item No. 't' - value

were decided through a pre-pilot study in I 18 20.67

2 24 19.95
which a few executives and workers were 3 31 17.28
asked to describe the relevant internal work 4 44 16.88
5 25 16.87
environment of their organisations; and 6 51 16.55
7 37 15.56
3. discussions and informal interviews with 8 17 15.45
experts. 9 28 15.38
10 66 15.05
The next step in the construction of the II 36 14.78
12 22 14.42
Organisational Climate Questionnaire was 13 16 13.41
preparation of items for the test. A large number of 14 32 13.12
15 10 13.04
items were written in accordance with the dimensions 16 52 12.60
17 8 12.43
identified. 11.81
18 30
Many items were adopted from various 19 7 11.63
20 9 11.61
published sources which conveyed the idea of the 21 65 11.61
relevant organisational characteristics. Care was 22 11 11.57
23 61 11.56
taken to include both positively worded (favourable 24 42 11.51
25 2 11.28
climate) and negatively worded (unfavourable
26 5 11.06
climate) items in the draft scale. The final test items 27 60 10.64
28 35 10.42
were selected from a large pool of items after 29 68 10.19
scrutinising and checking out irrelevant, redundant 30 14 10.18
31 21 9.80
or ambiguous items. Expert suggestions were also 32 20 9.79
solicited while finalising the test items. 33 13 9.73
34 49 9.67
In the final form, the draft OCQ consisted 35 27 9.47
36 19 9.02
of a total of 68 items which represented different 48 8.98
37
aspects of organisational climate. Each item had five 38 56 8.98
39 41 8.93
response categories, viz., Strongly agree (A); Agree 40 38 8.62
(B); Undecided (C); Disagree (D); and Strongly 41 6 8.38
42 55 8.34
disagree (E). Of the total 68 items, 38 were 'true 43 64 8.09
keyed' and 30 were 'false keyed'. 44 29 8.08
45 62 8.05
46 43 7.96
47 34 7.84
Administration and Scoring 48 15 7.64
Organisational Climate Questionnaire is a 49 53 7 .45
50 39 7.41
self-administering one. However, the investigator 51 46 7.32
may assist those who have difficulty in understanding 52 26 7.22
53 3 6.99
the items, or mode of responding to them. Instructions 54 50 6.66
55 23 6.46
are printed at the beginning. Response space, '[ ]' 56 57 6.32
are provided against each item, and the respondent 57 4 6.32
58 45 6.23
is required to write the appropriate letter representing 59 54 6.23
his response inside the bracket. The scores of the 60 I 5.86
61 12 5.64
responses were 5, 4, 3, 2, & 1 for the response A, B, 62 59 4.79
63 58 4.53
C, D & E, for a positive item. The scores were in 64 33 4.50
reverse order for a negative item. Sum of the scores 65 63 3.29
66 67 3.05
of all the different items constituted the total score 67 40 3.01
68 47 1.54
on the scale.

29
 the PSYCHESPACE Dimensions of Organisational Climate

.
-,
Indian situation, it seems difficult to below. It may be noted here that the factors, are
identify, assess and describe the actual status ofthe numbered in the order of percentage of variance
work environment because (a) organisations accounted for by them after rotation.
generally disagree in permitting researchers to carry The rotated factor matrix of the items
on research during or after the work periods proceeds, from which the factors are extracted are given in
(b) management is sensitive in publishing the state Appendix A.
of their employees to the public and (c) as it interferes
the natural rhythm of work. However precautions Factor I: Welfare Concern
and remedies were planned and adopted to tackle The items which had the highest loadings
this situation. on factor 1 were the following: (Factor loadings are
given in the brackets at the end and the serial number
Item Analyses of the item in the inventory at the beginning after
Item analyses of the scale was done using serial number).
Likert's method (Edwards, 1969). For this purpose, 1. (5) We are adequately compen-
a pilot study was conducted in which the scale sated for the occupational
hazards like accidents and
(together with a few other scales to be mentioned
health problems (0.711)
later) was administered to a representative sample
2. (28) All the mandatory health
of 300 subjects. The subjects were rank ordered on facilities are available here
the basis of the total scores in the draft-scale, and (0.676).
the upper and lower one third of the subjects were 3. (25) This institution provides all
selected as the high and the low groups respectively. welfare facilities to the emplo-
yees and theirfarnilies (0.659).
The 't' values relating to the items are given in the
4. (32) The welfare facilities provided
above Table 1. It is evident from the table that 67
by this institution are no less
out of 68 items differentiated between high and low than that of the other
groups significantly. All the items (including the one institutions (0.647).
non-significant item) were retained in the final scale, 5. (42) Elaborate facilities for mainte-
as the investigator intended to carry out a factor nance of health are provided
analysis of the items in the scale and hence reduction to the employees here (0.616).
6. (35) This institution provides the
in the total number of items in the initial stage was
employees with adequate
not very advisable. amount of fresh air, water,
lighting etc. (0.594).
Identification of Factors 7. (18) Management does everything
Initial statistics relating to the analysis of to ensure the well-being of the
the items on the organisational climate questionnaire employees (0.569).
8. (24) The management is always
showed that 18 factors had eigen values above 1.0.
ready to solve problems and
together they accounted for 57.54 percentage of the grievances of employees
total variance. Though all these factors could be (0.568).
considered significant, a closer scrutiny.revealed that 9. (66) All the important decisions
it would be more convenient to retain a fewer necessary for the smooth running
member of factors, for reasons of parsimony and of the institution are taken with
the knowledge and consent of
interpretability of the factors obtained. Accordingly,
the employees (0.565).
it was decided to retain the first 10 factors, which 10. (60) The workers have the freedom
together accounted for 44.17 percent of the total to interact directly with the
variance. Important loadings on these factors (after management and express their
being subjected to varimax rotation) are described opinions (0.562).

30
M. Balachandran & Immanuel Thomas the PSYCHESPACE

11. (31) The management has always a 4. (59) The company has clear rules
sympathetic attitude towards and regulations regarding the
employee problems (0.498). work of each and every
] 2. (16) The employees have employee (0.575)
representation in several 5. (7) By employing scientific
committees where decisions planning, this institution tries
to maximize the use of human
are to be taken by consensus
(0.458). potential (0.573).
6. (21) Well set out supervision
13. (17) The company has enough
contributes greatly to the
facilities to deal with the
success of this institution
employees' grievances (0.440).
(0.543).
14. (19) This institution offers several 7. (56) Strict enforcement of
attractive benefits at discipline without fear or
superannuation (0.423). favour has improved the
15. (30) In all the major decisions that efficiency of this organisation
had an impact on the growth (0.537).
and development of the 8. (11) Our institution has clear rules
institution, the opinions of the and regulations for the early
employees too were taken into solution of day to day problems
consideration (0.385). (0.490).
16. (2) Before taking a decision, the 9. (61) The management is ready to
management always looks into take any measure that lead to
the opinion of the employees progress and growth in
(0.283). competition with other rival
institutions (0.451).
10. (10) My supervisors give every
It may be seen that the items which load
encouragement they can, in my
highly on this factor are all related to the work (0.420).
managements' interest and involvement in various 11. (68) Instead of being influenced by
aspects of employee welfare, health facilities, extra the opinion of a few, our
benefits, sympathetic attitude towards employee management takes decisions
problems, etc. Hence the investigator feels it proper only after evaluating all
aspects properly (0.356).
to label the factor as 'Welfare Concern'. This factor
12. (27) This institution selects fully
could account for 9.31 % of the total variance.
qualified candidates through
fair and unbiased evaluation
Factor II: Norms and Standards (0.317).
Items which load highly on the second factor 13. (39) The management believes that
are given below: production will automatically
increase if the employees are
1. (64) This institution have plans to
satisfied (0.307).
develop stage by stage (0.636).
2. (4) The duties to be undertaken by
each of the employees are An examination of the items which load
meticulously defined and highly on this factor indicate that the underlying
logically classified (0.632). feature of the factor is the clarity of vision, proper
3. (65) The secret of success of this planning, and maintenance of proper norms and
company lies in its well standards by the management. This has prompted the
defined policies and discipline investigator to label it as 'Norms and Standards'. The
(0.611). factor accounted for 7.16 per cent of the total variance.

31
the PSYCHESPACE
Factor III: Interpersonal Relations
The items with high loadings on this factor
are given below:
1. (15) Since the employees of our
institution are divided among
themselves on the basis of
political affiliation and other
considerations, mutual help
and co-operation is very low
(0.669).
2. (29) Other than on the official
plane, the management does
not maintain any relation with
the employees (0.657).
3. (22) The relationship between the
employees and executives of
our institution is strained
(0.628).
4. (36) The management always keeps
a distance in its relations with
the employees (0.625).
5. (8) The power struggle among the
top executives is a big problem
in this institution (0.574).
6. (53) Nobody tries to draw the
attention of the authorities
towards our problems and
needs (0.410).
It is evident from the content of the
items which loads highly in this factor that it is
concerned with various aspects of interaction
among the members of the organisation. The item
cover uch aspects as co-operation, informal
relationships between management and employees
etc. hence the factor is named as 'Interpersonal
Relations'. Factor III accounted for 4.87 per cent of
the total variance.
Factor IV Recruitment and Training
There were seven items with high loadings
on the fourth factor. These items and their loadings
are given below:
1. (41) Employees of this institution
are often faced with problems
resulting from lack of job
training (0.689).
32
Dimensions of Organisationai Climate
2. (48) There is no provision for
scientific job training by
experts in this institution
(0.612).
3. (34) Majority of the employees of
this institution have got in
through bribary and undue
influence (0.594).
4. (55) If the employees had been
given sufficient training,
production would have
increased (0.565).
5. (20) The methods that this
institution uses to recruit its
employees are outdated
(0.556).
6. (14) Lot of manpower is wasted
here due to heedless activities
(0.468).
7. (62) The management considers
each and everyone, only on the
basis of one's position in the
job hierarchy (0.350).
This factor could be identified based on the
above variables with the highest loadings on it. The
content of all these items relates to the organisation's
practices in the selection of employees and imparting
training to the selected ones. This justified naming
the factor as 'Recruitment and Training'. The factor
accounts for 4.79 per cent of the total variance.
Factor V Recognition and Encouragement
Items 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 and
expertise is the major goal of
the management (0.482).
3. (37) Those who can bring about
achievements are always given
due recognition (0.477).
4. (44) Knowledge and expertise are
given due recognition and
reward (0.464).
 M. Balachandran & Immanuel Thomas the PSYCHESPACE

5. (49) Management often makes use
of disciplinary procedures to
take vengeance at the
employees (0.367).
6. (54) The fear of loss inhibits the
company from diversifying
(0.364).
7. (46) The policies and instructions of
the company are never
efficiency communicated to all
the workers (0.319).
It may be seen that the underlying theme of
the different items which load highly on this factor
is the amount of encouragement and recognition the
management extends to the employees. This led to
the labeling of the factor as 'Recognition and
Encouragement'. It may also be noted here that the
items contain the implied idea that the management
keeps a watchful eye on the performance of the
workers. The factor explains 3.59 per cent of the
total variance.
Factor VI: Fair Rewards
Five variables loaded highly on the 6th
factor, which could explain 3.26 per cent of the total
variance. The loadings ranged between 0.756 and
0.316. Items and their loadings are cited below:
1. (38) My salary is very low
compared to my labour
(0.748).
2. (45) My salary is lower when
compared to the salary of other
having the same qualification
(0.748).
3. (13) The work gets stalled waiting
for the approval of decisions by
the senior manager (0.368).
4. (6) Even in small matters, one has
to depend on the superiors for
final decision (0.357).
5. (52) Sincere and satisfactory work
is properly rewarded (0.316).
It may be seen that the items generally
reflect the employee's concern about the fairness of
dealings ofthe management, especially with regard
to salary and rewards. Discrimination and
administrative bottlenecks are also implied by some
of the items. Considering all these, the factor is
named as 'Fair Rewards'.
Factor VII: Job Security
Items 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 role
in the discussions and meetings
that are held regularly to sort
out the daily problems (0.415).
3. (26) I have anxiety about the
security of my tenure (0.358).
The first 3 items which load highly on this
factor directly or indirectly related to the stability
and security of the job or perceived by the employee.
Hence the label 'Job Security' is believed to be
appropriate for this factor. The factor accounts for
3.19 per cent of the total variance.
Factor VIII: Job Autonomy
The 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 upon
me, I could have performed
better (0.664).
2. (50) Unnecessary interference from
the part of executives makes
my work disorderly (0.640).
3. (43) I have no autonomy in my job
(0.423).
4. (23) The views of the employees get
no place in the policy decisions
(0.381).
An examination of the items which have
highest loadings on this factor indicates that all of
them are related to the degree of autonomy and
freedom 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 total
vanance.

33
 the PSYCHESPACE Dimensions of Organisational Climate

Factor IX: Freedom and Control Factor X: Red Tapism

The four items that comprised this factor are
given below:
I. (33) Due to strict disciplinary
actions, the employees of this
institution are in constant fear
of losing their job (0.536).
2. (63) Each and every member has
the freedom to determine the
quantum of work to be
completed in a day (-0.451).
3. (67) Before taking every step the
employees are bound to take
orders from their superiors
(0.448).
4. (I) All the staff of this institution
behave like members of a
single family (-0.384).
The last factor of the organisational climate
retained for the study explains 2.08 per cent of the
total variance. The items of this factor are given
below, with factor loadings in brackets.
1. (47) This institution does not
hesitate to experiment with
ideas that does not give full
guarantee of success (0.644).
2. (58) Due to the complexity of the
legal and administrative
framework, new and original
ideas are not given the
recognition (0.423).
3. (3) My abilities are given
sufficient recognition by the
superiors and co-workers
(0.309).

The ninth factor in the order of eigen value When one examines the content of the items
account for 2.80 per cent of total variance, and could it becomes clear that the factor is related to
be identified mainly on the basis of the four variables inefficiency in functioning due to details of
with loadings ranging from 0.536 to 0.384. Of the administrative procedure. Hence the factor is named
four items two were negatively loaded. The pattern as 'Red Tapism'.
of positive and negative loadings pose some
difficulty in identifying and interpreting this factor. Reliability and Validity
The two items with positive loadings indicate that it The retest reliability of the test (with an
relates to the sense of security and freedom of the interval of 6 weeks) was found to be 0.96 (N = 75).
employees. At the same time, the negative loadings The split-half reliability of the test (after correction
on the other two items indicate that a high score on using Spearman-Brown Formula) was found
he factor is also associated with a low score on these to be 0.94 (N = 300), and the Cronbach alpha 0.92
items. In other words the freedom do not imply a (N = 300).
complete freedom to choose one's own daily work As the items in the inventory was
load. Negative loadings on the fourth item further meticulously prepared after a thorough review of the
indicate that some amount of formal atmosphere is available literature and a pre-pilot study, the
also associated the factor. Thus, the picture that investigator was able to make sure that all the relevant
emerges is that of a setup where the employee enjoys content areas were adequately represented in the scale.
a sense of security and freedom and at the same time An examination of the items included in the scale
there is full control by the management with regard may justify the claim for content validity of it.
to the quantum of work to be done and also in
maintaining a formal atmosphere. Conversely, in a References
set up where there is no sense of freedom and job
Aaker, D. A. & Jacobson, R. (1987). The Role of Risk in
security, there is not control and monitoring of the
Explaining Differences in Profitability, Academy of
work by the atmosphere. Taking into consideration
Management Journal, 30,277-296.
all these, the factor is labelled as 'Freedom and Ahuja, K. K. (1986). Personnel Management, New Delhi:
Control' . Kalyani Publishers.

34
 M. Balachandran & Immanuel Thomas the PSYCHESPACE

Barber, A. E., Dunham, R. M., & Formisano, R. A. (1992). Mullins, T. W. (1982). Interviewer Decisions as a function of
The Impact of Flexible Benefits on Employee Applicant Race, Applicant Quality and Interviewer
Satisfaction: A Field Study, Personnel Journal, 45: I, Prejudice, Personnel Psychology, 35, 163-174.
55-75. Padald, R. (1982). A Study of Organisational Climate and
Bartolome, F. & Laurent, A. (1986). The Manager: Master Work Behaviour, Ph. D. Thesis, Gujarat University:
and Servant of Power, Harward Business Review, Nov. Ahmedabad.
Dec., 77-81. Padaki, R. (1982). A Study of Organisational Climate and
Blum, M. L. & Naylor, J. C. (1984). Industrial Psychology: Work Behaviour, Ph. D. Thesis, Gujarat University:
Its Theoretical and Social Foundations, New Delhi: Ahmedabad.
CBS Publishes. Schneider, B. & Bartlett, C. J. (1968). Individual differences
Dunnette, M. D. & Hough, L. M. (1998). Handbook of and Organisational Climate, I: The research plan and
Industrial and Organisational Psychology (Eds.), Vol. questionnaire development, Personnel Psychology, 21,
4, Delhi: Jaico Publishing House. 323-333.
Edwards, A. L. (1969). Techniques of Attitude Scale Trivedi, P. & Mookerjee, R. (1989).Comparative Impact of
Construction, Bombay: Valdis, Feffer and Simons. Monetary Incentives in Productivity in Public and
Gregory, W. L. & Burroughs, W. J. (1989). Introduction to Private Enterprises: A Case Study of the Indian
Applied Psychology, London: Scott, Foresman and Economy, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations,
Company. 25:1, I-II.

Grunberg, M. M. & Oborne, D. J. (1992). Industrial Virginia, V. J., Robert, R. W., & James, J. W. (1987).

Productivity: A Psychological Perspective, London: Participation in Decision Making on Worker

McMillan Press. Satisfaction and Productivity: An Organisational

Hellweg, S. A. & Philips, S. L. (1980). Communication Simulation, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,

and Productivity in Organisations: A State of the 17:2, 158-170.

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 Received September 8, 2007
Industrial Employees: An Analysis, Indian Journal of Accepted October3, 2007
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.

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 0.5400
2 (28) 0.6759 0.1397 0.0426 0.1472 0.1528 -0.0344 -0.1186 0.0551 -0.0197 0.1611 0.5678
(25) 0.1553 0.1424 0.1212 0.1223 0.2170 -0.0542 -0.0352 -0.0378 -0.1234 0.5766
3 0.6593
4 (32) 0.6474 0.0945 0.0972 0.1837 0.1612 0.2307 -0.0469 -0.0436 -0.0683 -0.1988 0.5720
5 . (42) 0.6164 0.0599 0.0342 0.1532 0.1805 0.0966 -0.1570 0.0662 -0.0062 0.0380 0.4596
6 (35) -0.5936 0.1232 -0.0457 0.0407 0.0282 0.0814 -0.0370 0.0229 0.1259 0.2402 0.4541
7 ( 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
( 16) 0.4581 0.1393 0.0612 0.0358 0.0773 0.0230 0.4406 0.0655 0.1391 -0.0956 0.4676
12
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 0.2827
IS (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 0.3161
17 (64) 0.0908 0.6361 0.0251 -0.0648 0.0839 -0.0257 0.0226 -0.0837 0.0817 -0.0286 0.4404
18 (4) 0.0485 0.6322 -0.1187 0.1298 -0.1906 0.0441 0.0368 -0.0474 0.0595 0.0992 0.4882
19 (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 0.4410
22 (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 0.3947
24 (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 0.3381
43 (12) 0.0997 0.0418 0.1243 0.0935 0.5321 0.0241 -0.1143 -0.0571 -0.0029 -0.0176 0.3362
44 (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 0.5494
46 (44) 0.2856 0.3887 0.0846 0.0574 0.4639 0.1017 0.2335 0.1021 -0.0734 0.0496 0.5415
47 (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 0.6392
51 (45) 0.0737 0.0156 0.0843 0.1047 0.0134 0.7481 0.0564 0.0407 -0.0130 0.0285 0.5894
52 (13) 0.1711 -0.0765 0.1285 0.2629 0.3135 0.3680 0.0174 0.1424 0.1426 0.1253 0.4111
53 (6) 0.1701 -0.0898 0.0826 0.1455 0.2746 0.3572 0.0063 0.2215 0.2205 0.2252 0.4165
54 (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 0.5086
56 (9) 0.3658 0.0991 0.0646 0.0672 0.1935 0.1047 0.4153 0.0616 -0.1123 -0.1144 0.4027
57 (26) 0.0540 0.0137 0.2008 0.2370 0.1287 0.1719 0.3584 -0.1165 0.2884 0.0003 0.1287
58 (57) -0.0114 0.1476 0.1289 0.1278 0.0028 0.0314 -0.0439 0.6637 0.0768 -0.0329 0.5053
59 (SO) 0.0849 0.1385 0.2498 0.0797 -0.0706 0.0474 -0.0399 0.6401 0.2595 0.0774 0.5870
60 (43) 0.1183 0.0885 0.3214 0.0699 -0.9980 0.0240 0.0668 0.4226 0.3656 0.0800 0.4629
61 (23) 0.1378 -0.0482 0.2050 0.0614 0.1598 0.1265 0.0810 0.3812 -0.2222 -0.1291 0.3265
62 (33) 0.0563 -0.0680 0.1870 0.2128 -0.0519 0.0056 0.2979 -0.0303 0.5355 0.0054 0.4676
63 (63) 0.1541 0.9250 0.0330 0.0187 0.0593 0.0680 0.0129 0.1732 -0.4512 0.0267 0.2763
64 (67) 0.1523 -0.1734 0.0745 0.0631 0.1866 0.1776 -0.0066 0.0957 0.4484 -0.1398 0.3590
65 (I) 0.0390 0.3612 0.2588 -0.0281 -0.0861 0.0414 0.1530 -0.0236 -0.3838 0.0277 0.3810
66 (47) 0.0273 0.1882 0.0052 -0.2029 -0.0483 0.0095 -0.0036 -0.0622 0.0108 0.6443 0.4989
67 (58) 0.0558 -0.1541 0.1136 0.3085 0.1129 0.0187 0.1112 0.1097 -0.1689 0.4228 0.3797
68 (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

View publication stats