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

net/publication/330243074

A THEORETICAL STUDY ON EVOLUTION OF ORGANISATIONAL CLIMATE,

THEORIES AND DIMENSIONS

Article · January 2019

CITATIONS READS

2 5,571

1 author:

Shreedevi Shintri

8 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Technostress View project

Stress View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Shreedevi Shintri on 25 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 A THEORETICAL STUDY ON EVOLUTION OF
ORGANISATIONAL CLIMATE, THEORIES AND
DIMENSIONS
Ms. Shreedevi Shintri1, Dr. S R Bharamanaikar2
1
Department of MBA, KLE Dr. M S Sheshgiri College of Engineering & Technology, Belagavi (India)
2
Department of PG Studies, Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi (India)

ABSTRACT
Climate, environment, atmosphere are words that describe the weather conditions of a particular geographical
location. Climate speak of people, place, perceptions and preferences of the inhabitants there. In today’s world,
these words are also used to describe the conditions in organisation and this is referred as Organisational
Climate. Employees’ perception of the workplace and their behavioral outcomes creates organisational climate.
The need to understand various factors that contribute to the formation of this climate is dated back to 1939.
Various theories and researches since then, have contributed to the establishment of factors (dimensions) that
contribute to the formation of Organisational Climate. As the years evolved, the definitions, dimensions and
approaches to understand Organizational climate changed. This paper aims to recognize, some of the major
researches that contributed to the establishment of the concept; understand the theories, dimensions considered
as contributors to the formation of organisational climate and the type of climates derived for the dimensions so
considered.

Keywords: Climate, climate dimensions, Climate types, organisational climate, Person-environment

fit

I. INTRODUCTION
Economic reforms, technological advancement, constant need to strive for excellence, cut-throat competition,
has just not brought changes into the business arena, but also has changed the atmosphere in the organizations.
Employees to meet up with the targets expand their scope of working; employees now end up spending nearing
eleven to twelve hours at workplace. Environment at workplace, organisational support and relation with
supervisors, peers and subordinates contribute a lot to the working of an individual. These factors add up to the
motivational aspects of an individual, his/her performance, his/her state of mind at work place, his/her way at
looking at things around and at large add up to the formation of an organizational climate that directly or
indirectly has an effect on an individual. With stress levels raising up in the lives of working men and women
across the globe, mental disturbances leading to mental ill-health, emotional imbalance followed by health
hazards; understanding the factors that contribute to the formation of organisational climate becomes important.

652 | P a g e
Organisational climate which was earlier referred as social climate has drawn lot of inquisitiveness among
researchers almost since 1940.
This paper aims to understand the evolution of the definitions of organisational climate, the theories that
contributed to the development of the concept „organisational climate‟, the dimensions researchers considered as
contributors to the formation of organisational climate and the type of climates so derived.

II. ORGANISATIONAL CLIMATE

2.1 Theories
The concept and framework of organizational climate has evolved over a long period of time with the earliest
available reference on the concept/framework of organizational climate being traced to 1939 (Lewin, Lippitt &
White), which was then referred as „Social Climate‟, as stated by Srivastav A K (2009) 1. Organisational climate
researchers Litwin and Stringer (1968)19 stated that, “shared beliefs and values of organizational members
constitute the perceived work environment”. Benjamin Schneider (1973)2 defined climate as “individual's
perception towards his work environment”. Schneider in 19753 opined that concept of organizational Climate
rests on certain assumptions which are associated with the Gestalt School of psychology and the School of
Functionalism. Glick (1985)4, stated that Climate construct add value to Organisational and individual
behaviour. Many climate researchers also opined on the same lines. These definitions help to pen down certain
common terminologies referred by these researchers – Perception, assumptions/postulates, individual‟s
behaviour, individual‟s relation with the organisation etc. Four prominent theories can be refereed to, for
understanding organisational climate – Gestalt psychology, Functionalism, Person-Environment fit model and
Lewinian Field theory.
2.1.1 Gestalt Psychology:
Gestalt psychology stands on two assumptions - (a) Humans‟ attempt to apprehend order in their environment
and create order throughout. (b) Humans‟ apprehend and/or attempt to create order in their environment, so that
they can effectively adapt their behaviour to the work environment. Schneider, in his paper “Organisational
climates: An Essay” (1975)3; attempted to define climate, interpreting the gestalt assumptions as “meaningful
apprehensions of order for the perceiver that are based on the equivalent of psychological cues.” The theory
supports the postulate that individuals create order/framework with respect the environment they are into and
display their behaviour accordingly.
2.1.2 Functionalism
Gestalt psychology defines „order‟ and Functionalism transmits the order into behaviour; i.e., based on the order
individuals create, they manifest their behaviour accordingly. This allows them to functionally adapt, seek
information to adapt and respond accordingly (Schneider & Snyder 1975)5
2.1.3 Person-Environment fit Model
Kurt Lewin (1935) conceptualized the interaction between the person and environment (P × E) as the key to
understanding people‟s cognitive, affective and behavioral reactions. Person–environment fit (P–E fit) is defined
as the degree to which individual and environmental characteristics match (French, Caplan, & Harrison, 1982 6;
Rounds et.al, 19927; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 20058). This theory further extended to
understand the behavioral demonstration of individuals, referred as „Lewinian Field theory‟ in 1951.

653 | P a g e
2.1.4 Lewinian Field theory:
The second assumption of Gestalt psychology, suggested that individual associate the order they created to the
environment they are in, which later translates into behaviour. Working on this assumption, Lewin (1951) 20 in
his work “Field theory in Social change” conceptualized the relationship between individuals and their social
environment. He expressed this in a form of a sample equation.
B = f (P.E.)
In which B= Behaviour, E= Environment, and P= Person
Both „Person-environment fit‟ and „Lewinian Field theory‟, restate that behaviour is an outcome of interaction
between person and environment.
Thus, these theories lay the foundation for the study of dimensions/factors contributing to the formation of
organisational climate.
2.2 Definitions
As the world evolved economically, socially, so did the definition of work, workplaces and their environments
(climates) evolved. Forehand and Gilmer (1964) 9 defined organisational climate as “a set of characteristics that
describe an organization and that (a) distinguish the organization from other organizations (b) are relatively
enduring overtime and (c) influence the behavior of people in the organization”. It was quite evident by the
study of Gestalt psychology and functionalism that individual‟s perception plays a major role in the formation of
organisational climate. Schneider in his paper “The perception of organizational climate: The customer's view”
(1973)2 stated, “Climate perceptions then are organized sets of cues; they are abstractions of many perceptions
of specific organizational conditions, events and experiences. They are conceptions of prevailing behavior
systems or perceptions about the guiding themes of what the organization is all about. People have such
conceptions because they need them as frames of reference against which to judge the appropriateness of their
planned behavior. Each organization has many climates; a climate for each of the different kinds of behaviors
(leadership, creativity, etc.) that occur in the organization”. In this paper, Schneider concluded that climate acts
as a motivation in the organisation and that climate determines the reliability of the organisation. Continuing the
study on climate, definition of climate was reestablished as a summary perception which individuals form of (or
about) an organization (Schneider & Snyder, 1975 5; Schneider, 19753).
Hellriegel and Slocum (1974)10, defined - “Organizational climate refers to a set of attributes which can be
perceived about a particular organization and/or its subsystems, and that may be induced from the way that
organization and/or its subsystems deal with their members and environment.” Moran and Volkwein, (1992) 11
elaborated organizational climate as “a relatively enduring characteristic of an organization which distinguishes
it from other organization and (a) embodies members' collective perceptions about their organizations with
respect to such dimensions as autonomy, trust, cohesiveness, support, recognition, innovation, and fairness: (b)
is produced by member interactions; (c) serves as a basis for interpreting the situation; (d) reflects the prevalent
norms, values and attitudes of the organization's culture; and (e) acts as a source of influence for shaping
behavior”. Hart & Cooper (2001)12 remarked - organisational climate operates at individual and workgroup
levels and contributes equally to employees‟ positive or negative work experiences.

654 | P a g e
2.3 Dimensions:
As definition of climate evolved, the dimensions considered by researchers also evolved. Some of the
dimensions considered by prominent organisational climate researchers are listed below.
1. Likert (1967)21 proposed Six dimensions to measure climate of an organisation - (1) Leadership, (2)
motivation, (3) communication, (4) decisions, (5) goal and (6) control.
2. Litwin and Stringer (1968)19 proposed nine dimensions for the study of organisational climate - (1)
Structure, (2) Responsibility, (3) Reward, (4) Risk, (5) Warmth, (6) Support, (7) Standard, (8) Conflict &
(9) Identity.
3. Schneider & Barlett (1968)13, included six dimensions in their study on climate - (1) Managerial Support,
(2) managerial structure, (3) concern for new employees, (4) inter-agency conflict, (5) agent dependence
and (6)general satisfaction.
4. Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler, and Weick (1970) 14 condensed the nine dimensions of organisational climate
proposed by Litwin and Stringer to four dimensions such as (1) task, (2) structure, (3) people, and (4)
technology.
5. Hellreigel and Slocum (1974)10 reviewed various organisational climates studies under two broad
environmental dimensions – „Simple-Complex‟ and „Static-Dynamic‟. The interaction of these
environmental dimensions, they said create organisational climate.
6. James and Jones (1979)15 proposed six dimensions – (1) conflict and ambiguity, (2) job challenges,
importance and variety, (3) leader facilitation and support, (4) workgroup cooperation, friendliness and
warmth, (5) professional and organizational esprit and (6) job standards.
7. Davidson, M.C.G (2000)23, added „regulations and organizational pressure‟ as the seventh dimension to the
study of organisation climate.
8. Schneider & Bowen (1985)16 studying the employee and customer perception in service industry (banks),
proposed five HR dimensions to the study of Climate: (1) Work facilitation, (2) Supervision, (3)
Organisational career facilitation, (4) organizational status, (5) New employee socialization.
9. Dr. Udai Pareek (1989)22 recognized twelve dimensions to assess – (1) Orientation, (2) Interpersonal
relationships, (3) Supervision, (4) Problem management, (5) Management of mistakes, (6) Conflict
management, (7) Communication, (8) Decision making, (9) Trust, (10) Management of rewards, (11) Risk
taking & (12) Innovation and Change.
10. Zammuto & Krakower (1991)17 proposed seven dimensions- (1) Trust, (2) Conflict, (3) Morale, (4)
Rewards, (5) Resistance to change, (6) Leader credibility, (7) Scapegoating.
11. Goran Ekvall (1991)18 identified ten dimensions: (1) Challenge, (2)Freedom , (3) Idea time, (4) Dynamism,
(5) Idea support, (6) Trust & Openness, (7) Playfulness and humor, (8) Conflicts, (9) Debates & (10) Risk
taking.
2.4 Types of Climate:
Referring to the dimensions considered for the study of organisational climate, researchers aggregated them as
particular types of climates.
1. Likert (1967)21, proposed four types of climates: Exploitive, Benevolent, Consultative, and Participative.

655 | P a g e
2. Litwin & Stringer (1968)19 measuring nine dimensions, derived three climates – (1) Achievement climate,
(2) Affiliative and (3) Power Climate.
3. Hellreigel and Slocum (1974)10 reviewed various organisational climates studies under two broad
environmental dimensions – „Simple-Complex‟ and „Static-Dynamic‟. They emphasized the interaction
creating 4 type of climate - (a) simple & static – „low uncertainty‟; (b) static & complex – „moderate
uncertainty‟; (c) simple & dynamic – „moderately high uncertainty‟ and (d) dynamic & complex – „high
uncertainty‟.
4. James & Jones (1979)15, studied climate under five heads - (1) Organizational Context, (2) Organisational
structure, (3) Process, (4) Physical environment & (5) System values and norms.
5. Dr. Udai Pareek (1989)22 proposed six motives of organisational climate - (1) Achievement, (2) Expert
Influence, (3) Extension, (4) Control, (5) Dependency, (6) Affiliation.
6. Zammuto & Krakower (1991)17 with the help of seven dimensions of the study proposed four types of
climate – (1) Group climate, (2) Developmental climate, (3) Rational goal climate and (4) Internal process
climate.
7. Goran Ekvall (1991)18 studying ten dimensions, proposed three outcomes of climate study - (1) Resources,
(2) Motivation & (3) Exploration.

III. CONCLUSION
An understanding of the evolution of definitions, dimensions considered by prominent researchers and the types
of climates they proposed, help understand organisational climate better. Understanding of the dimensions will
help in well structured, organized study of climate and further can be applied to assess the impact of these
dimensions on various HR and organisational behaviour aspects like employee performance, employee
motivation, job satisfaction, occupational stress, employee commitment, employee morale, employee behaviour,
team effectiveness and organisational efficiency.

REFERENCES
Journal papers:
[1.] Srivastav, A. K. (2009). Heterogeneity of Organisational Climate, Research and Practice in Human
Resource Management, 17(2), 1-13.
[2.] Schneider, B. (1973). The perception of organizational climate: The customer's view. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 57(3), 248.
[3.] B.Schneider (1975), (a) “Organizational Climate: An Essay”, Personnel Psychology, 28, pp.447-479. (b)
“Organizational Climate: Individual Preferences and Organizational Realities Revisited”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, 60, pp.459-465.
[4.] William H.Glick, (1985), “Conceptualizing and Measuring Organizational and Psychological Climate:
Pitfalls in Multi Level Research”, Academy of Management Review, 10, pp.601-616.
[5.] Schneider B. & Snyder R.A (1975), Some relationships between job satisfaction and organizational
culture, Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 318-328.

656 | P a g e
 [6.] French, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Van Harrison, R. (1982). The mechanisms of job stress and strain (Vol.
7). Chichester [Sussex]; New York: J. Wiley.
[7.] Rounds, J. B., Dawis, R., & Lofquist, L. H. (1987). Measurement of person-environment fit and
prediction of satisfaction in the theory of work adjustment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31(3), 297-
318.
[8.] Kristof‐ Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals'fit at
work: a meta‐ analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor fit.
Personnel psychology, 58(2), 281-342.
[9.] Forehand, G. A., & Von Haller, G. (1964). Environmental variation in studies of organizational behavior.
Psychological bulletin, 62(6), 361.
[10.] Hellriegel, D., & Slocum, J. W. (1974). Organizational climate: Measures, research and contingencies.
Academy of management Journal, 17(2), 255-280.
[11.] Moran, E. T., & Volkwein, J. F. (1992). The cultural approach to the formation of organizational climate.
Human relations, 45(1), 19-47.
[12.] Cotton, P., & Hart, P. M. (2003). Occupational wellbeing and performance: A review of organisational
health research. Australian Psychologist, 38(2), 118-127.
[13.] B.Schneider and C.J. Bartlett, (1968), “Individual Differences and Organizational Climate I: The
Research Plan and Questionnaire Development”, Personnel Psychology, 21, pp.323-333.
[14.] Campbell, J. J., Dunnette, M. D., Lawler, E. E., & Weick, K. E. (1970). Managerial behavior,
performance, and effectiveness.
[15.] Jones, A. P., & James, L. R. (1979). Psychological climate: Dimensions and relationships of individual
and aggregated work environment perceptions. Organizational behavior and human performance, 23(2),
201-250.
[16.] Schneider, B., & Bowen, D. E. (1985). Employee and customer perceptions of service in banks:
Replication and extension. Journal of applied Psychology, 70(3), 423.
[17.] Zammuto, R. F., & Krakower, J. Y. (1991). Quantitative and qualitative studies of organizational culture
(pp. 83-114). JAI Press Inc.
[18.] Ekvall, G. (1991). The organizational culture of idea-management: A creative climate for the
management of ideas. Managing innovation, 73-79.
Books:
[1.] Litwin, G. H., & Stringer Jr, R. A. (1968). Motivation and organizational climate Boston: Division of
Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
[2.] Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social change New York. Harper Torchbooks, 1964
[3.] Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: its management and values. McGraw-Hill
[4.] Pareek, U., & Purohit, S. (2011). Training Instruments in HRD and OD. McGraw Hill.
Theses:
[1.] Davidson, M. C. G. (2000). Organisational climate and its influence upon performance: A study of
Australian hotels in South East Queensland, Doctoral dissertation, Griffith University.

657 | P a g e

View publication stats