Human Resource Development International

ISSN: 1367-8868 (Print) 1469-8374 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rhrd20

Relationship between organizational culture and

job satisfaction in Russian business enterprises

Elena Zavyalova & Dmitry Kucherov

To cite this article: Elena Zavyalova & Dmitry Kucherov (2010) Relationship between
organizational culture and job satisfaction in Russian business enterprises, Human Resource
Development International, 13:2, 225-235, DOI: 10.1080/13678861003703740

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13678861003703740

Published online: 23 Apr 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1581

View related articles

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rhrd20
Human Resource Development International
Vol. 13, No. 2, April 2010, 225–235

Relationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction in

Russian business enterprises
Elena Zavyalova* and Dmitry Kucherov

Organization Behavior and Personnel Management Department, Graduate School of

Management, St. Petersburg State University, Russia
(Received 20 January 2010; final version received 22 March 2010)

This paper examines the correlation between organizational culture, psycho-

logical contract and job satisfaction in the context of cooperation between
employers and employees in a new social and economical environment. The
empirical study is based on the analysis of the personnel survey data from
thirteen St. Petersburg and Moscow companies. The typology of organiza-
tional cultures was evaluated using the Organizational Culture Assessment
Instrument (OCAI) methodology by K. Cameron and R. Quinn (2003). Job
satisfaction was evaluated using A. Meier’s questionnaire modified for our
purposes. The research shows that organizations with different types of
organizational culture differ in the level of job satisfaction of employees.
According to our data, market culture mainly creates the conditions for the
satisfaction of self-affirmation needs; hierarchic culture, for the satisfaction of
cooperation and safety needs; clan culture, for the satisfaction of respect needs;
adhocratic culture, for the satisfaction of self-actualization needs.
Keywords: organizational culture; job satisfaction; psychological contract;
Russian enterprises

The relationship between organizational culture of a given enterprise and job

satisfaction of personnel is a crucial issue related to scientific and practical aspects of
Russian HRM.
We assume that organizational culture is the factor that influences job
satisfaction and could contribute to the creation of a psychological contract between
employer and employee under new socio-economic conditions. In this paper the
following propositions are put forward:

(1) There is a relationship between the type of organizational culture and the
level of job satisfaction
(2) Such features of organizational culture as strength, integrity and efficiency
influence general job satisfaction.

*Corresponding author. Email: zavyalova@gsom.pu.ru

ISSN 1367-8868 print/ISSN 1469-8374 online

Ó 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/13678861003703740
http://www.informaworld.com
226 E. Zavyalova and D. Kucherov

Theoretical background
Organizational culture
Organizational culture is defined a set of norms, values and beliefs, and is reflected in
legends, rituals, symbols, and language (Daft 1994).
In Russia the history of scientific studies of organizational culture started
at the end of the twentieth century and is connected with the following names:
Makarchenko (2004), Solomanidina (2003), Solomanidina and Solomanidin
(2005), Spivak (2001), Tchanko (2005), and Zavyalova (1994). The book by
Cameron and Quinn (2001) containing a detailed description of OCAI
methodology, which allows us to differentiate the types of organizational culture,
and served as an incentive to empirical studies.
Their concept covers key culture characteristics and allows to evaluate them
both qualitatively and quantitatively and to diagnose corporate culture. The
typology is based on a framework of competing values. The framework was based
on a study of the company’s key efficiency indices. For instance, such companies as
Nike and Microsoft consider themselves efficient if they are adaptive, forward
moving and apt to change. Other organizations are considered efficient if they are
stable, predictable and mechanically integral, e.g. government structures, research
institutions, universities, military corporations, etc. Another way of differentiation
is to evaluate efficiency criteria of, on the one hand, internal orientation and
integration, and, on the other hand, external orientation, differentiation and
competition.
All principles listed above form four quadrants, each corresponding to certain
notions of efficiency, values, management styles and thus creating a certain culture.
Four types of culture can be distinguished:

. hierarchic (bureaucratic) culture,

. market culture,
. clan culture,
. adhocratic culture.

Hierarchic cultures are characterized by the following features – the leader is a

mentor; efficiency is measured by profitability; control is a primary value.
Market cultures are characterized by the following features – the leader is a strict
supervisor, competitor and shaper; efficiency is measured in terms of achieving the
objective; competition is a primary value.
Clan cultures are characterized by the following features – the leader is a parent;
the climate is positive and aimed at developing human resources; dedication is
primary value.
Adhocratic cultures are characterized by the following features – the leader is
an entrepreneur; the results are creativity and growth; innovation is the primary
value.
OCAI methodology was adapted for use in Russia (Makarchenko 2004; Tchanko
2005). According to the studies of these scholars, at the beginning of the twenty-first
century the majority of the companies studied did not have a clear type of
organizational culture. A market culture tendency prevailed, followed by hierarchic
culture and then clan culture. Adhocratic culture was practically absent. An evident
 Human Resource Development International 227

correlation between the type of organizational culture and that of the company’s
activity was observed.
In the publications of Solomanidina (2003) and Shakurova (2004) the relation-
ship between aspects of job satisfaction and types of organizational culture was
studied.

Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction could be defined as a ‘pleasurable emotional state resulting from the
appraisal of one’s job’ (Weiss 2002, 282); ‘an emotional reaction to one’s job’ (Weiss
2002, 174). Weiss (2002) has argued that job satisfaction is an attitude, but points out
that researchers should clearly distinguish the objects of cognitive evaluation which
affect emotion, opinions and behaviour.

Psychological contract
The term ‘psychological contract’ appeared in the early 1960s, but became
increasingly popular after the economic downturn in the early 1990s. In general
the psychological contract is a unique and subjective set of ‘. . . beliefs regarding
reciprocal obligations’ (Rousseau 1990, 390). In other words, it refers to ‘the
idiosyncratic set of reciprocal expectations held by employees concerning their
obligations (what they will do for the employer) and their entitlements (what they
expect to receive in return)’ (De Cuyper et al. 2008, 543).
The theoretical model of psychological contract violation proposes that when an
employee perceives a discrepancy in the reciprocal promises between the employees
and the organization, their response may manifest itself as job dissatisfaction. The
results of the empirical study revealed a negative relationship between psychological
contract violation and both job satisfaction and organizational commitment
(Knights and Kennedy 2005).
In this paper, the psychological contract is not the main object of the
study. At the same time we use this term in order to discuss the results we have
obtained.
As we know, the problem of relationship between job satisfaction, aspects of
psychological contract and types of organizational culture as exemplified by Russian
companies has not yet been studied.

Research procedure and methodology

The empiric material collected includes surveys that covered 816 employees of
various hierarchy levels from 13 Russian companies:

. Company 1: a sporting goods supplier (60 participants)

. Company 2: a leading natural gas supplier (80 participants)
. Company 3: a marketing communications agency (20 participants)
. Company 4: a gambling equipment manufacturer and supplier (100
participants)
. Company 5: a stationery manufacturer and supplier within a state enterprise
(70 participants)
228 E. Zavyalova and D. Kucherov

. Company 6: a pharmaceutical equipment manufacturer (64 participants)

. Company 7: a career development centre providing consultancy services (42
participants)
. Company 8: an R&D enterprise (58 participants)
. Company 9: an IT developer and supplier (47 participants)
. Company 10: a large trading business (59 participants)
. Company 11: consumer goods manufacturer (125 participants)
. Company 12: packing manufacturer (19 participants)
. Company 13: insulating materials manufacturer (72 participants)

Aspects of organizational culture were researched using the OCAI methodol-

ogy developed by Cameron and Quinn (2001). To analyse job satisfaction, we
compiled and modified for our purposes a questionnaire based on that by
Professor A. Meier of Munich University (Chiker 2003). The questionnaire was
aimed at assessing personnel satisfaction with various aspects of the organization’s
activities, including the existing compensation system. We evaluated satisfaction
with:

. principles of salaries, bonuses and benefits;

. management’s attitude towards employees’ needs;
. labour organization;
. career opportunities;
. management’s objectivity in evaluating the work done;
. management style and methods;
. awareness of the organization’s business matters;
. ability to influence personnel matters;
. personnel morale;
. ability to show creativity and skills;
. ability to feel important;
. professional growth opportunities.

Assessment of organizational culture

Our research showed that none of the companies is dominated by a particular type of
culture. Nevertheless, the companies can be grouped according to the leading type of
organizational culture using the OCAI methodology (Table 1).
Thus, the companies were distributed into groups for further analysis:

. Market culture – companies 1, 4, 5, 11.

. Hierarchic culture – companies 2, 8, 12.
. Clan culture – companies 3, 7, 9, 13.
. Adhocratic culture – companies 6, 10.

Some similarities could be observed with the results obtained by Makarchenko

(2004) and connected with the absence of clearly prevailing types of organizational
culture. On the other hand, our studies revealed differences with the data of 2004.
Two companies show a tendency towards adhocratic culture creation. There was no
evident relationship between the type of company activity and the type of
organizational culture.
 Human Resource Development International 229

Table 1. Field of activities and leading types of organizational culture of the companies
surveyed.

Company # Industry Type of organizational culture

1 Sales Market culture
2 Manufacturing Hierarchic culture
3 Services Clan culture
4 Manufacturing Market culture
5 Manufacturing Market culture
6 Manufacturing Adhocratic culture
7 Consultancy Clan culture
8 R&D Hierarchic culture
9 IT Clan culture
10 Sales Adhocratic culture
11 Manufacturing Market culture
12 Manufacturing Hierarchic culture
13 Manufacturing Clan culture

Assessment of job satisfaction

For quantitative evaluation, all factors were arranged according to the degree of job
satisfaction with the stimuli used (JS). The calculation procedure used suggested the
following conclusions depending on the value of the parameter (JS):

JS ¼ 5 to 7 – high level of satisfaction;

JS ¼ 3.5 to 5 – satisfaction above average;
JS ¼ 2 to 3.5 – satisfaction below average;
JS ¼ 0 to 2 – low level of satisfaction.

Market culture organizations

These companies show the average satisfaction of 4.0, with five factors reaching the
high level of satisfaction. Such factors as the ability to influence personnel matters,
the ability to feel important, personnel morale, the ability to show creativity and
skills, the ability to get a decent salary, and bonuses and benefits are satisfied to a
higher degree. There is minimum satisfaction of needs for management’s attention
and objectivity and for career opportunities.

Hierarchic culture organizations

The average satisfaction is 4.7, with seven factors reaching a high level. These
companies mostly satisfy such motives as a decent salary, bonuses and benefits, need
for management’s attention, awareness of the organization’s business matters and
ability to influence personnel matters. Management style and ability to show
creativity are satisfied to a lesser degree.

Clan culture organizations

The clan culture organizations show the average satisfaction of 5.2, with eight
factors reaching the high level of satisfaction. Such factors as the ability to feel
important, professional growth opportunities, career opportunities, and personnel
230 E. Zavyalova and D. Kucherov

Table 2. Comparing different aspects of job satisfaction in companies with different types of
organizational culture (scored).

Factor/type of culture A B C D
Salary, bonuses and benefits 5 6* 4.5 3.2
Management’s attitude towards employees’ needs 4 5.5* 5 3.9
Labour organization 2.2 4 5.5* 4.5
Career opportunities 2 5 6 6
Management’s objectivity in evaluating the work done 2.3 3.7 3 5.8*
Management style and methods 3.1 3 3.7 3.9
Awareness of the organization’s business matters 4.5 6.1* 4.2 5.8
Ability to influence personnel matters 6.7* 6 5.9 5.8
Personnel morale 5.4 5.5 6.1* 4.7
Ability to show creativity and skills 5 3 5.4 6*
Ability to feel important 6 3.4 7 6.6
Professional growth opportunities 4.5 5.7 6.4* 6.4*

Notes: A – market culture companies; B – hierarchic culture companies; C – clan culture companies; D –
adhocratic culture companies. *p  0.05.

morale are dominating in these companies. The need for objective evaluation is
satisfied to a lower degree.

Adhocratic culture organizations

The adhocratic culture organizations also demonstrate the average satisfaction of
5.2, with seven factors showing a high level of satisfaction. The adhocratic culture
companies are dominated by such factors as the ability to show creativity and skills
and the ability to feel important, and career and professional growth opportunities.
The remuneration and management style are satisfied to a lower degree.

Comparing job satisfaction in companies with different types of organizational culture

Table 2 summarizes data from companies with different types of organizational
culture.
The comparison shows market culture priority in satisfying the need for
influencing the organization’s business matters. Hierarchic culture takes the lead in
satisfying the compensation principles, management’s attitude and awareness of the
organization’s business matters. Clan culture best satisfies the labour organization
principles, personnel morale, career and professional growth opportunities and
feeling important. Adhocratic culture prevails in satisfying the needs for creativity,
career and professional growth and fair evaluation of the work done.
If we compare the data with the characteristics of organizational cultures listed
earlier, our results appear logical and reflect major features of each type.

Correlation between the overall job satisfaction and quantitative measurements of

organizational culture
To diagnose organizational culture, the OCAI methodology uses two measure-
ments – contensive (reflecting fundamental values) and quantitative (generated by
score evaluation) (Cameron and Quinn 2001). This section shows the results of our
 Human Resource Development International 231

research of the correlation between overall job satisfaction and such quantitative
measurements of organizational culture as strength, integrity and efficiency (Table 3).
The following parameters were taken for major characteristics:

. Strength of organizational culture (depending on the degree of acceptance of the

company’s key values, the organization’s culture was defined as strong or weak);
. Integrity of organizational culture (degree of apprehended integrity of the
culture);
. Efficiency of organizational culture (degree of correlation between the values
proclaimed and the reality – cultures of real vs. fictional declarations).

Regression analysis was chosen as a tool for measuring the degree of correlation
between variables. The regression analysis showed a direct correlation between the
degree of overall job satisfaction and the organizational culture strength, integrity
and efficiency. The correlation matrix is presented in Table 4.
Based on the values of correlation and determination coefficients, the following
conclusions can be drawn.
A direct linear correlation exists between the level of job satisfaction and the level
of organizational culture strength. The determination coefficient (Dxy) is 0.96746.
Table 4 illustrates this with a trend line and determination coefficient whose value
show that the degree of job satisfaction was in 96% of cases connected with the

Table 3. Summarized measurement data for organizational culture and overall job
satisfaction (scored).

Company #/
correlation factors A B C D
1 1.27 0.26 0.38 0.36
2 1.47 0.33 0.42 0.42
3 1.21 0.23 0.35 0.35
4 1.72 0.49 0.55 0.52
5 1.87 0.54 0.58 0.56
6 1.49 0.35 0.43 0.43
7 1.36 0.29 0.39 0.38
8 1.77 0.51 0.56 0.51
9 1.38 0.31 0.4 0.39
10 1.54 0.42 0.47 0.48
11 1.64 0.48 0.52 0.5
12 1.53 0.39 0.45 0.46
13 1.6 0.44 0.5 0.49

Notes: A – job satisfaction; B – culture strength; C – culture integrity; D – culture efficiency.

Table 4. Correlation matrix between organizational culture level and job satisfaction index.

Correlation matrix A B C D
A 1 0.9835979 0.984488 0.9794495
B 0.967464837 1 0.9925928 0.9900262
C 0.969216645 0.98524046 1 0.9785075
D 0.959321298 0.98015186 0.9574768 1

Notes: A – job satisfaction; B – culture strength; C – culture integrity; D – culture efficiency.

232 E. Zavyalova and D. Kucherov

change in the level of organizational culture strength. In other words, the stronger
the organizational culture, the higher the degree of job satisfaction.
A direct linear correlation exists between the level of job satisfaction and the level
of organizational culture integrity. The determination coefficient (Dxy) is 0.96921.
Table 4 illustrates this with a trend line and determination coefficient whose value
shows that the degree of job satisfaction was in 97% of cases connected with the
change in the level of organizational culture integrity. In other words, the more
integral the organizational culture, the higher the degree of job satisfaction.
A direct linear correlation exists between the level of overall job satisfaction and
the level of organizational culture efficiency. The determination coefficient (Dxy) is
0.95932. Table 4 illustrates this by the trend line and determination coefficient. The
latter value shows the degree of overall job satisfaction was in 96% of cases
connected with the change in the level of organizational culture efficiency. In other
words, the more efficient the organizational culture, the higher the degree of overall
job satisfaction.

Discussion
The data collected during the study of the Russian enterprises, corresponding to the
dates, describes the relationship between the type of organizational culture and
overall job satisfaction in other countries.
Several empirical studies have linked organizational culture with job satisfaction
and organizational commitment. Zazzali et al. wrote:

These studies have been conducted in diverse organizational and country settings
among a variety of occupational groups. Many of these studies utilize typologies of
cultures, such as (1) Wallach’s (1983) distinction between bureaucratic, innovative, and
supportive cultures, (2) Cameron and Freeman’s (1991) distinction between clans,
adhocracies, markets, and hierarchies (which are conceptually similar to the group,
developmental, rational, and hierarchical cultural types in the Competing Values
framework), (3) Quinn and Rohrbaugh’s (1983) distinction between group, develop-
mental, rational, and hierarchical cultures, and (4) Hofstede et al.’s (1990) measurement
of six cultural practices (results versus process orientation, job versus employee
orientation, professional versus parochial, closed versus open system, right versus loose
control, and pragmatic versus normative). As is evident from the labels, the cultural
types resemble one another across typologies. Not surprisingly, these studies find that
similar types of cultures have positive impacts on employee job satisfaction. Thus,
satisfaction is higher in organizations with innovative, supportive, group, clan, and
adhocracy cultures. Conversely, some studies find that satisfaction is lower in
organizations with rational, hierarchical, and market cultures (Cameron and Freeman
1991; Quinn and Spreitzer 1991; Zammuto and Krakower 1991a; Nystrom 1993;
Goodman, Zammuto, and Gifford 2001; Lund 2003). (Zazzali et al. 2007, 1153)

Thus, the relationship between the type of organizational culture and overall job
satisfaction could be described as a universal pattern, rather than a local problem
peculiar to Russian companies.
In addition, we may conclude that each type of organizational culture based on
different incentives for satisfaction, creates peculiar conditions of psychological
contract between employer and employee. Nelson, Tonks, and Weymouth wrote:
‘This suggests that a contract can involve both extrinsic and intrinsic elements, but
the weight given to these elements may vary’ (2006, 19). According to our data,
market culture mainly creates the conditions for the satisfaction of self-actualization
 Human Resource Development International 233

needs; hierarchic culture, for the satisfaction of cooperation needs and safety needs;
clan culture, for the satisfaction of respect needs; adhocratic culture, for the
satisfaction of self-actualization needs. As a whole the data received correlates with
the results described by Shakurova (2004). These facts lead us to two practical
recommendations. Firstly, recruitment and selection of personnel in the company
with a certain type of organizational culture must be coordinated with labour
motives of the applicants in order to create the conditions for cooperation of
employers and employees. Together they should try and achieve a common aim,
preventing eventual job dissatisfaction and a violation of psychological contract.
Secondly, it is necessary to analyse in depth the system of organizational incentives
and to align them with key expectations of employees.
In our study we have for the first time obtained evidence of a linear correlation
between strength, integrity and efficiency of organizational culture and overall job
satisfaction. These results also have a practical value. The more integrated and
consistent the internal organizational environment, the more strongly pronounced
job satisfaction, regardless of the qualitative (typological) peculiarity of organiza-
tional culture. Thus, employers have to take into account the need for accordance
of policy and practice of HRM with the overall management strategy, including
culture. Deliberate, purposeful and reflexive management of these processes
enables the so-called ‘hour-glass’ effect: managers’ behaviour first contributes to
the creation of the desired cultural norms, and later an organized culture becomes
a model and regulator of behavior for all participants of labour process (Zhalilo
2008).

Summary and conclusion

The empirical data of this research proved our two research propositions. The main
results of the research are:

. Specific features of organizational culture and job satisfaction were diagnosed

in 13 Russian companies;
. Differences in qualitative and quantitative indices of employees’ job satisfac-
tion were found in companies with different types of organizational culture.
Employees of enterprises with dominating market and hierarchic culture types
demonstrated the lowest degree of satisfaction, whereas those of the clan and
adhocratic types of culture were satisfied to the highest degree;
. Close correlations between the level of overall job satisfaction and quantitative
measurements of organizational culture, such as strength, integrity and
efficiency, were discovered. The stronger, more integral and efficient the
culture, the higher the level of job satisfaction;
. Conditions and features of organizational culture and job satisfaction were
systematized as the most important elements of the HR management system.

Applicability of our research results needs further analysis and consideration.

Further research is needed to study the level of job satisfaction in companies with
different types of organizational culture, especially the market type as this is the most
widespread at present. Eventual research should be aimed at finding correlations
between organizational culture, job satisfaction and objective indices of personnel
performance.
234 E. Zavyalova and D. Kucherov

So far we can positively state that the stronger, more integral and efficient the
organizational culture, the more satisfaction personnel feel with management’s
actions and the organizational environment. We strongly recommend that HR
managers spare no efforts in creating and developing a strong, efficient and integral
organizational culture to ensure the efficiency of labour behaviour and cooperation.

References
Cameron, K., and S.J. Freeman. 1991. Cultural congruence, strength, and type: Relationships
to effectiveness. Research in organizational development 5, no. 5: 23–58.
Cameron, K., and R. Quinn. 2001. Diagnosing and changing organizational culture. St.
Petersburg: Piter Publishing.
Chiker, V.A. 2003. Psychological diagnostics of organization and personne. St. Petersburg:
Rech Publishing.
Daft, R.L. 1994. Management. Fortworth, TX: Dryden Press.
De Cuyper, N., T. Rigotti, H. De Witte, and G. Mohr. 2008. Balancing psychological
contract: Validation of a typology. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management 19, no. 4: 543–61.
Goodman, B., R. Zammuto, and B. Gifford. 2001. The competing values framework:
Understanding the impact of organizational culture on the quality of work life.
Organizational Development Journal 19, no. 3: 58.
Hofstede, G. 1990. Culture and organizations: Software of the mind. London: Harper Collins
Publishers.
Knights, J.A., and B.J. Kennedy. 2005. Psychological contract violation: Impact on job
satisfaction and organizational commitment among Australian senior public servants.
Apply H.R.M. Research 10, no. 2: 57–72.
Lund, D.V. 2003. Organization culture and job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Industrial
Marketing 18, no. 3: 219–36.
Makarchenko, M.A. 2004. The investigation of organizational culture of Saint-Petersburg
firms. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Management Series 8, no. 3: 53–77.
Nelson, L., G. Tonks, and J. Weymouth. 2006. The psychological contract and job
satisfaction: Experiences of a group of casual workers. Research and Practice in Human
Resource Management 14, no. 2: 18–33.
Nystrom, P.C. 1993. Organizational cultures, strategies, and commitments in health care
organizations. Health Care Management Review 18, no. 1: 43–9.
Quinn, R.E., and J. Rohrbaugh. 1983. A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a
competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science 29: 363–77.
Quinn, R.E., and G.M. Spreitzer. 1991. 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, ed. R.W. Woodman and W.A.
Pasmore, 115–42. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Rousseau, D.M. 1990. New hire perceptions of their own and their employer’s obligations: A
study of psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behaviour 11, no. 5: 389–400.
Shakurova, A.V. 2004. Motivational determinants of differences in organizational and
cultural preferences of employees in enterprises. Vestnik RGGU 1, no. 3: 70–84.
Solomanidina, T.O. 2003. Corporate organizational culture. Moscow: Personnel Management
Journal Publishing.
Solomanidina, T.O., and V.G. Solomanidin. 2005. Motivating personnel’s labour activity.
Moscow: Personnel Management Journal Publishing.
Spivak, V.A. 2001. Corporate culture. St. Petersburg: Piter Publishing.
Tchanko, A.D. 2005. Essay on diagnosing Russian companies’ organizational culture. Russian
Management Journal 3, no. 4: 29–54.
Wallach, E.J. 1983. Individuals and organizations: The cultural match. Training Journal 37,
no. February: 29–36.
Weiss, H.M. 2002. Deconstructing job satisfaction: separating evaluations, beliefs and
affective experiences. Human Resource Management Review 12, no. 2: 173–94.
 Human Resource Development International 235

Zammuto, R.F., and J.Y. Krakower. 1991. Quantitative and qualitative studies in
organizational culture. Research in Organizational Change and Development 5: 83–111.
Zavyalova, E.K. 1994. Organizational culture and organizational development. Saint-
Petersburg: SPbGPU publishing.
Zazzali, J.L., J.A. Alexander, S.M. Shortell, and L.R. Burns. 2007. Organizational culture and
physician satisfaction with dimensions of group practice. Health Services Research 42,
no. 31: 1150–76.
Zhalilo, B. 2008. Operation on soul. http://www.e-xecutive.ru/knowledge/announcement/
736387/index.php?ID¼736387 (accessed December 7, 2009).