The Validity and Reliability of the Organizational Culture Questionnaire

Date: March 10, 2000 Revision: 2nd Prepared by Hee-Jae Cho

. S.......... Numbers inside the parenthesis are coefficient alpha.............9 Table 8 Relationship of each scale within and between indexes (For the best-fit model candidates) ..............11 Table 11 Rotated factor matrix: Factor loadings by maximum likelihood method for the "Consistency" scale data ......................12 Table 13 Rotated factor matrix: Factor loadings by maximum likelihood method for the "Mission" scale data..............3 Table 3 Pearson's correlation of the 12 organizational culture scale....................................................................................................................... 2000 1 ........................................................ item ................................10 Table 10 Rotated factor matrix: Factor loadings by maximum likelihood method for the "Involvement" scale data ............................................. N.................................................. Mean........................................... N................................................. alpha value changes when items are deleted.................................. S.........................7 Table 5 Item-total correlations...........15 Figure 3 The best fit model:................ ........................................................................................... item ........................9 Table 7 Inter-scale alpha ............................6 Table 4 Descriptive Statistics and Alpha Coefficients for the Organizational Culture Questionnaire (N=36542) (After deleting the missing values: N = 36542)..........................................................................................................................D........................................................................D...........................................13 Figure 1 The hypothetical Model.......................................................................................................................................................... (N=36542) ..................................................12 Table 14 Goodness-of-fit for measurement models (2×2 structure models).............................................. interitem correlations.................Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Contents Table 1 Index........................................................................................................ Index............... Mean.......................................... interitem correlations....... scale.....................................................2 Table 2 (Continued)..................................................................................10 Table 9 Relationship of each scale within and between indexes (The best-fit model)........................................14 Figure 2 The best fit model:........... scale............................ (N=36542) ..............16 March 10..... alpha value changes when items are deleted.................................................................11 Table 12 Rotated factor matrix: Factor loadings by maximum likelihood method for the "Adaptability" scale data....... ..8 Table 6 Item-total correlations.............................

we work hard to achieve "win-win" solutions. We often have trouble reaching agreement on key issues. 2000 2 . Teams are our primary building blocks. 26. item Index Scale Involvement Empowerment Team Orientation Capability Development Consistency Core Values Agreement Coordination and Integration Item 1. Teamwork is used to get work done. 19. 22." 17. Decisions are usually made at the level where the best information is available. (Phasing & answer reversed) 25. 15. Most employees are highly involved in their work. 24. There is good alignment of goals across levels. The leaders and managers "practice what they preach. March 10. People work like they are part of a team. It is easy to reach consensus. Working with someone from another part of this organization is like working with someone from a different organization. 2. 27. Cooperation across different parts of the organization is actively encouraged. 7. There is a clear and consistent set of values that governs the way we do business. (Phasing & answer reversed) 16. (Phasing & answer reversed) 30. 13. There is a clear agreement about the right way and the wrong way to do things. 21. Our approach to doing business is very consistent and predictable. People from different parts of the organization share a common perspective. The capabilities of people are viewed as an important source of competitive advantage. even on difficult issues. 28. 14. There is continuous investment in the skills of employees. 11. Information is widely shared so that everyone can get the information he or she needs when it's needed. 29.Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 1 Index. 18. 9. There is a "strong" culture. Authority is delegated so that people can act on their own. 8. 4. Ignoring core values will get you in trouble. Work is organized so that each person can see the relationship between his or her job and the goals of the organization. When disagreements occur. Everyone believes that he or she can have a positive impact. rather than hierarchy. 20. The "bench strength" (capability of people) is constantly improving. There is a characteristic management style and a distinct set of management practices. 23. Business planning is ongoing and involves everyone in the process to some degree. 6. 5. It is easy to coordinate projects across different parts of the organization. 10. scale. 12. 3. Problems often arise because we do not have the skills necessary to do the job. There is an ethical code that guides our behavior and tells us right from wrong.

52. (Phasing & answer reversed) 51. 43. 48. There is a clear mission that gives meaning and direction to our work. Our strategic direction is unclear to me. scale. Our strategy leads other organizations to change the way they compete in the industry. We encourage direct contact with customers by our people. Index. but realistic. We view failure as an opportunity for learning and improvement. 34. (Phasing & answer reversed) 35. 42. 50. Different parts of the organization often cooperate to create change. (Phasing & answer reversed) 40.Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 2 (Continued). The leadership has "gone on record" about the objectives we are trying to meet. 45. 32. Learning is an important objective in our day-to-day work. (Phasing & answer reversed) 59. Leaders have a long-term viewpoint. Our vision creates excitement and motivation for our employees. Short-term thinking often compromises our long-term vision. We are able to meet short-term demands without compromising our long-term vision. Innovation and risk taking are encouraged and rewarded. 56. 54. There is a clear strategy for the future. 37. (Phasing & answer reversed) 44. We respond well to competitors and other changes in the business environment. Customer Focus Organizational Learning Mission Strategic Direction & Intent Goals & Objectives Vision March 10. The interests of the customer often get ignored in our decisions. 49. 60. The way things are done is very flexible and easy to change. 53. 39. We have a shared vision of what the organization will be like in the future 57. item Index Adaptability Scale Creating Change Item 31. There is a long-term purpose and direction. 58. 41. Lots of things "fall between the cracks". 47. New and improved ways to do work are continually adopted. Attempts to create change usually meet with resistance. All members have a deep understanding of customer wants and needs. There is widespread agreement about goals. People understand what needs to be done for us to succeed in the long run." 46. Customer input directly influences our decisions. Leaders set goals that are ambitious. We make certain that the "right hand knows what the left hand is doing. 36. 33. 55. Customer comments and recommendations often lead to changes. 2000 3 . 38. We continuously track our progress against our stated goals.

alpha value changes when items are deleted. Adaptability. My Check list: Did I do this? Refinement Procedures Dimensionality Reason Identifying the presence of subfactors or superordinate factors in an instrument Methods Factor analysis: both exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic techniques are integral to this process. 2. Data analysis procedure I estimated four measurement models for each index (Involvement. including either reports that some factors correlated with a criterion but others did not or more rigorous. Empirical indicators of item consistency include item-total correlations. convergent and discriminant validity investigations. I estimated a structural equation model for the indexes jointly with the measurement models. Mission) separately. replicating measure refinements on an independent sample. the more rigorous process of conducting item-level refinements on one sample and then replicating measure performance on a second sample. Analysis methods: Factor analysis: exploratory factor analysis (factor loading tables) and confirmatory factor analysis (RMSEA and fit statistics) Then for each pair of indexes. in the case of factor analysis. Finally. factor loadings. 15 items in each index were analyzed to check whether three scales (3 latent constructs) were extracted from 15 items.Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Strategy of Data Analysis 1. item content be judged to represent the content domain of the construct accurately. alternative construct indicators. interitem correlations. It was a scale-level analysis. Check Here Done Item-level statistical analysis Content-based item-level analysis Independent sample replication Assessment of discriminant validity This property should be reflected in an empirical finding that item scores are highly intercorrelated. It was an item-level analysis. it was to identify the presence of latent constructs (scales) in the OC questionnaire. I combined them two by two and then estimated six measurement models for all indexes. cases were rated successful on this criterion if they reported any tests of discriminant validity. six scales (3 scale from each index) were analyzed to see how six scales were interrelated to each other. As a first step. the tendency to endorse one construct indicator should be associated with the tendency to endorse other. Consistency. 2000 4 . and. It was to check “dimensionality” of the questionnaire. Done refinement or replication necessary When the OCQ was developed Done Done March 10.

2000 5 .Organizational Culture: Summary Tables March 10.

63 .48 .70 .63 .65 .60 . Capability development 4. Agreement 6.71 1 (.54 . Vision Mean 3.57 .30 3. Core value 5.76) .66 .61 .59 . Organizational Learning 10.61 .69 (.72 (.71 .06 3.64 .59 .34 3.66 .49 .36 3.59 .80) . Strategic Direction 11.80 .60 .70) .64 .44 .67 .58 .73 .62 .73 .59 .45 3.62 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 (.67 .62 .53 .97 S.50 (.06 3.65 . Numbers inside the parenthesis are coefficient alpha.85) .59 .61 .D.00 3.49 . Coordination & Integration 7. (N=36542) Scales Variable 1.31 3.62 (.58 . Team 3.51 .58 .75 .56 .67 .69 .74 .63 .83) .75) .68 . Empowerment 2.60 .56 (.12 3.Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 3 Pearson's correlation of the 12 organizational culture scale.77) .38 2.78) March 10.48 .68 .49 .70) .59 . Creating Change 8.50 .61 .73 .73) .65 .64 .67 .71 .58 .63 (. .58 .60 (.80 . Goals & Objectives 12. 2000 6 .73 (.60 .67 .76) .59 .66 .62 . Customer Focus 9.48 .75) .19 3.62 2 (.62 (.

80 .06 .78 .67 .73 .71 .71 .73 .97 .73 .38 2.87 5 5 5 36542 36542 36542 3.90 α (Cronbach coefficient alpha from 3 scales) .87 Involvement Empowerment Team Orientation Capability Development Consistency Core Values Agreement Coordination and Integration Adaptability Creating Change Customer Focus Organizational Learning Mission Strategic Direction & Intent Goals & Objectives Vision 5 5 5 36542 36542 36542 3.92 5 5 5 36542 36542 36542 3.Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 4 Descriptive Statistics and Alpha Coefficients for the Organizational Culture Questionnaire (N=36542) (After deleting the missing values: N = 36542).68 .81 .00 .69 .34 3.45 3.83 5 5 5 36542 36542 36542 3. 2000 7 .85 .89 March 10. 4 Indexes & 12 Scales # items N Mean SD α (Cronbach coefficient alpha for inter-items) α (Cronbach coefficient alpha from 15 interitems) .30 3.77 .36 3.70 .31 .71 .88 .83 .75 .80 .80 .19 3.76 .78 .12 3.70 .70 .06 3.73 .75 .

57 .94 3.76 March 10.70 Agreement α = .45 .61 .05 1.59 .98 3.31 3.35 .72 .50 .67 .77 .59 .11 1.01 .95 .52 .D.95 1.93 .80 .14 S.85 1.05 .02 1.81 .97 3.03 .47 3.79 .27 3.08 1.21 3.80 3.57 .53 .9 Scale Empowerment α = .60 Alpha after deleting this item .50 .59 .96 1.04 2.70 . .68 .66 .47 .22 3.07 1.64 .57 .04 3.10 1.44 3.99 .22 .33 3.58 .09 1.09 .Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 5 Item-total correlations.01 1.94 Team Orientation α = .72 N 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 Mean 3.61 .71 .70 2.54 .02 2.72 .00 1.41 3.98 1.99 .29 3.46 .74 .12 3.71 .88 Core Values α = .64 .91 . N.62 .73 3.65 .68 .00 1.92 3.76 .39 .37 3.79 .14 3.62 .23 3. S.75 .27 2.43 .61 .13 3.71 . interitem correlations.77 Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Item-Total Correlation .72 .59 .04 1.38 2.56 .62 .60 . 2000 8 .03 1.D. (N=36542) Index Involvement α = .09 .30 3.05 3.56 .43 .77 .95 1.70 Consistency α = .00 1. Mean.83 Capability Development α = . alpha value changes when items are deleted.93 .73 .69 .75 .8 3.75 Coordination & Integration α = .45 .72 .

59 .77 .00 1.76 .58 .32 2.35 .69 .99 1.57 .71 .51 3.48 .D.96 1.66 .90 .57 3.11 .93 .77 . 1.58 3.72 .49 .70 3.01 1.72 .81 .70 .01 3.60 .72 .42 3. 2000 9 .16 3.14 3.80 .92 .87 .59 3. interitem correlations.68 .99 .35 3.75 Mission α = .37 3.D.59 Alpha after deleting this item .89 3.77 3.82 .15 .75 3.76 .10 S.63 37 .88 2.49 .83 .60 .01 .18 3.73 3.57 . Mean.98 .06 1.79 . alpha value changes when items are deleted.72 .28 2.70 .06 1.92 .73 Organizational Learning α = . S.52 .97 1.74 .06 .72 .30 3.90 .64 .74 .58 2.30 3.99 .85 Goals & Objectives α = .69 .92 Strategic Direction & Intent α = .60 . N.74 .00 3.94 1.87 .76 Item 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Item-Total Correlation .46 .89 Involvement Consistency Adaptability Mission March 10.97 .80 Vision α = .28 2.94 .78 Table 7 Inter-scale alpha Alpha from 15 items .87 .48 3.98 .63 .88 .71 2.52 .92 Alpha from 3 scales .98 .57 .83 .Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 6 Item-total correlations.97 1.73 N 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 36542 Mean 2.79 .87 Scale Creating Change α = . Index Adaptability α = .46 .52 .57 .06 .43 3.69 .68 .00 .46 .88 .60 .19 3.74 .02 1.53 .92 Customer Focus α = .00 1.65 .29 3.62 .73 .81 .77 .

67) * (-. 2000 10 .20) * (-.51) * (-. Learning Mission Strategic Direction Goals & Objectives Vision *** Three scales in each index (Within scale relationship) * Significant negative relationship with other scales (Between scale relationship) * (-. Consistency Core Values Agreement Coord. & Integration Adaptability Creating Change Customer Focus Org.37) * (-.Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 8 Relationship of each scale within and between indexes (For the best-fit model candidates) Organizational Culture Index Involvement Scale Empowerment Team Orientation Capability Devel. Learning Mission Strategic Direction Goals & Objectives Vision *** Three scales in each index (Within scale relationship) ** Significant positive relationship with other scales (Between scale relationship) * Significant negative relationship with other scales (Between scale relationship) ** (.29) *** *** *** ** (. & Integration Adaptability Creating Change Customer Focus Org.21) * (-. Consistency Core Values Agreement Coord.29) Consistency Adaptability Mission March 10.75) Involvement *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** * (-.19) Consistency Adaptability Mission Table 9 Relationship of each scale within and between indexes (The best-fit model) Organizational Culture Index Involvement Scale Empowerment Team Orientation Capability Devel.55) * (-.67) * (-.25) Involvement *** *** *** * (-.21) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** * (-.17) ** (.46) * (-.

Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 10 Rotated factor matrix: Factor loadings by maximum likelihood method for the "Involvement" scale data Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Variance explained by each factor (weighted) Factor 1 .59 .27 .31 .45 .50 .28 .28 .15 .29 .04 Factor 3 .46 .40 .18 .41 .20 3.43 .08 Table 11 Rotated factor matrix: Factor loadings by maximum likelihood method for the "Consistency" scale data Items 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Variance explained by each factor (weighted) Factor 1 .68 .42 .39 .39 .30 .69 .47 .31 .41 .12 .12 .26 .57 .31 .59 .60 .17 .26 .32 Factor 3 .40 .60 .10 .27 .42 .49 March 10.38 .42 .52 .28 .61 .58 .49 .03 Final Communality .42 .35 .81 Final Communality .58 .24 .30 .23 .61 .29 . 2000 11 .49 .31 .36 .23 .49 .47 .15 .29 .36 .21 .24 .48 .70 .24 .06 4.43 .44 .24 .21 .06 .58 .28 Factor 2 .63 .45 .17 .35 .47 .57 .55 .32 .39 .20 .38 .64 .25 .24 .38 .24 .37 4.56 .39 .57 .26 .31 .43 .22 .31 .87 Factor 2 .13 .18 4.21 .23 .54 .04 .54 4.20 .51 .41 .26 3.44 .24 .33 .37 .42 .29 .46 .24 .

Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Table 12 Rotated factor matrix: Factor loadings by maximum likelihood method for the "Adaptability" scale data -.38 .58 .46 .21 .22 .32 .44 .11 .27 .33 .31 .39 .37 .59 .62 .27 .47 5.43 .29 .02 Factor 2 .57 . 2000 12 .11 .42 Final Communality .58 .37 .75 .43 .46 .34 .25 .15 .57 .00 Factor 3 .55 .52 .53 .34 .31 .18 .44 .53 .15 .65 .82 .Problematic Items 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Variance explained by each factor (weighted) Factor 1 .58 .48 .13 .57 .12 .45 .19 .26 .50 .48 2.50 .33 .17 .34 .12 Factor 2 .65 .30 .19 .40 .31 .41 .15 .74 .61 6.31 .56 .73 .36 .38 .05 .21 .41 .19 .38 .20 .11 5.44 .23 .22 8.56 .11 .18 .44 .20 4.11 .35 .46 March 10.39 .51 .19 .51 .46 Table 13 Rotated factor matrix: Factor loadings by maximum likelihood method for the "Mission" scale data Items 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Variance explained by each factor (weighted) Factor 1 .53 .43 .30 .18 .33 .29 .80 Final Communality .79 .84 .57 .62 .29 .40 .05 .34 .58 .51 .15 .36 .24 .27 .13 Factor 3 .33 .21 .28 .21 .52 .37 .22 .33 .

0042 .995 .998 .997 1 . 2000 13 .990 CFI .0039 .987 .25 62.987 .44 329.983 .990 AGFI .991 .016 .Organizational Culture: Summary Tables × Table 14 Goodness-of-fit for measurement models (2×2 structure models) Model Involvement * Consistency Involvement * Adaptability Involvement * Mission Consistency * Adaptability Consistency * Mission Adaptability * Mission Involvement * Consistency * Adaptability * Mission χ2 384.995 .998 .997 1 .042 .998 .035 .998 .0035 .0053 .044 NFI .42 463.042 .74 df 7 6 7 5 5 7 44 RMSEA .0071 March 10.997 .997 .049 .57 3177.990 .975 RMSR .37 226.998 .17 625.0064 .0017 .038 .

RMSEA = .0000.15 Agreement Coordination & Integration Consistency 1.00 .17 Team Orientation Capability Development Core Values .44 .14 .90 .69 . 2000 14 .20 .00 .94 .50 .63 .92 .18 Strategic Direction/Intent Goals & Objectives . df=48.68 .61 .34.84 Creating Change .56 Involvement 1.62 .00 .61 .20 .18 .13 Mission 1.13 Vision March 10.053 .56 .28 Customer Focus Organizational Learning Adaptability 1.19 .Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Figure 1 The hypothetical Model Chi-square=4905.58 . p=.15 Empowerment .90 .88 .00 .55 .

19 .56 -.86 .00 .15 .60 .00 .21 Involvement 1.17 Team Orientation Capability Development Core Values .044 .92 .69 .90 .21 .44 .51 .15 Empowerment .14 -.55 .Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Figure 2 The best fit model: Chi-square=3177.18 .74.17 .0000.25 1.28 Customer Focus Organizational Learning Adaptability 1.13 Agreement Coordination & Integration Creating Change Consistency -. 2000 15 .03 .14 Vision March 10.57 .99 1. df=44.95 .93 -. RMSEA = . p=.00 .62 .91 Strategic Direction/Intent Goals & Objectives .93 .63 .29 .00 .60 .14 Mission 1.

93 .25 Adaptability → Core Values: -. RMSEA = .17 .44 .14 .03 . df=44.0000.56 Core Values . p=.15 .99 Empowerment Team Orientation Capability Development .92 .17 Involvement .62 .28 Adaptability .63 Strategic Direction/Intent .60 .15 .13 .93 .57 Agreement Coordination & Integration .60 .91 Mission Goals & Objectives Vision .19 Creating Change Customer Focus Organizational Learning .51 Mission → Agreement: -.29 March 10.14 .21 Negative Estimate Involvement → Agreement: -.044 (same as Figure2) .90 .18 .55 .95 Consistency 1.Organizational Culture: Summary Tables Figure 3 The best fit model: Chi-square=3177.74.69 .14 .86 . 2000 16 .21 Consistency → Strategic Direction & Intent: -.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.