The components of the climate construct can be seen as the characteristics that define an organization and differentiate it from other organizations, and which, according to Litwin and Stringer1, can be measured and controlled. From the above discussion, it is clear that definitions and approaches to organizational climate are diverse. In the literature, it is evident that the sample applies to the dimensions and measurement of organizational climate because a wide variety of dimensions are used by various researches to assess organizational climate.
Litwin and Stringer (1968)2 identified that 9 dimension of organizational climate as follows:
- Structure: This dimension refers to how employees feel about various organizational constraints and rules. For example, can the organization be seen as having set processes and procedures that must be followed or can it be characterized by more relaxed approach to getting things done.
- Responsibility: This dimension is concerned with how employees feel about being able to make their own decisions without having to constantly “check in” with a boss. This involves knowing what one entail and making sure the work gets done.
- Reward: This dimension focuses on how employees perceive being rewarded for the work they do. The emphasis is on positive reinforcement and the perception of fairness regarding payment and promotion policies.
- Risk: This dimension seeks to describe the risk or challenge as that is associated with a particular job as well as the organizations general approach to taking risks of its inclinations to adopt a more stable view.
- Warmth: The focus of this dimension is on the groups or organization’s general feeling of friendliness.
- Support: The aim of this dimension is to gauge how employees perceive their managers and colleagues willingness to help and provide support.
- Standards: This dimension refers to the emphasis that is placed on achieving set goals and meeting the standard and doing outstanding work.
- Conflict: This represents the extent to which managers and employees wish to openly discuss issues or concerns rather than ignoring them as well as wanting to explore varying views.
- Identity: This dimension measures the extent to which employees feel valued in the group and feel part of the organization.
- Supervisory-management relations. has highlighted various dimensions as follows:
- Scope for advancement
- Grievance handling
- Monetary benefits
- Participative management
- Objectivity and rationality
- Recognition and appreciation
- Safety and security
- Training and education
- Welfare facilities
Schneider and Barlett4
- i) management support gave a broader and systematic study of climate dimensions. They include the following factors:
- ii) management structure
- iii) concern for new employees
- iv) inter-agency conflict
- v) agent dependence and
- vi) general satisfaction
Schneider and Bartlett (1968)5 had proposed four organizational climate dimensions. They are:
- Individual autonomy – based on the factors of individual responsibility, agent independence, rules orientation, and opportunities for exercising individual initiative.
- The degree of structure imposed upon the position – based on the factors of structure, managerial structure and the closeness of supervision.
- Reward Orientation – based upon the factors of reward, general satisfaction, promotional-achievement orientation, and being profit minded and sales oriented and
- Consideration, warmth and support – based upon the factors of managerial support, nurturing of subordinates, warmth, and support.
Zammuto and Krackover (1991)6 mapped the seven dimensions of climate into the competing values framework and in that way created four different climate types which they labeled: 1) The Group Climate 2)The Developmental Climate 3)The Rational Goal Climate and 4)The Internal Process Climate.
He also measured climate using the following dimensions:
- Trust: An organization has a high level of trust when the individuals are open, sharing, and truthful, where individuals place their confidence. An organization has a low level of trust when the individuals are closed, guarded, uncaring, untruthful, and creates an atmosphere of anxiety and insecurity.
- Conflict: An organization has a high level of conflict when there is a high opposition of forces, goals and beliefs, which are experienced in friction and disagreement among the individuals. An organization has a low level of conflict when there is harmony in goals, beliefs, which yields a spirit of cooperation among the individuals.
- Morale: An organization has a high level of employee morale when the individuals are confident and enthusiastic about the organization–an Esprit de Corps. An organization has a low level of employee morale when the individuals lack confidence and enthusiasm about the organization and individuals lack a sense of purpose and confidence about the future.
- Rewards: An organization is equitable in its rewards when individuals accept rewards as fair and just without bias or favorism. An organization inequitable in its rewards when individuals see favorism, bias, and nonwork related criteria as the basis for rewards.
- Resistance to change: An organization has a high resistance to change when individuals believe the inertia is high and presume desire that “we will do things tomorrow as we did them today.” An organization has a low resistance to change when individuals embrace change as the normal circumstance and relish that “tomorrow will be different.”
- Leader credibility: The leader credibility is high when individuals have belief in its leadership; there is a sense of respect, inspiration and acceptance of decisions and actions. The leader credibility is low when the individuals lack respect and do not accept the legitimacy of authority.
- Scapegoating: An organization has a high level of scapegoating when individuals believe that the responsibility for actions will be shifted to others – top management, staff, employees, or outsiders. An organization has a low level of scapegoating when individuals believe that the responsible individuals assume the responsibility for the failure of actions.
For citing this article use:
- Padmaja, B. (2014). Organisational climate and human resource dimensions a study with special reference to andhra pradesh southern power distribution company limited prakasam district.
- Litwin. Op.cit.,
- Litwin. Op.cit.,
- Schneider and Barlett. Op.cit.,
- Schneider and Barlett. Op.cit.,
- Zammuto and Krackover