We apply Quinn and Rohrbaugh's (1983) competing values framework (CVF) as an organizing taxonomy to meta-analytically test hypotheses about the relationship between 3 culture types and 3 major indices of organizational effectiveness (employee attitudes, operational performance [i.e., innovation and product and service quality], and financial performance). The paper also tests theoretical suppositions undergirding the CVF by investigating the framework's nomological validity and proposed internal structure (i.e., interrelationships among culture types). Results based on data from 84 empirical studies with 94 independent samples indicate that clan, adhocracy, and market cultures are differentially and positively associated with the effectiveness criteria, though not always as hypothesized. The findings provide mixed support for the CVF's nomological validity and fail to support aspects of the CVF's proposed internal structure. We propose an alternative theoretical approach to the CVF and delineate directions for future research.

The advent of the 21st century has witnessed an increasing interest in developing knowledge of international management to meet the needs of global business development. To take stock of the progress in organizational behavior research with national culture as the major explanatory variable, the authors analyzed 93 empirical studies published in the 16 leading management journals from 1996 to 2005. This analysis shows some advances but also identifies many gaps in both theory and methods. They offer seven recommendations to address these gaps and advance future research.

In this article, we examine the concept of humility among chief executive officers (CEOs) and the process through which it is connected to integration in the top management team (TMT) and middle managers’ responses. We develop and validate a comprehensive measure of humility using multiple samples and then test a multilevel model of how CEOs’ humility links to the processes of top and middle managers. Our methodology involves survey data gathered twice from 328 TMT members and 645 middle managers in 63 private companies in China. We find CEO humility to be positively associated with empowering leadership behaviors, which in turn correlates with TMT integration. TMT integration then positively relates to middle managers’ perception of having an empowering organizational climate, which is then associated with their work engagement, affective commitment, and job performance. Findings confirm our hypotheses based on social information processing theory: humble CEOs connect to top and middle managers through collective perceptions of empowerment at both levels. Qualitative data from interviews with 51 CEOs provide additional insight into the meaning of humility among CEOs and differences between those with high and low humility.

We propose a mediation model to explain the relationship between CEO humility and firm performance. Building on upper echelons, power, and paradox theories, we hypothesize that when a more humble CEO leads a firm, its top management team (TMT) is more likely to collaborate, share information, jointly make decisions, and possess a shared vision. The firm will also tend to have lower pay disparity between the CEO and the TMT. The humble CEO and TMT, in turn, will be more likely to adopt an ambidextrous strategic orientation, which will be associated with stronger firm performance. We tested the model by using both survey and archival data that were collected at multiple time points from 105 small-to-medium-sized firms in the computer software and hardware industry in the United States. Findings largely support our theoretical assertions, suggesting that CEO humility has important implications for firm processes and outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract

Although workplace incivility has received increasing attention in organizational research over the past two decades, there have been recurring questions about its construct validity, especially vis-à-vis other forms of workplace mistreatment. Also, the antecedents of experienced incivility remain understudied, leaving an incomplete understanding of its nomological network. In this meta-analysis using Schmidt and Hunter’s [Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (3rd ed.), Sage] random-effect meta-analytic methods, we validate the construct of incivility by testing its reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, as well as its incremental predictive validity over other forms of mistreatment. We also extend its nomological network by drawing on the perpetrator predation framework to systematically study the antecedents of experienced incivility. Based on 105 independent samples and 51,008 participants, we find extensive support for incivility’s construct validity. Besides, we demonstrate that demographic characteristics (gender, race, rank, and tenure), personality traits (agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, negative affectivity, and self-esteem), and contextual factors (perceived uncivil climate and socially supportive climate) are important antecedents of experienced incivility, with contextual factors displaying a stronger association with incivility. In a supplementary primary study with 457 participants, we find further support for the construct validity of incivility. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of this study.

Organizational culture is an important predictor of organizational effectiveness, but it is also part of an organizational system that consists of highly interdependent elements such as strategy, structure, leadership, and high performance work practices (HPWPs). As such, accounting for the effect of culture's system correlates is important to specify more precisely organizational culture's predictive value for organizational outcomes. To date, however, efforts to connect culture with its system correlates have proceeded independently without integration. This trend is problematic because it raises questions about the strength of culture's association with its system correlates, and it casts uncertainty about organizational culture's predictive validity for organizational outcomes relative to other elements of an organization's system. We addressed these issues by conducting a meta-analysis based on 148 independent samples (N ϭ 26,196 organizations and 556,945 informants). Results generally supported hypothesized predictions linking culture with strategy, structure, leadership, and HPWPs. Meta-analytic regressions and relative weight analyses further revealed that culture dimensions explained unique variance in effectiveness criteria after controlling for the effects of leadership and HPWPs but varied across effectiveness criteria in terms of relative importance. We discuss theoretical and practical implications and highlight several avenues for future research.