Organizational Culture Of Local Government: The Comparative Case Studies In The
Central Part Of Thai Local Government
Refereed Paper
Jittaruttha, Chanida
Abstract
Modern organizational culture theorists confirm that “Cultural-Fit Management” approach is an
important practice affecting behavioral management of organisations. This exploratory research was
resulted from the awareness of organizational culture management which leads to organizational
accomplishment and decreases the conflict between organization and individual. It was aimed to
determine the cultural-fit between organization and individual in the central part of Thai local
government, by comparative studying among these six local governments: Chachoengsao,
Nakhonnayok, Pathum Thani, Saraburi, Sa Kaeo, and Ayutthaya on five major issued: 1) cultural-fit
between organizational and individual perceived culture in local government, 2) appropriate culture
between organization and individual in the sampling units, 3) key success factors leading to cultural-fit
in local government, 4) factors causing incongruent culture, and 5) specific motivating factors
appropriated with individual culture in local government. The methodology used in this research is
mixed methods which conducted by analyzing academic works as well as a field survey. The article
postulates that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that appropriate organizational culture of the
sampling unit is ‘Role’ culture and eight key success factors leading to cultural-fit in local government
and success of both. Due to organizational context, the factors causing mismatched culture are
slightly different in six local governments. The results reveal that some parts of the government
officials perceived that organizational culture is ‘Club’ culture. This indicates a strong implication of a
political culture, contaminated with ‘Role’ culture, which causes a deviation of cultural-fit management
in local governments. The specific motivation factors appropriated with individual culture in local
government are security of work, higher position and status, work progress, and power from authority.
The extent of congruency between the values and norms of the organization and individual will
proceed cultural-fit if determinant factors of culture are matched with their right conditions.
Keywords: organizational culture, individual culture, cultural-fit management, local
Government
At present, modern organization theorists recognize that the “Cultural-Fit Management” approach is
an important practice affecting behavioral management of organisations. This research resulted from
the awareness of organizational culture’s importance which can decrease the conflict between
organization and individual and was aimed to determine the cultural-fit between the organization and
individuals of the central part of Thai local government, by comparative studying among these six
local governments: Chachoengsao, Nakhonnayok, Pathum Thani, Saraburi, Sa Kaeo, and Ayutthaya.
The research methodology used in this study is a mixed method of both qualitative and quantitative
methods, particularly conducted by verifying Charles Hendy’s Cultural Propriety Theory and exploring
appropriate motivation factors for individuals. The results offer a beneficial proposal that there will be
cultural-fit if the key success factors of culture are matched with their right conditions.
Problem Statement and Purpose
Organization culture is a new vogue topic in a prescriptive as opposed to a descriptive sense. In
effect, the concept of an organizational culture is another expression of realization that the
organization itself takes on features which can be characterized as organizational personality and
character. Organisations are thus perceived as having their ways of thinking, feeling, and acting just
as human individuals do. Not only considered in the descriptive sense as ‘soft criterion’, but
organizational culture is understood in the prescriptive sense as creating the normative context for
shaping behavior of members as well.
The great advantage of the approach is that it starts with real organisations and behaviors. Many of
the organizational culture theorists (Smircich, 1983; Ott, 1989; Cornwall and Perlman, 1990; Handy,
1991; Bolman and Deal, 2003; Schein, 2004; Denhardt and Denhardt, 2007) asserted that
organisations have their own cultures, way of life, beliefs, roles, behaviors, and needs for
achievement such as progress, reputation and successful employees. On another side, individuals
are different in many aspects and have their own ways of living and working. If organizational culture
does not match with an individual’s, there will be conflict between both sides (Handy, 1991). At
present, experts in human resources realize that culture should be a major determining factor in
selecting, hiring, and even firing employees, given the fact that an organization is looking for those
who fit well with the organization norm and culture. From this perspective, culture can have a strong
impact on both organizational performance and employee (member) satisfaction. (Bardwick, 998;
Johns and Saks, 2005)
Thus, cultural-fit management can address the deficiency and limitation of prior organizational
concepts or theories since it helps both organisations and individuals meet their values, priorities,
needs, and proper behaviors. The congruence between both organizational and individual cultures
can lead to the success of both sides. Achieving a best cultural fit between the employee's values,
styles, and priorities and the conditions, requirements, and payoffs offered by an organization is a key
to cultural congruence. Managers need to know what an organization’s true culture is—the one that
the logic of the work demands or the one that exists in the existing complex of the individuals and
their cultures (Handy, 1991). Without the best cultural fit, the chances for success and retention
plummet; with best cultural fit, the chances for success increase.
A local government is an organization described as a product of the modern state, which was recently
born and will significantly develop in democratic countries. Modern theorists have asserted that local
government would have been occurred if only the modern state was already established. They also
focused attention to the role of state organization that has maximum political power, which delegates
its power to local government. State certification may be written in the constitution or be assigned in
any act and results in a local government as a juristic person, a corporate entity, which can be divided
into three types: (a) Administrative decentralization, (b) Political decentralization, and (c) Fiscal
decentralization. Thus, local government organisations are very important in promoting the concept of
decentralized government and a participatory state which strengthens democratization, enhances the
right and freedom of citizen, and flourishes public benefits fairly. The goal of local government
organization is fulfilling the expectations of its citizens on its function and ability. Therefore, cultural-fit
management in local government will not only help enhance the effectiveness of these vital key
concepts, but also ensure work efficiency of local government agencies. Exploring and comparing the
cultural pattern of six local governments in the central region of Thailand indicates to their principal
cultures of organizational and individual perceived cultures, their proportion of “congruent” or “deviant”
cultures between organisations and officials. The sameness or differences of cultural-fit dimensions of
each local government also points out the success factors and vice versa, particularly on
understanding specific motivation factors responded to local government officials’ needs which lead to
job satisfaction. Cultural-fit management in local governments can benefit both organisations and
individuals to be aware of their natural culture or adjusting their suitable culture which is promoting the
concept of decentralized government and a participatory state which strengthens democratization,
enhances the right and freedom of citizen, and flourishes public benefits fairly, as above described.
Especially, if the executives have good insights about organizational cultures and their alignment with
types of work and characteristics of worker, they can manage most effectively and it will be easier to
create the desirable values and behaviors that lead to increase high performance and achievement of
local government management. Empirical evidences from these six local governments in the central
region of Thailand also help us understand the patterns of organizational culture and individual culture
of local government within Thai social context and lead to the suggestions on cultural-fit management
of local government, both in the other regions of Thailand and in the other local governments with
different social contexts as well.
The purpose of this study is to explore how Handy’s theory -‘The Theory of Cultural Propriety’ (1991) can explain organizational behavior in Thai local government, especially in the area of cultural-fit
between an organization and its members and to investigate what specific motivating factors
suggested by Herzberg’s theory - ‘Two Factors Theory’ (1993) are appropriate with organizational and
individual culture among Thai local governments.
Research Questions
This study was aimed to investigate the following questions. That is: (a) whether there is cultural-fit
between organizational and individual perceived culture among the sampling units by testing Handy’s
theory, (b) whether the appropriate culture among the sampling units is Role culture (Apollo culture),
which can promote a highest achievement of organization and its member as Handy’s proposed, (c)
what key success factors lead to cultural-fit among the sampling units, (d) factors caused to
incongruent culture among the sampling units, and (d) what specific motivating factors are appropriate
with individual cultures among the sampling units.
Theoretical Framework
Organizational culture is a subject of intense interest in both the popular and academic literature,
especially in the finding of ‘best fit’ and ‘cultural fit’ approach. Cultural fit is considered to be the most
significant key success factor to fulfill individual and organizational need, goal, and success. The
local government is being considered as a machine bureaucracy organization as Mintzberg’s (1983)
proposed, which has its specification of ‘role culture’ as Handy categorized in his theory. The
interesting point is that organisations are perceived as having their ways of thinking, feeling, and
acting just as human individuals do and just as the gods of ancient Greece. By this way of thinking,
Handy (1991) used the four gods of ancient Greece to be representative of the four different cultures
existed in organisations. This metaphor is very interesting and a challenging tool for pursuing
research on organizational culture. Handy’s theory promotes cultural-fit as the best solution to help
both the organization and individuals meet their values and proper behaviors and fulfill their needs.
This research specifically explored Handy’s Theory of Cultural Propriety, which was found necessary
for this study by this reasoning: Handy proposed in his theory that employee will have work
satisfaction if they can find the workplace appropriate with their cultures. The key concept emphasized
in his theory is: (a) inappropriate cultures lead to unhappiness and inefficiency, which gave support to
investigate cultural-fit and its key success factors, (b) Handy exclusively separated the typology of
cultures into four patterns by using a smart metaphor. Each god represented quite different
assumptions of four cultures and is clearly defined, (c) While every organization and individual is
different, his theory offers four patterns of culture that can be discerned. It is not quite easy to find the
organizational culture theory that is properly used in all type of organisations, and (d) this theory can
be applied in both organizational culture and individual culture. Besides, it goes beyond time, space,
and settings. No scholarly work has ever been proposed such as the one created by Handy.
This study also attempts to investigate whether Herzberg’s theory can lead to the answer regarding
the motivation factors appropriate for local officials of those six local governments. Individuals with
strong growth needs respond positively to enrich jobs. It will be very useful to know what do officials
among the sampling units, who were proposed by Handy’s theory to be appropriate with ‘Role
culture’, want from their formal authorization-seeking.
Literature Review
The literature Review in this study serves two main purposes. The first is to examine the fundamental
theories or concepts contributed to the research questions. They are: (a) theories on organizational
culture and individual culture, particularly Handy’s (1991) theory and organizational culture concepts
from Smircich (1983), Ott (1989), Schein (2004), and Denhardt and Denhardt (2007), (b) cultural-fit
management concepts from Cornwall and Perlman’s (1990), Bardwick (1998), Bolman and Deal
(2003), and Johns and Saks (2005), (c) organizational structure concept, particularly Mintzberg’s
(1983) theory of organizational structure, (d) individual culture: Maccoby’s (1976) personality concept
, individual emotion and brain concept of Handy (1991).
The second purpose of the literature review is to examine theories which help explain the research
findings. Those are: (a) Likert’s (1961) concept of ‘System four’ management, (b) Handy’s (1991)
concept of work type , and (c) psychological theories: Herzberg’s Two Factors theory (Herzberg,
Mausner, and Snyderman, 1993), Murray’s Needs Theory (1971). Table 1 illustrates four types of
Handy’s culture compared with essential involved theories or concepts reviewed and synthesized by
the researcher.
Table 1. Handy’s four cultures with essential involved theories
Involved
Theories
& Concepts
System 4
(Likert)
Organization
Structure
(Mintzberg)
Motivation factor
(Herzberg,Mainer,
& Snyderman))
Needs
(Murray)
Individual
Personality
(Maccoby)
Individual
Emotion
(Handy)
Individual
Brain
(Handy)
Work type
(Handy)
Club Culture
Role Culture
Task Culture
ZEUS
Benevolent
authoritative
management
Simple
Structure
ATHENA
Participative
management
Acceptance/
Challenge
APOLLO
Exploitative
authoritative
management
Machine
Bureaucracy
Structure
Responsibility/
Security
Success/
Reputation
Professional
Bureaucracy
Structure
Growth/
Actualization
Affiliation
Power
Achievement
Autonomy
Jungle Fighter
Company Man
Gamesman
Craftsman
Choleric
Phlegmatic
Sanguine
Melancholic
Right brain
Intuition/
Hunch
Asterisk
Task
Left brain
Order/
Sequence
Steady-state
Task
Left brain
Logic/ Reason/
Sequence
Development
Task
Right brain
Imagination/
Creativity
Asterisk
Task
Adhocracy
Structure
Existential
Culture
DIONYSUS
Consultative
management
Organisational Culture and Individual Culture
Organisational culture vitally and inseparably relates to individual culture (Handy, 1991). As to
Cornwall and Perlman (1998), a culture is an organization’s reality, and culture shapes all that goes
on within an organization. It is reflected in an organization’s norms, philosophies, rules, values,
climates, symbols, heroes, and almost everything its members do. A different group of people has a
different way of life and different ways to give meaning to things and different values and behaviors.
Therefore, organizational culture is dictated by the values, beliefs, behaviors, and norms which
permeate organization members and are expressed through the words and behaviors of each
member in organization. Culture reveals organizational life, both organization and individual sides,
and creates particular patterns or ways of its identity. As Ott (1989) states, “It functions as an
organizational control mechanism, informally approving or prohibiting behaviors” (p.50). Schein (2004)
suggested that the often hidden and largely unquestioned assumptions and beliefs held by members
of the organization that guide their behavior constitute the core definition of culture: a pattern of basic
assumptions that has worked well enough to be considered valid, and therefore, to be taught to new
members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems. Organizational
culture expresses the ideas and overall values that define an organization and has a significant and
long-lasting influence on its members (Denhardt and Denhardt, 2007).
Organisations are selecting people whose core needs or highest priorities can be met. In turn,
individuals have to know what most matters to them at the time, and the conditions in which they're
most likely to flourish.
Cultural-fit Management
Today, successful organisations do not select people only on work-based consideration of "ability" as
a basis, but also focus on “best-fit” to ensure consistency in both organizational culture and individual
culture. Experts in human resources realize that culture should be a major determining factor in
selecting, hiring, and even firing employees (Cornwall and Perlman, 1990), given that an organization
is looking for those who fit well with the organizational norms and culture. Manager needs to know
what an organization’s true culture is, the one that the logic of the work demands, or the one that
exists in the existing complex of the individuals and their cultures (Handy, 1991). Cultural fit, which is
at the heart of employee satisfaction and organizational success, requires that people and
organisations really know what they're like and what they want to become. There are no ‘best
organisations’ or ‘best employees’. There's no one size that fits all. Instead, there's a best cultural fit, a
match between an individual's values, priorities, and behaviors and those of an organization, which
also decreases conflict between organisations and individuals (Bardwick, 1998). Handy stated,
“Inappropriate cultures lead to unhappiness and inefficiency” (1991, p.10). A better cultural fit means a
person will be happier on the job, will want to stay, and will have greater job satisfaction and
commitment (Johns and Saks, 2005).
Theory of Cultural Propriety
Charles Handy (1991) proposed the concept of cultural- fit management in the ‘Theory of Cultural
Propriety’, which holds that what matters is getting the right culture in the right place for the right
purpose. He illustrated his concept by symbolic analogies of four ancient Greek gods to represent four
different cultures follow to characteristics, duties, roles, emotions, satisfaction, and competency of
each god. Those are: (1) Club Culture, ruled by Zeus; the dynamic entrepreneur, characterized by
speed of decision, rapid, and intuitive communication, (2) Role Culture, ruled by Apollo; god of order
and bureaucracy which based on definition of the jobs to be done, (3) Task Culture, ruled by Athena;
goddess of craftsmanship, recognizes only expertise as the basis of power and influence, and (4)
Existential Culture, ruled by Dionysus; the god preferred by artists and professionals who owe little or
no allegiance to a boss.
Handy (1991) suggested that each culture worked on quite different assumptions in quite different
styles of management, structures, procedures, leaders, motivation factors, and reward systems. Each
would work well in certain situations, but get the wrong god in the wrong place and there would be
trouble.
Club Culture
Role Culture
God
Zeus
Symbolic
Spider’s web
Cultural Pattern
Speed of decision / Network
Risk / Intuition / Nepotism
Empathy / Affinity / Trust
God
Apollo
Symbolic
Greek Temple
Cultural Pattern
Rational / Logic / Exact contract
Stability / Fixed role / Predictability
Order and Rule
Task Culture
Existential Culture
God
Athena
Symbolic
Spider’s web
Cultural Pattern
Skill / Expertise / Teamwork
Talent / Creativity
Solving new problem
Expensive culture
God
Dionysus
Symbolic
Spider’s web
Cultural Pattern
Difficult to manage / Professional
Commune culture / Independence
Freedom
Figure 1. The Epitome of Handy’s four different cultures
Local Government as the “Role Culture” or “Apollonian” Organization
Local government is one of the kinds of organization that appropriates with “Role culture (Apollo
culture)” as described in Handy’s (1991) theory. Specific attributes of role culture were summarized by
the researcher and are illustrated in Table 2 which shows the make-up of its componential analysis.
The table also indicates important factors that can reflect on its cultural unidimensionality.
Table 2.
Summary of Role culture and Specific Attributions of its unidimensionality
Attributes
God’s Personality
Symbolic Analogy
Greek temple
Features
Role Culture
APOLLO
God of order and rules / Its patron god
The pillars represent functions and divisions in a
role organization. The pillar are joined managerially
only at the top, the pediment, where the heads of
the functions and divisions joined together to form
the board, committee or president’s office. The
pillars are linked by tension wire of rules and
procedures. It depicts bureaucracy
picture.
Order /Rules / Rational decision, Stability of work /
Predictability / Fixed role / Exact contract
Style of Management
By authority of Top Leader or Committee
Power
From formal role
Pattern of Work
Kinds of Organization
Steady-state
Organization of Japanese management / Hospitals
/
Life insurance companies / Civil service / State
industries / Local government / Prison / Military
Machine bureaucracy
Strength of Culture
Future predictability/ Stable management / Security
for members
Weakness of Culture
Low efficiency when there are unstable or
unpredictable situations / Employees gets bored
from exact role and duties
Decision - making
By logic or reason / By analytic method / Sequence
of decision - making
Communication
Formal procedures / Prefer writing in formal to
speaking / Impersonal interaction
Way of Thinking and
Think logically, sequentially and analytically /
Learning
Learn by training/ Transfer process by adding more
skills or knowledge
Way of Influencing and Influence of time table / Changed by structure or
Changing
systems
Way of Motivating
Motivated by formal power, certainty, progress
And Rewarding
of position or status / Rewarded by an increase in
formal authority, outward visible status
Local Government as the Machine Bureaucracy Organization
Mintzberg (1983) asserted that “the Machine Bureaucracy organization” (pg. 165-167) depends
primarily on the standardization of its operating work processes for coordination, thus the key part is
the techno-structure that houses the analysts who do the standardizing. Power in this organization
rests with the managers of the strategic apex and formal communication is favored at all levels. Rules
and regulations permeate the entire machine bureaucracy and decision making tends to follow the
formal chain of authority. Local government is designed in this structural pattern which attempts to
eliminate all possible uncertainty, so that the bureaucratic machine can run smoothly without
interruption. Thus, in local government ‘role culture’ always exists. The work in this organizational
culture strongly emphasizes division of labor and unit differentiation in all their forms-vertical,
horizontal, line/staff, functional, hierarchical, and status which is controlled by ‘role’ of its members.
Motivation Factor
Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman (1993) proposed ‘Two Factor Theory’ which confirms that there
are two major factors: the motivation factors and the hygienic factors. Herzberg emphasized that
focusing on hygienic factors to motivate employees will not work, but providing motivation factors to
motivate people with opportunities for responsibility achievement and personal growth will be better.
Within the different context of organizational culture, the manager has to consider the consequences
of unmet needs and learn how to handle situations involved. Because of conflict and frustration,
individuals do not give their best. Thus, the motivation factors: achievement, recognition, work itself,
responsibility, and advancement, which are suitable for individuals’ needs in different cultures, are the
best solution (Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman, 1993; p.60).
Methodology
The research methodology used in this study is a mixed method of both qualitative and quantitative
methods and conducted by analyzing academic works as well as a field survey. The sampling units,
selected by the way of a multistage-sampling technique, were the six local governments in the central
region of Thailand: Chachoengsao, Nakhonnayok, Pathum Thani, Saraburi, Sa Kaeo, and Ayutthaya.
The target populations were the ‘Strategic Apex’ and ‘Administrative Components’ officials of those six
sampling units.
The instruments were the survey modified from Handy’s questionnaire and the unstructured in-depth
interviews. This research design was chosen to ensure the best opportunity to determine whether the
cultural-fit of ‘Role culture’ between organisations and individuals among the sampling units exists or
not and what determinant factors lead to cultural-fit. While a test provides numerical indicator of the
observed phenomena, an in-depth interview sheds light to the causes of those phenomena. Both
selected methods thus contribute to the validity of this research.
Selection of Sample
Selection of the sample was based on theoretical criteria and led to the usage of a non-probability
method. This research is an exploratory attempt. The sample was selected by way of multi-stage
sampling that was a blending of a simple random sampling, a quota sampling, and a purposive
sampling. First, the population were segmented into mutually exclusive sub-groups based on the
attribute criterion of organizational culture described in Handy’s (1991) theory, particularly on ‘kinds of
organization’ and ‘type of work’ (illustrated on Table 2). The six local governments were randomly
selected from all local governments in the central region of Thailand. All subjects in those sampling
unit are the ‘strategic apex’ and ‘administrative component or support staff’ units, purposively drawn
from five parts of the organization which Mintzberg (1983) proposed in his ‘Structure in Fives’ concept.
These two parts are the employees that usually work in the fundamental section of producing goods
and services. The strategic apex is charged with ensuring that the organization serves its mission in
an effective way and also that it serve the needs of those who control or otherwise have power over
the organization. While the administrative component or support staff provides support to the
organization outside its operating work flow.
After purposively selecting subjects from these two parts, the sampling unit was then judged by quota
sampling selection from the six local governments at 180 officials for statistical testing purpose. The
total number of 180 questionnaires was mailed to each targeted individual in 6 provincial
administration organisations, 82 Tambon administration organisations, 8 municipal cities and 21
municipal districts. From those respondents in four types of organization, 36 officials were purposively
chosen for in-depth interviewing, sufficient and specific to explore the emergence of patterns which
reached a saturation point with this respondent’s number. Both the interview schedule and the mailed
questionnaire were modified from Handy’s test of cultural-fit to be more relevant to the Thai context
and more exclusive to expand cultural dimensions and clearly separate the pattern of different
cultures.
The table of sampling frame, sampling unit, target population, sections of sampling unit and sample
size selected to participate in this study is shown on Table 3. They were grouped and drawn to be
good representation by considering the attributes of Role culture (as illustrated in Table 2). If the
number of target population was lesser than 30 persons or access to data collection was denied; such
survey population would have been replaced by another population of the same kind. The good
sample size will be at least 25-30 % of population, if number of population is less than 100-999
(Cochran, 1977).
Table 3.
The sampling selection by way of multi-stage sampling
Organization
Local
Government
Sampling
Frame
All Local
Governmen
t
in Thailand
(75)
Sampling
Unit
(Random
Sampling)
Target
Population
(Purposive
Sampling)
Sections of
Sampling
Unit
(Quota
Sampling)
n
(180)
The six Local
Governments
In the Central
Region
-Chachoengsao,
-Nakhonnayok,
-Pathum Thani,
-Saraburi,
-Sa Kaeo,
-Ayutthaya
-Strategic Apex
-Administrative
Components
(Techno
Structure &
Middle Line)
6 provincial
administrations
8 municipal
cities
21municipal
districts
82 Tambon
administrations
18
6
16
12
34
6
112
6
Test
n
(30)
In
ter
view
Instrumentation
A Test. First, a test was designed for measuring the perceptions of the survey population, as a
member of organization, in both organizational and individual culture. It demonstrated the level of
congruence or conflict between organizational and individual perceived culture of ‘operating core’
subjects in the sampling unit. The test, modified from Handy’s test, has 15 headings including set of
values, beliefs, behaviour patterns which was used to verify cultural-fit in 15 dimensions. They are: (1)
A good boss, (2) A good subordinate, (3) First priority of good member, (4) People who work well in
organization, (5) The way organization treats the individual, (6) By which way people are influenced,
(7) Power of control, (8) The basis of task assignment, (9) Competition, (10) Motivation of work, (11)
Type of work, (12) Way of thinking and learning, (13) Communication, (14) Decision-making, and (15)
Recruitment and selection. If the organizational perceived culture and individual perceived culture of
the target population is mostly fit well in a sum total of (a) clause there will be congruent on Club
culture. The cultural-fit in a sum total of (b) clause means that Role culture exists, while the cultural-fit
in a sum total of (c) clause expresses cultural congruence on Task culture, and the cultural-fit in a sum
total of (d) clause confirms to cultural congruence on Existential culture.
The test was back translated and modified from Handy’s original questionnaire. The questions
number 10-15 were designed by the researcher to expand the cultural dimensions test since these six
increased headings help testify and clearly exclude different pattern of each culture. Those were
derived from a meticulous analysis of Handy’s theory and carefully chosen from cultural key factors
and follow the attributes of ‘Role Culture’ summarized by the researcher (in Table 2). The test was
improved after testing by a pilot group and examined twice by Professor Dr. Supachai Yavaprabhas,
an expert and national outstanding researcher on human resource management in the Thai public
sector.
The validity of the test used to collect quantitative data was ensured by considering three criteria of
validity: (1) construct validity, (2) internal validity; and (3) conclusion validity; the test leads to valid
conclusions or that the sample enables valid inferences. The reliability of the test was ensured by
examining two criteria: (1) internal consistency; Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient of the test is
0.85. This Cronbach’s alpha values represent the internal consistency of the items, and correlation
coefficients show a general description about the relationships across the constructs and subconstructs among the proposed variables (Siegel, 2000; Howell, 2007). (2) sensitivity; the test has a
discriminatory power to categorize and significantly exclude four different cultures.
Interviews. Secondly, an in-depth interview was designed for probing the real opinion of the subjects
selected by a purposive sampling method. Data collected via these interviews is intended to explain
the cultural-fit or conflict between organizational and individuals. The in-depth interview was based on
conceptual structure, from word association method, relating to the cumulative causes of the culturalfit. The survey subjects were requested to define 6 words based on the following questions: (1) what
is the meaning of individual’? (2) How do they measure their ‘work achievement’? (3) What are the
factors that lead to their ‘satisfaction of work’? (4) What are the causes of their ‘work stresses’? (5)
What ‘type of work’ they do? And (6) what are their ‘motivation factors’?
Data Collection and Analysis
With permission granted by the target agencies and organisations, data were collected and analyzed
by using both methods described earlier. Data from a test were summarized by the sum of scores,
ranked by 180 respondents of all the statements under each of the two columns, ‘oneself’ and
‘organization’. After data summarizing, the process of hypothesis testing of proportion was used by
the non- parametric method, the Mcnemar test, to verify whether the proportion of respondents’
perceptions, on their organizational and individual culture, is fit on or deviant from Role culture.
The data from depth-interview were collected by way of informal and unstructured
interviewing to explore participants’ perception, beginning from six words as above described, which
leaded to explain the causes of cultural incongruity. By this method, 30 respondents were asked by
probing with open-ended or unstructured questions to explore meanings and causes of cultural-fit or
cultural conflict. The data collected by using word of association method could relate to the attributes
of culture which aligned with the purpose of this study.
Results
The results of quantitative data collected by the test are comparatively illustrated in Table 4 below.
Table 4.
Cultural-Fit between organizational and individual perceived culture (n=180)
Data which were collected by the test instrument indicates the results of cultural fit in the sampling
units. There were 19 out of 30 respondents (63.33%) in Chachoengsao, 16 respondents (53.33%) in
Nakhonnayok, 21 respondents (70.00%) in Pathum Thani, 15 respondents (50.00%) in Saraburi, 17
respondents (56.67%) in Sa Kaeo, and 18 respondents (60.00%) in Ayutthaya who perceived that
their principal organizational and individual perceived culture is fit in Role culture. The sub-ordinate
cultural-fit of the sampling units is Club culture, only in Pathum Thani and Sa Kaeo. The remaining
samples show a mix of incongruent cultures because of the deviant perception between
organizational and individual perceived culture. In Chachoengsao, Nakhonnayok, and Saraburi,
officials perceived their sub-ordinate organizational culture as Club culture but perceived their subordinate individual cultures as Role culture, and in Ayutthaya officials perceived their sub-ordinate
organizational culture as Club culture but perceived their sub-ordinate individual cultures as Task
culture.
After data summarizing, the process of hypothesis testing of proportion was used by Non- parametric
method. The Mcnemar Test was employed to verify whether the proportion of respondents’
perceptions, on their organizational and individual culture, is fit on or deviant from Role culture. The
results of comparative statistical test in those six sampling units are illustrated in Table 5.
Table 5
Comparative of Respondent Perceptions among the six local governments by testing
of proportion with Mcnemar test (n=30 per each local government)
Local
Governments
Perception of
Role Culture on
Organization side
Chachoengsao
Fit Culture
Perception of
Role Culture on
Individual side
Fit
Mismatched
Culture
Culture
19
2
Total
Chisquare
value
Chisquare
prob
2.57
.289
21
Mismatched Culture
6
3
9
Total
25
5
30
Fit Culture
16
4
20
Mismatched Culture
7
3
10
Total
23
7
30
Fit Culture
21
0
21
Mismatched Culture
2
7
9
Total
Fit Culture
23
15
7
3
30
18
Mismatched Culture
7
5
12
Total
22
8
30
Fit Culture
17
4
21
Mismatched Culture
1
8
9
Total
18
12
30
Fit Culture
18
4
22
Mismatched Culture
2
6
8
Total
20
10
30
Nakhonnayok
Pathum Thani
Saraburi
Sa Kaeo
Ayutthaya
.373
.549
21.30
.500
2.30
.344
12.80
.375
8.52
.687
Comparative of Respondent Perceptions among the six local governments by testing of
proportion with Mcnemar test (n=30 per each local government)
The responses indicated that cultural-fit of ‘Role’ culture existed in all sampling units as proposed in
Handy’s theory. The Mcnemar Test, Non-parametric method, was employed to verify the hypothesis
by testing of proportion. The result, tested by Chi-square value at significant level 0.05, is that value
ratio of cultural-fit between organizational and individual perceived culture in six local governments is
slightly different. (Table 5) The Chi-square probability of Chachoengsao is .289, of Nakhonnayok is
.549, Pathum Thani is .500, Saraburi is .344, Sa kaeo is .375, and Ayutthaya is .687. The proportion
of cultural-fit only decreased from 129 to 125 and p > 0.05 (0.644), strongly supports the test
model.(See Table 6). Most of 180 members perceived their cultural-fit, between organizational and
individual cultures, with ‘Role’ culture.
Table 6
All Respondent Perceptions from testing of proportion by Mcnemar test (n=30)
Perception of
Role Culture on
Organization side
Fit Culture
Mismatched Culture
Total
Perception of
Role Culture on
Individual side
Total
Fit
Culture
Mismatched
Culture
106
23
129
19
32
51
125
55
180
Chisquare
value
Chisquare
prob
.214
.644 or
.643
The results of qualitative data collected by in-depth interview indicate causes leaded to cultural fit and
to cultural conflict in those sampling units. The respondents also mentioned the factors that caused
incongruence between organization and individual perceived culture. Those factors were not in their
right conditions and ineffectively led to mismatched culture. They are comparatively summarized and
illustrated on Table 7.
Table 7
Factors causing incongruence culture among the six local governments by interviewing
Sampling Units
Factors
Chachoengsao
Leader
Management
Achievement
Nakhonnayok
Pathum Thani
Work satisfaction
Management
Achievement
Indicators
Work satisfaction
Leader
Management
Achievement
Indicators
Work satisfaction
Motivation factor
Saraburi
Leader
Management
Achievement
Motivation factor
Sa Kaeo
Leader
Management
Achievement
Motivation factor
Ayutthaya
Leader
Management
Motivation factor
Negative Effects
Require leader as monitor
Require more formal practice
Need for more efficiency
Need for more authority from role
Lack of formal control
Need for more efficiency
Require regularity, completeness
Need for more authority from role
Require leader as monitor by role
Lack of formal control
Lack of efficiency
Require regularity, completeness, in
time
Need for more power from role,
recognition
Need for security and progress
Require leader as monitor by role
Require more formal control, better
work system, and elimination of
political intervention
Lack of efficiency
Need for security and progress,
Loss of ideology or values of officials
Require leader as monitor
Require more formal practice,
elimination of political intervention
Lack of efficiency
Need for security and progress,
work type does not respond to officials’
needs
Require leader as monitor
Require more formal practice
Need for security and progress,
Loss of ideology or values of officials
From Table 7, the data revealed that members had needs for self-esteem and required a participative
style of management and merit system. They also perceived that achievement of work was not
unattainable to its goal and work type was boring, overloaded, and repetitious. In addition, collected
data also revealed that the motivation factor was affected. The members felt that they didn’t have a
progress of work which they deserved on their career path, thus, their satisfaction of work was
unfulfilled. Moreover, the political context had influenced to those local governments and caused to
deviant or mismatch culture.
Cultural - fit management of the six local governments in the central region of Thailand is appropriated
with ‘Role culture’, but most of the government officials among the six sampling units perceived that
sub-ordinate organizational and individual perceived culture is ‘Club culture’. This indicates a strong
implication of a political culture, a ‘patronage’ or ‘nepotism’, contaminated with Role culture, which
causes a deviation of cultural-fit management in those local governments. By analyzing factors that
led to an incongruent culture, relevantly compared with involved theories and concepts (Table 1), the
researcher found eight key success factors which related to the major attributes of Role culture
criteria described in Handy’s theory, as illustrated on Figure 2. This diagram reveals the eight key
success factors of cultural-fit between organization and individual in Role culture. Those key success
factors are a combination of five key success factors on organizational side: (1) leader, (2)
management, (3) work type, (4) work achievement, and (5) performance indicator, and three key
success factors on individual side: (1) motivation factor, (2) needs, and (3) work satisfaction. The
cultural-fit in different cultures is owing to the right conditions of those eight key success factors.
Role Culture (Apollo)
Organizational Side
Leader
Management
Work type
Achievement
Indicators
Monitor (by formal role)
By authority
Steady-state task
Efficiency
Regularity, Completeness
Role Culture (Apollo)
Individual Side
Motivation factor Responsibility, Progress
Needs
Power, Status
Work satisfaction Security, Power from role,
authorization, status
Figure 2. Key success factors and conditions of cultural - fit in Role culture
The findings of this research are supported by involved theories and responded to those five queries:
1) cultural-fit of local government;
The cultural-fit of ‘Role’ culture existed in all sampling units as proposed in Handy’s theory.
2) appropriate culture between organization and individual;
The principle culture, appropriated between organization and individual, of local government is Role
culture. And the subordinate one is Club culture.
3) key success factors leading to cultural-fit in local government;
The researcher found eight key success factors which related to the major attributes of ‘Role’
culture criteria described in Handy’s theory. Those are a combination of five key success factors on
organizational side: (1) leader - role of monitor (Blake and Mouton, 1994), (2) management - by
authority (Likert, 1961), (3) work type - steady-state task (Stewart, 1986; Handy, 1991), (4) work
achievement – efficiency (Stewart, 1986; Handy, 1991), and (5) performance indicators - regularity
of work and completeness (Handy, 1991), and three key success factors on individual side: (1)
motivation factor - responsibility and progress (Herzberg, 1993), (2) needs (motive) - for power and
status (Murray, 1971; Handy, 1991, Hy and Lovinger, 1996), and (3) work satisfaction – security,
power from role, authorization, status (Murray, 1971; Handy, 1991; Herzberg, 1993). The cultural-fit
in different culture is owing to the right conditions of those eight key success factors.
4) factors causing incongruent culture;
Due to organizational context, the factors causing mismatched culture are slightly different in six
local governments. In a whole picture, the researcher discovered similar factors but different
degree that caused incongruent culture of 6 local governments. They were: 1) leader, 2)
management, 3) work achievement, 4) performance indicator, 5) motive, and 6) work satisfaction.
5) specific motivating factors appropriated with individual culture in local government;
Motivating factors are the result of internal instincts in each employee, and leads to motivation
rather than movement. If they well suit with desirability and satisfaction of individuals in ‘Role’
cultures, they will decrease conflict between organization and individual and lead to achievement
for both parties. Those specific ones are security of work, higher position and status, work
progress, and power from authority.
Conclusions
The conclusions and recommendations give support to both Handy and Herzberg theories. Previous
studies on cultural-fit management aligned with the findings of this study are those researches of
Bardwick (2001), Bolman and Deal (2003), and Jittaruttha (2009, 2010). They also suggest that local
government will attain to their needs and vision, and public management will be efficient if determinant
factors of each culture are matched with their right conditions. The most important thing local
government leaders should aware is that whether motivation factors are not well-fit with individuals,
the cultural-fit will be decreased.
Contributions to New Knowledge in HRD
The argument about the ‘real’ relationship between individual culture and organizational culture will
probably go on indefinitely because of the complexity of both entities and their interactions. Even
simplifying the discussion to focus on the personality of an organization or that of individual does not
provide an opportunity to reach a cultural-fit between both side, but requiring deep ‘insight’ of cultural
dimensions. The power of the culture to change individuals and vice versa on sustainable
development in HRD depends on: (1) the extent of congruency between the values and norms that
proceed behaviors of the organisations or individuals, (2) the breadth, depth and uniformity which
point to both sides of organizational life, among each pattern of the organization’s cultural values as
well as that of the individuals (3) the reward system of organization, (4) the skill, determination and
tenure of the leaders, and increasingly, (5) the recognized urgency for organisations to change the
culture in order to thrive or survive. Both organization and individual need to be aware of their own
cultures which their values can coexist.
References
Bardwick, J. M. (1998). In praise of good business: How optimizing risk rewards both your bottom line
and your people. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organisations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cochran, W. G. (3rd.ed.) (1977). Sampling techniques. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Cornwall, J. R. & Perlman, B. (1990). Organizational entrepreneurship. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Denhardt, J. V. & Denhardt, R. B. (2nd ed.). (2007). The new public service: Serving, not steering.
Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Handy, C. B. (3rd ed.). (1991). Gods of management. Great Britain: Business Books.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. and Snyderman B. B. (1993). The motivation to work. New Brunswick, NJ:
Transaction.
Howell, D. C. (6th ed.). (2007). Statistical methods for psychology. Belmont, CA: ThomsonWadsworth.
Johns, G. & Saks, A. M. (6th ed.). (2005). Organizational behaviour: Understanding and managing
life at work. New York, NY: Prentice - Hall.
Jittaruttha, C. (2009). “Mismatch between Organizational and Individual Perceived Culture: An
Exploratory Case Study of Professional Organization in Thailand.”
Proceeding Paper, the 8th International Conference of the Academy of HRD (Asia Chapter) and 1st
International Conference of the Academy of HRD
(MENA Chapter), Bahrain: Manama, December 12-15, 2009.
Jittaruttha, C. (2010). “Organizational Culture and Determinant Factors of Royal Thai Army: An
Exploratory Case Study of Cultural Aspect of Public Management.”
Proceeding Paper, the 14th Annual Conference of the International Research Society for Public
Management (IRSPM), Switzerland: Berne, April 07 – 09, 2010.
Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York: McGraw - Hill.
Maccoby, M. (1976). The gamesman. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Mintzberg, H. (1983). Structure in fives. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice - Hall.
Murray, H. A., (1971). Thematic apperception test. By Henry A. Murray and the staff of the Harvard
Psychological Clinic, S.l.: S.N.
Ott, J. S. (1st ed.). (1989). The organizational culture perspective. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Schein, E. (3rd ed.). (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Siegel, A. F. (4th ed.). (2000). Practical business statistics. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly,
28, 339-358.