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

InvolvedTheories

& Concepts

Club Culture

ZEUS

Role Culture

APOLLO

Task Culture

ATHENA

Existential Culture

DIONYSUSSystem 4(Likert)

Benevolentauthoritativemanagement

Exploitativeauthoritativemanagement

Participativemanagement

Consultativemanagement

Organization Structure

(Mintzberg)

SimpleStructure

Machine Bureaucracy

Structure

AdhocracyStructure

ProfessionalBureaucracy

StructureMotivation factor

(Herzberg,Mainer,& Snyderman))

Acceptance/Challenge

Responsibility/Security

Success/Reputation

Growth/Actualization

Needs(Murray)

Affiliation Power Achievement Autonomy

Individual Personality (Macco

by)

Jungle Fighter Company Man Gamesman Craftsman

IndividualEmotion(Handy)

Choleric Phlegmatic Sanguine Melancholic

IndividualBrain

(Handy)

Right brainIntuition/Hunch

Left brainOrder/

Sequence

Left brainLogic/ Reason/

Sequence

Right brainImagination/

CreativityWork type(Handy)

AsteriskTask

Steady-stateTask

DevelopmentTask

AsteriskTask

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 God ApolloSymbolic Spider’s web Symbolic Greek TempleCultural Pattern Cultural PatternSpeed of decision / Network Rational / Logic / Exact contractRisk / Intuition / Nepotism Stability / Fixed role / Predictability Empathy / Affinity / Trust Order and Rule

Task Culture Existential Culture

God Athena God DionysusSymbolic Spider’s web Symbolic Spider’s webCultural Pattern Cultural PatternSkill / Expertise / Teamwork Difficult to manage / ProfessionalTalent / Creativity Commune culture / IndependenceSolving new problem FreedomExpensive culture

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 Role CultureAPOLLO

God’s Personality God of order and rules / Its patron god

Symbolic Analogy

Greek temple

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 bureaucracypicture.

Features 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 rolePattern of Work Steady-stateKinds of Organization Organization of Japanese management /

Hospitals /Life insurance companies / Civil service / State industries / Local government / Prison / MilitaryMachine 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 Learning

Think logically, sequentially and analytically / Learn by training/ Transfer process by adding more skills or knowledge

Way of Influencing and Changing

Influence of time table / Changed by structure or systems

Way of MotivatingAnd Rewarding

Motivated by formal power, certainty, progress 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

OrganizationSampling

FrameSampling

Unit(RandomSampling)

TargetPopulation(Purposive Sampling)

Sections ofSampling

Unit(Quota

Sampling)

n(180)

Test

n(30)Inter

view

LocalGovernment

All LocalGovernmen

tin Thailand

(75)

The six LocalGovernmentsIn the Central

Region-Chachoengsao, -Nakhonnayok, -Pathum Thani,

-Saraburi, -Sa Kaeo, -Ayutthaya

-Strategic Apex-AdministrativeComponents

(TechnoStructure &Middle Line)

6 provincialadministrations

18 6

8 municipalcities

16 12

21municipaldistricts

34 6

82 Tambonadministrations

112 6

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 sub-constructs 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 cultural-fit. 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 sub-ordinate 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)

LocalGovernments

Perception of Role Culture on

Organization side

Perception of Role Culture onIndividual side

TotalChi-

square value

Chi-square prob

Fit Culture

Mismatched Culture

Chachoengsao Fit Culture 19 2 212.57 .289Mismatched Culture 6 3 9

Total 25 5 30

Nakhonnayok

Fit Culture 16 4 20.373 .549Mismatched Culture 7 3 10

Total 23 7 30

Pathum Thani Fit Culture 21 0 21

21.30 .500Mismatched Culture 2 7 9

Total 23 7 30Saraburi Fit Culture 15 3 18

2.30 .344Mismatched Culture 7 5 12

Total 22 8 30

Sa Kaeo Fit Culture 17 4 2112.80 .375Mismatched Culture 1 8 9

Total 18 12 30

Ayutthaya Fit Culture 18 4 228.52 .687

Mismatched Culture 2 6 8

Total 20 10 30

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)

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

Perception of Role Culture on

Organization side

Perception of Role Culture onIndividual side Total

Chi-square value

Chi-square prob

.214 .644 or .643

Fit Culture

MismatchedCulture

Fit Culture 106 23 129

Mismatched Culture 19 32 51

Total 125 55 180

Factors causing incongruence culture among the six local governments by interviewing

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

Sampling Units Factors Negative Effects

Chachoengsao Leader Require leader as monitor Management Require more formal practiceAchievement Need for more efficiency

Work satisfaction Need for more authority from roleNakhonnayok Management Lack of formal control

Achievement Need for more efficiencyIndicators Require regularity, completeness

Work satisfaction Need for more authority from rolePathum Thani Leader Require leader as monitor by role

Management Lack of formal controlAchievement Lack of efficiency

Indicators Require regularity, completeness, in time

Work satisfaction Need for more power from role, recognition

Motivation factor Need for security and progress

Saraburi Leader Require leader as monitor by roleManagement Require more formal control, better

work system, and elimination of political intervention

Achievement Lack of efficiency Motivation factor Need for security and progress,

Loss of ideology or values of officialsSa Kaeo Leader Require leader as monitor

Management Require more formal practice, elimination of political intervention

Achievement Lack of efficiencyMotivation factor Need for security and progress,

work type does not respond to officials’ needs

Ayutthaya Leader Require leader as monitor Management Require more formal practice

Motivation factor Need for security and progress,Loss of ideology or values of officials

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) Role Culture (Apollo) Organizational Side Individual Side

Leader Monitor (by formal role) Motivation factor Responsibility, Progress Management By authority Needs Power, Status Work type Steady-state task Work satisfaction Security, Power from role, Achievement Efficiency authorization, status Indicators Regularity, Completeness

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: Thomson- Wadsworth.

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.