1. 1 NEW TRENDS IN ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE RESEARCH Vicente González-Romá University of Valencia Spain Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, May 31, 2007

2. 2 OUTLINE 1. INTRODUCTION 2. INITIAL ISSUES 3. CLIMATE AS SHARED PERCPETIONS AND THE ROLE OF WITHIN-UNIT DISPERSION. 1. Composition models. 2. Payne’s 3-dimension model 3. Dispersion theory and forms of emergence 4. CLIMATE AS A CONFIGURAL UNIT PROPERTY 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 1. Climate strength’s influences. 2. Antecedents of climate strength 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS. 7. CONCLUSIONS

3. 3 1. INTRODUCTION Organizational Climate: classic topic in WOP, but nowadays there is interest in it: Organizational Climate: classic topic in WOP, but nowadays there is interest in it: Recent Handbooks: Recent Handbooks: Ashkanasy, N. M., Wilderom, C. P. M., & Peterson, M. F. (2000). Handbook of organizational culture and climate. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ashkanasy, N. M., Wilderom, C. P. M., & Peterson, M. F. (2000). Handbook of organizational culture and climate. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cooper, C. L., Cartwright, S. & Earley, P. C. (2001). The International handbook of organizational culture and climate. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons. Cooper, C. L., Cartwright, S. & Earley, P. C. (2001). The International handbook of organizational culture and climate. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons. Recent Meta-analyses (Parker et al., 2003, JOB; Carr et al., 2003, JAP) Recent Meta-analyses (Parker et al., 2003, JOB; Carr et al., 2003, JAP) According to PsycINFO, the number of published studies is increasing. According to PsycINFO, the number of published studies is increasing.

4. 4 1. INTRODUCCIÓN Number of articles in PsycINFO where ‘Organizational climate’ is the major point of the article.

5. 5 1. INTRODUCTION Aims: Aims: To present a new line of research in organizational climate. To present a new line of research in organizational climate. To propose a conceptualization of climate as a configural unit property. To propose a conceptualization of climate as a configural unit property. To present some results on the relationships between within-unit dispersion in climate and team processes and outcomes. To present some results on the relationships between within-unit dispersion in climate and team processes and outcomes.

6. 6 2. INITIAL ISSUES. Climate: employees’ perceptions of the social setting of which the person is a part (Rousseau, 1988). Climate: employees’ perceptions of the social setting of which the person is a part (Rousseau, 1988). In organizations, the social setting may be the work- team, the department, the organization  distinct targets. In organizations, the social setting may be the work- team, the department, the organization  distinct targets. Facets: The content of climate perceptions clusters on groups of psychologically related events and meanings (support, innovation, service, safety, etc.). Facets: The content of climate perceptions clusters on groups of psychologically related events and meanings (support, innovation, service, safety, etc.). Climate can be operationalized at different levels of analysis: Climate can be operationalized at different levels of analysis: Individual: psychological climate. Individual: psychological climate. Higher-levels: aggregate climate. Higher-levels: aggregate climate.

7. 7 3. CLIMATE AS SHARED PERCPETIONS AND THE ROLE OF WITHIN-UNIT DISPERSION. Climate at higher-levels (aggregate climate) is defined as shared perceptions. Climate at higher-levels (aggregate climate) is defined as shared perceptions. Within-unit agreement is a prerequisite for arguing that unit climate can be operationalized and that it exists. Within-unit agreement is a prerequisite for arguing that unit climate can be operationalized and that it exists. This approach: This approach: restricts the conceptualization of climate restricts the conceptualization of climate has hidden the status of within-unit dispersion as a scientific construct. has hidden the status of within-unit dispersion as a scientific construct. Recently  A number of conceptual and theoretical proposals have contributed to extending the unit climate concept by highlighting the role of within-unit dispersion in climate perceptions. Recently  A number of conceptual and theoretical proposals have contributed to extending the unit climate concept by highlighting the role of within-unit dispersion in climate perceptions.

8. 8 3.1. Composition models. Specify the functional relationships among constructs operationalized at different levels of analysis (Chan, 1998; James, 1992). Specify the functional relationships among constructs operationalized at different levels of analysis (Chan, 1998; James, 1992). Chan’s (1998) typology: additive, direct consensus, referent-shift consensus, dispersion, process models. Chan’s (1998) typology: additive, direct consensus, referent-shift consensus, dispersion, process models. In direct consensus and referent-shift consensus models  within-unit agreement is a prerequisite for aggregation. In direct consensus and referent-shift consensus models  within-unit agreement is a prerequisite for aggregation. Dispersion models: within-unit agreement (dispersion) is the focal construct. Dispersion models: within-unit agreement (dispersion) is the focal construct. Examples: norm crystallization (Jackson, 1975), mental model sharedness (Mathieu et al., 2005), climate strength. Examples: norm crystallization (Jackson, 1975), mental model sharedness (Mathieu et al., 2005), climate strength.

9. 9 3.2. Payne’s 3-dimension model. Payne (2000, 2001) proposed a 3-dimension model for analyzing organizational climate and culture. Dimensions: Payne (2000, 2001) proposed a 3-dimension model for analyzing organizational climate and culture. Dimensions: 1. Pervasiveness: range of defined and controlled beliefs and behaviors (narrow-wide) 1. Pervasiveness: range of defined and controlled beliefs and behaviors (narrow-wide) 2. Psychological intensity: target constructs (shallow-deep). 2. Psychological intensity: target constructs (shallow-deep). 3. Strength of consensus: degree of agreement (low-high). 3. Strength of consensus: degree of agreement (low-high). Payne (2000) found in a sample of 56 organizations that the degree of consensus in 17 climate scales varied notably across organizations. Payne (2000) found in a sample of 56 organizations that the degree of consensus in 17 climate scales varied notably across organizations.

10. 10 3.3. Dispersion theory and forms of emergence. Dispersion Theory (TD, Brown & Kozlowski, 1999): within-unit dispersion of individual-level constructs can be used for examining the degree of emergence of higher-level constructs. Dispersion Theory (TD, Brown & Kozlowski, 1999): within-unit dispersion of individual-level constructs can be used for examining the degree of emergence of higher-level constructs. Within-unit dispersion comprises two dimensions: Within-unit dispersion comprises two dimensions: 1. strength: the degree of within-unit agreement of the individual-level construct 1. strength: the degree of within-unit agreement of the individual-level construct 2. uniformity: the pattern of the individual-level construct at the unit level. 2. uniformity: the pattern of the individual-level construct at the unit level.

11. 11 3.3. Dispersion theory and forms of emergence. Four ideal dispersion types (Brown & Kozlowski, 1999).

12. 12 3.3. Dispersion theory and forms of emergence. In climate research, the role of dispersion dimensions as scientific constructs has been neglected for a long time. In climate research, the role of dispersion dimensions as scientific constructs has been neglected for a long time. Researchers have recently begun to study the role of climate strength (the degree of within-unit agreement in climate perceptions): Researchers have recently begun to study the role of climate strength (the degree of within-unit agreement in climate perceptions): Bliese & Halverson, 1998; Lindell & Brandt, 2000; Schneider et al., 2002; González-Romá et al., 2002, 2005; Colquitt et al.; Zohar & Luria, 2004, 2005; Moliner et al., 2005. Bliese & Halverson, 1998; Lindell & Brandt, 2000; Schneider et al., 2002; González-Romá et al., 2002, 2005; Colquitt et al.; Zohar & Luria, 2004, 2005; Moliner et al., 2005. Lack of studies about uniformity. Lack of studies about uniformity. Chan (1998) refers to the absence of multimodality (i.e. subgroups) as a prerequisite for composition in dispersion models. Chan (1998) refers to the absence of multimodality (i.e. subgroups) as a prerequisite for composition in dispersion models.

13. 13 3.3. Dispersion theory and forms of emergence. Factors to explain this situation: Factors to explain this situation: Predominance of the integration perspective: unit climate as shared perceptions. Predominance of the integration perspective: unit climate as shared perceptions. A number of factors in real work units promote convergence of climate perceptions (ASA processes, socialization, social interaction, leadership). A number of factors in real work units promote convergence of climate perceptions (ASA processes, socialization, social interaction, leadership). However, there are ‘non-uniform climates’. However, there are ‘non-uniform climates’.

14. 14 3.3. Dispersion theory and forms of emergence. Observed non-uniform climates

15. 15 3.3. Dispersion theory and forms of emergence. We know very little about this type of climates. We know very little about this type of climates. What factors promote these patterns of climate perceptions? What factors promote these patterns of climate perceptions? Demographic diversity Demographic diversity Leader-member interaction Leader-member interaction What are their influences on unit processes and outcomes? What are their influences on unit processes and outcomes? Conflict Conflict Communication Communication Performance Performance

16. 16 3.4. Summary. To promote research on these issues we need a broader conceptualization of unit climate. To promote research on these issues we need a broader conceptualization of unit climate. The conceptual and theoretical contributions presented above call for the consideration of within-unit dispersion in climate perceptions. The conceptual and theoretical contributions presented above call for the consideration of within-unit dispersion in climate perceptions.

17. 17 4. CLIMATE AS A CONFIGURAL UNIT PROPERTY. Unit climate: the pattern of employees’ perceptions of their unit. Unit climate: the pattern of employees’ perceptions of their unit.

18. 18 4. CLIMATE AS A CONFIGURAL UNIT PROPERTY Assumption: climate may emerge as a configurational property adopting different shapes, following a compilation process of emergence; not only as a shared property following a composition process of emergence. Assumption: climate may emerge as a configurational property adopting different shapes, following a compilation process of emergence; not only as a shared property following a composition process of emergence. Kozlowski & Klein (2000): 3 types of unit-level constructs: Kozlowski & Klein (2000): 3 types of unit-level constructs: Global unit properties: originate and are manifest at the unit level (unit size, unit function); single-level phenomena. Global unit properties: originate and are manifest at the unit level (unit size, unit function); single-level phenomena. Shared unit properties: originate at lower levels, but are manifest as higher-level phenomena; describe the characteristics that are common to the members of a unit. Shared unit properties: originate at lower levels, but are manifest as higher-level phenomena; describe the characteristics that are common to the members of a unit. Configural unit properties: originate at lower levels, but are manifest as higher-level phenomena; capture the pattern of individual-level phenomena within a unit. Configural unit properties: originate at lower levels, but are manifest as higher-level phenomena; capture the pattern of individual-level phenomena within a unit.

19. 19 4. CLIMATE AS A CONFIGURAL UNIT PROPERTY Kozlowski & Klein (2000): 2 reference types of emergence: Composition: the type and amount of individual-level phenomena (cognition, perception, affect, behavior) are similar for all unit members. Compilation: either the amount or type of individual- level phenomena is different, or both the amount and type are different.

20. 20 4. CLIMATE AS A CONFIGURAL UNIT PROPERTY If climate is conceptualized as a configural unit property, the pattern of strong similarity that has dominated research in the field is one of the possible observable patterns. If climate is conceptualized as a configural unit property, the pattern of strong similarity that has dominated research in the field is one of the possible observable patterns. “A given phenomenon or construct domain does not necessarily have to exhibit a universal form of emergence; that is, a given emergent phenomenon may be the results of composition processes in one situation and of compilation processes in another” (Kozlowski & Klein, 2000, p. 59). “A given phenomenon or construct domain does not necessarily have to exhibit a universal form of emergence; that is, a given emergent phenomenon may be the results of composition processes in one situation and of compilation processes in another” (Kozlowski & Klein, 2000, p. 59).

21. 21 4. CLIMATE AS A CONFIGURAL UNIT PROPERTY Implications: All units have climate as a higher-level property. All units have climate as a higher-level property. To describe unit climate, we have to consider: To describe unit climate, we have to consider: Uniformity Uniformity Strength Strength Localization Localization Other contributions in this direction: Other contributions in this direction: Lindell, M. K. & Brandt, C. J. (2000, JAP): Dissensus does not imply that climate does not exists. Lindell, M. K. & Brandt, C. J. (2000, JAP): Dissensus does not imply that climate does not exists. Ostroff, Kinicki & Tamkins (2003): variability in fundamental elements may not necessarily lead to lack of emergence of a higher-level property. Ostroff, Kinicki & Tamkins (2003): variability in fundamental elements may not necessarily lead to lack of emergence of a higher-level property. Roberson, Q. M. & Colquitt, J. A. (2005). Shared and configural justice: A social network model of justice in teams. Academy of Management Review, 3, 595-607. Roberson, Q. M. & Colquitt, J. A. (2005). Shared and configural justice: A social network model of justice in teams. Academy of Management Review, 3, 595-607.

22. 22 4. CLIMATE AS A CONFIGURAL UNIT PROPERTY Research questions: Research questions: What factors contribute to shaping work-units’ climate? What factors contribute to shaping work-units’ climate? What are the consequences of different climate configurations? What are the consequences of different climate configurations? By studying climate strength’s role in the unit climate-unit outcomes relationship, recent empirical research has begun to pay attention to the pattern of climate perceptions within work units.

23. 23 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 5.1. Climate strength’s influences. Performance Absenteeism Satisfaction Commitment Burnout Service quality Unit climate Climate strength González-Romá, Peiró & Tordera (2002), Schneider, Salvaggio & Subirats (2002), Colquitt, Noe & Jackson (2002), González-Romá & West (2003), González-Romá, Fortes, Peiró & Gamero (2005); Moliner, Martínez-Tur, Peiró, Ramos & Cropanzano (2005).

24. 24 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 5.1. Climate strength’s influences. González-Romá et al.’s (2005) study TEAM CLIMATE TEAM PERFORMANCE CLIMATE STRENGTH

25. 25 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 5.1. Climate strength’s influences. González-Romá et al.’s (2005) study The moderator influence of climate strength is based on Mischel’s (1973) concept of situational strength: The moderator influence of climate strength is based on Mischel’s (1973) concept of situational strength: the degree of ambiguity presented in the context the degree of ambiguity presented in the context STRONG SITUATIONS: STRONG SITUATIONS: Lead persons to interpret events in a similar way Lead persons to interpret events in a similar way Induce uniform expectancies regarding the most appropriate behavior Induce uniform expectancies regarding the most appropriate behavior Behavioral variability will be small Behavioral variability will be small Behavior is more predictable Behavior is more predictable

26. 26 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 5.1. Climate strength’s influences. González-Romá et al.’s (2005) study

27. 27 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 5.1. Climate strength’s influences. Bliese & Halverson’s (1998) study: Lack of consensus  Stressful work environments  Well-being CLIMATE STRENGTH Leadership climate Peer relations UNIT PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING +

28. 28 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 5.1. Climate strength’s influences. Bliese & Britt’s (2001) study: WORK STRESSORS INDIVIDUAL MORALE CLIMATE STRENGTH Leadership climate

29. 29 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 5.1. Climate strength’s influences. Are other forms of relationship plausible? The case of team innovation

30. 30 5. RESEARCH ON CLIMATE STRENGTH. 5.2. Antecedents of climate strength. Demographic diversity Leader-member interaction Interaction among team members Supervisors’ behavioral patterns (simplicity, variability, visibility) Organizational type (Mechanistic vs. Organic) Climate strength Naumann & Bennett, 2000; Klein, Conn, Smith & Sorra (2001); Colquitt, Noe & Jackson (2002), González-Romá, Peiró & Tordera (2002), González-Romá & West (2003), Zohar & Luria (2004, 2005); Dickson, Resick & Hanges, 2006.

31. 31 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.1. Introduction. Lack of studies. Lack of studies. Why are these studies necessary? Why are these studies necessary? Climate strength (CS) only conveys part of the information about climate configuration. Climate strength (CS) only conveys part of the information about climate configuration. The same CS value may show different forms. The same CS value may show different forms.

32. 32 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.1. Introduction. Configurations with VAR (X) = 2

33. 33 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.1. Introduction. Configurations with VAR (X) = 1

34. 34 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.1. Introduction. Research question: What are the influences of uniform and non-uniform climate configurations on team processes and team outcomes? Research question: What are the influences of uniform and non-uniform climate configurations on team processes and team outcomes? In this study we identified 3 levels for uniformity: In this study we identified 3 levels for uniformity: Uniform Uniform Non-uniform (2 sub-groups) Non-uniform (2 sub-groups) Non-uniform (1 sub-group) Non-uniform (1 sub-group)

35. 35 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.1. Introduction. Hypotheses: Hypotheses: Non-Uniform configurations: Non-Uniform configurations: More (task & relationship) conflict and tension More (task & relationship) conflict and tension Less communication quality and optimism Less communication quality and optimism Considering that a given within-unit dispersion value may adopt different forms, the relationship between climate strength and team processes & outcomes will depend on uniformity: Considering that a given within-unit dispersion value may adopt different forms, the relationship between climate strength and team processes & outcomes will depend on uniformity: The relationship will be more dysfunctional when the configuration is non-uniform. The relationship will be more dysfunctional when the configuration is non-uniform.

36. 36 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.2. Method: Sample. Teams: 193 bank branches. Teams: 193 bank branches. Team size: average = 4.6 (SD = 1.8) Team size: average = 4.6 (SD = 1.8) Subjects: 846 team members. Subjects: 846 team members. Response rate: 95.4% Response rate: 95.4% 55% men; 2/3 between 25-45 years old. 55% men; 2/3 between 25-45 years old.

37. 37 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.2. Method: Measures. Team climate: 4 facets: Team climate: 4 facets: Support from the organization: 4 items,  =.81 Support from the organization: 4 items,  =.81 Innovation: 4 items,  =.78. Innovation: 4 items,  =.78. Goal achievement: 4 items,  =.83. Goal achievement: 4 items,  =.83. Enabling formalization: 4 items,  =.84. Enabling formalization: 4 items,  =.84. Climate strength: Average Deviation Index (-1) Climate strength: Average Deviation Index (-1)

38. 38 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.2. Method: Measures. Uniformity in team climate configurations: Uniformity in team climate configurations: Uniform Uniform Non-uniform (2 sub-groups) Non-uniform (2 sub-groups) Non-uniform (1 sub-group) Non-uniform (1 sub-group) 2 dummy variables (comparison group: uniform) 2 dummy variables (comparison group: uniform)

39. 39 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.2. Method: Measures. Team Conflict: Team Conflict: Task: 6 items,  =.89 Task: 6 items,  =.89 Relationship: 4 items,  =.90 Relationship: 4 items,  =.90 Quality of communication: 5 items,  =.90 Quality of communication: 5 items,  =.90 Team mood: Team mood: Tension: 6 items,  =.90 Tension: 6 items,  =.90 Optimism: 6 items,  =.91 Optimism: 6 items,  =.91 Aggregation at the team level was justified.

40. 40 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.2. Method: Analysis. Team level. Team level. Hierarchical regression analysis. Hierarchical regression analysis. Steps: Steps: Average climate as a control Average climate as a control Climate strength Climate strength Dummies for uniformity Dummies for uniformity Interaction term: climate strength * uniformity Interaction term: climate strength * uniformity

41. 41 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.3. Results. SUPPORT Non-uniform configurations: Less communication quality Less optimism More tension

42. 42 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.3. Results. GOAL ACHIEVEMENT Non-uniform configurations: Less optimism More tension

43. 43 6. A STUDY ON UNIFORMITY IN TEAM CLIMATE PERCEPTIONS 6.3. Results. INNOVATION When the configuration is Non-uniform (2 sub-groups): Climate strength shows a significant negative relationship with task and relationship conflict. Uniformity does not show significant relationships for enabling formalization.

44. 44 7. CONCLUSIONS To better understand the role of unit climate we need a broader conceptualization  climate as configural unit property. To better understand the role of unit climate we need a broader conceptualization  climate as configural unit property. Implications for research: Implications for research: A new area of research focused on climate configurations. Lack of studies. A new area of research focused on climate configurations. Lack of studies. Empirical evidence on climate strength  models of unit climate should pay attention to within-unit dispersion. Empirical evidence on climate strength  models of unit climate should pay attention to within-unit dispersion. Do not remove units with low climate strength (ask why, reduced sample size, restriction of range) Do not remove units with low climate strength (ask why, reduced sample size, restriction of range) Implications for practice: Implications for practice: Climate surveys: The mean is not enough (only at the extremes!). Climate surveys: The mean is not enough (only at the extremes!). The SD may not be enough. The SD may not be enough. The analysis of within-unit climate configurations yields a more detailed diagnosis. The analysis of within-unit climate configurations yields a more detailed diagnosis.

45. 45 Thank you very much Vicente.Glez-Roma@uv.es University of Valencia