Organisational Culture Is Linked To Employee Behaviour

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Leadership has several dimensions which makes it difficult to find a particular meaning of leadership. Leadership could be ability for some and could be attributing for some people as well, and relationship is a part of leadership quality also. It is a mix of all these qualities and every single measurement is a part of leadership. Everybody at some point of time in their lifetime is required to show the leadership aspect, and when it is demanded as such it usually very challenging with being rewarding. Our thinking about leadership does affect how we practice it (Peter Guy Northouse, 2008)

According to John Sculley(1989) Leadership revolves around image, facts, directions, and inspire people with an aim to direct them towards certain goals with day-to-day functioning. A leader must be able to influence employees beyond his own ability. He must be capable of inspiring other people to do things without actually sitting on top of them with a checklist.

Two leadership styles

Charismatic Leader:

The job of the Charismatic leader is to lead by filling it's group members with enthusiasm and energy (Weber,1905). This type of leadership does not work under short term contracts, meaning a Charismatic leader needs to me attached to the organisation for a long term and should not leave the tasks undone. As failure or success of a company highly depends on the leader itself instead of the team, it may be difficult for the organisation to digest the loss which may be caused if the Charismatic leader decides to leave the company for more prosperous future options. This is because the workforce behind a Charismatic leader is so much attached to it's charisma that they are not able to get used to the change of leadership easily.

Transformational Leader:

(Burns,1978) This Leadership is all about the ability of the leader to motivate the team and prove it's efficiency and effectiveness. A Transformational leader remains mostly at the front and in the picture and make use of the command chain to make sure the job is accomplished. The foundation is the communicating ability in order to achieve the goals and group focus in the final result. Such type of leaders focus on much wider area through being encircled by people who keeps the details updated with them.

Transformational Leadership vs. Charismatic Leadership:

According to (Yukl,1999b) it remain unclear whether is it possible to be Charismatic and Transformational both at the same time. An important source of obvious difference between the two is charisma on one side and personal identity on the other. (Bass,1985) noted that charisma is a must for both, but it is not necessary that a charismatic leader can be transformational. A lot of the behaviours of leadership looks to be similar in both the theories, but we may find a lot of dissimilarities in them as a transformational leader is suppose to do many more such things which will result in lesser dependency of the followers on to their leaders. Transformational leaders could be found at many stages in several organisations but the charismatic leader is some one who is rare and comes ones in a while and the appearance will depend on more favourable conditions (Bass,1996,1997).

Both, Charismatic and Transformational leadership are lacking enough specifications for assess the affects of influence. If we talk about the Charismatic leadership it talks mostly of the leader centred approach, whereas there is a need to understand the reciprocal influence rather than just leaders impact on the employee. Both the theories suggest how the leader can impact the motivation and dedication of the employees towards the organisation, which is more of an extension to the theories of Motivation, whereas there should be a need to understand the mutual cooperation and understanding between the leader and the followers to act towards improved organisational performance.(Beyer,1999, Yukl & Lepsinger,2004). Though there are many similarities between both the theories still, there are areas which affects the employees in different ways- Transformational leadership leads to intellectual stimulation, inspiration, idealized influence and individual consideration (Bass & Avolio,1993). Charismatic leadership affects as- changed perception towards work, more expanded future and growth, feeling of a collective identity, improved self efficiency. (Some industry examples are:- Although charismatic leadership is more valued that transformational leadership within industry circles, it is not necessary that by institutionalizing a leaders charisma will produce charismatic results like, Watson of IBM wanted to make his workers feel like executives by dressing them in traditional IBM dark corporate dress, it worked well for a start but later it became a symbol of stiffness.

Examples for both

Motivation theories


Motivation is the one thing that has transformed mankind from the stone age to the present era. To achieve the desired targets motivation is very crucial for any individual be it personal or professional life. Motivation is very important in a professional life, the job which employess do without motivation becomes vry monotonus and then leads to low productivity in delivering standad perfomance. So we can say that a company can flourish only if they have a motivated staff working for them. 

There was a time when the employees were considered just a part of the general production process and not much value was given to their feelings and attitude, but certain studies like the Hawthorne studies by Elton Mayo have bought a major change in the thinking of the organisations that employees are merely not impressed by the monetary factor alone but there is a major factor which id attitude of the employees (Dickson, 1973). Willingness to work hard is motivation, it works on a team level and also on an individual level. For an organisation to succeed it is important to have a work force which is highly motivated as they are keen on working hard and making lesser mistakes while creating lesser waste and always looking forward for the feedback. Organisations can gain valuable suggestions from motivated employees and they are more productive as they are happy with their job and do not waste much time.

When motivated employees work in teams they become more efficient and start cooperating with each other and put the interest of the organisation and the team first. An individually motivated employee is much more satisfied with the job, and remains in good health with more prosperous future options.

Definitions: (Kreitner,1995) Motivation is the process which is psychological and helps in providing a direction and purpose to the behaviour.

As per (Higgins,1994) Motivation is an inner force which satisfies the needs which are unsatisfied and it encourages people to achieve certain goals.

Theories of Motivation-

There are major theories of motivation which leads us better understanding of motivation. The five major theories of motivation are-

Maslow's need hierarchy theory

Herzberg's two factor theory

Vroom's expectancy theory

Alderfer's ERG theory

Acquired needs theory (Mcclellan)

2 and examples

Maslow's Needs Hierarchy Theory

One of the earliest and best-known content theories is needs hierarchy theory. Developed by psychologist Abraham Maslow, this theory condenses the numerous needs that scholars have identified into a hierarchy of five basic categories. At the bottom are physiological needs, which include the need to satisfy biological requirements for food, air, water, and shelter. Next come safety needs - the need for a secure and stable environment and the absence of pain, threat, or illness. Belongingness includes the need for love, affection, and interaction with other people.Esteem includes self-esteem through personal achievement as well as social esteem through recognition and respect from others. At the top of the hierarchy is self-actualization, which represents the need for self-fulfillment - a sense that the person's potential has been realized.

Maslow recognized that an employee's behavior is motivated simultaneously by several need levels, but behavior is motivated mostly by the lowest unsatisfied need at the time. As the person satisfies a lower-level need, the next higher need in the hierarchy becomes the primary motivator. This concept is known as thesatisfaction-progression process. Even if a person is unable to satisfy a higher need, he or she will be motivated by it until it is eventually satisfied. Physiological needs are initially the most important, and people are motivated to satisfy them first. As they become gratified, safety needs emerge as the strongest motivator. As safety needs are satisfied, belongingness needs become most important, and so forth. The exception to the satisfaction-progression process is self-actualization; as people experience self-actualization, they desire more rather than less of this need.

Although Maslow's needs hierarchy is one of the best-known organizational behavior theories, the model is much too rigid to explain the dynamic and unstable characteristics of employee needs. Researchers have found that individual needs do not cluster neatly around the five categories described in the model. Moreover, gratification of one need level does not necessarily led to increased motivation to satisfy the next higher need level. Although Maslow's model may not predict employee needs as well as scholars initially expected, it provides an important introduction to employee needs and has laid the foundation for Alderfer's ERG theory, which has better research support.

Vroom's expectancy theory:

This expectancy theory is based on the belief that the effort by the employee leads to performances and the performance leads to rewards which may be either negative or positive. If the rewards are positive this will lead to more motivation in the employees and if the reward is negative the level of employee motivation is low. The equation of the Vroom's expectancy theory is M=E*I*V where M stands for motivation, E stands for expectancy and I stands for instrumentality (Vroom, 1964).

The Expectancy Theory of Motivation (Porter & Lawler, 1968; Vroom, 1964) is one of the process theories.  I see this theory as a model of behavioral choice, that is, as an explanation of why individuals choose one behavioral option over others.  In doing so, it explains the behavioral direction process.  It does not attempt to explain what motivates individuals, but rather how they make decisions to achieve the end they value.  What follows is a brief summary of this model.


Expectancy theory is comprised of three components: Expectancy, Instrumentality, and Valance.

Expectancy- Probability (E→P)

The expectancy is the belief that one's effort (E) will result is attainment of desired performance (P) goals. This belief, or perception, is generally based on an individual's past experience, self confidence (often termed self efficacy), and the perceived difficulty of the performance standard or goal.

Examples include:

If I spend most of tonight studying will it improve my grade on tomorrow's math exam?

If I work harder than everyone else in the plant will I produce more?

If I practice my foul shot more will my foul shooting improve in the game?

If I make more sales calls will I make any more sales?

Variables affecting the individual's Expectancy perception:

Self Efficacy. Self efficacy is a person's belief about his or her ability to perform a particular behavior successfully. Does the individual believe that he or she has the require skills and competencies required to perform well and the required goals?

Goal Difficulty. Goals that are set too high or performance expectations that are made too difficult, lead to low expectancy perceptions. When individuals perceive that the goals are beyond their ability to achieve, motivation is low because of low expectancy.

Control. One's perceived control over performance is an important determinant of expectancy. In order for expectancy to be high, individuals must believe that some degree of control over the expected outcome. When individuals perceive that the outcome is beyond their ability to influence, expectancy, and thus motivation, is low. For example, many profit-sharing plans do not motivate individuals to increase their effort because these employees do not think that they have direct control over the profits of their large companies.

Instrumentality- Probability (P→R)

The instrumentality is the belief that if one does meet performance expectations, he or she will receive a greater reward. This reward may come in the form of a pay increase, promotion, recognition or sense of accomplishment. It is important to note that when it is perceived that valued rewards follow all levels of performance, then instrumentality is low. For example, if a professor is known to give everyone in the class an "A" regardless of performance level, then instrumentality is low.

Examples include:

If I get a better grade on tomorrow's math test will I get an "A" in math?

If I produce more than anyone else in the plant, will I get a bigger raise? A faster promotion?

If my foul shooting improves will I have a shot a team MVP?

If I make more sales will I get a bonus? A greater commission?

If I make more sales will I believe that I am the best sales person or be recognized by others as the best sales person?

Variables affecting the individual's Valance for outcomes:

Trust. When individuals trust their leaders, they're more likely to believe their promises that good performance will be rewarded.

Control. When workers do not trust the leaders of their organizations, they often attempt to control the reward system through a contract or some other type of control mechanism. When individuals believe they have some kind of control over how, when, and why rewards are distributed, Instrumentality tends to increase.

Policies. The degree to which pay and reward systems are formalized in written policies has an impact on the individuals' Instrumentality perceptions. Formalized policies linking rewards to performance tend to increase Instrumentality.

Valance- V(R)

The valance refers the value the individual personally places on the rewards. This is a function of his or her needs, goals, values and Sources of Motivation.

Examples include:

How much I really want an "A" in math?

Do I want a bigger raise? Is it worth the extra effort? Do I want a promotion?

How important to me is it to be team MVP?

Do I need a sales bonus? Is the extra time I spend making extra sales calls worth the extra commission?

Is it important to me that I am the best salesperson?

Variables affecting the individual's Valance for outcomes:





Sources of Motivation 

Potential Valued Outcomes may include:  

Pay increases and bonuses


Time off

New and interesting assignments


Intrinsic satisfaction from validating one's skills and abilities

Intrinsic satisfaction from knowing that your efforts had a positive influence in helping someone.

We use the Expectancy Theory of motivation to help us understand how individuals make decisions regarding various behavioral alternatives. This model deals with the direction aspect of motivation, that is, once behavior is energized, what behavioral alternatives are individuals likely to pursue. The following are propositions of Expectancy Theory:

When deciding among behavioral options, individuals select the option with the greatest motivational force (MF).

Motivational Force (MF) = Expectancy x Instrumentality x Valance

Expectancy and instrumentality are attitudes, or more specifically, they are cognitions. As such, they represent an individual's perception of the likelihood that effort will lead to performance and performance will lead to the desired outcomes. These perceptions represent the individual's subjective reality, and may or may not bear close resemblance to actual probabilities. These perceptions are tempered by the individual's experiences (learning theory), observations of others (social learning theory), and self-perceptions.  Valance is rooted in an individual's value system.

Expectancy Theory can be used to define what is termed a strong situation. Strong situations act to have base is a strong influence on the behavior of individuals, often overriding their personalities, personal preferences, and other dispositional variables.  

Consequences. There are highly valued positive or negative outcomes perceived to be associated with behavior in the situation. This is the same as valance in expectancy theory.

Likelihood. There is a high perceived probability that these consequences will follow behavior (e.g., "I am certain that if I swear at my boss, she will fire me"). This is the same as instrumentality in expectancy theory.

Specificity. Required behavior is well defined and understood by the individual (e.g., "Wear a black tuxedo" is more specific than "dress appropriately"). This is a part of what determines expectancy in expectancy theory.

Organisational culture

Organisational culture may be defined as the accepted norms and values that are associated with a particular company. These norms are seen as distinctive to a particular organisation and normally affect the way specific organisations go about implementing their organisational goals. These norms are also passed on from one group of the organisation to another. The most fundamental question that managers and other organisational stakeholders need to answer is what is the relevance of organisational culture to the way they go about their activities? Organisational culture is closely related to organisational strategy. Managers who normally experience problems are those ones who fail to merge organisational culture to their strategies. If new strategies are incompatible with the kind of culture prevailing at that time, then chances are they might fall fail. Numerous authors have explained how many companies have failed in their endeavours to change their organisation because they had a plan to reorganise and transform without looking at prevailing culture. (Locke, 1976)

Organisational culture related to employee behaviour

Organisational culture can be tackled in three realms; these are;

behaviour and artefacts


assumptions and beliefs

Assumptions and beliefs indicate all the underlying values that have been taken for granted by particular organisation. These are usually values that have become so common to a specific organisation that no one even notices that they are there. Values on the other hand are issues that determine behaviour. It should be noted that values are more internal and are only expressed through behaviour. The latter term; behaviour denotes the visible elements of culture prevailing within a certain organisation. These can be analysed through the organisational dress code, the way employees use technology in their tasks, how work spaces are divided and even the way top executives are treated within the organisation. All the above elements should be understood by managers and implemented in order to influence and affect organisational culture.

Corporate communication

It is essential to remember that any particular form of organisational culture is affected by the way employees, employers and shareholders communicate to each other. Organisational culture is reflected in the manner communication is made within the firm. Corporate communication normally refers to the way companies distribute or disseminate their information either externally or internally. Internal communication will refer to the way employees share information within their organisation and also the way suppliers, partners and investors will share knowledge with the company. Leaders should endeavour to create organisational cultures in which employees represent the best image of the company. (Brown, 1995)

Corporate communication normally affects the way the company is perceived by the external market. It may involve internal relations, crisis communication, corporate social responsibility, issue management and change management. These are all very critical in the determination of how an organisation will go about implementing its tasks and objectives. Sometimes, there may be a need to change certain policies. This is something that will need corporate communication. If done in an appropriate manner, it can affect organisational culture in the future and consequently employee behaviour. Sometimes internal corporate communication may be done to check on the progress of a certain plan to be conducted by the company. Managers should ensure that their communication is done transparently. It should also be done in a compassionate manner in order to make the employees feel as though they are an important part of the organisation and should not be undermined by certain rigid communication procedures. It is also important to make sure that communication is done openly. Most managers make the mistake of letting rumours or here-say be the source of their communications. Most of the time, such employers will not bother correcting or rectifying information. This kind of communication normally persists in cases where there is a high system of hierarchy. Leaders need to realise that they have the ability to influence organisational culture hence employee behaviour through the types of communication that they adopt for their organisation. Good corporate communication is one in which all the virtues mentioned above are incorporated. (Bate, 1994)

Leaders need to realise that they can utilise corporate communication to influence organisational culture hence employee behaviour as they are communicated to the consumer. Organisations that build a system of loyalty through open communication will instil these values and will make their employees trickle this down to their clients. Such employees will ensure that their clients' needs are met through discussions with them and will therefore contribute towards their satisfaction. Such organisations will normally have greater competitive advantage in comparison to others in the market.

Decision making

Decision making processes are also ways in which organisational culture can be transformed thus changing employee behaviour and competitive advantage. Organisations where employees are; confused about their enumeration systems or those ones where employees' job description contracts always come in late or those ones where new employees are never recruited on time, may have problems with employee behaviour hence service delivery. It is essential for leaders to employ the expertise and knowledge that its employees have in their decision making processes. This is because staff members are the ones who eventually have to carry the burden of those decisions. Leaders need to realise that employees have a lot of contact with clients and may be more knowledgeable about consumer preference. It is therefore wise to learn about those ideas from their employees. This will make employees more responsible and will instil an organisational culture that is full of cooperation. (Kilmann et al, 1986)

CEO s and other types of leaders need to create a free environment where employees are allowed to think for themselves. This will go a long way in enhancing efficiency because too much bureaucracy slows down service delivery. Employees should be encouraged to contribute their views through regular meetings with managers or employers. This can also be topped up by freedom to elect an independent advisory group that will facilitate certain agreements between employees and their employers. Organisations that are characterised with top-down management structure and cultures rarely affect their employees' behaviour and will be less effective in achievement of sustainable advantage.

Decision making as a method of influencing employee behaviour and organisational culture is effective in that it allows employees to be prepared psychologically for business activity. Organisations in which decision making is largely left to the employee are characterised by fast and intellectual employees during treatment of clients. It should be noted that such employees are normally quite ready for nay occurrences in the firm since they contributed to its formation. Consequently, chances of meeting obstacles and objections during hours of business will be minimised by those employees and they will be more effective in their tasks. Examples of areas in which employees should be allowed to contribute to include aspects of products sold. Employees can make their contribution about how their product should be based on knowledge acquired from consumers. They could also give their ideas about pricing strategies. Through their interaction with clients, employees will have the ability to know what consumers are looking for in their area of interest are. Such issues will contribute towards better employee behaviour and hence organisational behaviour. (Benedict, 1934)

mploying specific character traits to affect employee behaviour

Managers with the right qualities have the ability to affect organisational culture and hence employee behaviour. Managers should endeavour to display attributes of justice and honesty. This can be achieved through the honesty during interaction with employees. When leaders need to solve disputes between their employees, they should do this in a fast and fair manner. The disagreeing parties should be accommodated effectively in this process. By being just, employers will be showing their employees that the company is on their side and this will go a long way in enhancing transparent organisational culture. Such a culture will be depicted by committed workers who have confidence in their organisation. (Allen, 1985)

Another quality that should be emphasised by managers is the participative culture. This can be achieved by working with employees. Organisations should try their best to create an environment where employers and employees collaborate to complete tasks. There is nothing that will many employees over like a leader who 'walks his talk'. Such employees will be encouraged to place more efforts or to go that extra mile because they realise that their employees will do the same too.

Leaders could also try to be more understanding of their employees. They should try and learn their employees and understand what the most important things to their employees are. Some employees may be motivated to work harder by money. Some employees may be motivated by continuous challenges in their tasks. On the other hand, others may prefer seeing the satisfaction on clients' faces. If employers can understand their employees as individuals, then they can customise motivational tools to create an organisational culture where most of the employees are satisfied by their motivational tools. This kind of culture will be depicted in the way most of these employees behave. (Weick, 1979)


Organisational culture is linked to employee behaviour in that the latter is an expression of the former. If managers try their best to institute changes in the organisation that influence organisational culture, this will be expressed by employee behaviour and can actually create competitive advantage.