Organizational culture, organizational climate, and collaborative capacity for planning

The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship of organizational culture and organizational climate on participant perceptions of collaborative capacity for planning, within the context of the Florida School Readiness Coalitions (FSRCs). Three hypotheses were proposed for study: First, that organizational culture would be correlated to organizational climate; second, that organizational culture would be correlated to collaborative capacity for planning; and the third that organizational climate would be correlated to collaborative capacity for planning. ^ A cross-sectional survey research design was used to obtain data from participants in 25 Florida School Readiness Coalitions. Pearson product-moment correlations were used to examine the association between the dependent variable, collaborative capacity for planning, and the independent variables, organizational culture and climate. Bivariate analyses revealed a significant level of association for five culture indicators to collaborative capacity for planning: motivation, interpersonal, service, supportive and individualistic indicators, and four climate indicators: cooperation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and role clarity. Findings suggest (a) a constructive culture and positive climate were present within the FSRCs during the period of study and (b) participants perceived that the collaborative capacity for planning existed. Hierarchical multiple regression, controlling for effects of participant demographics, were used to examine the degree to which organizational culture and climate predict collaborative capacity. The culture indicators, supportive and individualistic, and the climate indicator job satisfaction accounted for 46% of the variance in collaborative capacity for planning. No other indicators of the independent variables demonstrated significance. The findings suggests that (a) culture and climate should be studied together, (b) culture and climate are two constructs that may provide knowledge about the way community groups work together, and (c) the collaborative capacity of groups planning services such as the FSRCs may benefit through consideration of how culture and climate affect service planners' relationships, communication, and ability to achieve a mission or goal. Culture and climate may offer social workers new information about internal factors affecting the collaborative process. Further investigation of these constructs with other types of groups is warranted. ^

Exploring calling work orientation: Construct clarity and organizational implications

Employees maintain a personal view toward their work, which can be referred to as their work orientation. Some employees view their work as their life's purpose (i.e., calling work orientation) and they tend to be 1) prosocially motivated, 2) derive meaning from work, and 3) feel that their purpose is from beyond the self. The purpose of the current dissertation was to differentiate calling work orientation from other similar workplace constructs, to investigate the most common covariates of calling work orientation, and to empirically test two possible moderators of the relationship between calling work orientation and work-related outcomes of job satisfaction, job performance, and work engagement. Two independent samples were collected for the purpose of testing hypotheses: data were collected from 520 working students and from 520 non-student employees. Participants from the student sample were recruited at Florida International University, and participants from the employee sample were recruited via the Amazon Mechanical Turk website. Participants from the student sample answered demographic questions and responded to self-report measures of job satisfaction, job performance, work engagement, spirituality, meaningful work, prosocial motivation, and work orientation. The procedure was similar for the employee sample, but their survey also included measures of counterproductive work behaviors, organizational citizenship behaviors, conscientiousness, and numerical ability. Additionally, employees were asked whether they would be willing to have a direct supervisor, peer, co-worker, client, or subordinate rate their job performance. Hierarchical regression findings suggest calling work orientation was predictive of overall job performance above and beyond two common predictors of performance, conscientiousness and numerical ability. The results for the covariate analyses provided evidence that prosocial motivation, meaningful work, and spirituality do play a significant role in the development of an employees' work orientation. Perceived career opportunities moderated the relationship between calling work orientation and job performance for the employee sample. Core self-evaluations moderated the relationship between calling work orientation and job performance, and core self-evaluations moderated the relationship between calling work orientation and work engagement. Collectively, findings from the current study highlight the benefits of examining work orientation in the prediction of workplace outcomes.

Exploring Calling Work Orientation: Construct Clarity and Organizational Implications

Employees maintain a personal view toward their work, which can be referred to as their work orientation. Some employees view their work as their life’s purpose (i.e., calling work orientation) and they tend to be 1) prosocially motivated, 2) derive meaning from work, and 3) feel that their purpose is from beyond the self. The purpose of the current dissertation was to differentiate calling work orientation from other similar workplace constructs, to investigate the most common covariates of calling work orientation, and to empirically test two possible moderators of the relationship between calling work orientation and work-related outcomes of job satisfaction, job performance, and work engagement. Two independent samples were collected for the purpose of testing hypotheses: data were collected from 520 working students and from 520 non-student employees. Participants from the student sample were recruited at Florida International University, and participants from the employee sample were recruited via the Amazon Mechanical Turk website. Participants from the student sample answered demographic questions and responded to self-report measures of job satisfaction, job performance, work engagement, spirituality, meaningful work, prosocial motivation, and work orientation. The procedure was similar for the employee sample, but their survey also included measures of counterproductive work behaviors, organizational citizenship behaviors, conscientiousness, and numerical ability. Additionally, employees were asked whether they would be willing to have a direct supervisor, peer, co-worker, client, or subordinate rate their job performance. Hierarchical regression findings suggest calling work orientation was predictive of overall job performance above and beyond two common predictors of performance, conscientiousness and numerical ability. The results for the covariate analyses provided evidence that prosocial motivation, meaningful work, and spirituality do play a significant role in the development of an employees’ work orientation. Perceived career opportunities moderated the relationship between calling work orientation and job performance for the employee sample. Core self-evaluations moderated the relationship between calling work orientation and job performance, and core self-evaluations moderated the relationship between calling work orientation and work engagement. Collectively, findings from the current study highlight the benefits of examining work orientation in the prediction of workplace outcomes.