Organizational Culture and Its Relationship with Employee Stress, Enjoyment of Work and Productivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite a recent resurgence in the study of organizational culture, insufficient attention has been paid to the impact of the types of organizational culture on employee well-being and productivity in Canadian settings. This study investigated which types of organizational culture are most closely related to employee levels of work-related stress, enjoyment of work and self-perceived productivity. A secondary research interest was to identify the dominant culture type at the studied university in northern Canada. A total of 193 staff members from various departments (e.g., academic services, facilities, student life) completed an online survey containing questions on organizational culture, stress, enjoyment of work and productivity. Three intriguing findings were generated from the data: (1) All four types of organizational culture – clan, hierarchy, adhocracy, market – were identified at the institution; (2) the hierarchy culture was most prevalent, followed by the adhocracy culture, the market culture and then the clan culture; and (3) the type of organizational culture was significantly related to stress, enjoyment of work and productivity. Employees working in a clan culture reported the lowest levels of stress, and highest levels of enjoyment and productivity, followed by those in the adhocracy and hierarchy cultures, lastly the market culture. Important implications include: (1) Organizational leaders need to take into account the role organizational culture plays in employee well-being and workplace functioning, and (2) Organizational leaders should implement strategies to create a workplace culture that promotes employee well-being and productivity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".