The importance of culture for enterprise dynamics: the role of type and strength of culture

Figures & data

Figure 1. The competing values model of organisational culture (source Ralston et al., 2006, p. 830).

Table 1. Size and business activity (industry) of enterprises in the sample.

	No. of enterprises	%
Size
Medium enterprises	28	40.0
Small enterprises	28	40.0
Micro enterprises	14	20.0
Total	70	100.0
Business activity (industry)
Manufacturing	22	31.5
Construction	11	15.7
Wholesale, retail	8	11.4
Financial intermediation	6	8.5
Hotels and restaurants	4	5.7
Other	19	27.2
Total	70	100.0

Source: Compiled by the authors.

Table 2. Factor matrix, means and standard deviations for enterprise dynamics indicators.

Items	Mean	Std. deviation	Factor loadings	Reliability
Development of strategic origins of success	1.29	1.206	0.767	0.872
Development of dual cultures	1.09	1.260	0.746
Flexible legal regulations	0.63	1.553	0.746
Limiting of the leadership system to reasonable optimum	0.71	1.534	0.738
Flexible adaptation of structural and process organisation	0.07	1.609	0.659
Time orientation	0.57	1.575	0.622
The seeking and gaining of new and attractive business opportunities	0.99	1.313	0.610
Development of dynamics promoters	1.03	1.318	0.539
Multiplication of systems and processes	1.16	1.379	0.538
Orientation toward individuals	1.21	1.273	0.408
Scale: −3 (disagree); 3 (strongly agree)
KMO = 0.847
Total variance explained = 57.32%

Source: Compiled by the authors.

Table 3. Enterprises’ dominant culture type and culture strength.

Culture strength	Frequency	%
Strong	47	67.1
Middle	20	28.6
Weak	3	4.3
Total	70	100.0
Culture type	Mean	SD
Clan	19.40	6.78
Adhocracy	13.39	4.62
Market	12.30	4.82
Hierarchical	15.49	6.60

Source: Compiled by the authors.

Table 4. The presence of dual enterprise cultures.

Culture types combination	No. of enterprises	%
Adchocracy/clan	17	54.8
Clan/hierarchical	8	25.8
Market/hierarchical	4	12.9
Adhocracy/hierarachical	2	6.5
Total	31	100.00

Source: Compiled by the authors.

Table 5. The mean values for the level of enterprise’s dynamics for enterprises with three types of cultural strength.

	N	Mean	Std. deviation
Middle	20	4.55	9.13
Strong	47	11.26	8.69
Weak	3	−2.67	11.85
Total	70	8.74	9.61

Source: Compiled by the authors.

Table 6. Dual enterprise cultures and the level of enterprises’ dynamics.

Culture types combination	The level of enterprises’ dynamics
	High		Medium		Low
	No. of enterprises	%	No. of enterprises	%	No. of enterprises	%
Adhocracy/clan	13	65.0	4	50.0	0	0.0
Clan/hierarchical	3	15.0	4	50.0	1	33.3
Market/hierarchical	3	15.0	0	0.0	1	33.3
Adhocracy/hierarchical	1	5.0	0	0.0	1	33.3
Total	20	100.0	8	100.0	3	100.0

Source: Compiled by the authors.

Table 7. Results of multivariate regression analysis for culture type influence on the level of enterprises’ dynamics.

	B	β	t	Sig.
(Constant)	3.177		0.306
Clan	−0.119	−0.084	−0.488	0.627
Adhocracy	0.505	0.244	1.797	0.077
Market	−0.050	−0.022	−0.148	0.883
Hierarchical	0.104	0.067	0.447	0.657

Dependent variable: the level of enterprise’s dynamics; R² = 0.05; p < 0.05.

Source: Compiled by the authors.

Table 8. One-way ANOVA for differences in the level of enterprises’ dynamics according to three types of culture strength.

	Sum of squares	df	Mean square	F	Sig.
Between groups	1038.819	2	519.409	6.519	p < 0.01
Within groups	5338.553	67	79.680
Total	6377.371	69

Source: Compiled by the authors.

Ralston, D. A., Terpstra-Tong, J., Terpstra, R. H., Wang, X., & Egri, C. (2006). Today's state-owned enterprises of China: Are they dying dinosaurs or dynamic dynamos? Strategic Management Journal, 27, 825–843.10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar