Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
 
DETERMINING KEY FACTORS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE 
IN SERBIAN COMPANIES 
Milan Nikolić* 
University of Novi Sad, Technical faculty “Mihajlo Pupin”, Zrenjanin 
Serbia 
mikaczr@sbb.rs
 
Branko Markoski 
University of Novi Sad, Technical faculty “Mihajlo Pupin”, Zrenjanin 
Serbia 
markoni@uns.ac.rs
 
Dragica Ivin 
University of Novi Sad, Technical faculty “Mihajlo Pupin”, Zrenjanin 
Serbia 
ivin_bd@hotmail.com
Abstract 
The paper presents the results of the research on organizational culture in Serbian 
companies. At the start of the research 72 parametres which represent organizational culture 
were defined. The research was carried out by analyzing the situation and importance of the 
parametres of organizational culture which had been defined beforehand. The situation of 
the defined parametres was determined by surveying company managers (Survey 1). The 
importance of the defined parametres was determined by surveying the experts (Survey 2). 
The main conclusion is that organizational culture in Serbian companies is at an average 
level. Factor analysis was also performed and 7 key factors of organizational culture in 
Serbian companies were identified. The research results have great theoretical and practical 
importance for both Serbian companies and foreign companies which are considering 
investments in Serbia and appearance on Serbian market. 
Key words: organizational culture, survey, factor analysis, Serbia. 
Topic Groups: Organizational behavior, Change management and organizational 
development, Managerial and organizational cognition and psychology. 
ABSRJ 3(1): 33 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 
Organizational culture is an increasingly important field of management today. However, in 
Serbia it has not been studied in depth. There are no data on the situation of organizational 
culture in Serbian companies, and hence there are no proposals or suggestions for its 
improvement. What is certain is that the level of organizational culture in Serbia is very low, 
and that there is an unfavorable base in national culture. It is assumed that substantial 
changes are required in organizational culture in Serbian companies. The need for this type 
of research arose as a consequence of this situation. 
Development of organizational culture is particularly important in companies in countries in 
transition. The influence of organizational culture is especially manifest in companies which 
have completed the process of ownership transformation. With the completion of the process 
of economic transition and with inflow of foreign capital on the market, organizational culture 
assumes an ever increasing important role in the process of making the process of doing 
business international. Companies in Serbia are currently faced with the following challenges: 
transition, privatization, need for accepting market economy conditions. The level of 
organizational culture is very important in order to overcome the above-mentioned 
challenges. Raising the level of organizational culture in Serbian companies would result in 
improving the quality of both national and international collaboration. 
The objective of this research is to establish the differences between the current and the 
desired situation of organizational culture in Serbian companies and to define the key factors 
of organizational culture.  
Organizational culture is a system of divided values, value orientations, beliefs, and customs 
within an organization, and thereby it influences the structure of the organization and directs 
its conduct, but also determines the norms of conduct within the organization itself. 
(Sharplin, 1958) Every company has its own specific organizational culture. Work groups 
within an organization have their own code of conduct within the organization itself as well 
as their own ways of reacting, which, when viewed in a broader context,  have impact on the 
entire system. (Black, 2003) Organizational culture is the factor which directly influences the 
success or failure of an organization. For this reason attention must be paid to the key 
dimensions of organizational culture: (Deal and Kennedy, 1982) 
 Values – represent the convictions, the heart of organizational culture. 
 Heroes – people who represent personification of the values. 
 Ceremonies and Rituals – an unofficial system of communication or concealed 
hierarchy of power in the organization. 
Bringing together individual goals with common goals and relying on the responsibility of the 
employees are the success factors of organizational culture. (Morgan, 1977) According to 
(Krefting and Frost, 1985) the way in which organizational culture can influence competitive 
advantage, is by improving and overcoming the limitations of the organization, in a way that 
it facilitates individual interaction and/or by limiting the flow of information to certain levels. 
The accepted values also enable managers to foresee the reaction of the employees to 
certain strategic decisions, which enables them to reduce the undesired consequences. 
(Ogbonna, 1993) Most theoreticians agree that sustainable competitive advantage stems 
from creating organizational competitiveness which is superior to and can hardly be reached 
by the competition. (Reed and DeFillippi, 1990) Unique qualities of a company’s 
organizational culture are a powerful source of generating advantage over competition. The 
ABSRJ 3(1): 34 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
link between the leadership style and organizational performance is connected by the nature 
and form of organizational culture. (Ogbonna and Harris, 2000) 
In addition to the need for determining the level, one of the greatest problems of 
organizational culture in Serbian companies is that the new model of conduct is based on the 
foundations of old values. This fact is the source of confusing messages, values, and norms 
and cause of vague insight into the new circumstances and changes. Therefore, the very 
importance of the changes in relation to the past period is questionable because the 
surroundings which is faced with the challenges of the new era is led and directed by 
outdated and antiquated norms. The need to replace the old with the new is the cause of 
transition, and one of the goals of privatization is improvement of efficiency of the company’s 
business. This can be achieved by changing the values of the employees and the managers 
in an organization. The company must build up a system of values by which it will be 
recognizable. Successful managers must influence the employees and then organizational 
culture integrates the values and attitudes of the employed in the company. (Weihrich and 
Koontz, 1998) Great uncertainty in life of an organization frequently endangers its 
achievements. A frequent topic of organizational research is reducing uncertainty as a way of 
establishing control over the company’s fate. (Thompson, 1967) New approaches to 
organizational culture include changes of the organization related to the customer, quality 
and innovation, introduction of the system of rewarding the employees, and development of 
knowledge and skills and abilities which is harmonized with the adopted concept of changes. 
The research by G. Hofstede (Hofstede, 1980) and the group of his collaborators included 40 
countries, among which there was also former Yugoslavia, the cities of Ljubljana, Zagreb, 
and Belgrade. After having been processed, the data were subsequently checked and tested. 
This research was refreshed by new data in the year 2001. (Hofstede, 2001) After the 
disintegration of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, it was possible to sort out the 
results for Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia. 
Hofstede identified the following characteristics of national and regional culture, which 
directly influence organizational culture: (Hofstede, 1980) 
 Power distance. Employees who belong to a culture with a great power distance 
prefer authoritative style of leadership. A low distance indicates that all people, all 
employees should have equal rights. 
 Avoiding uncertainty. Indicates the limit to which a society accepts uncertainty and 
risk. 
 Individualism or collectivism. The limits to which people are expected to oppose or 
behave in a superior manner as members of a group or an organization. 
 Male or female culture. Indicates the cultures based on traditional male or female 
values. For example, male culture comprises competitiveness, ambition, accumulation 
of money and material things. 
Sociologists in Serbia have diagnosed that Serbian national culture is compatible with the 
picture of national culture which derives from Hofstede’s research. On the basis of (Hofstede, 
1980), the situation of the dimensions of Serbian national culture can be perceived, as well 
as its impact on organizational culture in Serbian companies: (Janicijevic, 1997) 
 Power distance. High power distance ranks Serbian culture with the group with the 
highest power distance in the world. This indicates a high propensity to 
authoritarianism. Organization leader is seen as ‘pater familias’. Influence tactics of 
Serbian managers is giving orders, and abuse of manager’s power is a very frequent 
ABSRJ 3(1): 35 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
t
occurrence. The relationship between the leader and his/her followers is emotional 
and extreme. 
 Avoiding uncertainty. Serbia belongs with the countries with the highest degree of 
avoiding uncertainty in the world. High avoiding of uncertainty indicates orientation 
to the task, and not to people. Serbian companies accept changes very hard and 
slowly, which can have very bad effects on the company’s business 
 Individualism or collectivism. Prevalence of collectivism indicates that members of 
Serbia culture think that the collective is responsible for the destiny of its every single 
member, and that it is obliged to take care of its every single member. Collectivism 
makes the relationship between the individual and the organization ethical and 
emotional, instead of rational. Members of an organization think that the leader is 
bound to take care of his/her subordinates’ interests. 
 Male or female culture. Serbia belongs with the cultures with express female values. 
Members of Serbian culture put the social before the material. The goal and the 
measure of values are status, rank, connections, acquaintances, and relationships 
between people, and not the results of work and acquiring based on work. Female 
values are reflected in orientation to people and tendency to harmonize the 
relationships. People attach more importance to status, rank and position, 
connections, acquaintances, and interpersonal relationships, and not to the results of 
work and material acquisition based on work. The leader is not determined and 
aggressive. He/She shows tendency to consensus. Appearance of a leader who 
shows both male and female values is very frequent. 
Such results confirm the thesis that organizational culture in Serbian companies is not at a 
satisfactory level, and that the reasons for this lie in unfavorable characteristics of national 
culture. For that reason, research on organizational culture in Serbian companies always has 
a special importance. 
RESEARCH METHODS 
The research had two basic objectives: 
1. Determining the state and importance of organizational culture parametres in Serbian 
companies. The state of organizational culture parameters shows the real level of 
organizational culture in Serbian companies. The significance of organizational culture 
shows the ranks and mutual relationship according to the importance of individual 
parameters of organizational culture in Serbian companies. 
2. Determining the key fac ors of organizational culture in Serbian companies. The key 
factors of organizational culture are determined by factor analyses of data 
considering the importance of individual parameters of organizational culture. These 
factors represent realistically organizational culture in Serbian companies. In this way 
the number of the observed variables is decreased which enables easier measuring, 
monitoring and improving of organizational culture in Serbian companies. 
Parametres of organizational culture which will be studies are defined right at the start. 
Parametres of organizational culture were defined after considering a large number of 
reference works, such as, for example: (Bilsky and Jehn, 2002; Buchanan, 2001; Bond and 
Smith, 1996; Kotter and Heskett, 1992; Hofstede, 1980, 1984, 1991, 1998, 2001; Hofstede 
et al. 1990; Morris, 1956; Dempsey and Dukes, 1966; Schwartz and Bilsky, 1987, 1990; 
Schwartz, 1994; O’Reilly et al., 1991; Cameron and Quinn, 1999; Peters and Waterman, 
1982; Schein, 1985). 72 parametres of organizational culture were defined in this way. The 
ABSRJ 3(1): 36 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
t
parametres were studied, and are shown in Table 1. The research itself was carried out 
through the two surveys (Survey 1 and Survey 2). 
Survey 1 
Survey 1 referred to determining the situation of the defined parametres of organizational 
culture in Serbian companies. Survey 1 was filled in by managers who are employed in 
Serbian companies. Their task was to quantitatively assess each parametre by one of the 
assessments 1-5 according to their personal estimate. This assessment represents the level 
of current situation of the observed parametre in the company. The assessments have the 
following meanings: 1 – Very unfavorable, 2 – Unfavorable, 3 – Average, 4 – Favorable, 5 – 
Very favorable. The similar approach to the organizational culture parametres assessment is 
applied in research (Veiga, Lubatkin, Calori, Very, 2000). 
Basic characteristics of the process and results of polling through Survey 1 are: 
 Number of managers. The total of 70 managers from 60 companies answered the 
questions (in some companies, two managers sent in their answers). 
 Responden s (managers). The respondents are people in high managerial positions in 
their respective companies and people who have insight into the company’s strategy, 
relationships within the company, etc. It can be said that the contacted managers 
were prevailingly the most competent people in the companies included in Survey 1. 
 Type of company. The research was carried out in Serbian companies, regardless of 
the business branch or form of property in the company. Smaller companies, with 
fewer than 20 employees, were not included in the research. 
 Research area in terms of geography. The research was conducted on the territory of 
Serbia. 
 Research period. The research lasted for about five (5) months, in the period 
between August and December, 2008. 
Survey 2 
Survey 2 referred to determining the importance of the defined parametres of organizational 
culture in Serbian companies. (The same parametres were studied as in Survey 1; in Survey 
1 their situation was determined, and in Survey 2 their importance). Survey 2 was filled in by 
experts from Serbia. Their task was to quantitatively assess each parametre by one of the 
assessments 1-5 according to their personal estimate. This assessment represents the 
importance and influence of the observed parametre on organizational culture. The 
assessments have the following meanings: 1 – Very little importance, 2 – Little importance, 3 
– Average importance, 4 – Great importance, 5 – Very great importance. 
Basic characteristics of the process and results of polling through Survey 2 are: 
 Number of experts. the total of 30 experts answered the questions. 
 Respondents (experts). According to the type of institution in which they are 
employed, the respondents were experts from scientific and educational institutions 
(professors, assistant-lecturers) and experts working in economy (general managers, 
research and development managers, scientific advisors, managers, etc.). According 
to the level of education, the experts were: PhDs, Masters of Science, university 
graduates. All the experts are from Serbia. 
 Research period. The research lasted for about five (5) months, in the period 
between August and December, 2008 (in parallel with Survey 1). 
ABSRJ 3(1): 37 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
RESEARCH RESULTS 
Situation and importance of parametres of organizational culture in Serbian 
companies 
Determining the situation and importance of parametres of organizational culture in Serbian 
companies represents the basic, initial result of this research (Table 1). The situation and 
importance of every single parametre is expressed by quantitative assessment 1-5. Each 
assessment in Table 1 is obtained as the average value of all the assessments (managers’ or 
experts’) for the observed parametre. Average assessment of all parametres of 
organizational culture in companies in Serbia is 3.62 (average of third column in Table 1). 
Table 1: Situation and importance of parametres of organizational culture in Serbian 
companies 
Para
m. 
No 
Parametres of Organizational Culture 
Assessment 
of the 
situation of 
the 
parametre  
Assessment 
of the 
importance 
of the 
parametre  
1. Decisions are made in the way which makes the business more efficient. 3.64 4.20 
2. Primary role of the manager in the organization is clear. 3.86 4.04 
3. Important strategic and operational decisions are quickly transformed into action. 3.30 4.16 
4. Top management cooperates when making strategic decisions. 3.71 4.36 
5. Decision which has once been made is realized without major corrections. 3.37 3.32 
6. Employees are included in the process of decision-making. 2.99 4.00 
7. Vision corresponds to the situation in the company’s surroundings. 3.37 3.88 
8. Vision and company mission are clearly defined. 3.64 4.28 
9. Employees support company vision and mission. 3.44 3.88 
10. Favorability of the structure and sources of power in the company. 3.21 3.60 
11. There is a positive democratic atmosphere in the company. 3.30 3.96 
12. The company successfully copes with the changes of external surroundings. 3.50 4.24 
13. Aiming of the company to do business in an original way. 3.69 4.08 
14. Aiming of the company to have original product originality. 3.70 4.20 
15. Information from the surroundings reach the superiors timely. 3.80 4.04 
16. Information from the surroundings are accurate and quality. 3.67 3.96 
17. Information is circulated efficiently through the organizational structure of the company. 3.41 3.72 
18. Employees receive clear information about the results of their work. 3.63 3.56 
ABSRJ 3(1): 38 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
19. Speed of change of bad actions in production and doing business. 3.41 3.84 
20. Representation of women in leading positions in the company. 3.26 3.60 
21. Company’s attitude to changes and innovation. 3.70 4.36 
22. Employees’ attitude to changes and innovation. 3.99 4.12 
23. Degree of investing in scientific and research activities. 3.04 4.00 
24. Importance attached to introducing new products in the production program. 3.63 4.12 
25. Degree of familiarity with and appreciating customers’ needs. 3.97 4.20 
26. Degree of application of IT in the company. 4.10 4.12 
27. Compnay’s ambitions to improve business results. 4.21 4.24 
28. Quality of promotion. 3.53 4.04 
29. Quality of PR. 3.56 4.12 
30. Quality of team work in the company. 3.61 4.28 
31. Employees can show their knowledge and skills. 3.67 4.04 
32. Employees have chances of promotion. 3.70 4.24 
33. Readiness of the management to invest in human resources. 3.50 4.08 
34. Employees have freedom in accomplishing their tasks. 3.49 3.64 
35. Employees are given precise and clearly defined tasks. 3.66 3.88 
36. Promotion and rewarding is performed on the basis of the results achieved. 3.47 4.16 
37. Rules which employees should observe are clear. 4.06 3.92 
38. Discipline of employees. 3.83 3.96 
39. The system of rewarding and punishing is completely clear. 3.54 3.80 
40. There is a possibility of freely expressing one’s opinion. 3.54 4.28 
41. Stimulating individual’s initiative and creativity. 3.37 4.24 
42. Application of technique of expansion and enrichment of business. 3.44 3.64 
43. Motivation of top management. 3.86 4.40 
44. Motivation and up-to-datedness of employees. 3.43 4.16 
45. Employees have the feeling of personal success. 3.37 3.80 
46. Evaluation of the results of an individual is adequate. 3.33 3.80 
47. Distribution of the staff to appropriate workplaces. 3.36 4.20 
48. The level of ergonomic conditions at the workplace (noise, light, cleanliness, temperature.....). 3.46 3.68 
49. Quality of internal interpersonal relationships in the company. 3.50 3.88 
50. Orientation of top management to the quality of relationships within the company. 3.53 3.84 
51. Application of systematic approach in solving conflicts at the workplace.  3.19 3.56 
52. Degree of confidence between top management and employees. 3.40 4.24 
ABSRJ 3(1): 39 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
53. 
Attitude of the company to active participants in the 
community (customers, citizens, business partners, 
journalists, media, competition.....). 
4.00 4.28 
54. Quality of orderliness of the company’s yard space. 3.89 2.72 
55. Recognizability of the company’s yard space. 3.60 2.64 
56. Quality of arrangement of the office space in the company. 3.63 3.36 
57. Recognizability of the arrangement of the office space in the company. 3.56 3.24 
58. Recognizability of the company’s logo. 4.43 4.16 
59. Representation of the logo within the business space. 3.97 3.60 
60. Characteristic style applied in communication. 3.69 3.44 
61. Application of dress code. 3.37 3.04 
62. Degree of markedness of the employees’ status symbols. 3.49 2.60 
63. Respect for and cultivation of the company’s tradition. 3.99 3.64 
64. Cultivation of the company’s history. 3.84 3.12 
65. Observation and maintaining of jubilees, anniversaries, and celebrations in the company. 4.09 3.36 
66. Emphasizing ethical norms within the company. 3.63 3.84 
67. Observation of ethical norms within the company. 3.64 3.96 
68. Characteristic nature and efficiency of the protocol in the company. 3.66 3.56 
69. Orientation of the company towards future. 4.00 4.28 
70. There is a sense of belonging and pride among employees. 3.61 3.92 
71. Measures for environment protection in the company. 3.71 4.04 
72. Degree of social responsibility of the company. 4.00 4.52 
Key factors of organizational culture in Serbian companies 
Factor analysis was applied in order to determine the key factors of organizational culture in 
Serbian companies. Factor analysis was performed on the results of Survey 2 on basis of 72 
defined parametres of organizational culture. Selection of factors was made according to 
Kaiser-Guttman criterion, on the basis of which seven (7) factors of organizational culture in 
Serbian companies were identified. These factors cover more than 71% of parametre 
variation of organizational culture (Table 2). 
Table 2: Factors of organizational culture in Serbian companies 
 (Eigenvalue and percentage of factor variation) 
 Eigenvalue % Total Cumulative Cumulative 
1 22.58485 31.36785 22.58485 31.36785 
2 7.45203 10.35004 30.03688 41.71789 
3 5.60289 7.78179 35.63977 49.49969 
4 5.17907 7.19316 40.81885 56.69284 
5 3.90115 5.41826 44.71999 62.11110 
6 3.54156 4.91883 48.26155 67.02993 
7 3.06192 4.25267 51.32347 71.28260 
ABSRJ 3(1): 40 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
The identified factors were rotated by applying varimax method. The results of this rotation 
are shown in Table 3. The identified factors are interpreted on the basis of the results which 
are shown in Table 3. On the basis of the shown results, the factors of organizational culture 
which are most important for Serbian companies were defined in the following way: 
F1 – Position and perspectives of the company’s employees, 
F2 – Recognizability of the symbols of organizational culture in the company, 
F3 – Orientation of the company to strategic aspects of doing business, 
F4 – Quality of communication and information flow in the company, 
F5 – Quality of internal relationships in the company and motivation of the employees, 
F6 – Aspirations of the company towards originality and customer satisfaction, 
F7 – Quality of the established norms of business conduct of the employees. 
Scree criterion was applied in the research. On the basis of this criterion, the number of 
important factors is determined on the basis of factor determining, which is followed by 
stabilizing the values of characteristic roots. On the basis of Fig. 1, on the horizontal axis are 
the factors, and the graph shows the Eigenvalue of each factor. On the basis of this Figure, 
there are breakpoints which help determine how many factors should be taken into 
consideration in the analysis. The Figure shows that the first factor is more important than 
the others. On the basis of this, the first factor explains the major part of variants and covers 
about 31% of variation in parametres of organizational culture (Table 2). After the first 
factor, the values decrease continually to the seventh, after which the values are stabilized. 
Figure 1: Relation of factors – Characteristic root values 
Plot of Eigenvalues
Number of Eigenvalues
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
Va
lu
e
 
 
ABSRJ 3(1): 41 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
Table 3: Variable (parametre) correlation coefficient with the given factor 
 Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6 Factor 7 
Parametar 1 0.317534 0.282553 0.222071 0.019173 0.558635 0.057676 0.035965
Parametar 2 0.007221 0.224600 0.494095 0.167199 0.311747 0.242833 0.305366
Parametar 3 0.177216 -0.112884 0.336582 0.375583 0.696933 -0.119118 0.003597
Parametar 4 0.262698 -0.303767 0.705512 0.026454 0.220991 0.130708 0.033975
Parametar 5 0.175541 0.136754 0.029284 0.684275 -0.104790 -0.066432 0.005985
Parametar 6 0.505277 -0.032257 0.461652 0.125105 0.283441 -0.163100 -0.178031
Parametar 7 -0.368229 0.215702 0.553717 0.229433 0.322939 0.314869 -0.070081
Parametar 8 -0.122986 0.060787 0.648921 0.209271 0.145849 0.395232 0.379499
Parametar 9 0.002487 0.065199 0.283008 0.758570 -0.156861 0.012630 -0.200971
Parametar 10 -0.137163 0.510079 0.120060 0.358936 0.022929 0.415588 0.247590
Parametar 11 0.441436 0.009607 -0.326996 0.753639 0.175907 0.048796 -0.020669
Parametar 12 -0.023535 0.028468 0.183468 0.553515 0.475655 0.363447 -0.383690
Parametar 13 0.237870 -0.050529 0.283017 -0.087535 -0.053997 0.712908 -0.320823
Parametar 14 0.305733 0.049886 0.363632 0.006276 0.051460 0.697435 -0.220934
Parametar 15 0.005879 0.059595 0.011142 0.801833 0.327881 0.103099 0.146306
Parametar 16 0.003009 0.099626 0.151307 0.815651 0.357717 0.220143 0.080429
Parametar 17 0.076195 0.012924 0.392654 0.547987 0.465374 0.038862 0.249539
Parametar 18 0.502472 0.075984 0.150880 0.521847 0.342747 0.065452 0.329529
Parametar 19 -0.057750 -0.103722 -0.305960 0.550320 0.513828 0.125049 0.249106
Parametar 20 0.670266 0.059137 0.091667 0.444530 0.318291 -0.061105 -0.068707
Parametar 21 0.069221 -0.246121 0.829269 0.013587 0.121187 0.079393 -0.136951
Parametar 22 0.042864 0.023054 0.591579 -0.195177 -0.250945 -0.439222 0.141653
Parametar 23 0.053249 -0.110260 0.741899 0.051766 -0.026041 0.127314 -0.109147
Parametar 24 -0.202061 -0.000146 0.065135 0.364430 -0.258222 0.567439 0.143093
Parametar 25 -0.144435 0.268371 0.215827 0.153610 0.093684 0.794139 0.284000
Parametar 26 0.511045 0.038603 0.204618 0.311082 0.339999 0.163486 -0.017679
Parametar 27 0.268647 -0.051629 -0.076401 0.046493 0.032535 0.622655 0.163915
Parametar 28 0.124052 0.358176 0.364769 -0.081978 0.206562 0.571470 0.251228
Parametar 29 0.735047 -0.011852 0.092057 -0.115312 0.178000 0.099642 0.150550
Parametar 30 0.475360 0.032297 0.510234 0.203496 0.478680 0.007913 0.279108
Parametar 31 0.679148 0.102800 0.317489 0.306828 0.168242 -0.190862 0.169471
Parametar 32 0.755823 0.048994 0.100457 0.223925 0.232224 0.153068 -0.077487
Parametar 33 0.392557 0.133083 0.486281 0.337827 0.420500 0.331258 -0.346245
Parametar 34 0.303670 0.368956 0.368580 0.585927 -0.153541 -0.139616 0.074531
Parametar 35 0.274216 0.008177 0.506850 0.610520 0.078048 -0.197812 0.259888
Parametar 36 0.242315 0.236621 0.210188 0.114344 0.642968 0.100244 0.178265
Parametar 37 0.390987 0.108652 0.255702 0.365899 0.442322 0.068692 0.345071
Parametar 38 0.162099 0.187461 -0.066013 0.006382 0.529374 0.007452 0.596133
Parametar 39 -0.068450 0.388054 -0.078114 0.046111 0.533994 -0.046259 0.610917
Parametar 40 0.710586 0.158312 -0.055297 0.004437 0.435911 0.014764 0.345939
Parametar 41 0.555116 0.123160 0.598112 0.116571 0.215041 0.136205 -0.205607
Parametar 42 0.377954 -0.121623 0.176827 0.383850 0.205720 0.305504 0.048759
Parametar 43 0.051900 0.031058 -0.066971 -0.139898 -0.063571 0.673603 -0.039356
Parametar 44 0.177666 0.157873 0.267430 0.162169 0.582478 0.351288 -0.001050
Parametar 45 0.492943 0.177543 0.484600 0.204260 0.088002 0.247092 0.214056
ABSRJ 3(1): 42 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
Parametar 46 0.202181 0.194689 0.012217 0.628844 0.574733 -0.194709 0.008760
Parametar 47 0.425470 -0.099235 0.623704 0.202848 0.240893 0.025443 0.298928
Parametar 48 0.146011 0.008110 0.480842 0.093611 0.457944 0.221613 0.077305
Parametar 49 0.172192 0.233639 0.145123 0.118768 0.819593 -0.008336 -0.065902
Parametar 50 0.416948 0.070624 0.126372 0.428041 0.116283 0.090913 0.570963
Parametar 51 0.239169 0.400730 0.428573 0.098853 0.465560 -0.110817 0.448577
Parametar 52 0.569219 -0.057672 0.412290 0.125655 0.305214 0.022388 -0.083635
Parametar 53 0.262163 0.125619 0.167251 0.095801 0.606328 -0.051860 0.284913
Parametar 54 0.104182 0.793662 0.072438 0.161004 -0.018844 -0.043701 0.218858
Parametar 55 -0.022735 0.803330 -0.062053 0.080483 0.185494 0.000899 0.082944
Parametar 56 0.315145 0.522425 0.020957 -0.067178 -0.163446 0.119208 0.502651
Parametar 57 0.138798 0.753685 -0.239226 -0.037786 0.018435 0.095596 0.337846
Parametar 58 0.462933 0.438502 -0.119505 -0.107743 0.200670 0.188628 -0.060562
Parametar 59 0.572898 0.443323 -0.073756 -0.229218 0.127960 0.108392 0.102714
Parametar 60 0.713196 0.418177 -0.037099 -0.096230 -0.070894 -0.151408 0.345600
Parametar 61 -0.198360 0.775117 0.097187 0.215890 0.223878 0.310911 0.057834
Parametar 62 0.044190 0.808056 -0.040081 0.012872 0.172661 0.073607 -0.124492
Parametar 63 0.253211 0.609021 -0.069192 0.003263 0.684259 0.027801 -0.014413
Parametar 64 0.159528 0.472117 -0.220097 0.356159 0.296384 -0.139832 -0.078173
Parametar 65 0.254155 0.549520 -0.295222 0.145689 0.411725 -0.269518 -0.028771
Parametar 66 0.711938 0.511955 0.174927 0.139138 0.186732 -0.051861 -0.057020
Parametar 67 0.629038 0.487769 0.424359 0.299852 0.144088 0.068136 -0.001795
Parametar 68 0.292229 0.390164 0.045002 0.017665 0.365788 0.049950 0.468997
Parametar 69 0.627287 -0.167632 -0.037070 0.112498 0.059901 0.105434 0.085449
Parametar 70 0.269038 0.020070 0.026715 0.004458 0.829454 -0.079844 0.050251
Parametar 71 0.556177 0.211222 0.479229 0.328472 0.190135 0.151437 0.173186
Parametar 72 0.467525 0.073839 0.137324 0.116975 -0.027290 0.232903 0.444211
Expl.Var 9.984211 7.268391 7.988697 7.675724 8.857920 5.187274 4.361253
Prp.Totl 0.138670 0.100950 0.110954 0.106607 0.123027 0.072045 0.060573
CONCLUSION 
On the whole, organizational culture in Serbian companies is at an average level. This result 
was expected, or it is probably slightly better than the expected. This reaffirms the positive 
effects of privatization and transitional processes in Serbian economy. 
Scientific contribution of this paper is visible in the research results. The results include the 
following: 
1. Current state and the level of organizational culture in Serbian companies. 
2. Significance and mutual relationship according to importance of individual parameters 
of organizational culture in Serbian companies. 
3. Seven key factors of organizational culture which realistically represent organizational 
culture in Serbian companies. Operative use of these factors enables easier 
measuring, monitoring and improving of organizational culture in Serbian companies. 
The results have theoretic significance by themselves and can be used as a base for 
education and further research. Besides, the presented results have a great practical 
significance for Serbian companies. It means that they can be used by company managers. 
Therefore, managers can analyze their own company and determine their position comparing 
ABSRJ 3(1): 43 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
to the average state. It is also possible to analyze the state of the most important 
parameters of organizational culture in the company. In addition, individual key factors of 
organizational culture enable fast, efficient and quality review of the current state and a 
good selection of the future activities in the field of organizational culture.  
The research limits are in the fact that the results are applicable only in Serbian companies. 
The results may be used in some countries in transition, too. There is also a possibility for 
further research in some other country or a new research in Serbia but by using some other 
parameters. 
However, there are possibilities for some further researches, first of all, thanks to the results 
of factor analyses: it is possible to determine dependence between organizational culture 
and indicators of company’s successful business performance. In practice, by using multi-
variant regression and correlation the influence of the key factors of organizational culture 
(defined in this paper) on individual economic indicators (economic indicators can be taken 
for indicators of business effects) can be determined. . In addition, the influences on each 
economic indicator separately can be examined, as well as the influences on certain groups 
of economic indicators together. The dependences, obtained in this way, can help at defining 
activities in order to raise the level of some factors of organizational culture with the final 
aim for achieving better business results. This is also the main direction for further 
researches resulting from this paper.  
REFERENCES 
Black, R. J. (2003). Organisational Culture: Creating the Influence Needed for Strategic 
Success, London, UK. 
Bilsky. W., & Jehn, K. A. (2002). Organizational culture and individual values: evidence for a 
common structure (Organisationskultur und individuelle Werte: Belege für eine 
gemeinsame Struktur), Myrtek, M. (Ed.) Die Person im biologischen und sozialen 
Kontext, Göttingen: Hogrefe, 211-228.  
Buchanan, A. (2001). Towards An Inclusive Organizational Culture – applying a „Diversity 
Lens“, Canadian Council for International Co-operation Organizational Development 
Team April. 
Bond, M. H., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Cross-cultural social and organizational psychology, 
Annual Review of Psychology, (47), 205-235. 
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture, OD 
Series: Addison-Wesley. 
Deal T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate 
Life, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth. 
Dempsey, P., & Dukes, W. F. (1966). Judging complex value stimuli: An examination and 
revision of Morris’s „Paths of Life”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, (26), 
871-882. 
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related 
Values, Sage Publications, Beverley Hills, CA. 
Hofstede, G. (1984). National cultures and corporate cultures, In L. A. Samovar & R. E. 
Porter (Eds.), Communication Between Cultures. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 
Hofstede, G., Neuijen, B., Ohavy, D. D., & Sanders, G. (1990). Measuring organizational 
cultures: A qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases, Administrative 
Science Quarterly, (35), 286-316. 
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: software of the mind, McGraw-Hill, London, 
New York. 
ABSRJ 3(1): 44 
 
Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) 
Volume 3 (2012), Number 1 
 
 
Hofstede, G. (1998). Attitudes, Values, and Organizational Culture: Disentangling the 
Concepts, Organization Studies, 19 (3), 477-493. 
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences; comparing values, behaviors, institutions and 
organizations across nations, 2nd ed., Beverly Hills: Sage publications. 
Morgan, W. (1977). Investor Owned vs. Publicly Owned Water Agencies: An Evaluation of 
the Property Rights Theory of the Firm, Water Resources Bulletin, (13), 75-82. 
Morris, C. W. (1956). Varieties of human value, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 
Janićijević, N. D. (1997). Organizational Culture – Collective Mind of a Company, Novi Sad, 
Ulixes, Belgrade (in Serbian). 
Krefting, L. A., & Frost, P. J. (1985). Untangling Webs, Sur. ng Waves, and Wildcatting: A 
Multiple-Metaphor Perspective on Managing Culture, In P. J. Frost et al. (eds) 
Organization Culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. 
Kotter, J. P. (1996).  Leading Change, HBS Press. 
Kotter, J., & Heskett, J. L. (1992). Corporate Culture and Performance, The Free Press, New 
York. 
O'Reilly, C. A. III, Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and Organizational Culture: 
A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit, Academy of 
Management Journal, 3 (34), 487-516. 
Ogbonna, E. (1993). Managing Organizational Culture: Fantasy or Reality?, Human Resource 
Management Journal, 2 (3), 42–54. 
Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. C. (2000). Leadership style, organizational culture and 
performance: empirical evidence from UK companies, The International Journal of 
Human Resource Management, 11, 766–788. 
Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In Search of Excellence Lessons from America's 
Best-Run Companies, Harper & Row, New York. 
Reed, R., & DeFillippi, R. J. (1990). Causal Ambiguity, Barriers to Imitation, and Sustainable 
Competitive Advantage, Academy of Management Review, 15,  88–102. 
Association of Independent Unions of Vojvodina (2007). Analysis of the Course and Results 
of the Process of Privatization, in Serbian), Novi Sad, March 2007 (in Serbian). 
Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View, San Francisco, 
Jossey-Bass Publishers, USA. 
Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human 
values, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (53), 550-562. 
Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1990). Toward a theory of the universal content and structure 
of values: extensions and cross-cultural replications, Journal of Personality and Social 
Psychology, (58), 878-891. 
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human 
values?, Journal of Social Issues, (50), 19-45. 
Sharplin, A. (1958). Strategic Management, McGraw-Hill, NY. 
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action, McGraw-Hill, New York. 
Veiga, J., Lubatkin, M., Calori, R., & Very, Ph. (2000). Measuring organizational culture 
clashes: A two-nation post-hoc analysis of a cultural compatibility index, Human 
Relations, 53 (4), 539-557. 
Weihrich, H., & Koontz, H. (1998). Management, 11th ed, Mate, Zagreb. 
ABSRJ 3(1): 45