Are National and Organizational Cultures
Isomorphic? Evidence from a Four Country
Comparative Study
Rune Ellemose Gulev
This pilot study investigates whether organizational practices as ob-
served through differing organizational cultures systematically repli-
cate or reject national values. It is among the first to project delineated,
narrow national cultural portrayals of Germany, Austria, Slovenia and
Denmark against pattern-specific organizational cultures. Through
country cluster analysis and correlation tests, the results achieve signif-
icance along all three dimensions. Trust allocations, authority percep-
tions and independence assertions were significant predictors for or-
ganizational traits of knowledge sharing practices, structure and con-
trol utilization, respectively. This demonstrates the value of assessing
national values in conjunction with organizational culture in order to
further understand the origins of corporate behaviour and the mecha-
nisms that can help promote organizational effectiveness.
Key Words: national culture, organizational culture, multinational
corporations, Europe
jEL Classification: zio, F23
Introduction
The European business environment is marked by great differences in
national culture. These differences have been the focus of many studies,
mostly relating to the works of culture authorities (e. g. Hofstede 2001;
Hall 1981; Inglehart 1997; Schwartz 1992) and their respective cultural di-
mensions that, in many ways, set the standard for successfully catego-
rizing cultures in a scientific manner, also termed 'sophisticated stereo-
typing' (Osland and Allan 2000). Attempts at understanding the impact
of national culture on various aspects of society, businesses, latent be-
haviours of individuals, etc. have subsequently followed in their wake.
The current paper contributes to this ongoing discourse by examining
how the values of the environment in which an organization is nested
impacts its organizational culture. Both national and organizational cul-
tures have been the focus of much academic scrutiny, yet, despite the in-
Dr Rune Ellemose Gulev is an Asisstant Professor at the Faculty
of Management Koper, University of Primorska, Slovenia.
Managing Global Transitions 7 (3): 259-279
tuitive relationship between the two, their intertwinement remains am-
biguous perhaps as a result of previous research agendas relying too
heavily on established multi paradigmatic dimensions, such as those of
Hofstede (2001), which are argued to be invalid because of the broad-
ness with which they can be interpreted (Blodget et al. 2005), and hence
failing at achieving significance.
In this paper I thus digress away from common and broad cul-
tural classifications that may have limited previous research agendas
and reduce the study to encompass minimalist narrow national- and
organizational-cultural depictions that only embody certain cultural and
organizational elements. If isomorphic behaviour between national- and
organizational-culture can be significantly detected at this level it will
strengthen the ideology that national management and organizational
models do persist in Europe as a result of national cultural variances.
The study takes a unique research outset in that it explores avenues
of organizational culture that are not commonly projected against na-
tional cultural variations. Three bands of national culture, - interper-
sonal and institutional trust, authority endowment levels and indepen-
dence perceptions - are linked with three equally narrow bands of orga-
nizational cultures impacting communication practices, structural de-
terminants and control mechanisms.
To actualize this pilot study, the national cultures of Germany, Austria,
Slovenia and Denmark are analyzed in conjunction with organizations
from each of those countries and their emergent organizational cultures.
The Theoretical Backdrop
The organizational culture perspective is representative of a synthesis of
managerial and company methodologies that are reliant on human be-
haviour. As such, it would be a logical anticipation to expect organiza-
tions to be isomorphic with their national cultural environments and to
maintain management techniques that achieve the highest level of align-
ment with the cultural values of the local environment. This thought line
is not new.
The notion that organizations must correspond with their environ-
ment in which they are embedded is a theme that has been increasingly
probed by academics over the last 20 years (for a thorough account of
this collusive relationship see Koen 2005). Worth mentioning, Goelzer
(2003) significantly linked several popular cultural indices to organiza-
tional traits and attributed their correlativeness to corporate compliance
that naturally occurs within successful organizations. Similarly, Bussey
(1999) found that a collaborative relationship between corporate and na-
tional culture could greatly reduce the friction observed in many com-
panies when implementing team-based work strategies; aligning to na-
tional cultural values pre-empted a work manner that was counterintu-
itive for the organization. Ogbor (1998) and Neelankavil et al. (2000) as-
certain that the assumptions and values of the indigenous, home-grown
population result in managerial dogmas that are particularly meaning-
ful, relevant and compatible with their domestic environment.
The concept is even touched upon by the most noted authors on cul-
ture. Hofstede (2001) suggests that organizational value systems exhibit a
national component congruent with the nationality of the organization's
founders and other top-tier management elite. In particular, he advo-
cates a potentially very strong connection between power distance and
uncertainty avoidance to affect certain hierarchical structures and de-
cision making habits, respectively. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner
(1998) hint at the congruency between national cultural variations within
equality and task reliability to spawn fulfilment-, project-, person- and
role-oriented organizational cultures. Schein (1999) brings forth several
layers of organizational culture that harbour specific and particular ways
of manifesting themselves relating to the origin and values of the organi-
zational leadership.
Despite the mantra of consensus, it is clear that a unilateral outcome
seldom exists. In fact, organizational cultures can develop that offset na-
tional biases and reject isomorphic relationships with the societal con-
text. Short of saying that organizations must develop organizational cul-
tures that counter national values, several authors ascertain that certain
organizational advantages can be drawn from defying some aspects of
commonly accepted norms. This form of differentiation can be termed
reciprocated opposition (Reed and Suresh 2003) and can provide an or-
ganization with specific advantages by challenging societal norms that
can lead to innovativeness and a disconnect from cultural values with
which the entire populace may not agree. Indian telecommunications
companies operating in Bangalore might illustrate such reciprocated op-
position; a disconnect from relaxed attitudes towards punctuality, nor-
mally apparent in Indian organizations and national culture, to a very
strict time schedule is observed, and accordingly, is considered leading
edge and innovative (Singh and Parashar 2005).
Revolutions within industrial capitalism have equally presented a
break from societal norms. Organizations that initially opposed national
cultural values and successfully introduced Western education styles
and factory labour methods clearly benefited through a non-isomorphic
cultural approach (Chandler 1994, 597). Furthermore, when first intro-
duced, the concept of open office spaces was in direct confrontation
with many western societies' appreciation of individualism and privacy.
At least some of these organizations in even the most individualistic
societies managed to draw benefits from a non-isomorphic collectivist
organizational culture.
Accordingly, it is apparent that there exists ambiguity and uncertainty
surrounding how influential, if at all, national cultures prompt organi-
zational cultures to develop in an isomorphic manner. The studies men-
tioned above contribute to the topic, yet most suffer from a common
limitation; the national cultural outset is not limited to specific mea-
surable dimensions but relies heavily on broad cultural groupings as
those suggested by Hofstede (2001), Hall (1981) and others. I believe that
these cultural indices have great merit, but on a different level that does
not lend itself well to specific organizational comparisons. Rather, much
more narrow cultural classifications that pinpoint certain cultural values
are sought for which greatly reduce the ambiguity that taints the broader
more common cultural depictions.
To work towards this goal, I propose singular classifications of national
culture that depict how our focus countries differ from each other along
socio-economic tendencies. By no means is the following national cul-
tural country portrayal complete; it serves only to elucidate some spe-
cific national cultural traits that are inherent to each of the countries
and that may bear latent repercussions on organizational culture. This
limited scope reduces the elusiveness of the term and thus arrives at a
workable representation of national culture along a few specific dimen-
sions.
An Organizational Culture Typology
Organizational culture comes in many forms and has been variously de-
fined. Because organizational culture cannot be seen, touched nor easily
observed, this makes it a complex phenomenon to define; its elusiveness
makes the term organizational culture difficult to label and handle. It re-
flects the organizational atmosphere and leadership which influence the
participation and attitude of the personnel (Deal and Kennedy 2000,4).
As such it is a set of elusive, soft variables that are usually regarded as im-
portant but often taken for granted. Organizational culture refers to the
underlying values, beliefs and principles that serve as a foundation for a
company's social system as well as the set of practices and behaviors that
both exemplify and reinforce that organization (Fairfield-Sonn 2001,12).
In an effort to arrive at a particular and workable definition of orga-
nizational culture, the current paper proposes a specific organizational
culture typology that taps into the above themes through measurable di-
mensions. It has its outset in Rosenfeld and Wilson's (1999) delimitation
of corporate culture as 'the established patterns of relationships between
component parts of an organization, outlining communication, control
and authority patterns' (Rosenfeld and Wilson 1999,136) and builds on
several authors' work within the field of organizational culture thus ar-
riving at a definition that absorbs the 'best-of' from these noted authors
and that delivers a typology that is of particular relevance to modern
organizations. From Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1998) struc-
tural determinants of organizational culture are considered that depict
the verticality, or hierarchical-ness, of authority defining superiors and
subordinates (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner 1998, 157). Finlay's
(2000) centrality of decision making power complements this dimen-
sion. Phatak et al. (2005) contribute with a system of defining organi-
zational control methodologies through input, behaviour and output
control mechanisms that relate to training and supervision, informal co-
ordination mechanisms commonly associated with input and behaviour
control, and targets and set goals, formal coordination mechanisms com-
monly connected with output control. These help visualize how orga-
nizational cultures monitor and evaluate employees. Finally, Dowling
and Welsch (2004) supply insight into organizational methods of fos-
tering an environment of openness and support for cross-fertilization
of ideas and best practices through organizational knowledge sharing.
This final facet of organizational culture gives specific insight into the
readiness of employees to overcome cognitive and motivational chal-
lenges to disseminate important knowledge to other organizational
members.
Albeit not all encompassing of everything organizational culture could
include, this limited definition of the term helps deliver a workable con-
cept that can be rationally measured. Accordingly, a conceptual frame-
work emerges that allows for organizational cultures to be typified and
ultimately correlated to variances in national culture. The three bear-
ing pillars of the current organisational culture model thus elucidate (1)
organisational structure patterns, (2) control and coordination mecha-
nisms, and (3) knowledge sharing practices.
Measuring National Cultural Differences
A necessary precursor to proceed with the study is to delineate variances
in the four focus countries and depict their respective national cultures
along a selection of characteristics and preferences. Here a conscious step
is made away from utilization of standardized cultural dimensions (e. g.
typically those of Hofstede 2001; Hall 1981) used in mainstream culture
studies and a deliberate move towards a more limited, and thus more
precise, cultural depiction. Without implying insult to the previous cul-
ture authors and their groundbreaking work, it is the current author's
conviction that the broadness with which their cultural dimensions can
be applied limits their utility. Accordingly, the current research seeks to
depict very limited aspects of national cultures through specific cultural
values taken from the European Values Study (evs 1999).1
Upon the enlargement of the eu with ten new members in 2004, the
multitude of cultural variances within the union increased by roughly
the same amount, with each new country bringing its own specific set of
cultural and business intricacies that further extended the cultural vari-
ance spectrum within the common market. Zver et al. (2004) propose
that there exists a significant culture gap between Central and Eastern
European Countries that have recently joined the eu and longstanding
eu members. In an effort to depict this gap and other variances that ex-
ists between the four countries' cultures, three sets of composite evs data
are calculated and made representative of values residing in each of the
four countries. The rationale is to understand how these variances influ-
ence corporate behaviour along the three pillars of organizational cul-
ture.
The three sets of evs data that illuminate variances in national cul-
tures are chosen because of their suspected interlinked-ness with orga-
nizational culture; a foreseeable connection is predicted which sets the
stage for our hypotheses formation. The first national cultural dimension
addresses interpersonal and institutional trust (iit). It seeks to measure
the amount of confidence employees retain towards their fellow employ-
ees and the magnitude of confidence allocated to institutions or systems.
Interpersonal trust is grounded in the experiences employees have with
each other and the familiarity that has been built (Bachmann and Zaheer
2006; Hardin 2002, 51). However, employees high on interpersonal trust
table 1 evs iit variables with cumulative calculations
Country	v1	v2	v3	v4	iit
Slovenia	2.2	3-11	4.91	4.41	3-172
			4-143		
Denmark	6.7	5.18	7-30	9.00	6.930
			7-159		
Germany	3.5	3-87	4-83	6-33	4-255
			5.009		
Austria	3.4	4.41	7-19	7.41	4.869
			6.338		
notes iit calculated as mean score of averaged institutional variables (v2, V3, V4) and
singular interpersonal variable (v1). v1 - the extent to which people feel that other peo-
ple can be trusted (interpersonal); v2 - the extent to which people trust parliamentary
systems (institutional); v3 - the extent to which people trust the social security system
(institutional); v4 - the extent to which people trust the justice system (institutional).
Source: own calculations based on composite evs (1999) data.
will extend this mindset to encompass trusting strangers as well because
the belief that people in general can be trusted is strong. Institutional
trust is based on the theory that institutions provide reliable sources of
input that are less likely to be tainted by individual motivations or per-
ceptions (Weick 2008) which therefore increase its credibility and allow
for deeper allocated levels of trust.
Interpersonal trust driven characteristics include having assurance
and conviction along with high levels of confidence and loyalty in fellow
employees. Institutional trust characteristics also bear remnants of high
levels of assurance and confidence but are directed towards institutional
sources that are less likely to be biased. To quantify the extent to which
the sample countries rank high or low on iit, one evs variable that
directly measures the intensity of interpersonal confidence has been uti-
lized and three evs variables have been applied to measure the intensity
of institutional confidence in three different systems.
From these results, it is noticeably evident that the countries span out
on the iit spectrum; Denmark and Slovenia appear to be located at high
and low iit levels, respectively, while Germany and Austria are nestled
in between. Linking these results to our organizational culture model, in
particular knowledge sharing practices, it is suspected that a latent link
may be observed.
The knowledge sharing disposition of organizational members is fun-
damentally a property of the composition of individualistic employee
traits as individuals embody the behavioural rudiments associated with
knowledge sharing. I suspect that these inherent rudiments vary in ac-
cordance with iit levels and influence the deployment of both tacit and
explicit knowledge. Therefore, it is expected that high interpersonal trust
will yield favourable tacit knowledge sharing organizational cultures, and
high institutional trust will yield favourable explicit knowledge sharing
conditions. This prediction is based on the former, involving higher lev-
els of unconscious knowledge transfer that act as tacit knowledge breed-
ing grounds and the latter being the result of repetitive and systematic
knowledge transfers. Together, high iit levels the vehicles conducive of
both tacit and explicit knowledge sharing practices.
hypothesis 1 National cultures that display high iit levels will ex-
hibit latent preferences towards organizational cultures high on knowl-
edge sharing practices.
The second national cultural depiction probes levels of authority en-
trustment (ae). ae considers the readiness to designate influential inputs
to both subordinate and authoritative sources opposed to sole authorita-
tive sources. As such it probes the natural flex that exists between author-
itative and subordinate members of society within a national culture.
Viewed on a high - low spectrum, people with low ae levels tend to
greatly revere authoritative positions and expect authoritative people to
have a large impact on the actions of everyone in society. In compari-
son, people with high ae, revere authoritative and non-authoritative po-
sitions equally and do not give a special bias towards the inputs stem-
ming from managerial sources and consequently do not automatically
comply with managers' orders but retain the ability to question the logic
or motives behind a particular action. In essence, this implies that na-
tional cultures with high ae levels delegate authority more readily to
non-authoritative positions, whereas cultures with low ae levels retain
authoritative powers to a select few.
On the company level, this national cultural dimension is marked by
interdependency between managers and subordinates; if managers act in
a particular way the subordinate will react accordingly. Consequently, the
extent to which a national culture has a preordained bias towards high
or low ae depends on the interactions between managerial and subordi-
nate parties from the outset and the values brought into the organization
from the start. The following evs variables have been utilized to quantify
table 2 evs AE variables with cumulative calculations
Country	v5	v6	v7	AE
Slovenia	1.8	7.4	2.7	3.967
Denmark	4.4	8.3	1.5	4.734
Germany	0.5	7.6	0.2	2.767
Austria	4.0	7-9	4-3	5.4OO
notes AE calculated as mean score of V5, v6 and V7. V5 - the extent to which an
increase in respect for authority would be viewed negatively; v6 - the extent to which
employees are free to make decisions at work without consulting with their managers;
v7 - the extent to which managers' orders must not always be followed. Source: own
calculations based on composite evs (1999) data.
the extent to which the populations of the sample countries are partial
towards high or low ae levels.
The composite results display differing levels of ae for each of the fo-
cus countries. Within the four country spectrum, Germany and Slove-
nia possess the lowest levels of ae whereas Denmark and Austria exhibit
the highest levels of ae, implying that the national cultures of the latter
countries are comparatively more enthusiastic about entrustment of au-
thority to broader circles in comparison to the former countries. An ex-
pected consequence of this is that countries with low ae national cultures
will favour organizational structures that bear remnants to the Trompe-
naars and Hampden-Turner (1998) Eiffel tower organizational culture;
namely tall organizational pyramids, high levels of respect and rever-
ence for their superiors and limited questioning of authority compared
to countries with high ae levels that engender a more egalitarian organi-
zational structure. Such an approach demands that key decision making
be centralized and conducted by a few select groups of managers who
maintain focused overviews and thwart the ability and need for decision
making to trickle down throughout the organization.
hypothesis 2 National cultures that display high ae levels will exhibit
a bias away from corporate structures that emulate a hierarchical Eiffel
tower organizational culture.
The third and final cultural depiction addresses independence and
distinctiveness (id) levels. That is, to which extent individualism is re-
warded or punished within a national context. The principal variation
between high and low id levels resides in the inter-connectivity with
which thoughts and actions of group members occur. As such, a highly
table 3 evs id variables with cumulative calculations
Country	v8	V9	v10	v11	v12	id
Slovenia	2.43	6.2	7.0	9.1	4.6	5.866
Denmark	3.50	4.4	8.0	9.4	7.0	6.460
Germany	7.10	9.3	7.0	9.9	6.2	7.901
Austria	7.09	9-5	7-1	9-7	5.6	7-798
notes id calculated as mean score of v8, v9, v10, vn and v12. v8 - the extent to
which the individual should take responsibility for people opposed to society or the state;
v9 - the extent to which being unselfish is not a priority; v10 - the extent to which being
independent is important; vn - the extent to which participating in community actions
is unimportant; v12 - the extent to which freedom is more important than equality.
Source: own calculations based on composite evs (1999) data.
id culture tends to have many connections with many different people
but for a short duration of time and holds that the individual is the pri-
mary unit of reality and that society is built up around a collection of
individuals. In contrast, low id reflects group members that have close
connections over a long period of time, where a strong sense of unity is
maintained and holds that the group is the primary unit of reality and
that the group determines one's identity.
Typical cultural characteristics of a high id are a preference towards
individual decision making, being self-orientated, basing efforts on in-
dividual initiative and looking out for their own best interests. On the
other hand, cultural characteristics of low id are centred on group de-
cision making, being collectively orientated, efforts based on a sense of
loyalty and duty and the group or society at large to go to great lengths
to look out for their best interests. To measure and benchmark the extent
to which the sample countries reveal a positive or negative latent prefer-
ence for a high or low id preference, data from the evs have been utilized
along the following dimensions that draw on the afore mentioned char-
acteristics.
From the composite id results, we notice a smaller distribution than
in the earlier two national cultural depictions, implying that the variance
between the focus countries along this dimension is smaller. In essence,
within the narrow four country band, Germany and Austria emerge as
most id inclined in contrast to Slovenia and Denmark which possess
smaller id levels. Projecting this onto our organizational culture model,
it is suspected that we may observe variations in control and coordina-
tion mechanisms within organizational cultures.
Within national cultures that rank low on id levels, the organization
will have great influence on the individual's well being as the organiza-
tion plays a large role in looking out for and defending the employee's
interest. A consequent dependency develops where employees, in return,
act in accordance with an organizational form of conduct and rely heav-
ily on company participation and training to stay abreast with corporate
initiatives. The organization can best comply with this interdependent
relationship through input and behavioural control mechanisms as they
have their foundations rooted in informal coordinating mechanisms that
are best upheld through personal relationships and informal communi-
cation. On the contrary, output control would best complement national
cultures that are high on id levels, as less emphasis is placed on the per-
sonal team-like connections, but more emphasis is allocated towards ac-
complishments and being result orientated. On this basis the final hy-
pothesis is formed.
hypothesis 3 National cultures that display high id levels will exhibit
a latent preference towards organizational cultures that utilize output
control and coordination mechanisms utilization.
Combined, the three cultural dimensions provide a static and limited
depiction of variances in the four countries' national cultures. However,
this limitation increases the accuracy of the results and hence their utility.
Rather than reflecting broad cultural representations that would more
appropriately embody the entire culture, the current method illuminates
only specific bands of cultural variation with surgical precision. Accord-
ingly, the context of the cultural descriptions is neglected in favour of
meaningful specific content interpretations that can be connected to or-
ganizational culture variations.
The Study
The empirical data for this research were collected as a part of a larger
p h d project researching a total of four national culture dimensions and
a multitude of organizational aspects. The data were extracted from 50
manufacturing companies taken to typify a stratified sample that allowed
for sub grouping of the initial sample data into industry, organization
size, organization age, organization success and geographical specific
classifications. This was a crucial step as each of the organizational pa-
rameters could, and most likely would, have major repercussions on the
materialization of the organizational cultures under scrutiny. The sam-
ple organization sizes, age and success rates were crucial parameters to
establish and keep constant, as small, newly entrant and modestly prof-
itable vs. large, incumbent and highly profitable companies possess in-
herently different organizational cultures that would skew entirely the
impacts that national culture has on the sought - for results. Further-
more, industrial classifications were necessary as well as a geographical
limitation as these parameters equally contaminate the purity of the na-
tional culture influence. Thus, in order to discount a scope-peripheral
bias, organizational size was limited to large, over 1,000 employees at the
mnc level, and organization age was limited to at least ten years of oper-
ations. Organization success was limited to at least a ten - year record of
profitability, and geographical localities were limited to the four coun-
tries comprising the focus of this study. Industry specific classifications
were limited to the manufacturing industry mainly as a result of an avail-
ability criterion.
Data collection was conducted through questionnaires, although fol-
low - up interviews via telephone and in person were conducted in a se-
lect number of organizations. The questionnaires and interviews probed
the intricacies of the company's perception of the organizational culture.
In order to gauge the actual respondent's national culture fit with that
of the evs data, the questionnaire first sought to identify how the re-
spondent valued certain characteristics pertinent to the national culture
dimensions that this study pivots around. Computation methods for the
empirical national culture data were identical to those utilized for the
Evs, thus providing a comparable base for verifying that the underlying
premises from which the hypotheses were made were still valid. Succeed-
ing questions probed the perceptions of the organizational culture along
the three dimensions of organisational structure patterns, control and
coordination mechanisms and knowledge sharing practices.
For ease of completing and analysing, the questionnaire was setup in
four clearly delineated sections that each addressed a separate manage-
ment aspect. Albeit at the cost of some respondents having to answer in
a language that was not their mother tongue, the questionnaire was ad-
ministered solely in English in order to overcome translation barriers.
Furthermore, in order to increase data reliability, the methodology of
data triangulation was utilized to address the same management issues
repeatedly. The questionnaire consisted of multiple-choice closed-ended
questions, five point Likert scale questions and normalized 10 point pref-
erence scaling questions. These facilitated point accumulation methods,
which made it possible to compare stances on the different aspects of
organizational culture.
The questions pertaining to control and coordination mechanisms
primarily probed, through a two-tier form, the respondents' perceptions
of the method in which they are controlled by their respective superi-
ors. The first tier illuminated a direct proportionate utilization ratio of
the three control forms (input, behaviour and output) as perceived by
the respondent. The second tier sought to investigate indirect manager
utilization of each control form. The data from each tier were weighted
and averaged into a united control and coordination mechanisms score.
The questions probing organizational structure patterns were structured
along three dimensions. The first examined direct decision making au-
thority levels within the organizations, the second examined the extent
to which power delegation was sufficient enough for lower ranked em-
ployees to have decision impact on the remainder of the organization,
and the third probed interpretative decentralization levels as perceived
by the respondents. The questions concerning knowledge sharing prac-
tices first examined the respondents' frequency with which they inform
others of strategically relevant information, and second, the frequency
with which two-way knowledge flow patterns are typical as opposed to
one-way knowledge flow patterns.
To test the hypotheses, cross-lateral Spearman rank correlation tests
were conducted fitted with confidence intervals for the 50 dataset sam-
ples to verify that a significant correlation exists between the national
culture and organizational culture scores. The Spearman rank correla-
tion coefficient (p) was calculated as:
where Di is the difference between each rank of corresponding values of
x and y, and n is the number of pairs of values.
Results and Discussion
The results concerning hypothesis 1 reveal a strong positive correlation
(0.648/0.01) between iit and knowledge sharing; as national cultures in-
creased in iit levels, so too did the organizational structure aptitude to
share knowledge (see columns 1-2 in table 4).
There is a direct, although not perfectly uniform, correlation between
high iit with high levels of composite knowledge sharing practices.
(1)
table 4 National to organizational country cluster- and correlation-test results
Country	nc	oc	nc	oc	nc	oc
	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
Denmark	6.93	0.859	4.73	0.410	6.46	0.71
Austria	4.87	0.855	5.40	0.494	7.80	0.81
Germany	4.25	0.741	2.77	0.652	7.90	0.72
Slovenia	3-17	0.619	3-97	0.598	5.87	0.38
P	0.648	**		0.566**	0.580**	
notes N = 50. **p < 0.01. nc - national culture, oc - organizational culture. Col-
umn headings are as follows: (1) Composite iit scores (2) Composite knowledge sharing
practice scores (3) Composite ae scores (4) Composite hierarchical Eiffel tower structure
scores (5) Composite id scores (6) Composite output control and coordination mecha-
nism scores. The individual scores for (2), (4) and (6) obtained at the organizational level
are bundled together within their respective country cluster and presented as composite
scores.
However, the respective upsurges and reductions in national culture iit
and organizational culture knowledge sharing levels are not proportion-
ately distributed in relation to each other. This is most apparent with
the Danish and Austrian data. The Danish iit scores more than a full
point ahead of the Austrian national culture score, yet the knowledge
sharing levels are almost identical, with the exception that the Danish
organizational knowledge sharing levels just out - edge the Austrian
organizations. Thus, the large gap in national culture between these two
countries is not represented with an equally large gap in knowledge shar-
ing levels. Furthermore, low iit scores are accompanied by lesser levels
of knowledge sharing, but not low levels of knowledge sharing. For this
realization it is noteworthy to recognize that all countries' organizations
scored a fairly high knowledge sharing grade and, as such, are all con-
sidered fairly knowledge sharing prone. Consequently, Slovenia's and
Germany's low iit scores (3.17 and 4.25, respectively) are not reflected
with low absolute knowledge sharing scores but only low comparative
scores.
Nevertheless, the results unanimously support the hypothesis, as a
clear tendency for greater knowledge sharing organizational culture is
observed as national culture trust levels increase. In an earlier study it was
shown that the majority of knowledge sharing in Slovenian companies
occurs through tacit means (Gulev 2007,161). In part this might help to
further elucidate the positive correlation. In environments that rely heav-
ily on tacit knowledge sharing it is a necessary precursor that the inter-
connectedness between members of that environment is strong. Low iit
levels would directly counter such inter-connectedness and would thus
undermine the principle vehicle conducive to tacit knowledge sharing
practices. This may be the cardinal explanation behind the low knowl-
edge sharing outcome for the Slovenian organizations. Whether the same
logic holds for the remaining organizations remains speculative.
The results regarding hypothesis 2 also conform the hypothesis, albeit
statistically at a slightly weaker intensity (-0.566/0.01). As national cul-
ture ae levels increase we observe a decrease in the frequency with which
hierarchical Eiffel tower structures were detected (see columns 3-4 in ta-
ble 4).
The Slovenian and German ae scores are ranked the lowest, while
united scoring highest on composite hierarchical Eiffel tower structure
scores, and the Austrian national culture, which scored the highest ae,
ranked moderately low on hierarchical structure. Taken together, this
works in accordance with the hypothesis prediction, albeit the results are
not pristine. Slovenia has a higher national culture ae score than Ger-
many, yet also a higher amount of hierarchical organizations were de-
tected. Furthermore, the large variance spectrum displayed between the
German and Austrian ae scores (2.63) is not reflected by an equally large
variance fluctuation in composite hierarchical structure scores (0.158).
This suggests that hierarchical Eiffel tower structure levels are not per-
fectly correlated to ae levels, as the large ae variance is mirrored only by
a small organizational structure variance. Consequently, it appears that
there is a tendency for high levels of ae preferences to be accompanied
by low levels of hierarchical Eiffel tower structures, although it is not a
precise relationship.
To further understand this strong negative correlation it is important
to recognize that countries that embrace high ae cultures are more likely
to produce an environment that harmonizes with egalitarian ideologies.
The endowment of authority to non top-tier positions empowers a larger
amount of people with decision making abilities, which works against
the constructs of an Eiffel tower organizational culture. In further ac-
cord, highly Eiffel tower organizational cultures endorse work environ-
ments where a bureaucratic division of labour with various roles and
functions is prescribed in advance and coordinated at the top by a hierar-
chy (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner 1998,166). Such a structure de-
mands that authoritative figures retain certain command mandates that
aid in enforcing the dominant boss - subordinate relationships. Low ae
national cultures directly facilitate this.
The results pertaining to hypothesis 3 reveal a strong positive correla-
tion (0.580/0.01) between national culture id scores and organizational
culture output control utilization; as individualism and distinctiveness
levels increase we observe a proportionate increase in the utilization of
organizational output control mechanisms (see columns 5-6 in table 4).
The Slovenian organizations are unique in that only they appear to
utilize a larger proportion of input and behaviour control to the detri-
ment of output control (0.38) compared to the other three countries'
organizations which collectively use output control to a greater extent.
However, this departure from output control utilization detected in the
Slovenian organizations concurs nicely with the hypothesis prediction;
with a few exceptions, an almost linear correlation is observed. Overall,
the correlation is stable and significant, however, the direct results do suf-
fer from some weaknesses as there appears to be no absolute connection
between high levels of id and high utilization of output control. As is ev-
ident from the data, the German organizations, which ranked the most
id (albeit just by a fraction), utilizes less output and more input and be-
haviour control than the Austrian organizations, which were marked by
a lower id score. Even more noticeable, the Danish organizations have
an almost identical ratio of output control utilization as that of the Ger-
man organizations, despite id levels varying by more than a full point.
Nevertheless, when broadening the scope, the underlying notion that or-
ganizations in national cultures that score high on id to utilize output
control does remain valid.
The logic behind this positive correlation resides in understanding
when an organizational culture emphasizing output control is most use-
ful. Output control through targets and set goals is not limited to highly
individualistic individuals; communitarian driven individuals also re-
spond positively to output control (Dowling and Welsch 2004, 137) as
well as to input and behaviour control. However, it is possible that in-
dividuals in highly id national cultures respond less favourably to input
and behaviour control, as their ability to be distinctive is decreased and
in essence they are asked to depart from a conduct that conforms nat-
urally to their high id culture. As such, the positive id national culture
to output control organizational culture correlation is more a product
of the inappropriateness of input and behaviour control, rather than the
appropriateness of output control, on highly id individuals.
Utility and Limitations
The current findings provide utility for a broad range of people. Most
notably, managers of organizations can use the findings to provide in-
sight into the fit between their national and organisational culture. On
the basis of our findings, managers can deduce that certain organiza-
tional traits may be subconsciously inferred as a result of national cul-
tural influences. This has implications for a wide array of organizational
circumstances.
First, the findings may prove fruitful in helping to better understand
intra-organizational behaviour. It is possible that the actions of corpo-
rate employees may have more to do with national cultural roots than
organizational agendas. Hence, bridging the gap between national and
organizational culture cognitively may help explain why employees and
managers conduct themselves in a specific manner; knowledge that can
greatly facilitate positive intra-organizational interaction. Second, the re-
sults act as a caution signal to any international organization that em-
ploys multiple nationalities with differing cultures. For these organiza-
tions, achieving a higher level of corporate compliance through organi-
zational culture may lie in further understanding the national cultural
roots of their diverse workforce. Finally, the results can be considered as
fodder for catalysts of organizational change. In instances where orga-
nizational change is warranted it may prove beneficial to give initiative
to the transformation process with an investigation of the organizational
members' inherent national cultures, as this may provide insight into
how the change management process can be endorsed and encouraged
internally.
Researchers and academics subscribing to the culturist approach will
find value in the study, as a relatively new methodology in analyzing
organizational and national cultures is presented. The limited and nar-
row avenues of national and organizational culture that are explored are
uncommon in academic research; most contributions group broad per-
ceptions of national and organizational culture together, thus gaining
broader cultural insight but diminishing the comparability of the com-
ponents. The current study makes a conscious move towards limited cul-
tural definitions, at the cost of providing complete cultural depictions,
but with the immense reward of strengthening the validity of the emerg-
ing results.
As with most culturally based studies, the current article suffers from
certain limitations. A predictable direct consequence of the limited cul-
tural depictions is that the national and organizational portrayals are not
complete representations of the whole picture. As such, certain elements
of culture - some even pertaining to the three national cultures covered
herein - are ignored. A further limitation is that I utilize datasets from
two sources only. Although I feel confident that the evs and question-
naire data are credible and provide a valid foundation for the research,
it must be acknowledged that other sources of national and organiza-
tional culture might have produced dissimilar correlation results. I do
not, however, believe that our model is sample specific and I expect to
find similar correlations from other sources in upcoming studies.
Conclusion
The current article is among the first to examine the extent to which a
triad of national cultural depictions influences organizational cultures
pivoting around communication, control and authority patterns within
a specific selection of European countries. Along this chord, we arrived
at several credible results; in large, we proved that organizational cultures
do emulate national culture characteristics along three finely defined di-
mensions.
First, a highly interpersonal and institutional trust-driven national
culture inclination acts as a catalyst for knowledge sharing organizational
cultures. It was found that trust, measured as a national component, fa-
cilitates the vehicles conducive to explicit and especially tacit knowledge
sharing. Accordingly, it is suggested that national levels of trust trigger
higher levels of knowledge sharing to occur within the organizational
culture.
Second, national cultures with high authority endowment traditions
yield organizational cultures that depart from the Eiffel tower structure
and gravitate more towards decentralized and egalitarian organizational
structures. The emphasis here is on the inclination of societal members
to disseminate authoritative powers away from select top-tier individ-
uals. Thus, it is proposed that national cultures that have low levels of
authority endowment, meaning that authority remains with a select few,
will produce organizational cultures that are hierarchical and tall.
Third, national cultures with high levels of independence and distinc-
tiveness characteristics tend to appreciate organizational cultures that
depart from the utilization of input and behaviour control but empha-
size output control. Here an appreciation of set targets and goals that
benefit (and punish) the individual outweighed communal supervision
and socialization of employees into the organization and its values.
Along these specific chords, organizational cultures are seen to be
isomorphic with national cultures; a clear and significant habit of de-
pendency between the analyzed variables emerged. These results alone
provide further nourishment for researchers and practitioners who sub-
scribe to the notion that national management models do persist in Eu-
rope (see also Klarsfeld and Mabey 2004) and that these sometimes fol-
low a predictable pattern. The current results thus provide helpful insight
into methods that can help bridge organizational clashes; understanding
the core roots that generate differing organizational cultures can help
promote the use of constructive conduits for further intra-European cor-
porate cooperation.
Notes
1 The European Values Study is a large-scale, cross-national and longitudi-
nal survey of moral, religious, political and social values. The survey was
designed to investigate the nature and inter-relationship of value systems,
their degree of homogeneity, and the extent to which they are subject to
change across time.
References
Bachmann R., and A. Zaheer. 2006. Handbook of trust research. Edward
Elgar: Cheltenham.
Blodgett, J. G., G. M. Rose, L. M. Horton, and A. Bakir. 2005. A test of
the validity of Hofstede's cultural dimensions. Paper presented at the
Eleventh Cross-Cultural Research Conference, New Orleans.
Bussey, J. A. 1999. The implications of national culture on American
knowledge work teams: A model of collaborative corporate culture
to support team functioning. p h d diss., University of North Texas.
Chandler, A. D., Jr. 1994. Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capi-
talism. Cambridge, ma: Harvard University Press.
Deal, T. E., and A. A. Kennedy. 2000. Corporate cultures. New York:
Perseus.
Dowling, P., and D. E. Welsch. 2004. International human resource man-
agement: Managing people in a multinational context. 4th ed. London:
Thomson.
evs. 1999. European Values Study. Http://www.europeanvalues.nl/.
Fairfield-Sonn, J. W. 2001. Corporate culture and the quality organization.
Westport, cn: Quorum.
Finlay, P. 2000. Strategic management: An introduction to business and cor-
porate strategy. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Goelzer, P. G. 2003. Effects of national culture on organizational culture.
p h d diss., Benedictine University.
Gulev, R. 2007. Intercultural subsidiary management: A cross country analy-
sis of Slovenia, Germany, Austria and Denmark. Koper: Faculty of Man-
agement.
Hall, E. T. 1981. Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.
Hardin, R. 2002. Trust and trustworthiness. New York: Russell Sage Foun-
dation.
Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviours,
institutions, and organizations across nations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks,
ca: Sage.
Inglehart, R. 1997. Modernization and post-modernization: Cultural, eco-
nomic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, nj: Princeton
University Press.
Klarsfeld, A., and C. Mabey. 2004. Management development in Europe:
Do national models persist? European Management Journal 22 (6):
649-57.
Koen, C. 2005. Comparative and international management. Maidenhead:
McGraw-Hill.
Neelankavil, J. P., M. Anil, and Y. Zhang. 2000. Determinants of manage-
rial performance: A cross cultural comparison of middle-level man-
agers in four countries. Journal ofInternational Business Studies 31 (1):
121-40.
Ogbor, J. 0.1998. Organizational leadership and authority relations across
culture: Beyond divergence and convergence. International Journal of
Commerce and Management 10 (1): 48-73.
Osland, J. S., A. Bird. 2000. Beyond sophisticated stereotyping: Cultural
sensemaking in context. Academy of Management Executive 14 (1): 65-
79.
Phatak, A. V., R. S. Bhagat, and R. J. Kashlak. 2005. International man-
agement: Managing in a diverse and dynamic global environment. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Reed, E. N., and G. Suresh. 2003. Do organizational cultures replicate na-
tional cultures? Isomorphism, rejection and reciprocal opposition in
the corporate values of three countries. Organizational Studies 24 (7):
1115-51.
Rosenfeld, R., and D. Wilson. 1999. Managing organizations. 2nd Edition.
London: McGraw-Hill.
Schein, E. H. 1999. The corporate culture survival guide. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Schwartz, S. H. 1992. Universals in the content and structure of values:
Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In Advances
in experimental social psychology, ed. M. Zanna, 25:1-65. New York:
Academic Press.
Singh, S. K., and M. Parashar. 2005. Cross-cultural conceptualizations re-
visited. Paper presented at the Eleventh Cross-Cultural Research Con-
ference, New Orleans.
Trompenaars, F., and C. Hampden-Turner. 1998. Riding the waves of cul-
ture: Understanding cultural diversity in business. 2nd edition. London:
Brealey.
Weick, K. E. 2008. Trust: A bigger picture. Academy of Management Review
33 (1): 271-4.
Zver, M., T. Zivko, and V. Bobek. 2004. Is there a gap in economic culture
between eu countries and the transition economies? Managing Global
Transitions 2 (1): 31-40.