Tác động của văn hóa và bầu không khí tổ chức đến sự gắn bó của người lao động tại doanh nghiệp viễn thông Việt Nam: Trường hợp của FPT Telecom

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

INFLUENCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND CLIMATE

ON EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN TELECOMMUNICATION

COMPANIES IN VIETNAM: THE CASE OF FPT TELECOM

TÁC ĐỘNG CỦA VĂN HÓA VÀ BẦU KHÔNG KHÍ TỔ CHỨC

ĐẾN SỰ GẮN BÓ CỦA NGƯỜI LAO ĐỘNG TẠI DOANH NGHIỆP

VIỄN THÔNG VIỆT NAM: TRƯỜNG HỢP CỦA FPT TELECOM

MA, Le Thi Tu Anh; MA, Vu Tuan Duong

Thuongmai University

lethituanh@tmu.edu.vn

Abstract:

In the industrial revolution context, human capital is considered as invaluable resource of

enterprises in any industry. Researchers and managers make efforts to clarify the determinants

of employee engagement, thereby tighten the linkage between employees and the organization.

This paper aims to evaluate the impact of organizational culture and climate on employee en-

gagement. Data collected from 277 employees of FPT Telecom - a well-known telecommunication

company in Vietnam, was analyzed by using different quantitative methods, such as descriptive

statistics and structural equation model analysis. The findings indicated that both organizational

culture and climate positively influence employee engagement. Particularly, market cultures and

hierarchy cultures have the strongest effect on engagement.

Keywords: employee engagement, organizational culture, organizational climate.

Tóm tắt:

Trong bối cảnh cách mạng công nghiệp, nguồn nhân lực được coi là nguồn lực vô giá của

các doanh nghiệp ở bất kỳ lĩnh vực nào. Các nhà nghiên cứu và quản lý đều nỗ lực để làm rõ các

yếu tố quyết định đến sự gắn bó của người lao động, từ đó thắt chặt mối liên kết giữa nhân viên

và tổ chức. Bài viết này nhằm mục đích đánh giá tác động của văn hóa tổ chức và môi trường

đối với sự gắn bó của người lao động. Dữ liệu thu thập từ 277 nhân viên của FPT Telecom - một

công ty viễn thông nổi tiếng tại Việt Nam, được phân tích bằng các phương pháp định lượng

khác nhau như thống kê mô tả và phân tích mô hình phương trình cấu trúc. Các kết quả chỉ ra

rằng cả văn hóa doanh nghiệp và bầu không khí tổ chức đều ảnh hưởng tích cực đến sự gắn bó

của người lao động. Đặc biệt, văn hóa thị trường và văn hóa thứ bậc có ảnh hưởng mạnh nhất

đến sự gắn bó.

Từ khóa: sự gắn bó của người lao động, văn hóa tổ chức, bầu không khí tổ chức.

1. Introduction

In the context of industrial revolution 4.0 involving powerful digital technologies, which

effectively supporting enterprises in improving operational efficiency, a new challenge for man-

634

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

ager is the attraction and retention of high-quality human resources. Managers increasingly realize

that technical problems could be easily solved thanks to innovative technology in short term, but

problems related to human resources require longer-term changes. Engagement plays an important

role in maintaining stability of personnel as well as improving work efficiency of employees,

thereby, significantly contributing to the overall success of the enterprise. However, according

to the report “State of the global workplace”, based on the results of a survey of the workforce

and working conditions in 155 countries, only 15% of the world’s workers surveyed are truly en-

gaged with the organization (Gallup, 2017). This rate in Vietnam is only 9%, only half of the av-

erage rate of Southeast Asia (19%), much lower than other countries in the same region such as

Singapore (23%). Thailand (23%), Malaysia (17%) ... One of the reasons for this result is that

organizations around the world are not properly aware of the importance of engagement, so they

have not applied effective measures to improve their level of engagement of employees.

Among the crucial factors affecting employee engagement, organizational culture and cli-

mate are two frequently mentioned factors in both theory and practice. On the one hand, organi-

zational culture is also frequently on the top list of issues of concern by executives across the

world. The report of Gallup (2017) also highlighted that 87% of CEOs of surveyed companies

believe that organizational culture - a system of values, beliefs and behaviors that shape the way

in which this organization operates - is an important factor contributing to business successes

and has a strong impact on employee attitudes. On the other hand, the organizational climate

refers to the characteristics of the organization from the employee’s perspective, how they per-

ceive subjectively about the activities of the members of the organization (Gray, 2008). Therefore,

organizational climate guides and regulates the employee’s behavior by imparting to them which

behavior is desirable and appropriate within this enterprise.

Despite a large number of studies that have mentioned the link between corporate culture

and employee engagement, few studies have simultaneously analyzed the effects of culture and

climate on engagement. This paper focuses on answering the question “How organizational cul-

ture and climate impact employee engagement”. In particular, the authors study the effects of 4

popular types of corporate culture (clan, adhocracy, market and hierarchy) and organizational en-

gagement climate on the level of engagement of employees.

The authors will firstly synthesize theories related to organizational culture, climate and

the effects of these dimensions on engagement. Next, we will present the analytical framework

and research methods used in this paper. Based on the results of the empirical analysis, this paper

will offer a number of solutions to shift the culture and climate in order to strengthen the cohesion

between employees and the organization.

2. Literature review

2.1. Organizational culture

Since the 1980s, organizational culture has gradually been more mentioned in the studies

of management. One of the most popular definitions of organizational culture (or corporate cul-

ture) is that of Schein (1992). He defines organizational culture as the set of fundamental con-

ventions that a certain group has invented, discovered or developed to learn to deal with problems

of external adaptability and internal integration. These conventions have worked well enough to

635

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

be considered valid, and therefore, be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive,

think, and feel in relation to those problems (Schein, 1992). From this definition, it can be seen

that the implementation of culture in an organization is towards cognitive unity among members

and develops uniform behavioral capacity for them. When all leaders, managers, and employees

in an organization have a clear sense of their shared culture, it creates social order, continuity,

collective identity, common commitment and vision, and reduces organizational uncertainty - all

of which lead to improved organizational performance (Cameron & Quinn, 2011).

The great diversity of organizational culture researches comes from the use of different

cultural approaches. Some studies analyze cultural constituent elements in purpose of identifying

the culture of an organization. Lau and Idris (2001) have proposed a cultural analysis model that

includes the following elements: Salary, bonus and recognition; Training and developing; Com-

munication in the organization; and Teamwork. Heskett (2011) studied culture based on four key

resources: Competitive advantage, Employee retention, Labor cost and productivity and Customer

relationship. Do Huu Hai (2014) offered a system of criteria for identifying corporate culture that

specifically applied to businesses in Vietnam. Accordingly, organizational culture is composed

of three main factors: Organizing, Managing and Leading.

Meanwhile, other studies concentrated on describing different cultural patterns of an or-

ganization. Deal and Kennedy (2000) analyzed organizational culture in four groups: Process

culture, Tough-guy culture, Work hard/play hard culture, and Bet-your-company culture. Cameron

& Quinn (2011) have defined four different types of culture: a creative culture (Adhocracy), a

culture of collaboration (Clan), a culture of control (Hierarchy) and a culture of competition (Mar-

ket). Each of these cultures is reflected by the dominant leadership styles and the definitions of

success that make an organization unique. In fact, the culture in most of enterprises shows more

than one aspect of these cultural types, but likely focuses on a specific direction that is called

dominant culture.

Overall, in studies of the role of culture in organizations, scholars often consider simulta-

neously various types of culture to find the difference in the influence of those types on the or-

ganizational outcomes and employee attitudes or behaviors. Therefore, in this paper, we use the

approach of Cameron & Quinn (2011) to examine the effect of organizational culture on employee

engagement.

2.2. Organizational climate

The organizational climate is composed of an employee’s common perception of the re-

warding, supporting and expected policies, practices, procedures and behaviors within the orga-

nizational context (Schneider, 1994). Perceptions shared by employees in a given work

environment show agreement in their assessment of the meaning and importance of the job. Com-

pletely different from the psychological climate - the perception of the impact of the work envi-

ronment on the well-being of each individual, the organizational climate refers to the consensus

of individuals within the organization in awareness about the impact of the work environment.

For example, when employees in an organization agree that they find their work environment

very stressful, the organizational climate is described as stressful.

636

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

Previous studies about this topic often concretized the climate in a certain aspect, such as

climate for service, ethical climate, climate for performance... to find out the effect of climate on

efficiency of organization or employee attitudes and behavior (Kuenzi and Schmink, 2008).

Therefore, in this paper, we concentrated on the effect of an organization engagement climate on

employee engagement. According to Albrecht (2014), organizational engagement climate refers

to a shared awareness of energy and participation that employees are willing to focus on achieving

goals of the organization. Working in engagement climate, employees think that their achieve-

ments in work are meaningful and clearly feel the linkage between themselves and their daily

work.

Organizational culture and climate are fundamental topics in both theory and practice,

which are closely related. While organizational culture focuses on shared values, organizational

climate emphasizes the consensus in shared perceptions of important aspects of work environ-

ment. Therefore, in order to comprehensively study the factors affecting engagement, it is nec-

essary to consider these two factors at the same time.

2.3. Employee engagement

The employee engagement is an important research topic, which has been approached in

many different ways. Several authors believed that the employee engagement is simply a psy-

chological state. Other authors considered engagement as the employee’s attitude and behavior.

As stated by Kahn (1990), the individual engagement to the organization is the self-ex-

ploitation of the members of the organization with their job roles. The individual uses and ex-

presses his / her physical, perception and emotion when performing his / her role. Perrin (2003)

placed more emphasis on employee behavior when it comes to employee engagement as their

willingness and ability to contribute to the success of the organization. The definition of Schaufeli

et al. (2006) is relatively popular, arguing that a fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is char-

acterized by vigor, dedication and absorption.

Combining both mental and behavioral aspects, employee engagement can be understood

as a sense of emotional commitment to the organization and they take action to ensure the success

of the organization. Employees engaged to the organization demonstrate interest, dedication, re-

sponsibility of enthusiasm and a focus on results.

2.4. Relationships between organizational culture, climate and employee engagement

Many studies around the world have addressed the relationship between organizational

culture, organizational climate and the level of engagement.

Organizational culture is a concept that refers to exchange, where good values and good

management are evidence of organization’s impact to the employees. A “good” organizational

culture can provide employees with a sense of psychological security and contribute to promoting

employee engagement (Kahn, 1990). The study of Denison (2010) also shows similar results,

that an organization with a “healthy” corporate culture strengthens its members’ attachment to

the organization. Organizational culture is like a bridge connecting the organization and the mem-

bers of that organization. Swatee and Srivastava (2012) analyzed the impact of organizational

637

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

culture on employee engagement. Research results of private banks in India have shown that the

five elements of organizational culture (autonomy, extroversion, cooperation, human resource

orientation, innovation) has an effect on engagement of staffs. Hellevig (2012) also emphasized

that employee engagement must be associated with a corporate culture that promotes and main-

tains individual participation, a culture of sustainable engagement.

A number of studies in Vietnam also paid attention to the relationship between organiza-

tional culture and employee engagement. The study of Nguyen Manh Quan (2012) has shown

that organizational culture is often considered as a method of creating solidarity within organi-

zations and enterprises. In other words, organizational culture can be used to govern organization

and increase the engagement of individuals. Cultural values encourage persons to voluntarily act-

ing for a common goal. Ha Nam Khanh Giao & Ho Thi Thu Trang (2016) also analyzed the im-

pact of organizational culture on engagement of office employees in joint stock companies in Ba

Ria - Vung Tau province. However, this study has just look at culture through its constituent fac-

tors without mentioning the role of different types of culture in employee engagement.

Besides, organization climate is considered as an important predictor of attitudinal and be-

havioral outcomes (Denison et al., 2014; King et al., 2007). A number of studies have shown a

positive effect of the organizational climate on engagement (Laschinger, 2010; Crawford et al.

(2010). However, the majority of studies often provide a general concept of climate without fo-

cusing on a specific aspect to clarify its relationship with employee engagement. Bakker et al.

(2011) gave the idea of conceptualize climate for engagement. Organizational engagement climate

refers to six areas of work life, including workload, control, reward, community, fairness, and

values. Organizational climate influences job demands and job resources (such as autonomy, skill

utilization) and ultimately the level of engagement (Dollard & Bakker, 2010). Lack of consensus

on the importance of climate for engagement lead us to explore the relationship between organi-

zational climate and engagement.

In sum up, a common point in the results achieved by these domestic and foreign studies

is the affirmation of the extremely important role of organizational culture in promoting the em-

ployee engagement. However, studies in Vietnam on organizational climate and especially its ef-

fect on employee engagement is still limited. This motivates the authors to study more deeply

about the direct effects of different types of culture and organizational climate on employee en-

gagement.

3. Analytical framework and hypotheses development

Based on a synthesis of theoretical and empirical studies, this paper proposes an analytical

framework that allows to study simultaneously the impacts of organizational culture and climate

on employee engagement as described in Figure 1.

638

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

(Source: Authors)

Figure 1. Analytical framework

iOrganizational culture:

T(Source: Authors)Organization Culture Assessment Instrument) model proposed by

Cameron and Quinn (2011) to identify the unique culture of an organization. The current cultural

profile of the company is described based on four basic cultures: Adhocracy culture, Clan culture,

Market culture and Hierarchy culture.

A special feature of Cameron and Quinn (2011) model is that in the development of organ-

ization, culture is not fixed but tends to shift through a predictable model of changes, starting

from adhocracy culture to clan culture, moving to hierarchy culture and then to market culture.

Although this trend is summarized through empirical research in the world, it does not mean that

this trend is compulsory and suitable for all businesses. Therefore, the implication of this tool

not only allows to compare the effects of different cultures on employee engagement, but also to

provide specific guidance to help leaders improve engagement of employees through adjusting

the organization’s culture.

The positive linkage between adhocracy cultures and positive attitudes of employee towards

the organization is supported in several empirical studies. Adhocracy cultures providing employ-

ees with significant job resources, such as autonomy, freedom of creativity, task variety. These

job characteristics have positive impact on work engagement (Bakker et al., 2007). Crawford et

al. (2010) also underlined the effect of innovativeness and employee development on several di-

mensions of engagement and overall satisfaction of employee. Therefore, we propose that:

H1a: Adhocracy culture has positive impact on employee engagement.

Many studies have shown a significant linkage between engagement and the characteristics

of clan culture. In fact, clan culture which focus on teamwork, collaboration and empowerment

will result in feelings of belongingness and attachment (Denison & Blader, 2003). Clan culture

should be linked to the positive attitudes of unit-level employees thanks to participation and in-

639

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

centives that lead to overall employee satisfaction (Hartnell et al., 2011). Decentralized decision-

making and support of supervisors and coworkers helps employees to trust in the organization

and gradually form a long-term desire and commitment to the organization. These studies lead

us to propose that:

H1b: Clan culture has positive impact on employee engagement.

Market cultures foster competitiveness in the organization and positively influence collec-

tive attitudes of employees. Market cultures characterized by result-orientation can promote em-

ployee satisfaction when they archive goals, receive rewards and recognition (Cameron & Quinn,

2011). However, excessive competition or inadequate rewards will probably lead to high work

pressure and cause psychological influence on employees. Therefore, leaders play an important

role in making decisions on rewards, maintaining healthy competition to motivate employees.

Clear goals and open communication between managers and their staffs is the key to enhance

aggressive performance (Hartnell et al., 2011). Based on cited studies, we suggest that:

H1c: Market culture has positive impact on employee engagement.

Research results on the influence of hierarchy culture on engagement are still inconsistent.

Several studies suggested that the bureaucracy and imbalance of authority

and power that restrict the freedom of employees tends to have a negative impact on their behavior

and motivation (Lee et al., 2017; Chatman et al., 2014; Richard et al., 2009). Other recent studies

have mentioned that an organization with a high level of hierarchy will be highly stable and the

employees often work closely together (Kang & Busser, 2018; Lu et al., 2016). Several charac-

teristics of hierarchy culture, such as guidelines of supervisors and job control are considered as

antecedents of engagement (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). The positive effects of hierarchy culture

need to be studied in more detail in different contexts.

H1d: Hierarchy culture has positive impact on employee engagement.

iOrganizational engagement climate:

The organizational engagement climate is examined based on the scale of Albrecht (2014).

This scale describes how employees feel about a climate of engagement. The Likert 5 is used to

represent the accuracy of each description of an organizational climate. Several models have been

proposed to investigate the relationship between climate and employee behaviors or organiza-

tional performance (Neal & Griffin, 2006). The studies of Crawford et al. (2010) and Halbesleben

(2010) pointed out the positive effect of the organizational climate on engagement.

iEmployee engagement:

Employee engagement measures the degree to which the employee attaches himself to the

job. The article uses the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) (Schaufeli et al., 2006)

which includes 9 observed variables. This scale is highly reliable and has been used in numerous

studies on employee engagement.

Based on cited theoretical and experimental studies, we propose research hypotheses as

follows:

H2: Organizational engagement climate has positive impact on employee engagement.

640

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

4. Methodology

4.1. Research approach

This paper used a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. In which,

qualitative research methods were used in analyzing and synthesizing secondary data as well as

in-depth interviews. Quantitative methods were mainly used for analyzing primary data. The ap-

plied software included IBM SPSS 22 and AMOS 23, in which SPSS supported descriptive sta-

tistics, EFA discovery factor test, Cronbach Alpha coefficient test. Meanwhile, IBM AMOS 23

supported CFA confirmation factor testing, CR (Composite Reliability), convergence test (AVE),

discriminant validity and differential Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). To assess the rele-

vance of the research model, the values considered include: Chi-square / df (chi-square to the

degree of freedom ratio), GFI (Goodness index of Fit Index), CFI (Comparative fit index), TLI

(Tucker and Lewis index), and RMSEA (Root mean square error of approximation). According

to Hair et al (2010), standards with these values include Chi-square / df less than 3; CFI, TLI,

GFI are greater than 0.9; RMSEA is less than 0.08.

4.2. Measures

The research scales were built on the literature review as well as the operational status of

human resource management and development at FPT Telecom. Besides, in order to increase the

relevance of the scale to the research context, we conducted preliminary research with sample

size n = 32. In-depth interviews were also applied with 5 selected experts, including 3 senior

human resource managers of FPT Telecom and 2 specialists in management. From the initial

scales with 41 observed variables, the scales were extracted to 38 observed variables.

The questionnaire consisted of 38 questions designed with 5-point Likert from 1- Strongly

disagree to 5- Strongly agree. In which, observed variables of organizational culture factors are

applied from the OCAI scale of Cameron and Quinn (2011); observed variables on the organiza-

tional engagement climate are adapted from the study of Albrecht (2014); employee engagement

scale was applied from the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale study scale (UWES-9; Schaufeli et

al., 2006).

4.3. Data collection

Research on the application of stratified sampling method with criteria related to the dis-

tribution of human resources in the entire system of FPT Telecom. Primary research data were

collected through offline and online procedures. Direct interviews were firstly enrolled with FPT

Telecom employees working in Hanoi. Research team members were supported by human re-

source managers to interact with employees during the early part of internal training. The ques-

tionnaire was introduced to FPT Telecom staff before they filling this questionnaire. All inquiries

about surveyed contents were answered by team members.

Simultaneously, we conducted an online survey form via Google Form software for per-

sonnel working at network points outside of Hanoi. In order to incorrect answers limitation, for

each question in the Google form, we added the option “I don’t know the question”. After re-

ceiving feedback and synthesizing, research team members will contact directly to respondents

who misunderstanding the question content to assist in completing the survey.

641

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

For the sample of the study, the rate of personnel working in Hanoi and network points

correspond to the actual rate. Accordingly, about 35% of respondents were in Hanoi, while 65%

of them were working in network points. Minimum sample size was respected according to Hair

et al. (2006). Each observed variable takes at least 5 respondents, so with a scale of 38 observed

variables of the study, the minimum sample size is 190. In fact, 350 questionnaires were collected

through two procedures. The number of received questionnaires were 329. After checking for

omission and standard distribution, the number of valid questionnaires was 277.

The demographic profile of the respondents is depicted in Table 1.

Table 1. Demographic profile of the respondents.

Demographic Characteristic

Gender

Frequency

%

Male

154

123

55,60

44,40

Female

Years of Experience

< 1 year

91

103

73

32,85

37,18

29,97

1-3 years

> 3 years

Workplace

Hanoi

97

35,02

64,98

Other provinces

180

5. Analysis results

5.1. Statistical approaches

According to Hair et al. (2006), the criteria for evaluating the model’s structure should

be considered on the factors Convergent and Discriminant Validity. Several value should be eval-

uated including the Standardized Factor Loading (Fls) should be greater than 0.5. Composite Re-

liability (CR) should be greater than 0.7 and the AVE (Average Variance Extracted) should be

greater than 0.5. SQRAVE value is larger than the Inter - Construct Correlation. The results for

Cronbach Alpha value must be greater than 0.6 and corrected item-to-total correlations with the

total variable should be greater than 0.3.

5.2. Measurement model, construct reliability and validity

The CFA results indicated that Chi-Square value = 806.393 and CFA model includes 611

degrees of freedom. P-value = 0,000 (less than 0.05). Chi-Square / df index = 1,320 (less than 3).

TLI = 0.949 and CFI = 0.953 are both greater than 0.9. RMSEA value = 0.041 (less than 0.08).

According to Hair et al. (2010), the model guarantees the standards and suit for the collected

data. Exceptionally, GFI value = 0.866 (less than 0,9) but according to Baumgartner et al (1996),

the GFI value is in the range of 0.8 - 0.9 is completely acceptable.

642

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

(Source: Authors)

Figure 2. Confirmatory factor analysis results

The result of testing the convergence of variables through 4 indexes showed that the value

of factor loading observed variables ranged from 0.567 to 0.794 (greater than 0.5). The Cronbach

alpha coefficient for the variables ranged from 0.837-0.869 (greater than 0.6). The CR (composite

reliability) value ranges from 0.806 - 0.870 (greater than 0.7). The average variance extracted

(AVE) value ranged from 0.506-0.539 (greater than 0.5). According to Hair et al. (2010) and

Byrne (2010), the scale ensures convergence and reliability.

Table 2. Items, reliability and convergent validity

Variables and Items

FLs

α

CR

0.806

AVE

0.539

Adhocracy cultures. Adapted from Cameron & Quinn

(2011)

0.837

The organization is a very dynamic and entrepreneurial

place. People are willing to stick their necks out and take

risks.

0.744

0.670

0.731

The leadership in the organization is generally consid-

ered to exemplify entrepreneurship, innovation, or risk

taking.

The management style in the organization is character-

ized by individual risk taking, innovation, freedom, and

uniqueness.

643

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

The glue that holds the organization together is commit- 0.759

ment to innovation and development. There is an em-

phasis on being on the cutting edge.

The organization emphasizes acquiring new resources

and creating new challenges. Trying new things and

prospecting for opportunities are valued.

0.754

The organization defines success on the basis of having

the most unique or newest products. It is a product

leader and innovator.

0.587

Clan cultures. Adapted from Cameron & Quinn (2011)

0.848

0.845

0.510

The organization is a very personal place. It is like an

extended family. People seem to share a lot of them-

selves.

0.623

The leadership in the organization is generally consid-

ered to exemplify mentoring, facilitating, or nurturing.

0.617

0.743

0.766

The management style in the organization is character-

ized by teamwork, consensus, and participation.

The glue that holds the organization together is loyalty

and mutual trust. Commitment to this organization runs

high.

The organization emphasizes human development. High 0.785

trust, openness, and participation persist.

The organization defines success on the basis of the de-

velopment of human resources, teamwork, employee

commitment, and concern for people.

0.724

Market cultures. Adapted from Cameron & Quinn (2011)

0.869

0.870

0.528

The organization is very results-oriented. A major con-

cern is with getting the job done. People are very com-

petitive and achievement-oriented.

0.702

0.757

0.785

The leadership in the organization is generally consid-

ered to exemplify a no-nonsense, aggressive, results-ori-

ented focus.

The management style in the organization is character-

ized by hard-driving competitiveness, high demands,

and achievement.

The glue that holds the organization together is the em-

phasis on achievement and goal accomplishment.

0.788

0.735

The organization emphasizes competitive actions and

achievement. Hitting stretch targets and winning in the

marketplace are dominant.

The organization defines success on the basis of winning 0.713

in the marketplace and outpacing the competition. Com-

petitive market leadership is key.

644

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

Hierarchy cultures. Adapted from Cameron & Quinn (2011)

0.868

0.867

0.522

The organization is a very controlled and structured place.

Formal procedures generally govern what people do.

0.715

The leadership in the organization is generally considered to 0.733

exemplify coordinating, organizing, or smooth-running effi-

ciency.

The management style in the organization is characterized by 0.772

security of employment, conformity, predictability, and sta-

bility in relationships.

The glue that holds the organization together is formal rules

and policies. Maintaining a smooth-running organization is

important.

0.779

The organization emphasizes permanence and stability. Effi- 0.742

ciency, control, and smooth operations are important.

The organization defines success on the basis of efficiency.

Dependable delivery, smooth scheduling, and low-cost pro-

duction are critical.

0.794

Organizational engagement climate. Adapted from Albrecht

(2014)

0.842

0.845

0.506

Overall, people in this organization strive to perform to the

best of their ability.

0.725

People in this organization are enthusiastic about their work. 0.709

People here really try to do a good job for the organization.

People here are fully involved in their work.

762

0.660

0.735

People here are willing to do their best to achieve the best

possible outcomes for the organization.

Employee engagement. Adapted from Schaufeli et al. (2006)

At work, I feel bursting with energy.

At my job, I feel strong and vigorous.

I am enthusiastic about my job.

0.863

0.864

0.508

0.650

0.622

0.656

0.586

0.676

0.567

0.663

0.711

0.651

My job inspires me.

When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work.

I feel happy when I am working intensely.

I am proud of the work that I do.

I am immersed in my work.

I get carried away when I am working.

Note: FLs: factor loadings; α: Cronbach’s alpha; CR: composite reliability;AVE: average variance

extracted

645

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

5.3. Descriptive analysis and discriminant validity

The discriminant validity test indicated that the value of SQRAVE is greater than Inter

Construct Correlation. Moreover, the results of descriptive statistics give a basic visualization of

the cultural characteristics of the surveyed company under employee’s approach (Table 3). Ac-

cording to Cameron & Quinn (2006), all four types of culture are likely to exist simultaneously

in an organization. However, its necessary to determine the dominant culture, which consist the

starting point for culture change strategy. Based on mean scores of four cultures, clan culture was

considered as the dominant culture in FPT corporation with the highest value (4.286), followed

by market culture (4.157). Adhocracy and hierarchy were subordinate cultures. In other words,

FPT’s culture emphasizes the typical values of clan culture, such as teamwork spirit, a humane

working environment, promoting empowerment and facilitating employee participation, com-

mitment and loyalty. Employees perceived the company as a big family and willing to share of

themselves. This culture is consistent with characteristics of information technology sector –

which always requires cooperation, sharing ideas and high unity among members for innovation.

Table 3. Descriptive statistics and discriminant validity.

Constructs

Employee engagement (EE)

Clan cultures (CC)

Mean

SD

EE

CC

MC

HC

AC

OEC

0,710

4.331 0.863

0,712

4.286 0.691 0,447

0,727

Market cultures (MC)

Hierarchy cultures (HC)

Adhocracy cultures (AC)

4.157 0.689 0,509 0,342

0,722

3.933 0.574 0,439 0,092 0,259

0,727

3.984 0.689 0,506 0,416 0,212 0,205

0,709

Organizational engagement climate

(OEC)

4.277 0.600 0,523 0,456 0,299 0,221 0,405

Note: Diagonal value indicates the square root of AVE of construct; SD: standard deviation.

(Source: Authors)

5.4. Hypotheses Testing

Structure equation modeling (SEM) is applied to test research hypotheses. The SEM model

of the study includes 883 degrees of freedom. The values to assess including: Chi-Square/df; P-

value; CFI, GFI, TLI were described at figure below. According to Baumgartner et al (1996) and

Hair et al (2010), the model is suitable for the collected data. R square value = 0.57, it means that

four culture types and engagement climate can explain 57% the variability of employee engage-

ment. The remaining changes come from other factors that have not been included in this model.

646

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

(Source: Authors)

Figure 3. SEM linear modeling results

The results of structural equation analysis show that organizational culture and engagement

climate significantly affect employee engagement at 0.01 level. In particular, the results show

that market cultures and hierarchy cultures have the strongest impact on Employee Engagement

with b = 0.26. clan culture has the weakest influence on engagement, with the coefficient of 0.206

while the remaining factors have an almost equivalent effect on engagement.

In more detail, adhocracy cultures and organizational engagement climate impacts engage-

ment with b of 0.220 and 0.210 respectively.

Table 4. Results of the structural model

Standardized

Hypothesized path

t

P

Decision

coefficients

Adhocracy cultures

Employee engagement

0.220

3.179 0.001 Supported

3.013 0.003 Supported

4.117 0.000 Supported

4.275 0.000 Supported

g

Clan cultures

Market cultures

Hierarchy cultures

0.206

0.263

0.260

Organizational en-

gagement climate

Employee engagement

0.210

3.164 0.002 Supported

g

(Source: Authors)

In summary, all of five hypotheses were supported suggesting that organizational culture

and engagement climate both have positive impact on employee engagement (Table 4).

647

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

6. Discussions and implications

Our findings support the significant impact of organizational culture and engagement cli-

mate on employee engagement. This paper has contributed to literature as compared to previous

studies that only examined separately culture and climate on employee engagement. Discussions

of key findings and several implications for managers are summarized below.

First of all, regression analysis result highlights the important role of four culture types

and organizational engagement climate in engagement improvement. This study provides prac-

titioners validated and reliable measurement scales for identifying organizational culture, evalu-

ating perceived climate and determining engagement levels of employee. From there, managers

can apply the OCAI model for culture shift in the desired direction. The application of these

scales and OCAI model not only support human resource management activities, improve lead-

ership effectiveness, but also create significant changes in the organization through adjusting the

way the organization operates (organizational culture) and enhancing employee clarity about or-

ganization’s goals, strategies (organizational climate).

Secondly, the influence of organizational culture on employee engagement varies by types

of culture. This result is consistent with majority of previous studies (Naidoo, 2014; Martin &

Cullen, 2006). Perceived positive cultures are related to higher level of engagement. Interestingly,

clan culture has weakest impact on employee engagement. Higher level of engagement is still

linked with a cultural context that is people oriented and supportive, but effect of this culture

style is the least important in comparison with market or hierarchy culture. This result is different

with the analysis results of Hartnell et al. (2011), whereby, clan culture plays the most significant

role in promoting work engagement. This can be explained based on the difference in the business

sector surveyed. Hartnell et al. (2011) examined engagement in health organizations, within which

cooperation is highly valued, a prerequisite for effective and long-term work.

It’s also noticeable that hierarchy culture positively impacted employee engagement. In

contrast to study of Lee et al. (2017), Chatman et al. (2014) and Richard et al. (2009) which in-

sisted the negative linkage between hierarchy culture and work engagement, our study highlights

that standardization, enforcement of rules and procedures will not restrict employee’s creativity

and could increase employee engagement. Managers are coordinators and maintain the organi-

zation’s regular functioning towards efficiency and stability.

This result suggests to businesses, especially those in the information technology sector,

to change their culture in purpose of promoting employee engagement, ultimately enhancing their

work performance. Cultural transformation is inevitable but can still be managed to align with

the organization’s goals and strategies. For telecommunication companies, developing market

culture can both strengthen the linkage between employees and the organization, and create a

healthy competitive environment for individuals to strive to achieve their goals and show their

superiority.

Thirdly, organizational engagement climate had positive relationship with employee en-

gagement. Similar to theoretical researches, organizational climate is a potential driver of em-

ployee’s motivation and positive attitude and behavior at work. This paper provides further

evidence on the necessary to expand climate approaches. Previous studies have only focused on

the importance of the climate of innovation, service or safety in organization effectiveness and

648

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

employee performance (Kang & Busser, 2018; Kuenzi and Schmink, 2008). Both researchers

and practitioners should pay more attention to climate of engagement to encourage employees to

truly engage in work and organization. This result suggests the importance of creating an open

and friendly climate in the workplace to influence employee perceptions and to make them more

willing to devote to their work and organization.

In spite of providing additional evidence of the relationship between organizational culture,

climate and employee engagement, this paper exists certain limitations. The sample survey scope

is still relatively narrow and only focuses on telecommunication field. Therefore, future studies

could address this limitation by expanding the scope of the research with different sectors.

7. Conclusions

In the context of technological explosion and increasing competition in the market, orga-

nizational culture helps each company to create its own identity and become an undeniable com-

petitive advantage. In addition, the organizational climate also created positive changes in

employee’s attitudes and behaviors. With the aim of clarifying the impact of organizational culture

and climate on employee engagement, the authors conducted a survey through questionnaires for

the employees of a telecommunications company in Vietnam. The analysis results showed that

both organizational culture and climate are important in promoting employee engagement. This

paper not only provided additional empirical evidence for literature on drivers of engagement, it

also offered significant suggestions for managers to actively change the culture and climate to

retain employees. Like others studies, this paper still has limitations related to sample represents

since we have focused on employees working within the same Vietnamese telecommunication

company. Future studies should enlarge the sample or conduct cross-field research for validity

enhancement.

REFERENCES

Albrecht, S.L. (2014), ‘Aclimate for engagement: some theory, models, measures, research,

and practical applications’, in Schneider, B. and Barbera, K. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Or-

ganizational Climate and Culture, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 400-413.

Bakker, A.B., Albrecht, S.L. and Leiter, M.P. (2011), ‘Key questions regarding work en-

gagement’, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 4-28

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., Hakanen, J. J., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007), ‘Job Resources

boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high’, Journal of Educational Psy-

chology, 99, 274-284.

Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996), ‘Applications of structural equation modeling in

marketing and consumer research: A review’, International journal of Research in Marketing,

13(2), 139-161.

Cameron, K.S., & Quinn, R.E. (2011), ‘Diagnosing and changing organizational culture:

Based on the competing values framework’, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Deal T.E and Kennedy A.A (2000), ‘Corporate Cultures’, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Chatman, J. A., Caldwell, D. F., O’Reilly, C. A., & Doerr, B. (2014), ‘Parsing organizational

649

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

culture: How the norm for adaptability influences the relationship between culture consensus

and financial performance in high-technology firms’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35,

785–808.

Crawford, E.R., Lepine, J.A. and Rich, B.L. (2010), ‘Linking job demands and resources

to employee engagement and burnout: a theoretical extension and meta-analytic test’, Journal of

Applied Psychology, Vol. 95 No. 5, pp. 834-848.

Denison, D.R. (1990), ‘Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness’, New York,

John Wiley.

Do Huu Hai (2014) ‘Hệ thống tiêu chí nhận diện văn hoá doanh nghiệp - Vận dụng cho

doanh nghiệp Việt Nam’, Doctoral Thesis, National Economics University, Vietnam.

Dollard, M.F., & Bakker, A. B. (2010), ‘Psychosocial safety climate as a precursor to con-

ducive work environments, psychological health problems, and employee engagement’, Journal

of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 579–599.

Gallup (2017), ‘State of the global workplace’, New York.

Gray, R. (2008), ‘How it feels to work here: Improving organizational climate, the inter-

national journal of knowledge’, The International Journal of Knowledge Culture and Change

Management Annual Review, 8(9), 85–91.

Ha Nam Khanh Giao & Ho Thi Thu Trang (2016) Ảnh hưởng của văn hóa tổ chức đến sự

gắn kết của nhân viên văn phòng tại tỉnh Bà Rịa – Vũng Tàu, Journal of Economic and Engi-

neering, 14, 39-49.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006), ‘Multivari-

ate data analysis’, Vol. 6, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), ‘Multivariate Data Analy-

sis’, 7th Edition, Pearson, New York.

Halbesleben, J.R.B. (2010), ‘A meta-analysis of work engagement: relationships with

burnout, demands, resources, and consequences’, in Bakker, A.B. and Leiter, M.P. (Eds), Work

Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research, Psychology Press, New York, NY,

102-117.

Hartnell, C. A., Ou, Y. O., & Kinicki, A. (2011), ‘Organizational Culture and Organizational

Effectiveness: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Competing Values Framework’s Theoretical

Suppositions’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 677-694.

Heskett, J. (2011), ‘The culture cycle: How to shape the unseen force that transforms per-

formance’, FT Press, Upper Saddle River.

Kahn, W.A. (1990), ‘Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement

at work’, Academy of Management Journal, 33.

Kang, H. J., & Busser, J. A. (2018), ‘Impact of service climate and psychological capital

on employee engagement: The role of organizational hierarchy’, International Journal of Hos-

pitality Management, 75, 1–9.

650

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS IN ECONOMICS & BUSINESS 2020

ICYREB 2020

King, E. B., de Chermont, K., West, M., Dawson, J. F., & Hebl, M. (2007), ‘How innovation

can alleviate negative consequences of demanding work contexts: the influence of climate for

innovation on organizational outcomes’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychol-

ogy, 80, 631–645.

Kuenzi, M. & Schmink, M. (2008), ‘An integrated model of work climate’, paper presented

at annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA.

Laschinger, H. K. S. (2010), ‘Staff nurse work engagement in Canadian hospital settings:

the influence of empowerment and six areas of worklife’, In S.L. Albrecht (Ed.), Handbook of

employee engagement: perspectives, issues, research and practice (pp. 309–322). Cheltenham,

UK: Edward Elgar.

Lau, H. C., & Iris, M. A. (2001), ‘The soft foundation of the critical success factors on

TQM implementation in Malaysia’, The TQM Magazine, 13(1), 51 - 62.

Lee, M. C. C., Idris, M. A., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2017), ‘The linkages between hierarchical

culture and empowering leadership and their effects on employees’ work engagement: Work

meaningfulness as a mediator’, International Journal of Stress Management, 24(4), 392–415.

Lu, L., Lu, A.C.C., Gursoy, D., Neale, N.R. (2016), ‘Work engagement, job satisfaction,

and turnover intentions: a comparison between supervisors and line-level employees’, Interna-

tional Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28 (4), 737–761.

Martin, K. D., & Cullen, J.B. (2006), ‘Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory:

A Meta-Analytic Review’, Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 175-194.

Naidoo, P. (2014), ‘Investigating the relationship between organizational culture and work

engagement’, Problems and Perspectives in Management, 12(4), 432-440.

Nguyen Manh Quan (2012), ‘Chuyên đề Văn hóa doanh nghiệp’, Bộ Kế hoạch và Đầu tư.

Perrin, T. (2003), ‘Working today: Understanding what drives employee engagement’.

Richard, O. C., McMillan-Capehart, A., Bhuian, S. N., & Taylor, E. C. (2009), ‘Antecedents

and consequences of psychological contrats: Does organizational culture really matter?’, Journal

of Business Behavior, 62, 818-825.

Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B. and Salanova, M. (2006), ‘The measurement of work en-

gagement with a short questionnaire: a cross-national study’, Educational and Psychological

Measurement, Vol. 66 No. 4, pp. 701-716.

Schein, E. (1992), ‘Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View’, San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schneider, W. (1994), ‘The Reengineering Alternative: A Plan for Making Your Current

Culture Work’, Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin Professional Publishing.

Swatee, S. & Srivastava, R.K. (2012), ‘Impact of organizational culture and communication

on employee engagement: An investigation of Indian privates banks’, South Asian Journal of

Management, 19(3), 18-33.

651