Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
Virginia Commonwealth University
VCU Scholars Compass
0eses and Dissertations Graduate School
2013
Organizational Culture, Job Satisfaction and
Turnover Intentions: "e Mediating Role of
Perceived Organizational Support
David Emerson
Virginia Commonwealth University
Follow this and additional works at: h1p://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd
Part of the Accounting Commons
© 0e Author
0is Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in
0eses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact libcompass@vcu.edu.
Downloaded from
h1p://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/2965
Organizational Culture, Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions:
The Mediating Role of Perceived Organizational Support
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in Business at Virginia Commonwealth University.
by
David J. Emerson, CPA
Bachelor of Science, Excelsior College, 2006
Masters of Business Administration, Rochester Institute of Technology, 2008
Ph.D. Candidate
Accounting Department, School of Business
Virginia Commonwealth University
Major Director: Benson Wier, Ph.D.
Professor of Accounting
Dean’s Scholar
Accounting Department, School of Business
Virginia Commonwealth University
Richmond, Virginia
March 14, 2013
ii
DEDICATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
When I first submitted my application for entry into the doctoral program at Virginia
Commonwealth University, I noted that I had a “transcendent support system.” No truer words
have ever been written. Had it not been for the constant encouragement and support of my wife
my chosen path would have been far more difficult, if not impossible, to traverse. She has
served as my perpetual advocate and promoter, my mate and best friend. Through separation
and hardship she remained stalwart, encouraging, and supportive of my dream. I believe there
are few women who could endure being displaced from a comfortable and secure life, being
wrenched away from family and friends, seeing her household income decimated, being obliged
to change jobs three times, and submitted to a vagabond (and cramped) existence in a thirty-four
foot motor home with the aplomb, grace and good cheer as she. She has never faltered in pursuit
of our goals. For these reasons, and many more, I dedicate this dissertation to my wife,
Catherine Emerson.
I would also like to acknowledge the debt I owe to my committee. Dr. Norman is an
inspiration and a trusted mentor. I only hope that all of my future Department Chairs will share
even a portion of her astute and insightful leadership. Dr. Kepes provided extensive guidance
and support in refining my methodology, and Dr. Brink offered many valuable insights. In
addition, Dr. Giaedi was invaluable in helping me to navigate the treacherous bureaucracy that is
the VHA. Lastly, my chair, Dr. Benson Wier has been a source of wisdom and support. He has
helped me grow as a teacher, scholar, and individual. I am fortunate to have been the
beneficiary of his guidance. I would like to offer my sincere thanks to each of these individuals
and to acknowledge their contribution. I could not have done it without any of you.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................... viii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER I .................................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER II ................................................................................................................................... 7
LITERATURE REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT OF HYPOTHESES ...................... 7
Job Satisfaction ............................................................................................................... 7
Perceived Organizational Support and Perceived Supervisor Support ........................... 9
Organizational Support Theory................................................................................. 10
Antecedents to Perceived Organizational Support ................................................... 14
Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Outcomes............................ 16
Organizational Culture .................................................................................................. 19
Overview ................................................................................................................... 19
iv
Measurement of Organizational Culture ................................................................... 23
Organizational Culture and Organizational Outcomes ............................................. 28
Culture Intercorrelation ............................................................................................. 39
Time Effects .............................................................................................................. 39
Intra-organizational Cultural Differences ................................................................. 41
CHAPTER III ............................................................................................................................... 46
SAMPLE ....................................................................................................................... 46
Measures ....................................................................................................................... 49
Instrument ................................................................................................................. 49
Analysis Approach ........................................................................................................ 56
Structural Equation Modeling ................................................................................... 56
CHAPTER IV ............................................................................................................................... 58
RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 58
Model Identification.................................................................................................. 58
Hypothesis Testing.................................................................................................... 69
CHAPTER V ................................................................................................................................ 80
DISCUSSION, LIMITATIONS and CONCLUSIONS ............................................... 80
Discussion ................................................................................................................. 80
v
Limitations ................................................................................................................ 86
Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 88
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 90
TABLES AND FIGURES .......................................................................................................... 104
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................ 126
APPENDIX I 2004 VHA ALL EMPLOYEE SURVEY ............................................ 126
APPENDIX II – DATA ACQUISITION ................................................................... 132
Timeline .................................................................................................................. 132
Communication between D. Emerson and NCOD ................................................. 133
D. Emerson WOC Contract with VHA................................................................... 193
Communications between B. Wier and Senator Webb and Congressman Cantor . 194
APPENDIX III WORK GROUPS & OCCUPATIONAL CODES .......................... 210
APPENDIX IV AMOS® OUTPUT ........................................................................... 242
CURRICULUM VITA ............................................................................................... 254
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 COMPETING VALUES FRAMEWORK ............................................................... 104
FIGURE 2 THEORETICAL MODEL ....................................................................................... 105
FIGURE 3 SCREE PLOT 2010 AES ......................................................................................... 106
FIGURE 4 FITTED THEORETICAL MODEL......................................................................... 107
FIGURE 5 STRUCTURAL MODEL ......................................................................................... 108
FIGURE 6 PATH MODEL ........................................................................................................ 109
FIGURE 7 HUMANISTIC CULTURE CHANGE .................................................................... 110
FIGURE 8 PRESCRIPTIVE CULTURE CHANGE ................................................................. 111
FIGURE 9 CULTURAL TREND LINES .................................................................................. 112
FIGURE 10 CULTURE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SUPV AND STAFF ............................ 113
vii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1 SAMPLE SIZE .......................................................................................................... 114
TABLE 2 DEMOGRAPHICS .................................................................................................... 115
TABLE 3 INDICATOR RELIABILITIES ................................................................................. 116
TABLE 4 CORRELATIONS ..................................................................................................... 120
TABLE 5 FIT INDICES ............................................................................................................. 121
TABLE 6 RESIDUAL COVARIANCE MATRIX .................................................................... 122
TABLE 7 MEDIATION ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 123
TABLE 8 NESTED MODELS ................................................................................................... 124
TABLE 9 COMPARATIVE MODEL FIT................................................................................. 125
viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AES – All Employee Survey
ACCT – Governmental Accountants
AVE – Average Variance Extracted
CFI – Comparative Fit Index
GFI – Goodness of Fit Index
HUM – Humanistic Culture
JSAT – Job Satisfaction
NCA – National Cemetery Administration
NCOD – National Center for Organizational Development
NFI – Normed Fit Index
OC – Organizational Culture
POS – Perceived Organizational Support
PRE – Prescriptive Culture
PSS – Perceived Supervisor Support
RMSEA – Root Mean Square Estimate of the Approximation
SEM – Structural Equation Modeling
SRMR – Standardized Root Mean Square of the Residual
SUPV – Supervisors
TOI – Turnover Intentions
VA – Department of Veterans Affairs
VBA – Veterans Benefit Administration
VHA – Veterans Health Administration
VISN – Veterans Integrated Service Network
WOC – Works Without Compensation Contract
ix
ABSTRACT
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE, JOB SATISFACTION AND TURNOVER INTENTIONS:
THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT
David J. Emerson, C.P.A., B.S., M.B.A., Doctoral Candidate
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctoral of
Philosophy in Business at Virginia Commonwealth University
Virginia Commonwealth University, 2013
Major Director: Benson Wier, Ph.D.
Professor of Accounting
Dean’s Scholar
Accounting Department, School of Business
This study investigates how the culture of an organization is related to the job satisfaction and
turnover intentions of government accountants. I show that perceived organizational support
serves as a mediator between organizational culture and both turnover intentions and job
satisfaction. I evaluate how cultural effects have changed over time, and assess how the relations
between the hypothesized associations differ between supervisory and staff accountants. I also
look for differences in how accountants and primary care nurses may perceive organizational
culture. I develop the constructs of interest, describe the proposed relationships, develop
hypotheses, describe the sample frame, provide a detailed review of the methodology and
describe the results. I conclude with a discussion of implications and limitations.
Keywords: Organizational Culture, Perceived Organizational Support, Job
Satisfaction, Turnover, Accounting,
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Organizational culture has been extensively studied by scholars with over 4,600 articles
published on the topic since 1980, and much of this research has focused on the purported link
between organizational culture and organizational outcomes (Hartnell, Ou, and Kinicki 2011).
Organizational outcomes can be broadly categorized as employee attitudes, operational
effectiveness or financial effectiveness (Hartnell et al. 2011). Previous research has shown
substantive relationships between different cultural archetypes and a wide variety of specific
organizational outcomes including team effectiveness, organizational safety climate, employee
job satisfaction, product quality, employee involvement, turnover intentions, customer service,
physician satisfaction, patient satisfaction, organizational profit, market performance and
organizational commitment (e.g., Cameron and Freeman 1991; Denison and Mishra 1995;
Detert, Schroeder, and Mauriel 2000; Goodman, Zammuto, and Gifford 2001; Gregory, Harris,
Armenakis, and Shook 2009; Hartmann, Meterko, Rosen, Zhao, Shokeen, Singer, and Gaba
2009; Hartnell et al. 2011; Lukas, Mohr, and Meterko 2009; Meterko, Mohr and Young 2004;
Quinn and Spreitzer 1991; Strasser, Smits, Falconer, Herrin, and Bowen 2002).
While the extant research provides convincing evidence of the influence of organizational
culture on organizational outcomes, some scholars have called for additional empirical research
into the mechanisms through which organizational culture affects those outcomes (Gregory et al.
2009). One potentiality is that organizational culture influences the attitudes of employees,
which in turn induces or contributes to such organizational outcomes as the support employees
believe is provided by the employer, the satisfaction that the employee feels toward their job and
any intentions the employee may have to leave the organization (Gregory et al. 2009; Mauseth
2008; Siehl and Martin 1990). This paper investigates the role that perceived organizational
support (POS) plays in mediating the relations between organizational culture and the
organizational outcomes of job satisfaction and turnover intentions. I also evaluate how these
associations differ across the organizational hierarchy, between work groups, and across time.
Perceived organizational support represents the extent to which employees believe that
their employer values their contribution to the organization and cares about their well-being
(Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, and Sowa 1986). Perceived organizational support has
