Author
Abstract
Organizational culture (OC) research has long relied on the competing values framework (CVF) and its associated organizational culture assessment instrument (OCAI) to map cultural dimensions. However, the original analytical methods—especially clustering based on ipsative scales—pose methodological limitations, such as distortion of individual-level data and loss of competitive value structure. This study responds to Hofstede’s early call for methodological refinement by introducing a novel analytical approach that better aligns with the CVF’s theoretical foundations. The aim of this research is to develop and validate a new methodology that identifies latent subcultures more accurately, preserves the ipsative character of the data, and enhances comparability across independent samples. To this end, the study proposes a centroid-based geometric method that calculates individual-level cultural vectors in a two-dimensional space. This approach avoids the subjectivity of traditional clustering, eliminates averaging distortions, and facilitates objective grouping into up to nine distinct (including blended and balanced) subcultures. The methodology was empirically tested using two organizational samples (n = 332 and n = 348), drawn five years apart from the same institution. Results show that while both the new and traditional methods yield similar subcultural compositions in ~60% of cases, the centroid method offers significantly deeper insight into cultural dominance, internal homogeneity, and change dynamics. The method also introduces new indicators for subcultural homogeneity and visual tools—such as vector diagrams—to assess discrepancies between perceived and desired culture. By improving OC measurement, increasing subcultural differentiation, and providing a clear, replicable approach fit for research and consultancy, this paper offers both theoretical and pragmatic contributions. The method is flexible enough for any ipsative scale-based tool in the CVF paradigm, like orthogonal quadrants.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-05819-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/palcomms/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.