Understanding the Structural and Cultural Antecedents of Workplace Cooperation

Project info

Project name
9.4: Cooperation Dynamics in Organizations
Work package
  • Work
Sustainability threat
  • Feedback Cycles
Challenge
  • Reconciling stakeholder interests

Study info

Related studies according to this researcher
The Relational Foundations of Workplace Cooperation: Insights from Employee Experiences
Description of Study
We study which matters more for cooperation in organizations: structure or culture. Drawing on Joint Production Motivation Theory and testing the antecedents empirically, we test how structural conditions (task design, reward systems, authority structures) and cultural conditions (vision clarity, reinforcement of shared purpose, normative signaling from leaders) predict three forms of cooperative behaviour (Workplace Solidarity, Work Group Collectivism, and Organisational Citizenship Behaviour) across a global sample. The findings consistently show that cultural factors outweigh structural ones. Several structural predictors lose significance entirely once cultural variables are introduced, while vision clarity and reinforcement of guiding causes remain robust predictors throughout.
Study research question
Do structural or cultural antecedents have a stronger influence on workplace cooperation? How do these antecedents operate across different forms of cooperative behaviour?
Collection provenance
  • -
Collection methods
  • Questionaire
Personal data
-
External Source
Source description
File formats
Data types
  • Structured
Languages
  • English
Coverage start
Coverage end
Spatial coverage
Collection period start
—
Collection period end
—

Variables

Unit
Unit description
Sample size
Sampling method
Individuals
384 employees across 25+ countries, predominantly from South Africa (63%), followed by Poland, the UK, and Portugal. 58.3% female, 41.4% male. 88.8% full-time. The majority worked in hybrid settings (54.9%) and had between 3 and 10 years of work experience (56.2%). 71.6% had leadership experience. Participants represented over 20 sectors including healthcare, finance, IT, and administration.
Sample 384 employees (400 surveyed, 384 retained after data cleaning)
Purposive criterion-based sampling via Prolific. Participants were required to be currently employed in a paid role with experience working in subgroups. The sampling strategy sought variation across company size, employer type, employment sector, and contract type.
Other
—
Organizational Structure and Organizational Culture
—
Hypothesis
Theory
Structural: H1a: The stronger the perceived association between individual roles and shared goals, the higher the cooperation. H1b: The higher the perceived task interdependence, the higher the cooperation. H1c: Individuals who receive on-the-job training report higher levels of cooperation. H2a: The higher the perceived contingency of rewards on group-level outcomes, the higher the cooperation. H2b: The higher the perceived emphasis on individual-level achievement in rewards, the lower the cooperation. H2c: The higher the perceived recognition of both process and outcome in rewards, the higher the cooperation. H3: The higher the perceived functional legitimacy of authority figures, the higher the cooperation. Cultural: H4a: The stronger the perception that common goals are embedded in clear and consensual vision and mission statements, the higher the cooperation. H4b: The higher the perceived reinforcement of vision and mission statements embedding common goals, the higher the cooperation. H4c: The higher the perceived normative signaling from leaders, the higher the cooperation.
Joint Production Motivation Theory (Lindenberg & Foss, 2011) and Goal Framing Theory (Lindenberg & Steg, 2007).
Variable type
Variable name
Variable description
Discipline-specific operationalizations
Conflict of interest

Data packages

Publications

Documents

Filename
Description
Date

Ethics

Ethical assessment
Yes
Ethical committee
Ethics Committee Sociology RUG