identifying organizational culture criteria system – applying in vietnamese enterprises

1

THE PREAMBLE

1. Rationale
For centuries, people have been conscious of the important role of culture
to life. The formation of culture is associated with the appearance of mankind,
and it serves both as the objective of, and the driving force for, the development
of society. Culture increasingly penetrates into every aspect of life, being the
lodestar for the creative activities of human beings. Although the cultural issues
in management and business administration were paid great attention from
researchers for a long time, there is still lack of a solid theoretical and practical
methodologies for effective people management at the macro level and
institutional level. Cultural awareness in business management is still vague and
confused, thus making the process of building and developing organizational
culture in enterprises difficult. While organizational culture is a new scientific
field that has a very broad range covering many different areas and there are still
many controversies as to the theoretical backgrounds related to it, research efforts
would be limited to the study of how to build a system of criteria to identify the
most noticeable signs of the organizational culture of an enterprise, or
organization. And this is why the author intends to carry out a research titled, "A
criteria system for identifying organizational culture, as applicable to
Vietnamese enterprises".
2. Research objectives
The objective of the thesis is to determine what factors constitute
organizational culture; from which to build the system of cultural recognition
criteria in enterprises on the basis of synthesizing and generalizing the arguments
about organizational culture, from the managerial perspective.

3. The object and scope of research
The subject of research is, “A criteria system for identifying organizational

culture”. The study covers the time span from June 2012 to November 2012 and
2

is conducted in 5 cities, namely Ha Noi, HCM, Da Nang, Hai Phong, and Can
Tho.
4. Research methods
The main methods used are: systematic method, generalization, analysis,
synthesis, comparison; both qualitative and quantitative research methods are
used.
5. The new contribution of the thesis
The thesis has the statistical criteria to identify organizational culture. At
the same time, it delineates these criteria into different groups, namely
organization, management, and leadership. In addition to the identity element
groups developed by the antecedent and contemporary researchers, the author
also developed some more new elements of organizational, management and
leadership factors which have impact on the system of criteria for identifying
organizational culture.
6. Thesis layout
In addition to the preamble, conclusion, bibliography, Appendix, the thesis
is structured in five chapters.
Chapter 1: An overview of research on criteria for identifying
organizational culture.
Chapter 2: Study method of organizational culture through the criteria.
Chapter 3: Results of studies on criteria for identifying organizational
culture of Vietnam's businesses.
Chapter 4: Proposed solutions to develop organizational culture in Viet
nam.

3

CHAPTER 1: AN OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CRITERIA
FOR IDENTIFYING ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

1.1. The concept of organizational culture
Enterprise culture or company culture is a concept that is known under
other names such as institutional culture (organizational culture) or business
culture. There are many different definitions of organizational culture, however,
from a managerial perspective, the organizational culture can also be defined as
follows: "Organizational culture includes a system of meanings, values,
dominant beliefs, ways of thinking and perceptions that are shared by all
members of an organization and have extensive influence on the manner of the
members’ behaviors".
1.2. The approaches to organizational culture
The research about organizational culture can be seen in two areas:
- The first research area focuses on finding, exploring the managerial
nature of the cultural factors in enterprise management (Allaire & Firsirotu,
1984; Hatch, 1993; Martin, 1992; Meek, 1988; Pettigrew, 1979; Smircich, 1983).
- The second research area focuses on the impact of cultural factors on
businesses, especially those with a multi-cultural operating or organizational
environment (Calori & Sarnin, 1991; Camerer & Vepsalainen, 1988; Denison &
Mishra, 1995; Gordon & DeTomaso, 1992; Kotter & Heskett, 1992).
1.3. Model research on enterprise culture
1.3.1. Three-layer model of organizational culture Schein
Schein's model focuses on three levels of culture and also the three cultural
criteria, going from realism, implying to the invisible:
 Level one: practicality (Artifacts)

 Level two: the standard value (Espoused Values)
 Level three: the assumption implied in common (Shared Tacit Assumptions)
4

1.3.2. Multi-dimensional cultural model of Hofstede
Geert Hofstede, a doctor in psychology, launched the model about the
dimensions of culture. The cultural dimensions introduced by Hofstede
include: Power distance; Collectivism/Individualism; Masculinity;
Uncertainty; Long-term orientation.
1.3.3. Research on the culture by Trompenaars
Trompenaars launched seven aspects of culture within the company that
performs business activity, namely:
- Universalism vs. particularism
- Individualism vs. collectivism (communitarianism)
- Neutral vs. emotional
- Specific vs. diffuse
- Achievement vs. ascription
- Sequential vs. synchronic
- Internal vs. external control.

1.3.4. Studies by model Cameron & Quinn
Cameron and Quinn (2006) classify businesses into four main cultural
types based on four different criteria: collaborate-clan culture, create-adhocracy
culture, control-hierarchy culture, compete-market culture. These are a
combination of two variable values in the competitive value framework
developed by Robert Quinn and John Rohrgough.
1.3.5. Model of Denison
In his study, Denison gave a scale, or criteria, to evaluate the strength or
weakness of the business culture using the four characteristics of culture,
adaptability, mission, consistency, and involvement. These are the traits in the

Denison model. Each of these organizational traits is further broken down into
three indexes. These indexes describe specific behaviors in business language to
make the results both relevant and actionable in the organization.
5

1.3.6. Some other research models in the world
Research by Jim Sellner (2009) classifies businesses based on six different
criteria to identify organizational culture: values and manners; elements inside
and outside; the vision; innovation; our mission; new look.
According to Recardo and Jolly (1997), the culture of the company is
measured based on the following eight aspects: communication, education &
development, awards and recognition, decision making, risk-taking, orientation,
teamwork, management policies.
David H. Maister in his research on cultural identity business has conducted
cultural measurement on 9 specific aspects, namely: quality and customer
relations, education & development, training, dedicated enthusiasm, high
standards, long-term goals, empowerment, equitable remuneration and
satisfaction.
Another aspect of organizational culture, pledge of attachment to
organization and the influence of it to the results of the business, was
introduced by many organizational behavior researchers across the world,
most notably Allen and Meyer (1990).
1.3.7. The model of research culture in Vietnam
In Vietnam, the business culture began to be mentioned from the 90s of the
last century, and over the past 20 years, several studies on the issue were
published, most noticeable of which were works of Nguyen Hoang Anh and
Nguyen Manh Quan, Duong Thi Lieu, Phung Xuan Nha, Do Thuy Lan Huong,
and some others.

6


CHAPTER 2: METHODS OF STUDYING BUSINESS CULTURE
THROUGH THE CRITERIA

2.1. Research orientation
Based on the research objectives as discussed above, the author suggests
three particular groups of factors that constitute the organizational culture,
namely: organizational factor group (corresponding to the system of matter), the
management factor (the value systems of action), and the leadership factor (value
system awareness).
2.2. Developing research questions
The research questions set for this thesis are:
- How does the organizational system impact the creation and change of business
culture?
- How does the management system impact the creation and change of business
culture?
- How does the leadership system impact the creation and change of business
culture?
- How can the set of criteria for organizational culture, which consist of three
elements groups - organizational, management, and leadership, help managers in
the evaluation and measurement of business culture?
2.3. Research model and hypotheses
The research model proposed by the author is as follows:

organizational
culture
enterprise

organizational
organizational
culture

enterprise
manager
enterprise
organizational
culture

leadership
7


Figure 2.1: Study model for identification of organizational culture

The research hypotheses:
 H1: Management factors have a proportional relationship that dominates the
establishment of criteria for identifying organizational culture.
 H2: Organizational factors have a proportional relationship that dominates
the establishment of criteria for identifying organizational culture.
 H3: The leadership factors have a proportional relationship that dominates

the establishment of criteria for identifying organizational culture.
2.4. Research design
a. Qualitative research: the author has selected five experts who had taught in the
field of organizational culture at the National Economics University to interview
experts and an audience of 30 people including staff, leaders and managers
working in enterprises to participate in in-depth interviews.
b. Quantitative research: this is done through the method of investigating a
selected sample.
2.5. Data sources and methods of data collection
The data source
- Primary data: opinions, the views of the staff, management and
leadership on the cultural aspects in enterprises such as organization,
management, leadership and commitment levels of employees for business.
- Secondary data: reference sources of information related to organizational culture
and organizational behavior that is obtained from researchers, scholars in the world.
The method of data collection
 Secondary data collection
From sources such as books, magazines, data from the Internet or other mixed
data.
 Primary data collection
a criteria system for identifying organizational culture
8

In primary data collection for the subject, the author also used interviews as a
method to help acquire the necessary information.
2.6. Design of questionnaires
Questionnaires were designed to consist of 2 parts:

Part A: General information on individuals and businesses.
Personal information that is required from each object investigated

includes: gender, age, education level, current rank/ position in the organization.
Section B: organizational culture.
This section includes close-end questions relating to the organizational,
management and leadership factors as constituting elements for the identification
of organizational culture, which the author quotes from a number of other studies
while trying to develop several new aspects.
2.7. Sample design
The research sample is selected under the convenient method from the
whole set of all staff working full-time at the Vietnamese businesses that are
established by Vietnamese businessmen and operating in the territory of
Vietnam. The sampling is limited within the 5 cities of Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh, Da
Nang, Can Tho, and Hai Phong. The 5 samples per measurement variable rule
applies, resulting in a sample size of approximately 600 samples.
2.8. Data processing methods
Before proceeding with the analysis, the data is checked and cleaned. Then,
the following analysis methods are used: descriptive method, the method of
evaluating the reliability of scales, factors analysis method, the method of
regression analysis of impact factors, the method of ANOVA testing.


9

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH RESULTS: THE CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING THE
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE OF VIETNAMESE ENTERPRISES

3.1. Sample description
According to the sampling plan, the sample size would be 705 samples with
a total of 1,000 questionnaires issued at the expected response rate of 70.5%. In
fact, out of the 1,000 questionnaires handed out, 725 samples were collected,

resulting in a response rate of 72.5%.
The objects investigated included enterprise staff, management and leaders
in Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh, Da Nang, including those working in state companies
(15.2%); in partnerships (15.2%); in private enterprises (21.8%); in limited
liability companies (24.0%); and in joint stock companies (23.8%).
3.2. Analysis measurement tools
As suggested in the research model, the system of criteria used for
identifying business culture is determined based on the study of the three factors,
namely management factor (which is considered from 6 aspects), leadership (12
aspects), and organizational (13 aspects).
3.2.1. Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient
 As for the Organizational Factor scale:
Organizational factor is measured by 13 aspects. In general, Cronbach’s
alpha coefficient of each aspect reaches 0.6, so the scale for every aspect has
reliability, namely: the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient specific to each aspect is as
follows: Communication in organization = 0.73; Education & Development =
0.749; Reward and recognition = 0.715; Team-work = 0.619; Group orientation
= 0.705; Satisfaction = 0.755; Pledge of attachment to organization = 0.763;
Accordance = 0.689; Organizing skill = 0.638. But for the Quality and the
relationship with the customer aspect (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.43), Collaboration
and integration (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.257), Customer orientation (Cronbach’s
10

alpha = 0.391), Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is very low, and an elimination of
the observation variations used for the scale of this aspect does not increase
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient to 0.6 and thus does not ensure reliability, so the
author removes the scales of those aspects. For the Change aspect (with
Cronbach’s alpha = 0.451), the TĐ5 and TĐ4 observation variables have an
item-total correlation coefficient of < 0.3; so the author proceeded to remove
the 2 variables from the scale for Change and therefore the Cronbach’s alpha

coefficient for the scale of this aspect reached 0.631 (guaranteed reliability).
 As for the Management Factor scale:
Management factor is measured in 6 aspects. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients
of these 6 aspects are as follows: Accepting risks from creative and innovative
work = 0.691; Control = 0.622; Orientation = 0.562; Coordination = 0.619;
Empowerment = 0.741; Regulation = 0.621. The scale for Orientation aspect
does not guarantee reliability, and an elimination of observation variables from
the scale of this aspect does not increase Cronbach's Alpha coefficient up to 0.6,
so the author decided to remove this scale. For the scale for Control, the
observation variables KS2 and KS5 have an item-total correlation coefficient of
< 0.3 and when these 2 variables are removed, the value of Cronbach's Alpha
increases to 0.646, so the author proceed to exclude the 2 variables, KS5 and
KS2, from the scales for Control.
 As for the Leadership Factor scale:
Leadership factor is measured in 12 respects. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient
of > 0.6 include: Orientation and plan in the future = 0.713; Strategy orientation
= 0.737; Target system = 0.747; Core values = 0.685; The control of the
leadership = 0.681; Leadership experience = 0.655; Mission = 0.614. The scale
is gaining credibility. Particularly for the scales for Core values, the observable
variable GTCL4 has an item-total correlation coefficient of < 0.3, and when this
variable is removed, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the scale increased to
0.745, so the author removed GTCL4 from the scale for Core values. As for the
11

scale for Efficiency in decision making (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.595); the Vision
(Cronbach’s alpha = 0.589); Leadership qualities (Cronbach’s alpha =-0.33);
Leadership personality (Cronbach’s alpha =-0.67), the Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient falls under 0.6, and an elimination of the observable variables in the
scale for this aspect does not increase Cronbach's Alpha coefficient up to 0.6
and thus the scale does not achieve the reliability, so the author proceed to

remove this scale. The scales for Leadership’s responsibility has Cronbach’s
alpha = 0.518 while the 2 observable variables TNLĐ1 and TNLĐ5 have an
item-total correlation coefficients of < 0.3; but after these 2 observable variables
are removed, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the scale stands at 0.642, thus
gaining credibility.
In summary, the measurement scales for organization, management and
leadership factors are gaining credibility; the scale for Leadership achieved the
highest reliability, then the scale for Organisation and lastly, Management. After
analyzing the reliability of the scales for each factor, the factors for Organization
(consisting of 37 observable variables), Management (19 observable variables)
and Leadership (27 observable variables) continue to be analyzed in the section
below.
3.2.2. Factor analysis
 Analysis of organizational factor
A KMO and Bartlett's test performed in factor analysis of 37 observable
variables in the scale shows the high level of the KMO (0.766) with a significance
equaling 0 (sig = 0.000). The Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings reached 58.98%
and there are 11 factors that have a typical value greater than 1. This reveals that the
use of 11 factors representing the 37 observable variables can explain 58.98% of
the variability of the data.
After the implementation of EFA, CK4 variable is eliminated because no
factor loading for it is found on any column. So, one observable variable is
removed from the set of the 37 observable variables used to measure the
organizational factor. Also, as a result of this, the number of factors is 11, which
12

exceeds the number of the original aspects that was designed to measure the
organizational factor. To be specific, the group of aspects of organizing skills
were divided into two sub-groups. Based on the content of the components in
the group, the author renamed the 2 sub-groups: Organizing skills sub-group,

which comprises observable variables KNTC1, KNTC2, KNTC3, and the
Target and guarantee sub-group, which contains the observable variables
KNTC4, KNTC5.
 Management factors analysis
A KMO and Bartlett's test performed in factor analysis of 19 observable
variables in the scale used to measure the Management factor returns a high
KMO index (0.741) with zero significance level (sig = 0.000). The Rotation
Sums of Squared Loadings reached 53.22% and there are 5 factors that have a
typical value greater than 1. This shows that the use of 5 elements representing
19 observable variables is able to explain 53.22% of the variability of the
observable variables.
After the implementation of EFA, 2 observable variables RR1 and RR5 is
eliminated because no value factor loading for them is found on any column.
 Leadership factor analysis
A KMO and Bartlett's test performed in factor analysis of 27 observable
variables in the scale shows the high level of KMO (0.779) with zero
significance level (sig = 0.000). The total Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
reach 59.64% and there are 8 factors that have a typical value greater than 1.
After the implementation of EFA, the MT5 variable was eliminated because
no value factor loading for it was found on any column.
3.2.3. Regression analysis
The three independent variables, managerial, organizational and leadership,
have a correlation coefficients R greater than 0.3 with dependent variable
Organizational culture. So, 3 independent variables in the scale can be used for
13

regression analysis to assess the extent to which the three independent variables can
explain the dependent variables.
All the 3 elements of the scale affect the organizational culture. All of them
have effects positively proportional to organizational culture (and thus have a

positive Beta coefficient; the condition being that, when the change of one factor
is considered, the other factors are assumed to be constant).
The regression equation for normalized variables has a form like this:
VHDN = 0.786 + 0.402 YTTC + 0.518 YTQL + 0.229 YTLĐ
Looking at the equation, we see that the Organization factor has the greatest
impact on organizational culture, Y, because Beta for it equals 0.786, which is
the greatest among the Betas. Leadership factor also influence quite heavily the
organizational culture (Beta equals 0.229). Finally, the Management factor with
the lowest Beta of 0.158.
A summary of testing results of a regression model with 3 independent
variables and a dependent variable is presented in table 3.17.
Table 3.17: Summary of testing results for the hypotheses
The hypothesis
Results
H1: Management factors have a proportional relationship that
dominates the establishment of criteria for identifying
organizational culture.
Accepted
H2: Organizational factors have a proportional relationship that
dominates the establishment of criteria for identifying
organizational culture.
Accepted
H3: The leadership factors have a proportional relationship that
dominates the establishment of criteria for identifying
organizational culture.
Accepted
[Source: author-made]
14

3.2.4. Testing the difference in mean values of the sample of the factors
constituting the system of identification criteria for organizational culture by
business type
A calculation of mean values of the sample of the factors constituting the
system of identification criteria for organizational culture by business type shows
that values of the elements constituting the identification criteria system for
organizational culture in the 5 types of businesses stand a bit higher than the
average and they are not significantly different among the various types of
business. The Organizational factor is rated highest in all the 5 types of business,
followed by Management and Leadership.
The result of a variance analysis (ANOVA) performed on the elements
constituting the identification criteria system for organizational culture per types
of businesses shows no difference in the respondents’ evaluation of each
constituent element of the identification criteria system for organizational culture
(the reason being that they all have a sig > 0.05).
3.4. Criteria system for identifying organizational culture and the reality of
organizational culture in Vietnam
3.4.1. The criteria system for identifying organizational culture
Through the steps of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient analysis and explorative
factor analysis, the scale consisting of 116 observable variables has been adjusted
2 times, with the total number of variables decreasing from 116 to 79, as
presented in table 3.20:

Table 3.20. Summary of criteria system for identifying organizational culture
Factors
The criteria
Organization
+ Changes in policies related to the company's employees
are fully informed and clear.
+ We have enough information to do the job

15

Factors
The criteria
+ We receive the guidance of supervisors when having
difficulty resolving the work.
+ We are trained in the job skills necessary to do the job
well.
+ We are aware of the conditions needed to be promoted
within the company.
+ We have many opportunities for career development in the
company
+ We receive great help to develop ourselves
+ When doing good work, we receive praise and
recognition from the upper level.
+ Bonus that we get conforms with the result of our
contribution to the company.
+ We enjoy working with everyone in our unit
+ Employees in our unit are ready to cooperate with each
other and work as a team.
+ Team-work is recommended and established in our
company.
+ We always encourage the spirit of cooperation between
the different departments within the organization.
+ People work as members of a group/team.
+ Teamwork is used to work, and not to set up a hierarchy.
+ Teamwork is the foundation of building our blocks.
+ Jobs are arranged so that each person can see the
relationship between their work with the goals of the
organization.

+ We are satisfied with our work.
+ We are proud of the achievements in our work.
16

Factors
The criteria
+ We are committed to our company as a chance for a
career.
+ We are ready to make every efforts to make the organization
successful.
+ We are very loyal to the organization.
+ We will accept all the assigned jobs to be able to
continue working in the organization.
+ In the event of disagreement, we strive to finding
solutions for “mutual benefit”
+ We have a “firm” culture.
+ We easily get consensus even when tackling the most
difficult issues.
+ We often get stuck when seeking agreement on key issues.
+ We also have clear agreement on the right and wrong ways of
doing things.
+ They way of working is very flexible and easy to
change.
+ We deal well with the competition and other changes in
the business environment.
+ We regularly, continuously improve working methods
and adopt new working methods.
+ We view failure as an opportunity to learn and improve.
+ Creative ability and the spirit of risk-taking is
encouraged and rewarded.

+ Many things are "omitted" or neglected.
+ Learning is an important goal in our daily work.
+ We must make sure that "different parts of the
organization communicate closely with each other".
17

Factors
The criteria
Management
+ Information is shared so that everyone can get the information
they want.
+ Great importance is attached to coordination among
units in the Organization in order to carry out their duties
smoothly.
+ Most of the employees are actively involved in the
work.
+ The resources needed to do the job are made available.
+ The costs of testing, trial, costs of assessing activities or
processes are reasonably minimized.
+ Appropriate solutions are in place for the prevention of
defects, re-manufacturing and for reducing warranty cost.
+ We are encouraged to work according to a method
different from the ways that people have been doing.
+ Improvements in efficiency are rewarded with money or
by other forms.
+ For every person involved in the planning and decision
making of the plan.
+ The success of each individual unit is evaluated based
on the innovative ideas and the implementation of those
ideas.

+ The success of each individual unit is evaluated based
on the performance of work.
+ The main indicators of the results of operation are used
to control and improve the supporting process.
+ We are highly encouraged to voluntarily contribute new
ideas and suggestions for the development of the work in the
company.
18

Factors
The criteria
+ We are free to take the necessary decisions in
accordance with our work.
+ We often express our views on the problems that we
think are important, even though knowing that those views
are not supported by others.
+ Decisions are often made at the management level that
has the most accurate information.
+ Information is shared broadly so that people can get the
information they want when needed.
Leadership
+ We are allowed to do the job according to our best
ability.
+ We are involved in the important decisions of the unit.
+ Sound decisions are beneficial for the company in the
long term.
+ Company future development strategies are set clearly.
+ We are shared information about the goals of the
company.
+ We fully support the goals of the company.

+ The company executives always plan ahead changes that
can impact business results.
+ Our strategy makes other organizations change the way
they compete in this sector.
+ We have long-term goals and directions.
+ We have a clear mission, which makes our work
meaningful and well-oriented
+ Many people agree on the company objectives.
+ The company leaders set ambitious but realistic targets.
19

Factors
The criteria
+ The Board of Directors has "made it clear" about the goals
we are trying to achieve.
+ We constantly monitor the evolution in the progress to
reach our stated goals.
+ The leaders often “talk the talk and walk the walk”.
+ They have a distinctive management style and have a set
of their own management practices.
+ There are clear and homogeneous values that govern the way
we do things.
+ The processes, indicators are set to facilitate monitoring
the ethical conduct in the operating structure of the whole
organization in interactive activities with customers and
partners.
+ Leadership supervises and handles breaches of the code
of conduct
+ A code of conduct is in place to guide our actions and
tell us what is right, what is wrong.

+ Leaders are experienced, mature and able to adapt to the
pressure and stress.
+ Leadership can anticipate concerns of the community
for products, services and activities, both current and future
+ Leadership proactively prepare to get ready to respond
to all kinds of concerns, including the use of the resources
stabilization process
+ We attach importance to long-term stability and are
interested in effective control of the operation.
+ We attach importance to human development. Every
member in our company trust in, and cooperate with, each
other.
20

Factors
The criteria
+ We attach great importance to the creation of new
challenges, tapping new resources and adopting new things.
+ Business leaders keep the relationship with, decentralize
the management of, and mobilize, all workers.
+ Business leaders encouraged the two-way
communication and information across the enterprise.
+ Business leaders thrive for creating and harmonizing
benefits for customers and partners in the operation of the
business.

3.4.2. The reality of organizational culture in Vietnam
Research and survey result show that organizational culture is still quite
unfamiliar with entrepreneurs and other social strata. Those surveyed still focus
on the tangible elements of organizational culture such as technology, products,

logos, etc., but they are not yet aware of the importance of the elements of
organisation, management, and leadership. Therefore, they see no difference in
these elements with regard to the culture of their organization.
Based on the research results presented above, out of the 3 factors that
constitute organizational culture, the organizational factor is rated as very
important. The aspects thought to be weak in Vietnam businesses are leadership
skills and management skills.

CHAPTER 4: SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS CULTURE IN VIETNAM

Through the study of the criteria system for identifying organizational
culture, the author proposes to apply the criteria to Vietnamese businesses that
are established and managed by Vietnamese people in the territory of Vietnam
when this business culture is weak, when businesses have not yet started building
21

business culture for their organization, or when organizational culture is found
to be weak and businesses want to renovate it.
Having combined analysis results of practices and testing results for the
research model for identifying enterprise culture in Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi, Da
Nang, Hai Phong and Can Tho, the author proposesa number of solutions as
follows:
- As regards Organization: it is necessary to encourage communication within
the organization, pay intention to education & development; increase
employee satisfaction and introduce measures to raise employee
commitment.
- As regards management: it is necessary to encourage creativity and innovation
in organization, build a human-centered organization and have empowerment
become a tool to help businesses manage more effectively.

- As regards leadership: businesses need to set clear directions, development
strategy for the future and focus on building a core values for themselves.

At the same time, the author will devise cultural development solutions for
businesses with particular regard to cultural factors because enterprises attach
limited portance to this aspect. Specifically:
- As for State enterprises – where the management elements are clear and
powerful but, at the same time, imposing and authoritarian:
It can be said that the business could not exist and succeed if it relies only
on the perceived abilities and qualities of leaders. In fact, the close collaboration
and cooperation of all collective members is equally important. In State
enterprises, in order to reduce autocracy, leaders need to find appropriate
approaches to workers, learn their aspirations, whereby help them understand the
company to orient themselves. Leaders need to demonstrate responsibility and to
find out the bottle-neck facing employees. As long as employees are not yet
"ready", they should be provided with the essential tools and supplies. When a
22

person is still not "willing", the company should assign him a more suitable job.
For those who are still not "capable", the company should provide guidance and
knowledge, and train them to get a clear understanding of what the task is about.
Leaders also need to enhance trust and delegate power to the lower levels. This
trust creates an “invisible” contract of responsibility for employees and helps
them to have the sense of "being treated fairly, as demonstrated by the
handshaking of every worker." However, apart from sharing of power to lower
levels, leaders still need a clear sense of his power and position in the enterprise.
The leader, first of all, has to consider himself a person as everyone else in the
company so that he can stand in the best position to judge, to evaluate and to give
instant rewards and, at the same time, to tackle the pettiness of individual persons
and prevent bureaucratic practices inherent in the business. In short, to get real

results in business activities in general and in organizational culture in particular,
it is necessary to emphasize again that the role of the leader is the atmost
important one, the leader has to have a leadership style with traditional and
contemporary perspectives, to be determined and consistent while paying
attention to the views and opinions of staff members. Organizational culture is a
major issue that decides the long-term development and even survival of the
enterprise, it is not merely an external form or routine behavior. To start up with
building business culture, there must be proper understanding of organizational
culture and the basic steps to build it. To build organizational culture through the
criteria, it is not simple to merely list the values you want or just change the
company decorations but in fact, this requires initiation, cheerleading,
encouragement from the leader, and understanding of all members’ efforts that
have proved to be persistent for many years.
- For private, joint-stock private enterprises, partnerships - where the
leadership elements are still vague and unclear:
23

Leaders need to check regularly the implementation of entrepreneur culture
through the criteria identified. Through practice, the role of leaders along with
their management style are decisive factors for developing the culture of every
business. Therefore, leaders need to regularly examine, urge, assess the culture
of the business in order to timely and reasonably adjust it while avoiding the
enterprise's culture being deflected too far. The business leader is the founder of
enterprise culture and also the person responsible for the final result, so they must
be good example for others in building organizational culture. They have to make
reasonable decisions in the construction of cultural value systems, and to be
instrumental in the realization of its objectives, to create momentum for the
members in the company.
Businesses need to improve cultural knowledge for the leaders so that they
are aware of their role in the construction of enterprise culture. In the context of

increasing social progress, life is becoming increasingly civilized, global
competition is increasingly intense, a good leader not only knows of success of
today but also tries to get a vision in the future. They are the pioneers in the field
of knowledge. Therefore, leaders need to be equipped with cultural knowledge
about some of the most important markets for businesses to enter into
cooperation and joint venture arrangements. Leaders must have the most basic
knowledge to be able to adapt to the cultural identity of the country in general
and the culture of the particular business. They must be very focused on the
differences in organizational culture prior to the negotiation or cooperation. For
example, for American or Japanese partners, the most precious thing for them is
time, followed by the title and authority of the counterpart sitting in front of them.
For many Western European companies, which have very different working
environment compared to Vietnam, the common characteristics is that the
ceremonial procedures are less cumbersome. The leaders should also understand
that cultural differences always exist, all persons from a particular cultural
24

background are trained and coached to behave according to the certain standards
of that culture. Leaders need to have critical mind and board knowledge through
an extensive knowledge-enriching and learning process.
CONCLUSION

From the results of the thesis as well as the recognition of the study, the
following conclusions could be drawn:
1. The thesis provides a basis and theory to serve for the study on
systematic criteria to identify organizational culture through the research model.
2. The literature overview of domestic and foreign research on the
organizational culture has helped to clarify the object of research of the thesis as
well as the approach to research organizational culture under the managerial
perspective. To create strong business culture, the business has to create a

development that is compatible in all the three aspects, namely organizational,
management and leadership.
3. A testing of the calibrated scale has provided evidence that the elements
Organization, Management, Leadership have an influence on the system of
identification criteria for the enterprise culture.
4. In the era of international economic integration, Vietnamese businesses
need to pay more attention to the construction of enterprise culture in order to
gain business efficiency and increase competitive advantage in a competitive
environment that is becoming increasingly fierce. For the construction of
enterprise culture in Vietnam, attention should focus on the construction of
enterprise culture through the three aspects, Organization, Management and
Leadership. To be more specific, arrangements should be made to encourage
communication in organizations, pay attention to education & development,
embrace creativity and innovation, develop a clear strategic direction and vision
for the future, build the concept of human-centered organization, and strengthen
contacts between leaders and employees


25


LIST OF THE AUTHOR’S STUDIES PUBLISHED

1. Đo Huu Hai (2010), Director of information technology with corporate
culture, Economic Management Review, volume 34, July, pp. 36-41.
2. Đo Huu Hai (2010), “The “laws” on corporate culture, Economy and
Forecast Review, volume 13, July, pp. 24-26.
3. Đo Huu Hai (2011), Application of corporate culture in building and
development of branding, deeply imbued with national identity, for the
Vietnam business, Nguyen Manh Quan et al. Ministry level science and

technology research topic, National Economics University.
4. Đo Huu Hai (2011), Corporate culture development in Vietnam market
economy, university level science and technology research topic, National
Economics University.
5. Đo Huu Hai (2012), Enhancing Social Responsibility in Small and Medium
Enterprises in Vietnam, International Symposium “Social enterprise
development through universities in Vietnam – Challenges &
Opportunities”, National Economics University, 4/2012.
6. Đo Huu Hai (2012), Corporate culture and the criteria for its evaluation,
Economy and Forecast Review, volume 4, Jan, pp. 83-87.
7. Đo Huu Hai (2013), Study of factors affecting the corporate culture,
Banking science & Training Review, volume 128+129, Jan, pp 97-105.
8. Đo Huu Hai (2013), Identification of corporate culture from the
perspective of corporate restructuring, Scientific Symposium “The
problems emerging in the process of restructuring state-owned enterprises
in Vietnam”, Banking Academy, 4/2013.