On the one hand, the climate in a meteorological sense that would understand the climate as: the set of characteristics that are stable over time within a defined geographical region and that includes a range of different elements.
It is not about the "weather that makes", but the peculiarities of the "prevailing time" in an area or place.
- The second meaning of the concept of climate refers to its psychosocial dimension or meaning. Within this sense we find different definitions of climate: “Set of objective characteristics of the organization, lasting and easily measurable, that distinguish one labor entity from another. They are styles of management, rules and physiological environment, purposes and processes of consideration.
Although individual perception is intervened to a certain extent, the fundamentals are indices of these characteristics ”. (Forehand and Gilmer, 1965)
- "Set of global perceptions (personal and psychological construct) that the individual has of the organization, reflecting the interaction between the two; what is important is how a subject perceives her environment, regardless of how others perceive it; therefore, it is more a dimension of the individual than of the organization ”. (Nicolás Seisdedos)
However, these definitions are too long and complex, so the following is proposed.
Let's analyze this definition. It is referring specifically to all those elements related to management processes, whether formal or informal (supported, therefore, by the company culture, in the established procedures or in the interpretation and use of these by team leaders) that positively or negatively influence the work.
With them all elements of the physical environment (ergonomics) are left out because they are not caused by organizational behaviors.
It also leaves out all those organizational aspects that influence the performance of its "human capital" in the short, medium or long term.
This allows the climate, and the improvements that may happen to its measurement and analysis, to be specified in those elements that are of interest to the professional at the same time (improve their perception of the organization) and to the company (improve the performance of their teams)..
To end this point, the difference between culture and climate must be established. Both concepts affect professional performance and both are based on commonly learned processes and behaviors, but the climate has a "lability" that the culture does not have. It is the effect that a corporate culture, filtered through leadership, has at any given time on employees. The climate thus has a temporary character while the culture has a more lasting character.
Elements of work climate analysis
Firstly, to point out the existence of two mutually exclusive work climate study schools:
- Dimensional approach: it is assumed that the climate is a "multidimensional" perception, which would explain the variety of perceptions - due to the variability in the development of each dimension - in the different areas of the organization according to their different circumstances. Typological approach: in the that the climate would have a total configuration, still integrated by different properties, which would explain the existence of a global macroclimate of the organization, and its inertia.
But in addition three types of climate must be distinguished :
- Climate of achievement Climate of affiliation Climate of power
Below are the six dimensions that must be considered when analyzing the work environment:
Another group of characteristics is the one that considers that the climate is made up of:
- Autonomy / Conflict Social relationships / Structure Quality of reward / reward Relationships performance / reward Motivation / Polarization of status (accentuation of inter-member limits) Flexibility / innovation Mutual support / mutual interest of members
Below are three examples from different companies:
- A mass consumption multinational company (international study HayMcBer, 1993-95). A study of managers of a multinational consumer products company demonstrated the relationship between positive climate and performance indicators.
At the beginning of the fiscal year, each manager was given financial goals for his unit.
The variable remuneration of the manager and that of his team was directly related to this performance measure.
At the end of the fiscal year, it showed a positive correlation between climate dimensions and performance measures. In other words, regardless of the country where the company will develop its business, the units that showed the best climate achieved better financial results.
- A multinational petrochemical company (US study, HayMcBear, 1993). A study of the three main business units was carried out to identify development opportunities.
The climate of approximately 350 managers in various business units was measured and compared for two key performance variables: cash flow and net operating income.
The dimensions of the climate showed a strong correlation with both variables, since the units with the best climate turned out to be the ones with the best financial results and those with the worst climate, consequently achieving the worst business results.
- LOMA CEOs (study conducted in the United States, 1994 HayMcBear).
In a study of the presidents of a leading company in the insurance sector, the climate that these managers generated in their collaborators was predictive of the performance of the organization in general. The company was divided into two groups: those with a positive climate and those with an average climate.
In this study, the climate variable was found to be predictive of high or low levels of performance by 69 percent. For specific variables, the accuracy increased to 75 percent.
