Three studies examine how organizational mindset—whether a company is perceived to view talent as fixed or malleable—functions as a core belief that predicts organizational culture and employees’ trust and commitment. In Study 1, Fortune 500 company mission statements were coded for mindset language and paired with Glassdoor culture data. Workers perceived a more negative culture at fixed (vs. growth) mindset companies. Study 2 experimentally manipulated organizational mindset and found that people evaluated fixed (vs. growth) mindset companies as having more negative culture norms and forecasted that employees would experience less trust and commitment. Study 3 confirmed these findings from more than 500 employees of seven Fortune 1000 companies. Employees who perceived their organization to endorse a fixed (vs. growth) mindset reported that their company’s culture was characterized by less collaboration, innovation, and integrity, and they reported less organizational trust and commitment. These findings suggest that organizational mindset shapes organizational culture.
AndersonN.PotočnikK.ZhouJ. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40, 1297-1333. doi:10.1177/0149206314527128
2.
BaronJ. N.HannanM. T. (2002). Organizational blueprints for success in high-tech start-ups: Lessons from the Stanford project on emerging companies. California Management Review, 44(3), 8-36.
3.
BersonY.OregS.DvirT. (2008). CEO values, organizational culture and firm outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 615-633.
4.
BlackwellL. S.TrzesniewskiK. H.DweckC. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246-263. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x
5.
BurnetteJ. L.O’BoyleE. H.VanEppsE. M.PollackJ. M.FinkelE. J. (2013). Mind-sets matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 655-701. doi:10.1037/a0029531
6.
CableD. M.JudgeT. A. (1996). Person–organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 294-311.
7.
ChatmanJ.GreerL.ShermanE.DoerrB. (2019). Blurred lines: How the collectivism norm operates through perceived group diversity to boost or harm group performance in Himalayan mountain climbing. Organization Science, 30, 235-445.
8.
ChatmanJ. A.CaldwellD. F.O’ReillyC. A.DoerrB. (2014). Parsing organizational culture: How the norm for adaptability influences the relationship between culture consensus and financial performance in high-technology firms. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 785-808. doi:10.1002/job.1928
9.
ChatmanJ. A.JehnK. A. (1994). Assessing the relationship between industry characteristics and organizational culture: How different can you be?Academy of Management Journal, 37, 522-553.
10.
ChatmanJ. A.O’ReillyC. A. (2016). Paradigm lost: Reinvigorating the study of organizational culture. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 199-224. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2016.11.004
11.
ColquittJ. A.ScottB. A.LePineJ. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 909-927. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.909
12.
DenisonD. R.MishraA. K. (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness. Organization Science, 6, 204-223.
13.
DirksK. T.FerrinD. L. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12, 450-467.
14.
DweckC. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
15.
DweckC. S. (2017). From needs to goals and representations: Foundations for a unified theory of motivation, personality, and development. Psychological Review, 124, 689-719. doi:10.1037/rev0000082
16.
DweckC. S.LeggettE. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256
17.
EdmondsonA. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350-383. doi:10.2307/2666999
18.
ElsbachK. D. (2014). Organizational perception management. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
19.
EmersonK. T.MurphyM. C. (2015). A company I can trust? Organizational lay theories moderate stereotype threat for women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 295-307.
20.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191. doi:10.3758/BF03193146
FuP. P.TsuiA. S.LiuJ.LiL. (2010). Pursuit of whose happiness? Executive leaders’ transformational behaviors and personal values. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 222-254. doi:10.2189/asqu.2010.55.2.222
23.
GelfandM. J.HarringtonJ. R.JacksonJ. C. (2017). The strength of social norms across human groups. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 800-809. doi:10.1177/1745691617708631
24.
GrahamJ. R.HarveyC. R.PopadakJ. A.RajgopalS. (2017). Corporate culture: Evidence from the field (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 2805602). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2805602
25.
GriffethR. W.HomP. W.GaertnerS. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26, 463-488. doi:10.1177/014920630002600305
26.
HartnellC. A.OuA. Y.KinickiA. (2011). Organizational culture and organizational effectiveness: A meta-analytic investigation of the competing values framework’s theoretical suppositions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 677-694. doi:10.1037/a0021987
27.
HeslinP. A.LathamG. P.VandeWalleD. (2005). The effect of implicit person theory on performance appraisals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 842-856. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.842
28.
HeslinP. A.VandeWalleD. (2011). Performance appraisal procedural justice: The role of a manager’s implicit person theory. Journal of Management, 37, 1694-1718. doi:10.1177/0149206309342895
29.
HongY.ChiuC.DweckC. S.LinD. M.-S.WanW. (1999). Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 588-599. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.588
30.
HoytC. L.BurnetteJ. L.InnellaA. N. (2012). I can do that: The impact of implicit theories on leadership role model effectiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 257-268. doi:10.1177/0146167211427922
31.
HuangM.LiP.MeschkeF.GuthrieJ. P. (2015). Family firms, employee satisfaction, and corporate performance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 34, 108-127. doi:10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2015.08.002
32.
JordanA. E. (2001). College student cheating: The role of motivation, perceived norms, attitudes, and knowledge of institutional policy. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 233-247. doi:10.1207/S15327019EB1103_3
33.
Kish-GephartJ. J.HarrisonD. A.TreviñoL. K. (2010). Bad apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: Meta-analytic evidence about sources of unethical decisions at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 1-31. doi:10.1037/a0017103
34.
KotrlikJ. W.WilliamsH. A. (2003). The incorporation of effect size in information technology, learning, and performance research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 21, 1-7.
35.
KotterJ. P.HeckettJ. L. (1992). Corporate Culture and Performance (1st ed., 3rd printing ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
36.
KrayL. J.HaselhuhnM. P. (2007). Implicit negotiation beliefs and performance: Experimental and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 49-64. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.49
37.
KrayL. J.HaselhuhnM. P. (2012). Male pragmatism in negotiators’ ethical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1124-1131. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.04.006
38.
Kristof-BrownA. L.ZimmermanR. D.JohnsonE. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281-342. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x
39.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
40.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (2010). Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 420-430. doi:10.1177/1745691610375557
41.
MoldenD. C.DweckC. S. (2006). Finding “meaning” in psychology: A lay theories approach to self-regulation, social perception, and social development. American Psychologist, 61, 192-203. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.3.192
42.
MurphyM. C.DweckC. S. (2010). A culture of genius: How an organization’s lay theory shapes people’s cognition, affect, and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 283-296. doi:10.1177/0146167209347380
43.
NussbaumA. D.DweckC. S. (2008). Defensiveness versus remediation: Self-theories and modes of self-esteem maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 599-612. doi:10.1177/0146167207312960
44.
O’ReillyC. A.CaldwellD. F.ChatmanJ. A.DoerrB. (2014). The promise and problems of organizational culture: CEO personality, culture, and firm performance. Group & Organization Management, 39, 595-625. doi:10.1177/1059601114550713
45.
O’ReillyC. A.ChatmanJ. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499.
46.
O’ReillyC. A.ChatmanJ.CaldwellD. F. (1991). People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 487-516.
47.
PollackJ. M.BurnetteJ. L.HoytC. L. (2012). Self-efficacy in the face of threats to entrepreneurial success: Mind-sets matter. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 34, 287-294. doi:10.1080/01973533.2012.674452
48.
Purdie-VaughnsV.SteeleC. M.DaviesP. G.DitlmannR.CrosbyJ. R. (2008). Social identity contingencies: How diversity cues signal threat or safety for African Americans in mainstream institutions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 615-630. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.615
49.
RattanA.SavaniK.KomarrajuM.MorrisonM. M.BoggsC.AmbadyN. (2018). Meta-lay theories of scientific potential drive underrepresented students’ sense of belonging to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115, 54-75. doi:10.1037/pspi0000130
50.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
51.
SørensenJ. B. (2002). The strength of corporate culture and the reliability of firm performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 70-91. doi:10.2307/3094891
52.
ScheinE. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
53.
WilliamsL. S. (2008). The mission statement: A corporate reporting tool with a past, present, and future. The Journal of Business Communication, 45, 94-119. doi:10.1177/0021943607313989
54.
ZouX.TamK.-P.MorrisM. W.LeeS.LauI. Y.-M.ChiuC. (2009). Culture as common sense: Perceived consensus versus personal beliefs as mechanisms of cultural influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 579-597. doi:10.1037/a0016399
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
