Exploring the Role of Hofstede’s

Dimensions in Determining how an

Organisational Culture of Jugaad-UPB
Impacts Employee Voice in the IT Sector

Shekhar Manelkar
PRN – 20029001048

Dr. Dharmesh K. Mishra – Associate Professor –

Symbiosis Institute of International Business
Introduction
• Rapid increase in corporate frauds in fast growing economies. (Gupta & Gupta, 2015)
• Whilst there may be short-term benefits, there is a huge price in terms of financial,
legal and reputational loss. (Beauchamp et al. 2008)
• In the 2016 the Ethics Compliance Initiative (ECI) survey Japan was at the top of the
ethical countries to do business; India was towards the bottom. (Lipman, V., 2016)
• A 2020 global survey indicated that 33% of respondents said that they had not
reported integrity concerns as they were worried about the backlash on their career.
(Singh, A., 2021)
• No legal recourse for whistleblowers in India other than fighting a Civil suit against
retaliation. (Sen, T., 2020)
Jugaad – Innovation & Shortcuts?
• Jugaad was an adaption of people to tough situations, legal strangleholds etc by finding a
workaround. (Berger & Herstein, 2014)
• It refers to Innovation and Resourcefulness to navigate difficult times and shows ”Frugality,
Flexibility and Inclusivity”. (Prabhu & Jain, 2015)
• It also refers to working around the system, taking short-cuts, giving and receiving bribes, using
political power to get things done and represents a systemic risk. (Birtchnell, T., 2011)
• Indian philosophy is broad in its definition of ethics and has both Utilitarian and Deontological
positions. Managers from collectivistic cultures are more likely to follow utilitarian theories of
ethical decision-making. (Berger & Herstein, 2014)
• In modern organisations there is pressure on managers to bend the rules to benefit the
organisation. This behaviour is also rewarded.
3
Literature Review (Information)
References Top Journals of Interest Seminal Work - Researchers

1. Journal of Business Ethics – 1. For Ethical Behaviour:

62 References in all
Kohlberg, L; Trevino, L.K.; Brown, M.E.;
Springer (A)
1. Peer-Reviewed Ciulla, J.

Journals 2. Academy of Management Review - 2. For Unethical Pro-organizational

Academy of Management (A*) Behaviour
a. 18 from A*
3. Journal of Management – Sage Umphress, E.E.; Bingham, J.; Price, T.L.
b. 22 from A
Publications (A*) 3. For Culture
c. 4 from B
Bandura, A.; Hofstede, G.; Pinto, J.; Prabhu,
4. Organization Science – INFORMS J
2. 4 from Books (A*)
4. For Social Exchange Theory
3. 14 Online Sources 5. Psychological Science – Sage Blau, P.M.; Ashforth, B.E.; Cropanzano, R.;
Publications (A*) Emerson, RM;

6. Research in Organizational 5. For Employee Voice

Morrison, E.W.; Rothschild, J.; Kish-Gephart,
Behavior – Elsevier (A)
J.J. 4
Literature Review (1 of 3)
No. From the Literature
1. Unethical Pro-Organisational
Behaviour (UPB) definition.
UPB and high organisational
identification (OI) with high Positive
Reciprocity Beliefs (PRB).
2. Ethical action is dependent on
1. Individual Factors - Moral
Attentiveness and Identity,
2. The Moral issue itself and
3. Organisational Culture –
Obedience to Authority and
Rewards.
3. Individual Factors – Moral Maturity,
Moral Identity, Moral Attentiveness
and OI, Job Insecurity (JI),
Psychological Entitlement (PE)
References Research Limitations & Gaps
Umphress et al (2010); 1. High OI & High PRB less likely to be morally aware of
Umphress & Bingham unethical actions benefitting the organisation.
(2011) 2. Situational & Cultural forces that impact UPB at team,
organisation and transnational level
3. How UPB could normalise corruption
Trevino, L.K. (1986); 1. An inductively driven model for understanding, investigating,
Trevino et al (2006); and predicting ethical decision making in organizations.
2. Behavioural ethics as a group-level or organizational-level
phenomenon.
3. Consequences of Ethical & Unethical Behaviour
4. Organizationally relevant ethical attitudes and beliefs across
national cultures.
Kohlberg, L. (1973); 1. Organisational context within which ethical decision processes
Aquino & Reed (2002); occur
Miao et al (2020); Lee et 2. Organizational climate may moderate the link between PE &
al (2019); Ashforth & UPB
Mael (1989); Ghosh, SK 3. UPB as a group-level construct and to examine what might
(2017); Chen et al (2016) influence it at the team level.
4. Peer pressure to conform may influence UPB
5
Literature Review (2 of 3)
No. From the Literature
3. Individual Factors – Moral
cont Maturity, Moral Identity,
d.. Moral Attentiveness and OI,
Job Insecurity (JI),
Psychological Entitlement
(PE)
4. Cultural Factors – LMX,
Egoistic Norms, Employee-
Organisational Relationship
(EOR), High Organisational
Control (Power – Who gets
rewarded etc), Bottomline
mentality, Social Exchange
Theory (SET)
5. Right v/s Beneficial creates
tension – resolved through
Voice or Neutralisation –
Rationalisation, Socialisation
and Institutionalisation.
References Research Limitations & Gaps
Kohlberg, L. (1973); 5. Antecedents and Consequences of Social Identification (SI) in
Aquino & Reed organisations.
(2002); Miao et al. 6. SI's impact on the internalisation of Organisational Values
(2020); Lee et al. 7. Factors affecting Group Insecurity
(2019); Ashforth & 8. Verify whether employees’ inclination to engage in fraudulent activities for
Mael (1989); Ghosh, the sake of their firm is a consequence of the “perform or perish” stance
SK (2017); Chen et taken by many organizations.
al. (2016)
Bryant & Merritt 1. LMX facilitates UPB willingness even when employees are high in moral
(2019); Babalola et identity. But convenience sample used.
al. (2020); 2. Four issues of interest in SET: (a) the roots of the conceptual ambiguities,
Cropanzano & (b) norms and rules of exchange, (c) nature of the resources being
Mitchell (2005); exchanged, and (d) social exchange relationship
Wang et al. (2019); 3. The effects of other types of EORs in organizations (e.g., psychological
Graham et al. contracts; perceived organizational support) on UPB
(2019); 4. Impact of Collectivistic cultures on LMX and reciprocity on UPB
5. The role of organizational culture - may also shape and motivate UPB.
Umphress & 1. Focus on behavioural ethics at a group-level, organisational level
Bingham (2011); 2. Do organization’s unethical actions validate or normalize UPB
Trevino et al. (2006); 3. How does form of corruption impact choice of ideologies and strategies.
Ashforth & Anand 4. Factors that facilitate or retard normalisation, and exit points that an
(2003) individual can use to halt the process.
6
Literature Review (3 of 3)
No. From the Literature
6. Voice Enabled – Taboo Trade-offs,
large infraction, mal-intent of actor,
high Moral Identity (MI) and is
Morally Attentiveness (MA) of the
observer.
7. Voice Inhibited – Job insecurity, fear of
retaliation, low relative power,
Perception of organisational politics
(POP), many observers (Bystander
Effect).
8. If Voice is inhibited, the observer is
left with unresolved tension that gets
dissipated through Moral Decoupling,
Moral Rationalisation.
References
Aquino & Reed (2002);
Miao et al. (2020); King, G.
(2001); Henik, E. (2008)
King, G. (2001); King &
Hermodson (2000); Cheng et
al. (2019); Morrison, E.W.
(2014); Hussain et al. (2017)
Ashforth & Anand (2003);
Trevino, LK (2006);
Bhattacharjee et al. (2013);
Fehr et al. (2019)
Research Limitations & Gaps
1. MI and Moral Cognition and its impact on
Behaviour
2. Peer reporting effectiveness of UPB, retaliation by
group, and group pressure to conform
3. Effect of emotions and hope on whistleblowing
4. Considering the organisational context within which
ethical decision processes occur
1. Examine the psychological variables mediating this
relationship Internal Whistleblowing and POP
2. Examine emotions such as the feelings of
unfairness, exhaustion, burnout or pressure as the
mediating variables between POP and internal
whistleblowing.
3. How do relations with co-workers affect voice and
silence?
1. The normative relationship between performance
and morality.
2. Factors that facilitate or retard normalisation
3. Impact of individual life experiences, culture and
language used in the organisation
7
Research Gaps
1. There is a lot of research that has happened exploring the
1. Situational and Cultural forces that impact UPB and antecedents to UPB, but little that examines the employee
Employee Voice (EV). Umphress et al. (2010) consequence of UPB. 
1. Does the “perform or perish” stance taken by organizations facilitate
2. There is no scholarly work on the negative impact of Jugaad
UPB. Ghosh, S.K. (2017)
from the point of view of UPB. 
2. How do relations with co-workers affect EV? Morrison, E.W. (2014)
3. There is a gap in research on whether national or
2. Consequences of Ethical and Unethical behaviour on the organisational culture impacts the response of observing
organisation. Trevino et al. (2006) employees towards the employee committing UPB in
1. Do organization’s unethical actions validate or normalize UPB. organisations. Specially, Hofstede’s dimensions of Power
Ashforth & Anand (2003); Trevino, L.K. (2006)
Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Masculinity vs Femininity
3. Differences in organizationally relevant ethical attitudes AS, Individuality vs Collectivism, and Indulgence vs
and beliefs across national cultures. Restraint. 
1. Impact of Collectivistic cultures on LMX and reciprocity on UPB. 4. No research paper builds a link between UPB and its impact
Babalola et al. (2020) on Employee Voice. 
2. UPB as a group-level construct and to examine what might influence it 5. There is a research gap in explaining whether an
at the team level. Lee et al. (2019)
organisational culture that is conducive to UPB can also be
3. Factors affecting Group Insecurity. Ashforth & Mael (1989)
conducive to Employee Voice. 
4. Factors that facilitate or retard normalisation. Ashforth & 6. The impact of Employee Voice (EV) in the context of Jugaad
Anand (2003) / UPB has not yet been explored
7. There is no current work in the area of EV, Jugaad and
8 UPB
Statement of the Problem

Explore the phenomenon of Jugaad in the context of UPB and

explore the role of Hofstede’s dimensions of “Power-
Distance”, “Uncertainty Avoidance”, “Masculinity versus
Femininity”, “Individualism versus Collectivism” and
“Indulgence versus Restraint” in determining how PPUPB
impacts Employee Voice.

9
Research Questions
1. What is the nature of the relationship between Jugaad and UPB?
2. What is the impact of Peer-Perceived UPB (PPUPB) on the Employee-Organization
relationship (EOR)?
3. How does High Power Distance in India impact EV during PPUPB?
4. How does our moderate to low rank on Uncertainty Avoidance impact PPUPB?
5. How does High Masculinity in Indian society impact EV during PPUPB?
6. How does our even score on Individualism versus Collectivism in India, impact EV during
PPUPB?
7. How does the high Indian score on Restraint (versus Indulgence) impact EV during PPUPB?
8. Is the expression of Employee Voice more difficult in the context of PPUPB?
9. Does an organisational culture that promotes UPB simultaneously inhibit EV?
10
Research Objectives
1. Examine the nature of relationship between the Jugaad mentality and UPB
2. Examine the impact of Peer Perceived-UPB (PPUPB) on the Employee-
Organisation Relationship (EOR) of the observer
3. Assess the impact of High Power-Distance, Individualism/Collectivism,
Restraint/Indulgence on Employee Voice
4. Assess the impact of Jugaad, Uncertainty Avoidance, High Masculinity on
PPUPB
5. Investigate the expression of EV in the context of PPUPB.
6. Explain the relationship between PPUPB, Culture, and EV (Build a Theory)
11
Research Methodology (1 of 2)
1. The phenomena being studied are based on reality that is co-constructed by all the actors.
Reality here is subjective based on the experience of the actor and the shared experience of
the group.
2. The presence of multiple subjective realities are best understood through direct interaction
to reveal the hidden layers of meaning held by individuals and collectively by
organisations.
3. Mixed Method for Research would be ideal since there are exploratory as well as
explanatory aspects in this proposed research. The design would be exploratory sequential.
4. Sequential qual + quan (exploratory + explanatory) and Triangulation using FGDs with
industry experts.
12
Research Methodology (2 of 2)
6. The Qualitative Research
a. The first step would be identify the IT companies that are based in India and largely employ Indians.
Identify 10 companies that are more than 500 people in strength.
b. Overall sample size of 20-30 senior professionals (or till saturation). Iterative.
c. Have a detailed 1-on-1 interaction with each of them and maintain exhaustive notes.
d. Using Coding to analyse the data.

7. Quantitative Research
a. Create a questionnaire based on the Qual – Test on sample (Use existing instruments where available)
b. Sample size based on Cochran’s formula n0= (Z2 x p x q)/(p-value)2
c. For a population size of 10,000, Bartlett et al (2001) suggest a sample size of 370
d. Validation of the constructs will be arrived at using FGD – (2 to 3, with about 10-12 participants each)
e. Use of social media and professional networks to reach maximum people.

13
Scope and Limitations of the Study
1. The study will be carried out on people working in the IT industry and will be specific
to India
2. IT organisations in the main IT hubs, Mumbai, Pune and Bengaluru will be covered. IT
organisations employee people from all parts of India, whereas the companies are based
in Maharashtra and Karnataka, its implication for other parts of the country is not within
the scope of study.
3. This will consider PPUPB in “white-collared” contexts of the IT organisation that is
largely not unionised. The impact of group-pressure to comply to PPUPB may be
different in manufacturing setups and is outside the scope of this study.
4. On account of COVID-19, face-to-face interviews may not happen, and the researcher
may have to conduct online interviews during the data-collection period.
14
Research Timeline
Phase Description Time Frame

I Literature survey Continuous

II Qualitative Research – In-depth Interviews January – 2022 to April – 2022

Ill Survey Questionnaire Development April – 2022 to June – 2022

IV Gathering Survey Data & Analysis June – 2022 to March – 2023

V Focus Group Discussions March – 2023 to May – 2023

V Development of the final model May – 2023 to February – 2024

VI Thesis writing and submission February – 2024 to December – 2024

15
 Thank You
For your time, your attention, your patience and your feedback in making this better.

16
Additional Slides

17
Proposed Study

Organisational
Culture

Perceived Peer
Employee Voice
UPB

National
Culture

18