THERELATIONSHIP BETWEENORGANISATIONALCLIMATE ANDSALUTOGENIC FUNCTIONING

Organisational climate, de¢ned as psychological atmosphere, was measured by means of 14 climate and four managerial support dimensions. Salutogenic functioning, referring to the origins of psychological health, was measured as the constructs sense of coherence, self-e⁄cacy and locus of control. A representative sample of 245 mining personnel was used. Climate correlates signi¢cantly with sense of coherence and locus of control, and through these, with self-e⁄cacy. It is recommended that Industrial Psychologists can act as facilitators in improving organisational climate by monitoring and enhancing the level of salutogenic functioning amongst its managers and sta¡ members.

Research results increasingly prove the relationship between salutogenic (Strˇmpfer, 1990) and fortigenic functioning (Strˇmpfer, 1992) on the one hand and various individual and work related behavioural constructs on the other hand. This can be seen as part of the challenge to explicate psychological well-being (see Wissing & Van Eeden, 1994, 1997a, 1997b within the ¢eld of positive psychology (Kogan, 2001), thus increasing knowledge about individual optimal functioning as well as organisational e¡ectiveness. Strˇmpfer andWissing (1999) give a summary of such results, referring mostly to sense of coherence as the most widely recognised salutogenic construct and its measurement by means of the Orientation to Life Questionnaire (Antonovsky, 1987a). Examples of correlating individual constructs are cognitive style, anxiety, depression (see Schnyder, Bˇchi, Sensky & Klaghofer, 2000), stress, positive / negative a¡ectivity, neuroticism, self-esteem, sex role, life satisfaction, extraversion, independence, conscientiousness, agreeableness, role behaviour and power. According to Antonovsky (1987a) salutogenesis also provides a theoretical model for the analysis of work related behavioural constructs such as job security, involvement, commitment, power, change (Antonovsky, 1987b) and especially job satisfaction, which has been researched extensively from this paradigm (Rothmann, 2000;Strˇmpfer, 1998). Moving from the level of individual behaviour as seen from a systems viewpoint (Robbins, 1998) to the group / team level, there is little evidence of a relationship between salutogenic functioning and collective behaviour such as organisational climate. Research within the ¢elds of clinical and family psychology (Feigin, Moshe & Abraham, 1996;Sagy & Antonovsky,1998) provides some evidence of the role of salutogenic functioning within speci¢c small group settings such as a family.
Although organisational climate has been de¢ned in many different ways (Litwin & Stringer, 1968), there seems to be consensus that it includes three behavioural levels, namely the individual, the interpersonal and the organisational. The individual's frame of reference in£uences his/her perception of the nature of the climate. Argued from the salutogenic paradigm and the study of coping behaviour (Antonovsky, 1979(Antonovsky, , 1987a, it could be hypothesised that the salutogenic person (Viviers, 1999) with his/her positive way of cognitively and e¡ectively appraising the world, will be more likely to show ''a readiness and willingness to exploit the resources . . . at their potential disposal'' (Antonovsky,1984:21) in perceiving and in-£uencing organisational climate. This is especially important in the South African mining industry, where the quest for establishing a motivated and committed work force to cope with the increasing demands for survival and change (and its e¡ect on climate), is threatening the industry's survival as well as the country's economic welfare. Therefore, the focus in this research is not whether organisational climate is positive, productive and growth enriching, but rather how the existing climate is perceived by the individual employee with reference to his/her salutogenic functioning.
The interpersonal dimensions refer to the nature of managerial support with its directive and interactive properties.The directive one's are structure, role clarity, job standards, managerial e¡ectiveness and job satisfaction and the interactive one's are communication, team functioning, contribution to pro¢ts, con£ict handling and reward. The combined directive / interactive properties are responsibility, decision making, job tension and propensity to leave (Kline & Boyd, 1991;Prakasam, 1986). Managerial support forms part of an e¡ective goalsetting strategy (Vance & Colella, 1990) and impacts on goal acceptance, goal commitment and performance (Locke, Shaw, Saari & Latham 1981). It can be de¢ned as a positive, constructive and helpful attitude of the manager towards subordinates in the attainment of goals (Locke & Latham, 1984). Babin and Boles (1996) suggest that support is measured by the provision of key resources (equipment and training), which facilitate the performance of the employee. Cummins (1989) suggests that managerial support relates to the building of the esteem of each employee, through informal and problem solving support. Based on House's (1981) concept of interpersonal transaction, managerial support consists of information support (information about the job), appraisal support (assistance in setting objectives), instrumental support (assistance with resources) and emotional support (a caring attitude).

Salutogenic functioning
The salutogenic paradigm (Antonovsky, 1979;1984;1987a) focuses on the origins of health and wellness, the location and development of personal and social resources and adaptive tendencies which relate to the individual's disposition, allowing him/her to select appropriate strategies to deal with confronting stressors. Antonovsky (in Cooper & Payne, 1991) suggests using the sense of coherence, self-e⁄cacy (Bandura, 1989) and locus of control (Rotter, 1990) as the most important constructs in salutogenic functioning^as used in research by Kossuth (1998), Rothmann (2000) and Viviers (1996).
1. Sense of coherence (SOC). Antonovsky (1984;1987a) de¢nes the SOC as a global orientation that expresses the extent to which the individual has a pervasive, enduring, though dynamic feeling of coherence, that (1) the stimuli deriving from his/ her internal and external environments in the course of living are structured, predictable, and explicable; (2) the resources are available to meet the demands posed by these stimuli; and (3) these demands are challenges worthy of investment and engagement.The SOC predicts the extent to which the individual feels that there is a probability that things will work out well (Antonovsky,1979). It consists of three core personality characteristics, namely comprehensibility (making sense of the stimuli in the environment), manageability (coping with the stimuli in view of the available resources) and meaningfulness (an emotional identi¢cation with events in the environment). The strength of the SOC is connected to a variety of coping mechanisms, called generalised resistance resources (GRR's) (Antonovsky,1979), de-¢ned as any characteristic of the person, the group, or the environment that can facilitate e¡ective tension management. According to Antonovsky (1987b), work has a signi¢cant role to play in the shaping of the SOC. Awork environment which is predictable, manageable, where the employee can participate in decision making and has a voice in regulating his/ her work, enhances the SOC because work is experienced as meaningful. Strˇmpfer (1995) supports this notion by saying that if all aspects are equal, the above orientation to work can only lead to productive performance, recognition, reward and promotion. These experiences would then become work-related GRR's that will strengthen the SOC further. 2. Self-e⁄cacy. Developed within the broad framework of social (Bandura,1989;Kirsch,1986) and cognitive learning theory (Gist & Mitchell, 1992), self-e⁄cacy focuses on the dynamic, triadic, reciprocal, causation relationship between cognition, behaviour and the environment. It refers to the individual's belief that he/ she has the capabilities to mobilise the motivational and cognitive resources, and courses of action needed to meet given situation-demands (Bandura, 1997;). The individual sets high, challenging and achievable goals, shows commitment and exercises choice and control over events in his/her life, which stimulates more success (Gist & Mitchell, 1992;Kirsch, 1986). A responsive, encouraging and rewarding environment, valuing aspirations, engagement and accomplishments, stimulates self-e⁄cacy further (Bandura, 1997;Barling & Beattie, 1983;Lee,1988;Taylor, Locke, Lee & Gist,1984). Rotter (1966), this concept derives from social learning theory with its focus on reinforcement in the acquisition of knowledge and skills. LOC is de¢ned as the extent to which the individual perceives that he/she has control over a given situation (Sutherland & Cooper, 1990). The di¡erentiation between external and internal LOC lies in the experience of freedom (Antonovsky in Cooper & Payne,1991), attribution and cognitive performance (Rotter,1966).The external individual feels out of control, sees no relationship between own behaviour and events, attributes the cause of events to the environment, others and fate, feels anxious, frustrated and helpless. The internal individual feels in control, sees a relationship between own behaviour and outcomes, attributes the cause of events to themselves, feels empowered and masterful and thus experiences less stress. Cognitively the internal acquires larger amounts and more diverse kinds of information.Work-wise, the external perceives performance as dependent on incentives, and believes that the withdrawal of these will lead to a loss in production (Erwee & Pottas, 1982). The internal perceives his/her own skill and judgement as a means to solving problems, and success not as entirely dependent on the existence or non existence of incentives (Garson & Stanwyck, 1997). He/she attends more to own self-development, shows more initiative, develops more constructive relationships with subordinates, is more participative, enterprising and achieves better results than an external (Foley & Clifton, 1990, Payne & Manning, 1988.

Locus of control (LOC). Attributed to
The salutogenic personality pro¢le incorporates the following behaviour ( Viviers, 1999): On the cognitive level, the individual is able to view stimuli from the environment in a positive and constructive manner, and to use the information towards e¡ective decision making. On the a¡ective level, the individual functions with self-awareness, is con¢dent, self-ful¢lled, views stimuli as meaningful and feels committed towards life in a mature manner. On the conative level, the individual has internal motivation, perceives stimuli as a challenge which directs his/her energy to cope, solve problems and achieve results. The interpersonal characteristics entail the capacity to form meaningful relationships with others at work and in society.

Theoretical integration
In linking work behaviour to sense of coherence, Antonovsky (1987b) refers to the experience of consistency providing a basis for comprehensibility, strengthening it further when the work environment enables the individual to see the entire spectrum and his/her own role in it. It also fosters con¢dence and feelings of security and it supports communicability in social relationships. A balance in workload provides a basis for manageability, strengthening it further in the case of collective decision making because perceived social resources, such as the support and advice of superiors and colleagues, are instrumental in the well-being of the individual. Participation in decision-making provides a basis for meaningfulness. Feldt, Kinnenen and Mauno (2000) found a strong relationship between SOC and organisational climate -employees who perceived organisational climate as positive and job security as high, reported higher scores on SOC. A positive climate has a strengthening e¡ect on an individual's view of the environment as being meaningful. They also found that when climate worsened, SOC diminished. SOC is high where the climate is considered to be positive within families (Antonovsky, 1988) and amongst university sta¡ members (Ryland & Greenfeld, 1992). The same applies where the climate is seen as contributing to the experience of meaning in and regard for life (Auhagen, 2000).
Self-e⁄cacy is high in organisations with e¡ective human resources policies and practices, where the culture is stimulating empowerment amongst employees (Chiles & Zorn,1995), where decision making and performance are e¡ective and the attaining of set management goals takes place Wood & Bandura,1989). Similar ¢ndings were reported in terms of internal locus of control (Rotter,1966;.
The above literature suggests that the high level salutogenic functioning employee perceives and assesses organisational climate in an optimistic and positive manner, understands the nature thereof and it will make sense to him/her. He/she feels involved and commitment towards climate issues and takes responsibility for his/her own behaviour and contribution therein. He/she believes in own abilities and acts from an internal motivation in in£uencing climate to the better, depending on a positive and supportive interpersonal environment.

Aim and research design
The aim of this research is to determine whether a relationship exists between organisational climate and salutogenic functioning and to report on the nature thereof. A quantitative survey design is used, measuring the two variables and reporting on the statistical correlation between them.

METHOD Population and sample
The research was done in the coal mining industry within one group of companies in Mpumalanga. The population consists of employees within one operation consisting of the mining, engineering, metallurgy, technical services, ¢nance, administration, human resources and security disciplines. From this, a representative sample of 245 (45%) was drawn. The sample consisted of 13 (5%) mine managers (Patterson band E), 39 (16%) senior supervisors (band D) and 193 (79%) artisans, miners, foremen and supervisors (band C). All were male -64% white and 36% black.
Acceptable levels of reliability and validity on both the climate instruments are reported by Kossuth (1998) and on all three the salutogenic instruments by Kossuth (1998), Rothmann andVenter (2000), andViviers (1996).These instruments were chosen because of their psychometric qualities as well as their conceptual correspondence with the above de¢nitions and behavioural characteristics of the constructs.

Data collection
The measuring instruments were computerised (in English and Afrikaans) and the sample was invited to attend pre-arranged sessions in groups of 30 in a computer room. The administration was done by a psychologist, trained and in command of the appropriate computer software. Each session lasted approximately two hours. The computerisation made it possible to ensure that all respondents answered all items on the measuring instruments.

Data processing and hypothesis
The following statistical analysis was done by means of the SAS (1985) and SPSS (1994) computer packages.
1. Reliability and dimensions of the measuring instruments. The data for each of the ¢ve measuring instruments were analysed separately, in terms of item-test reliability and Cronbach alpha's. As guideline, the suggestions by Watkins and Mauer (1994) (item-test correlations of less than 0,2 should be excluded) and Nunnally (1978) (an item of between 0,5 and 0,6 is satisfactory for research purposes) were used.
2. Inter correlations. The strength of the relationship between the dimensions were calculated, using the Pearson-product moment correlation coe⁄cient (Howell, 1989). The statistical hypothesis being tested is that there is a signi¢cant relationship between organisational climate and the salutogenic constructs.

Inter correlations
The results show a signi¢cant relationship between organisational climate and salutogenic functioning, speci¢cally SOC and LOC.
Cognitive behaviour. The salutogenic functioning individual perceives the organisation as a coherent system in terms of its structure; sees climate in a positive light in terms of its structure, performance standards and opportunities for recognition and promotion; evaluates the e¡ectiveness of decision making and understands why it is made on speci¢c organisational levels; understands his/her own role in the organisation and knows how to perform e¡ectively; experiences the self as effectively involved in decision making; accepts the responsibility being delegated to him/her; experiences job satisfaction and turns negative tension into a positive experience.
A¡ective behaviour. The individual experiences comfort with organisational planning as well as the level of order or chaos; feels recognised from within instead of easily criticised or punished, con¢dent and comfortable to express ideas, free to receive constructive criticism, involved in the solving of disagreements and problems in a mature way; experiences a lack of suspicion and feels generally comfortable to stay on in the organisation.
Conative behaviour. The individual experiences the predictability of organisational life; engages in managing the demands through making use of own resources, skills and judgement; sees the relationship between own, team and organisational behaviour and outcomes; and empowers the self.
Interpersonal behaviour. The individual relies on and ensures having the necessary information from colleagues and supervisor; has con¢dence in the supervisor's abilities to set objective; is open to the supervisor's support and assistance in terms of information and resources; accepts emotional support and guidance form the supervisor; communicates freely; participates and gives constructive cooperation to make a group work as a team. He/she will be trusted by others to perform his/her assigned task and will contribute towards establishing a positive climate.
Further, the results show a signi¢cant relationship between organisational climate and salutogenic functioning, speci¢cally self-e⁄cacy, through the primary relationship and as well as through the inter-correlations between the salutogenic constructs, SOC, LOC and self-e⁄cacy. Thus, the statistical hypothesis is accepted.

DISCUSSION
In line with the above theoretical expectation and hypothesis, the results revealed that the individual's experience of a positive organisational climate relates to a high level of salutogenic functioning. On the other hand, the perception that the organisational climate is negative, relates to a low level of salutogenic functioning. This research ¢rstly supports Antonovsky's (1987b) observation that a comprehensive, manageable and meaningful (SOC) working environment relates to a positive psychological atmosphere. Secondly, the result adds self-e⁄cacy as a cognitive / environmental disposition and self-e⁄cacy and locus of control as representing an internal motivational stance, as relating to a positive experienced organisational climate. Antonovsky (1987b) also claims that the two constructs have a strengthening e¡ect on one another. It is suggested that a positive organisational climate strengthens the individual's experience of meaningfulness as the cognitive component as well as manageability as the motivational component (Antonovsky, 1987a;1987b;. This result adds the cognitive / environment disposition measured by self-e⁄cacy to the already known comprehensibility and the internal locus of control measured by self-e⁄cacy and locus of control, to the manageability aspect. On the other hand, this means that a working environment characterised by comprehensibility, individual belief and trust in own cognitive resources, manageability where the individual is internally motivated and emotional meaningfulness, will strengthen the organisational climate towards becoming more positive. It may be worth mentioning the correspondence between the above ¢ndings about organisational climate and results with other situational organisational variables. Rothmann (2000) found a strong correlation between these same three salutogenic constructs and job satisfaction. Rothmann and Agathagelou (2000) found a correlation between internal locus of control (including autonomy) and job satisfaction.
Argued from the organisational climate point of view, the results suggest that almost all of the above organisational dimensions as well as the support given by the supervisor, impact on the individual's understanding of the bigger picture (comprehension), his/her ability to cope (manageability), and his/her emotional commitment to his/her work (meaningfulness). These dimensions also in£uence the amount of personal control and freedom the individual experiences and is able to exercise in his/her work, the realisation of the link between own behaviour and outcomes and the resulting empowered e¡ect. The individual will be able to in£uence climate in terms of bringing in information as well as facilitating e¡ective relationships amongst colleagues.
It is concluded ¢rstly that organisational climate is signi¢cantly in£uenced by employee's salutogenic functioning. Firstly, a high SOC and LOC facilitates a more (than a low level) positive and realistic perception and e¡ect on climate. This is supported by the individual's level of self-e⁄cacy in a secondary way. Secondly, the nature of organisational climate in£uences the individual's salutogenic functioning, which could explain how, for example, a depressing climate can immobilise employees and vice versa.
In view of the ¢ndings, the following recommendations are made: 2. The nature of the relationship indicates that Industrial Psychologists can facilitate improved organisational climate by using the level of salutogenic functioning amongst managers and sta¡ members as indicator. This implies becoming more aware of their level of cognitive understanding of stimuli in a positive and constructive manner, their level of experienced meaningfulness, internal motivation and the quality of their interpersonal relationships. This will act as mirror of the collective psychological atmosphere amongst the team and even in the larger organisation. By ¢nding means to enhance these through for example individual discussion and focussed team building, and organisational development interventions, the climate will become more positive and constructive.