Competing values

The Competing Values Framework explains why organisations can appear effective according to one standard and ineffective according to another. Robert Quinn and John Rohrbaugh derived it from the criteria experts used to judge organisational effectiveness, revealing recurring tensions between internal and external focus, flexibility and control, and means and ends. The framework also supports culture diagnosis and management development.

When to use it

Use the framework to:

• design supervision and management-development programmes;
• understand why functions value different ways of working;
• diagnose gaps or overused management approaches; and
• describe the organisation’s current and preferred culture.

Origins

Robert E. Quinn and John Rohrbaugh developed the framework from research into how organisational theorists and researchers judged effectiveness. Their early work identified tension among competing criteria, and their 1983 Management Science article used multivariate analysis to map three value dimensions: control versus flexibility, internal versus external focus, and means versus ends. Kim Cameron and Quinn later adapted the framework for culture assessment through the clan, adhocracy, market and hierarchy quadrants.

What it is

The model has three underlying dimensions:

Internal versus external focus:

cohesion, people and internal systems on one side; the environment, competition and external position on the other.

Flexibility versus stability and control:

discretion, adaptation and change contrasted with order, coordination and predictability.

Means versus ends:

attention to processes and capabilities contrasted with final outcomes and goals.

The first two axes create four effectiveness models. The third explains whether attention in each quadrant is directed towards the mechanism or the result.