{
  "name": "組織文化・組織風土・規範・文化変革 研究の質と限界",
  "version": "0.1",
  "notice": "簡易評価であり正式なRoB評価ではない。",
  "assessments": [
    {
      "study_id": "smircich-1983",
      "design": "conceptual review",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "概念論",
        "単一の正解定義ではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "schein-1990",
      "design": "conceptual review",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "概念・事例中心",
        "後の版で概念発展"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "hofstede-1990",
      "design": "multimethod field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ケース数限定",
        "特定企業群",
        "国民文化との混同に注意"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "oreilly-1991",
      "design": "measure and field studies",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "自己報告・選択効果",
        "同質化や差別へ転用しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "denison-mishra-1995",
      "design": "multimethod field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究",
        "成果指標・業界差",
        "文化を操作レバー化しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "meyerson-martin-1987",
      "design": "conceptual synthesis",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "概念論",
        "測定・介入効果ではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "hatch-1993",
      "design": "conceptual model",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "概念モデル",
        "実証検証は別途"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "chatman-oreilly-2016",
      "design": "integrative review",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ナラティブ統合",
        "介入効果レビューではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "schneider-2013",
      "design": "annual review",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ナラティブレビュー",
        "境界は完全には固定しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "hartnell-2011",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究",
        "類型内異質性",
        "万能の最良文化ではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "schneider-reichers-1983",
      "design": "conceptual review",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "概念論",
        "後続の多層研究で発展"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "james-2008",
      "design": "integrative review",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ナラティブレビュー",
        "尺度・焦点の異質性"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "patterson-2005",
      "design": "measure validation",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "尺度項目・利用条件",
        "英国中心",
        "次元を一得点にしない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "chan-1998",
      "design": "multilevel methodology",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "方法論",
        "特定風土の効果証明ではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "schneider-strength-2002",
      "design": "multilevel field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "特定業界",
        "観察研究",
        "強い風土を善としない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "zohar-1980",
      "design": "measure and field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "古典的製造業",
        "現代サービス・心理社会リスクへ拡張注意"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "clarke-2006",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究中心",
        "尺度・産業差",
        "事故過少報告"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "beus-2010",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究",
        "事故記録差",
        "逆因果"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "christian-2009",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "相関研究中心",
        "個人責任へ還元しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "schneider-service-1998",
      "design": "multilevel field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "単一業界",
        "観察研究",
        "顧客第一で従業員を犠牲にしない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "hong-2013",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究中心",
        "業種・測定差",
        "顧客ハラスメントを正当化しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "nishii-2013",
      "design": "multilevel field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究",
        "二元的性別構成中心",
        "他の交差性に一般化注意"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "mckay-2007",
      "design": "longitudinal field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "米国人種分類・単一企業",
        "観察研究",
        "差別監査を代替しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "anderson-west-1998",
      "design": "measure validation",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "尺度権利・長さ",
        "革新成果そのものではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "hunter-2007",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究中心",
        "尺度の異質性",
        "過重な挑戦を推奨しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "victor-cullen-1988",
      "design": "measure and field study",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "古典的分類",
        "倫理性の高低を単純順位化しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "martin-cullen-2006",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "相関研究中心",
        "文化・業界差",
        "倫理をアンケートだけで証明しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "kish-gephart-2010",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "主に意思決定研究",
        "自己報告・実験を含む",
        "個人選別へ使わない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "kaptein-2008",
      "design": "measure development",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "自己報告",
        "尺度権利",
        "コンプライアンス実効性を単独証明しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "morrison-2011",
      "design": "multilevel field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究",
        "発言内容・報復を別途評価"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "frazier-2017",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究中心",
        "安全尺度を文化全体と同一視しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "baron-2001",
      "design": "longitudinal organization study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "特定地域・時代・業界",
        "モデルは文化そのものではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "giberson-2009",
      "design": "multilevel field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究",
        "CEOだけで文化を決めない",
        "共通方法差"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "berson-2008",
      "design": "multilevel field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究",
        "因果方向",
        "リーダー中心主義に注意"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "kristof-1996",
      "design": "integrative review",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ナラティブレビュー",
        "適合の定義・測定差"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "verquer-2003",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "自己報告同時測定が多い",
        "実離職・業績は限定"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "arthur-2006",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "採用で主観的同質性を増幅する危険",
        "法的・公平性監査"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "oh-2014",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "文化・尺度・自己報告差",
        "因果確定ではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "van-vianen-2018",
      "design": "annual review",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ナラティブレビュー",
        "介入効果は限定"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "rivera-2012",
      "design": "qualitative field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "特定高所得業界・米国",
        "質的研究",
        "すべての適合評価を否定しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "cable-judge-1997",
      "design": "selection field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "観察研究",
        "面接者バイアス",
        "価値適合と人物類似を分ける"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "howard-grenville-2006",
      "design": "qualitative field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "単一事例中心",
        "環境課題文脈",
        "一般化制約"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "golden-1992",
      "design": "qualitative field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "事例研究",
        "文化強度を善としない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "weick-quinn-1999",
      "design": "annual review",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ナラティブレビュー",
        "文化変革だけに限定されない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "ogbonna-harris-1998",
      "design": "qualitative field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "事例研究",
        "管理主導視点",
        "長期因果限定"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "harris-ogbonna-2002",
      "design": "qualitative field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "少数事例",
        "自己報告",
        "一般化制約"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "stouten-2018",
      "design": "integrative review",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ナラティブ統合",
        "文化変革に限定されない",
        "万能手順ではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "rafferty-2013",
      "design": "multilevel review",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "ナラティブレビュー",
        "準備性を服従性にしない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "taras-2010",
      "design": "meta-analysis",
      "strength": "統合研究",
      "directness": "統合研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "国平均を個人へ当てはめない",
        "時代・国内差",
        "組織文化と別"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "gelfand-2011",
      "design": "cross-national study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "国レベル平均",
        "個人・組織へ直結しない",
        "規範強度を善悪化しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "ashforth-mael-1989",
      "design": "conceptual review",
      "strength": "基礎理論・測定",
      "directness": "基礎理論・測定",
      "key_limits": [
        "概念論",
        "同一視を忠誠義務にしない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "pratt-2000",
      "design": "qualitative field study",
      "strength": "介入・実証研究",
      "directness": "介入・実証研究",
      "key_limits": [
        "単一特殊組織",
        "質的研究",
        "操作的同一視に注意"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "who-2022",
      "design": "evidence-based guideline",
      "strength": "公式指針・制度",
      "directness": "公式指針・制度",
      "key_limits": [
        "各勧告の確実性差",
        "医療的個別助言ではない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "iso-45003",
      "design": "international standard guidance",
      "strength": "公式指針・制度",
      "directness": "公式指針・制度",
      "key_limits": [
        "規格本文は著作権・有料",
        "認証だけで有効性を証明しない",
        "2026年時点で体系的レビュー中"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "ilo-c155",
      "design": "international labour convention",
      "strength": "公式指針・制度",
      "directness": "公式指針・制度",
      "key_limits": [
        "批准・国内実施を確認"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "ilo-c187",
      "design": "international labour convention",
      "strength": "公式指針・制度",
      "directness": "公式指針・制度",
      "key_limits": [
        "批准・国内実施を確認",
        "標語で代替しない"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "ilo-c190",
      "design": "international labour convention",
      "strength": "公式指針・制度",
      "directness": "公式指針・制度",
      "key_limits": [
        "批准・国内実施を確認"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "doj-compliance-2024",
      "design": "official evaluation guidance",
      "strength": "公式指針・制度",
      "directness": "公式指針・制度",
      "key_limits": [
        "米国刑事執行文脈",
        "一般的な文化評価規格ではない",
        "2024年9月版"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "japan-whistleblower",
      "design": "Japanese statute",
      "strength": "公式指針・制度",
      "directness": "公式指針・制度",
      "key_limits": [
        "対象・要件・現行指針を確認"
      ]
    },
    {
      "study_id": "mhlw-harassment",
      "design": "official guidance portal",
      "strength": "公式指針・制度",
      "directness": "公式指針・制度",
      "key_limits": [
        "指針改正・個別該当性を確認"
      ]
    }
  ]
}