| Version | Date | Author | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 28 Feb 2026 | Lead Consultant | Draft |
| 0.9 | 10 Mar 2026 | Lead Consultant | Review |
| 1.0 | 15 Mar 2026 | Lead Consultant | Final |
This document contains proprietary and confidential information belonging to Oman Investment Authority. It has been prepared by Talent Arabia Business LLC exclusively for authorized OIA personnel. This document may not be reproduced or disclosed without prior written consent. All individual survey responses have been anonymized. No individual can be identified from the data presented.
Talent Arabia was engaged by Oman Investment Authority to conduct a comprehensive assessment of organizational culture using the Denison Organizational Culture Model and the Competing Values Framework. The assessment combined quantitative survey data from 85 employees with qualitative insights from 8 executive interviews, 6 focus groups, and a systematic review of organizational documents.
OIA's culture falls in the "Moderate" range, indicating a functional organization with meaningful room for improvement. The score reflects a culture that has clear strategic direction but struggles to translate that clarity into agile execution and employee empowerment.
OIA has a strong sense of where it is going (Mission: 73.8%) but employees feel constrained in their ability to adapt, innovate, and contribute to decisions that affect their work (Adaptability: 51.0%, Involvement: 55.3%). The culture is stable and structured, but this stability has come at the cost of flexibility and empowerment.
The CVF assessment reveals OIA currently operates as a Hierarchy/Market culture (Hierarchy: 35, Market: 28) but employees desire a shift toward Clan/Adhocracy (desired Clan: 30, Adhocracy: 25), indicating appetite for more collaboration, innovation, and empowerment.
Define and communicate clear decision rights at each level. Target: Reduce approval cycle time by 40% within 6 months.
Create a structured program for employees to propose, pilot, and scale new ideas. Target: 10 proposals in Year 1.
Create project-based teams spanning departments. Target: 3 cross-functional task forces within 4 months.
The assessment employed a multi-method approach combining quantitative measurement with qualitative exploration. Two internationally validated frameworks were used:
| Method | Participants | Duration | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
| Culture Survey (Denison) | 85 respondents | Weeks 4-6 | Quantitative culture measurement |
| CVF Assessment (OCAI) | 70 respondents | Weeks 4-6 | Culture type identification |
| Executive Interviews | 8 leaders | Weeks 5-8 | Leadership perspective |
| Focus Groups | 6 groups (62 staff) | Weeks 6-9 | Employee voice |
| Document Review | 12 documents | Weeks 4-10 | Formal culture artifacts |
Data was analyzed using a triangulation approach. Quantitative survey results provided the statistical foundation, while qualitative data added context and root cause understanding. Where sources converged, we have high confidence. Where they diverged, we investigated further.
| Department | Responses | % |
|---|---|---|
| Investment Management | 18 | 21% |
| Finance and Risk | 14 | 16% |
| Strategy and Planning | 12 | 14% |
| HR and Administration | 12 | 14% |
| Corporate Communications | 11 | 13% |
| IT and Digital Transformation | 10 | 12% |
| Legal and Compliance | 8 | 9% |
| Tenure | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Less than 1 year | 4 | 5% |
| 1 to 3 years | 10 | 12% |
| 3 to 5 years | 17 | 20% |
| 5 to 10 years | 25 | 30% |
| 10 to 15 years | 17 | 20% |
| More than 15 years | 12 | 13% |
All 85 responses were complete. The response rate across departments was sufficient to meet the minimum anonymity threshold of 5 respondents per group. The demographic distribution is broadly representative of the workforce.
The overall culture score of 61.7% places OIA in the "Moderate" range, slightly below the global benchmark average of 64.8% but above the GCC public sector average of 60.3%.
| Axis | Score | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| External Focus (Mission + Adaptability) | 62.4% | Moderate external awareness |
| Internal Focus (Involvement + Consistency) | 61.0% | Internal alignment needs work |
| Stability (Mission + Consistency) | 70.3% | Strong structural foundation |
| Flexibility (Adaptability + Involvement) | 53.2% | Limited agility |
The 17.1 point gap between Stability (70.3%) and Flexibility (53.2%) is the most important pattern. It reveals an organization that has invested heavily in structure and direction but underinvested in agility and empowerment.
Mission is OIA's strongest trait, reflecting clear strategic direction and a well-communicated vision. Employees understand where the organization is heading and broadly agree on its goals.
| Sub-Index | Score | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Direction and Intent | 72.0% | Healthy |
| Goals and Objectives | 72.2% | Healthy |
| Vision | 77.2% | Healthy |
Vision (77.2%) is the highest scoring sub-index in the entire assessment. The challenge is not in knowing where to go, but in enabling people to get there with agility.
OIA has established systems, values, and processes, but alignment and effectiveness could be strengthened. Values exist but are not always consistently modeled by leadership.
| Sub-Index | Score | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Core Values | 65.6% | Moderate |
| Agreement | 67.1% | Moderate |
| Coordination and Integration | 67.5% | Moderate |
Employees do not feel sufficiently empowered, developed, or connected to team-based working. "Lack of empowerment" and "decisions always go up" were recurring themes in interviews and focus groups.
| Sub-Index | Score | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Empowerment | 52.9% | Needs Work |
| Team Orientation | 56.2% | Needs Work |
| Capability Development | 56.7% | Needs Work |
Empowerment (52.9%) is the lowest sub-index within Involvement and represents a critical barrier. When employees cannot make decisions within their scope, it creates bottlenecks and signals a lack of trust.
OIA's weakest trait. The organization struggles to respond to change, learn from experience, and incorporate stakeholder feedback. In an era of rapid economic diversification, this is a strategic vulnerability.
| Sub-Index | Score | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Creating Change | 48.0% | Critical |
| Stakeholder Focus | 52.5% | Needs Work |
| Organizational Learning | 52.5% | Needs Work |
Creating Change (48.0%) is the lowest sub-index in the entire assessment. The two lowest scoring questions ("encourage stakeholder contact" at 38.8% and "mistakes as learning" at 40.0%) both fall within this trait.
| # | Sub-Index | Trait | Score | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vision | Mission | 77.2% | Healthy |
| 2 | Goals and Objectives | Mission | 72.2% | Healthy |
| 3 | Strategic Direction | Mission | 72.0% | Healthy |
| 4 | Coordination | Consistency | 67.5% | Moderate |
| 5 | Agreement | Consistency | 67.1% | Moderate |
| 6 | Core Values | Consistency | 65.6% | Moderate |
| 7 | Capability Dev | Involvement | 56.7% | Needs Work |
| 8 | Team Orientation | Involvement | 56.2% | Needs Work |
| 9 | Empowerment | Involvement | 52.9% | Needs Work |
| 10 | Stakeholder Focus | Adaptability | 52.5% | Needs Work |
| 11 | Org Learning | Adaptability | 52.5% | Needs Work |
| 12 | Creating Change | Adaptability | 48.0% | Critical |
All Mission sub-indices are in the top 3. All Involvement and Adaptability sub-indices occupy the bottom 6. OIA is fundamentally stronger on "knowing where to go" than on "empowering people to get there."
| Culture Type | Current | Desired | Gap | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hierarchy (Control) | 35 | 25 | -10 | Decrease significantly |
| Market (Compete) | 28 | 20 | -8 | Decrease |
| Clan (Collaborate) | 22 | 30 | +8 | Increase significantly |
| Adhocracy (Create) | 15 | 25 | +10 | Increase significantly |
Employees want OIA to move from a control-oriented, hierarchical culture toward one that emphasizes collaboration, innovation, and empowerment. The largest desired shift is in Adhocracy (+10 points), indicating a strong appetite for innovation and flexibility. This aligns directly with the low Denison Adaptability and Involvement scores.
This shift requires leaders to evolve from directive and controlling to facilitative and empowering. Leaders need to model the desired behaviors: delegating decisions, celebrating initiative (even when outcomes are uncertain), investing in collaboration, and reducing unnecessary formality.
| Trait | OIA | Global | Diff | Position |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mission | 73.8% | 68.0% | +5.8% | Above |
| Adaptability | 51.0% | 62.0% | -11.0% | Below |
| Involvement | 55.3% | 64.0% | -8.7% | Below |
| Consistency | 66.7% | 65.0% | +1.7% | At |
| Trait | OIA | GCC | Diff | Position |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mission | 73.8% | 65.0% | +8.8% | Above |
| Adaptability | 51.0% | 55.0% | -4.0% | At |
| Involvement | 55.3% | 58.0% | -2.7% | At |
| Consistency | 66.7% | 63.0% | +3.7% | At |
Against the global benchmark, OIA outperforms on Mission but falls significantly below on Adaptability (-11%) and Involvement (-8.7%). Against the GCC public sector benchmark, OIA is broadly in line with peers except for Mission, where it performs well above average. OIA's strategic clarity is a genuine competitive advantage in the regional context.
| # | Department | Score | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Strategy and Planning | 67.5% | Moderate |
| 2 | IT and Digital Transformation | 63.7% | Moderate |
| 3 | Finance and Risk | 62.9% | Moderate |
| 4 | Investment Management | 61.3% | Moderate |
| 5 | Corporate Communications | 60.3% | Moderate |
| 6 | Legal and Compliance | 60.0% | Moderate |
| 7 | HR and Administration | 56.0% | Needs Work |
| Department | Mission | Adapt. | Involv. | Consist. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strategy | 76 | 58 | 60 | 71 |
| IT | 70 | 65 | 60 | 58 |
| Finance | 72 | 42 | 54 | 76 |
| Investment | 78 | 52 | 48 | 65 |
| Corp Comms | 68 | 52 | 58 | 60 |
| Legal | 70 | 38 | 46 | 80 |
| HR | 62 | 55 | 65 | 48 |
Mission is consistently strong across departments (62 to 78%). Adaptability shows the widest variation (38 to 65%). Legal and Compliance has the lowest Adaptability score (38%), reflecting the process-driven nature of the function. HR has the lowest overall score (56%) driven by low Consistency (48%).
| # | Question | Trait | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Our strategic direction is clear to me | Mission | 81.2% |
| 2 | Widespread agreement about goals | Mission | 80.0% |
| 3 | Shared vision of the future | Mission | 78.8% |
| 4 | Leaders have a long-term viewpoint | Mission | 78.8% |
| 5 | Vision creates excitement and motivation | Mission | 78.8% |
| 6 | Clear strategy for the future | Mission | 76.5% |
| 7 | Ethical code guides behavior | Consistency | 72.9% |
| 8 | Clear and consistent set of values | Consistency | 71.8% |
| 9 | Ignoring core values has consequences | Consistency | 70.6% |
| 10 | Meet short-term demands without compromising vision | Mission | 70.6% |
| # | Question | Trait | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Encourage direct contact with stakeholders | Adaptability | 38.8% |
| 2 | See mistakes as learning opportunities | Adaptability | 40.0% |
| 3 | Flexible and easy to change | Adaptability | 43.5% |
| 4 | New ways of work adopted | Adaptability | 45.9% |
| 5 | People work as part of a team | Involvement | 47.1% |
| 6 | Innovation and risk-taking encouraged | Adaptability | 48.2% |
| 7 | Employees highly involved in work | Involvement | 49.4% |
| 8 | Decisions made where best info is | Involvement | 50.6% |
| 9 | Stakeholder input influences decisions | Adaptability | 51.8% |
| 10 | Information widely shared | Involvement | 52.9% |
8 of the bottom 10 come from Adaptability and Involvement. The two lowest (38.8% and 40.0%) relate to stakeholder engagement and learning from mistakes, pointing to a culture that is internally focused and punitive rather than externally aware and growth-oriented.
All eight leaders articulated a clear understanding of OIA's direction. Six noted that translating strategy into departmental and individual action remains a challenge at the middle management level.
Seven of eight leaders acknowledged that decision-making is too centralized, though they differed on root causes.
Five leaders expressed frustration that the conservative approach to risk has become a barrier to improvement.
Six leaders noted that while OIA attracts strong talent, development is inconsistent and often depends on individual managers rather than organizational systems.
Four groups mentioned that recognition depends heavily on individual managers. Some are generous with praise; others operate on "no news is good news."
61 of 85 respondents answered open-ended questions. Most valued: stability and mission (38%), professional colleagues (24%). Most wanted change: faster decisions (34%), more collaboration (22%), clearer career paths (18%).
Employees value OIA for its stability, mission, and people. They want changes in how work gets done, not in what the organization stands for. The foundation is strong and the desired improvements are operational.
OIA's strategic plan (2024-2028) is well-articulated and aligns with national economic diversification goals. However, cascading of strategic objectives to departmental and individual levels is inconsistent. Some departments have clear linked KPIs while others operate with loosely defined goals.
HR policies are comprehensive and compliant with Omani labor law. However, they tend toward rigidity with limited flexibility for managers to adapt approaches. The performance management framework is well-designed on paper but applied inconsistently across departments. Training and development lacks a systematic approach to capability planning.
| Stated Value | Survey Evidence | Gap |
|---|---|---|
| Innovation | Adaptability: 51%, "Innovation encouraged": 48% | Significant |
| Collaboration | Team Orientation: 56%, focus group concerns | Moderate |
| Excellence | Mission: 73.8%, strong strategic clarity | Small |
| Integrity | Core Values: 65.6%, Ethical code: 72.9% | Minor |
| Dimension | Current | Desired | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Decision-Making | Centralized, multi-layered | Distributed, empowered | Large |
| Innovation | Risk-averse, failure penalized | Experimentation encouraged | Large |
| Collaboration | Siloed, formal processes | Fluid, easy cooperation | Moderate |
| Development | Ad hoc, manager-dependent | Systematic career paths | Moderate |
| Strategic Clarity | Strong at top, weaker cascade | Strong at all levels | Small |
Multiple levels of approval for operational decisions. Legacy of government origins combined with custodial mandate creates excessive caution. Result: bottlenecks, reduced empowerment, lower engagement.
Consequences of failure are perceived as severe (career impact) while rewards for innovation are modest. This asymmetry has created rational risk avoidance at all levels.
Organizational structure, budgets, and metrics all operate along departmental lines. Few structural incentives for cross-departmental collaboration.
Middle managers are the critical link between strategy and execution but have not been systematically developed as culture carriers. Their ability to empower teams varies significantly.
Define decision rights at each level. Reduce approval cycle time by 40% within 6 months. Directly addresses Involvement and Adaptability.
Structured program for employee ideas. 10 proposals in Year 1, at least 3 pilots. Addresses Adaptability and risk-aversion.
Project-based teams spanning departments. 3 task forces in Month 4. Addresses collaboration and Clan culture desire.
| Initiative | Owner | By |
|---|---|---|
| Share results with all staff | CEO / HR | Month 1 |
| Form Culture Steering Committee | CEO | Month 1 |
| Launch Employee Voice Program | HR | Month 2 |
| Complete Decision Speed Review | COO | Month 3 |
| Draft Empowerment Charter | CEO / HR | Month 3 |
| Initiative | Owner | By |
|---|---|---|
| Roll out Empowerment Charter | Division Heads | Month 4 |
| Launch Innovation Incubator | Strategy | Month 4 |
| Establish Task Forces | COO | Month 5 |
| Individual Development Plans | HR / Managers | Month 6 |
| Mid-point Pulse Survey | HR | Month 7 |
| Initiative | Owner | By |
|---|---|---|
| Full re-assessment | HR / External | Month 12 |
| Culture in performance reviews | HR | Month 12 |
| Annual culture health check | CEO / HR | Month 18 |
| Metric | Baseline | 12-Month | 24-Month |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Culture Score | 61.7% | 67% | 72% |
| Adaptability | 51.0% | 60% | 65% |
| Involvement | 55.3% | 62% | 67% |
| CVF Clan Score | 22 pts | 27 pts | 30 pts |
| Innovation Proposals | 0 | 10 | 25 |
| Element | Details |
|---|---|
| Denison Model | 4 traits, 12 sub-indices, 60 Likert-5 questions. Top-2-Box favorability scoring. |
| CVF/OCAI | 6 dimensions, 12 questions. Point distribution (100 points across 4 types). |
| Interviews | 8 sessions, 60 to 90 minutes. Thematic coding. 15 core questions. |
| Focus Groups | 6 sessions, 8 to 12 participants, 90 to 120 minutes. Barrett Values exercise. |
| Anonymity | UUID tokens. No link between response and invitation. 5 respondent minimum per group. |
| Score | Label | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 80%+ | Strong | Celebrate and sustain |
| 70 to 79% | Healthy | Minor improvements |
| 60 to 69% | Moderate | Targeted intervention |
| 50 to 59% | Needs Work | Priority action area |
| Below 50% | Critical | Immediate intervention |
Complete question-by-question scores are available in the digital platform at /company/analytics/questions. The platform provides interactive filtering, sorting, and drill-down capabilities for each of the 60 Denison questions.