The problem with the Handy/Harrison model is that it is actually a model of structures, which are then assumed to have determined attitudes. Structures may or may not be determined by cultural values, but in any case this is a structural-functionalist approach and needs to be acknowledged as such. Symbolic and interpretive anthropologists would reach very different conclusions. Further, climate (psychology) and culture(anthrpology) and sub-culture (sociology) are different concepts and slthoguh related should not be conflated. The Handbook of Organzational Culture and Climate 2nd ed 2010 is an excellent resource in this regard, and there is a listserver on jiscmail ORG_CULT that is packed with researchers of all styles who would readily offer you suggestions on the most approrriate instruments and their strengths and weaknesses, if you really think that cuture can usefully be measured
Cullen, J.B., Victor, B., & Bronson, J.W. (1993). The ethical climate questionnaire: an assessment of its development and validity. Psychological reports, 73(2), 667-674.
For performance and mastery climate please check out this one written by my colleagues:
Nerstad, C. G. L., Roberts, G. C., & Richardsen, A. M. 2013. Achieving success at work: Development and validation of the motivational climate at work questionnaire (MCWQ). Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43: 2231-2250.