Organizational Culture - Essay Example

?Running Head: Comparative Analysis COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Introduction The term culture refers to the total way of life of a people (Jary, & Jary. 1991). Organizational culture is the term used to describe the way of life of the people within a given social organization. There are many things that differentiate people in an organization form another. For instance people within the military or police have strong discipline and instantly obey orders unlike people in a business organization who have the luxury of questioning and giving their own suggestions on almost everything. As human beings evolve so does their culture (Marcus, 1995). People are always striving to improve their state of living for the better. This is done by improving their clothing to fit in better with the weather conditions, while at the same time coping with the need to make them fashionable and easy to keep to hygienically clean. Music, theatre, fine arts, language and literature are developed in order to add some color and entertainment in everyday living, as well as improve on communication. Sports and educational syllabuses are also developed for entertainment and improvement of skills. All these facets of life among others keep on changing from one form the other thus enriching culture (Marcus, 1995). All of these developments are recorded for future references in different symbols including writing, drawings, cave paintings or passed from one person to another orally. As this culture is passed on it is modified through innovation, borrowing from others. Elements like language therefore constantly improve and diversify as time goes by (Cohen, 1985). This paper sets out to analyze the development of national culture and to explain why people within a certain nationality or region typically develop traits that are unique to themselves. The paper looks at how different cultural backgrounds affect persons working within an organization. It also explains the effects impede or support the realizations of the objectives of the said organization. Elements of Organizational Culture Every nation is renowned for certain things. For instance the vast majority of people of Britain enjoy association football [also known as soccer] whose rules were founded in that country in 1863; very much. This is different when compared to Americans who prefer their own version of football which is closer to the Rugby that is also loved a lot in Britain (Maccambridge, 2004). This same case applies to organizations. According to Hofstede (1980), national culture directly influences organizational culture. Organizations exist within countries and are therefore influenced by the prevailing culture within them. In his study of national cultural influences he identified four dimensions of culture. These he classified as power distance, uncertainty avoidance, collectivism vs individualism and masculinity vs femininity (Hofstede, 1980). The first dimension, power distance, refers to the difference of power allowed by the society between the highest and lowest echelons of power. A high power difference score means that there is a great difference between the power wielded and the privileges enjoyed by people high ranking individuals and their lower ranking counterparts within the organization (Schein, 2005). A low score on the other hand means that everybody in the organization enjoys almost equal rights to anybody else (Schein, 2005). The measure of power distance in different nationalities revealed that countries such as Australia, Austria, Denmark and Israel had some of the lowest power distance levels while sub-Saharan African and Malaysia among others had the highest (Hofstede, 1980). The second one uncertainty avoidance refers to extent of anxiety about the unknown in a society. In cultures where there is strong uncertainty avoidance, people prefer operating with explicit rules and laws that govern labor and social relations. Employees in this system tend to keep the same job for long since they feel less uncertain about the future and feel strongly that the rules guarantee their rights. The societies with weak uncertainty avoidance prefer to flexible rules and informal activities. Employees also tend to change jobs very often to try and reduce their level of uncertainty (Hofstede, 1980). Collectivism refers the practice of people doing things collectively rather than individually. Under collectivism people tend to identify themselves as members of a long term group such a family, tribe, profession or religion. Individualist societies tend to encourage persons to strive and establish their own individual identity. Studies have shown that societies tend to become more individualistic as they get wealthier (Hofstede, 1980). Masculinity refers to the dominant role played by males in the management of society affairs. Feminist societies are those that share the leadership roles between both males and females. Masculine societies espouse male related attributes such as, competition, aggression, ambition and wealth accumulation. On the other hand, societies with high femininity tend to espouse values such as affection, family, quality of life and relationships (Hofstede, 1980). Taking the example of Japanese global automaker Toyota, there are various in its organizational culture worldwide. Male roles are more expressed in the chiefly patriarchal societies of the Middle East and even in Japan itself (Schein, 2005). However, there is a more feminist approach in countries like Sweden where male and female roles are at par. This goes to show that the internal organizational culture of a company is highly influenced by the national culture of the country in which they operate (Chatman, & Jehn, 1994). Alternative Approaches to Corporate Culture Other scholars have come up with other dimensions of organizational culture. These vary from Hofstede’s but are generally based on it. For O’Reilly, Chatman and Caldwell (1990), there are seven elements of organizational culture. These are differentiated by the values reinforced within the organization (O’Reilly, Chatman, & Caldwell, 1991). They identified the seven main values as innovation, respect for individuals, stability, aggressiveness, orientation to outcomes, attention to detail and team orientation. The developed a self assessment tool called the Organizational Culture Profile [OCP]Model to help organizations report on their own organizational culture. This reporting tool was based on the assessment of the seven categories identified (O’Reilly, Chatman, & Caldwell, 1991). The rationale of this assessment is not to show how well the organization is performing in terms of business outcomes, but merely to elucidate the type of culture prevalent in the organization. But like in all assessments, those who use this tool are persuaded by the results to adjust their culture a little bit in some areas. This is with the aim of orienting their organization more towards goal achievement and better outcomes (Cable , & Parson, 2001). This is because, according to a study carried out in 2003 by the Harvard Business School, organizational success depended heavily on the culture of the organization. Organizations that were goal and success oriented, tended to be more successful and stable over a number of years than those that did not (Harris, 1994). However, it is not necessarily the most aggressive organizations that succeed, but the most consistent ones. So a culture that ensures stability and continuity may prove to be more useful than one that merely emphasizes on aggression (Montana, & Charnov, 2008). Another theorist Daniel Denison (1990) came up with another four different dimensions of culture. He said that the dimensions are mission, adaptability, involvement and consistency. Mission means the direction, objectives, intent, goals and vision strategically adopted for the organization. In short this is the sum total of the entire range of aims for which the organization exists (Denison, 1990). The second dimension they identified, adaptability, refers to the process of change, reorientation of strategies to current prevailing circumstances and learning that takes place within the organization. Every organization learns something from both past successes and mistakes. The main difference between organizations is whether they put this new knowledge gained into action or not (Denison, 1990). The third, involvement, refers to capacity building among the workforce through training. Training is not just given once, but is given several times in order to keep the employees updated on the most recent developments, for instance in the technology. It also includes the giving of incentives, improvement of working conditions and regular orientation of the team towards desired goals. Management that is involved in the day to day activities of the organization tends to understand the problems that need to best solved and areas that need to be improved better than management that remains aloof (Denison, 1990). The last one, consistency, refers to the extent to which the organization remains true to its long term goals even with the changes occurring within it. It also refers the level of agreement on various issues by the stakeholders in the organization and the handling of conflicts in a civil manner. The manner is which affairs in the organization are coordinated and all functions integrated also contribute to the consistency aspect of the organization (Denison, 1990). Another approach to organizational culture is given by Deal and Kennedy who came up with observations that organizational culture simply refers to the way things are done within the organization. They came up with the issue of process culture which refers to workers playing their role without getting any feedback on the outcomes of their work (Harris, 1994). The workers are therefore more interested in process rather than results. Their main concern is to ensure that rules are followed to the letter. This is common in bureaucracies such as the civil service. It is useful since even though there are no outstanding achievements, work is done consistently and steadily since everyone understands their role pretty well (Harris, 1994). As for Charles Hardy (1985), organizational culture is closely related organizational structures. He identified four types of organizational culture. These are power, role, task and person cultures. Power culture centralizes power on a few persons who then exert this power on the rest of the organization. Power cultures are characterized by few bureaucratic structures and swift decision making (Hardy, 1985). The role culture involves complex bureaucracies composed of individuals with highly defined roles. Authority is delegated to individuals according to the roles they play in the organization. The position given to the individual determines how much power he wields and there is little emphasis on expertise. What matters most is the experience gained through the system as the individual gets promoted. Once again this kind of situation is typical of the civil service and other big organizations (Hardy, 1985). The task aspect lays emphasis on the particular task to be carried out. It lays a lot of emphasis on expertise perform the task more than anything else. This culture is seen in teams that are formed to tackle particular issues. Many organizations form task forces to carry out fact finding missions on particular issues affecting the organization. Where a particular expert is needed, that expert enjoys a lot of authority (Hardy, 1985). Person cultures are centered on individuals who believe they are more important than the organization. In partnerships for instance, each partner feels more important than the organization they form since they each feel that they can do very well on their own. Such organizations find it hard to survive. A good example is a musical band in which every musician has released a hit song. Ultimately the band is likely to collapse since each individual feels like the boss (Hardy, 1985). Whatever the type however, the one thing that applies to all categories of culture, is that it they are rigid and highly resistant to change. This very change is what is of primary importance in terms of improving the performance of the organization whenever necessary. It is therefore, important to note that change of culture, whenever necessary, should be carried out gradually and with patience, where it is not moving fast enough. Conclusion A basic understanding of different types and aspects of organizational culture is very important for any person involved or interested in the running of organizations. This is because, as seen earlier, the stability, effectiveness and success of different organizations have been noted to be closely related to the culture within the organization itself and how this fits in with the prevailing national culture in the host country of the organization. Without a proper understanding of what is involved, it becomes difficult to know what action to take in case change is needed to enable the organization improve itself. References Cable , D.M. & Parson, C.K. (2001). “Socialization Tactics and Person-Organization Fit”. Personnel Organization 54. Chatman, J. A., & Jehn, K. A. (1994). ‘Assessing The Relationship Between Industry Characteristics And Organizational Culture: How Different Can You Be?’ Academy Of Management Journal, 37(3). Cohen, A. P. (1985). The Symbolic Construction of Community. New York: Routledge. Harris, S. G. (1994). "Organizational Culture and Individual Sensemaking: A Schema-Based Perspective." Organization Science, Vol. 5,(3). Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, Beverly Hills, CA, Sage Publications. Jary, D. & J. Jary. (1991). The HarperCollins Dictionary of Sociology. New York: HarperCollins. Maccambridge, M. (2004). America's Game : The Epic Story of How Pro Football Captured a Nation. October 26, Random House. Marcus, G. E. (1995). "Ethnography of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography." In Annual Review of Anthropology 24. McSweeney, B. (2002, January). "Hofstede's Model of National Cultural Differences and Their Consequences: A Triumph of Faith - A Failure of Analysis". Human Relations 55 (1) Montana, P., & Charnov, B. (2008). Management (4th ed.), Barrons Educational Series. New York: Hauppauge. O’Reilly, C.A., Chatman J. & Caldwell, D.F. (1991). ‘People and Organizational Culture: A profile Comparisons Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit’. Academy of Management Journal 34(3). Schein, E.H. (2005). Organizational Culture and Leadership, 3rd Ed. New York: Jossey-Bass. Read More