How Organizational Sustainability Will Influence Organizational Behavior - Essay Example

? Organisational Structure and Design Executive summary In the previous decade, sustainability has become a more and more fundamental part of carrying business in any industry. For organizations to balance their social, environmental and financial risks, duties and opportunities, business sustainability has to shift from financial motives to the wider society perspective. As firms work through these changes, business leaders are beginning to acknowledge that organizational culture plays an integral part in the change towards sustainability. In spite of numerous corporate sustainability reports that set out how corporations do business, most organizational leaders lack a clear comprehension of how to transition their business to becoming sustainable business. Nokia is seeking to understand on how to sustain business sustainability in the long term. Introduction Nokia Corporation is an international leader in cellular communications whose products have turned out to be part of a fundamental part of community’s lives around the globe. The corporation’s hi-tech and design novelties have made its trade name among the most acknowledged in the globe. Nokia seeks to regain Smartphone leadership by forming strategic partnerships with Microsoft. The main element of the corporation is to build a new winning mobile ecosystem by partnering with Microsoft. The corporation also seeks to invest in next generation disrupting technologies, bring next billion online in developing growth markets, as well as increase focus on speed, results and accountability. For the corporation to achieve its strategy, it management has to recognize the importance of formulating a strategy on corporate social responsibility. Business sustainability is managing the triple bottom line in which companies manage their monetary, community and environmental risks duties and opportunities. The three impacts are referred to as people, profits and planet. Business sustainability represents resilience over time, where business can bounce back from shocks as it is connected to environmental, social and healthy economic systems. Business sustainability necessitates that firms adhere to the rules of sustainable development. These are economic efficiency (prosperity and innovation), social equity (health and wellness and poverty) and environmental accountability (biodiversity and climate change). Managers need to understand business sustainability in order to comprehend how businesses can reconcile the need to be socially and environmentally sustainable with demands of a high market based system, whose key dimensions of success are profit and growth. Further, business sustainability helps managers to understand more thoroughly what makes business stay alive. How organizational sustainability will influence organizational behavior Organization culture is usually viewed as the core reason for the failure of implementing organizational change programs. Whilst tools and techniques fir change strategies exist, scholars assert that failure results because the essential culture of the organization remains the same. Successful implementation of organizational culture for business sustainability may well be largely reliant on the values and ideological underpinnings of an organization’s culture, eventually affecting how corporate sustainability is implemented. The competing values framework of organization culture discusses the connection between business sustainability and organization culture (Schein, 2004, p 54). Competing values framework demonstrates the contending demands within a business on two separate and competing proportions Competing values framework The internal-external dimension reflects whether the organization is focused on its internal dynamics or the demands of its outside environment. The flexibility-control aspect exhibits managerial preferences for control and coordination formation. Organizations relying on control end of the model tend to lean on official mechanisms of control and coordination through policies, direct supervision, financial planning and budgets to enforce compliance. Organizations that rely on flexibility tend to rely on more on social synchronization through training, participation, internalization of beliefs, commitment and peer pressure to attain desired outcomes and conduct. Organization cultures that are dominated by human relations values (upper left quadrant) promote cohesion, participation and morale among workers. This is attained through training and development of workers, employee involvement, and participative decision making. Coordination and control are attained through decentralized decision making (Linnenluecke & Griffiths, 2010, p 363). Organizational cultures are dominated by open systems place value on growth and resource acquisition through promotion of change, readiness and adaptability and flexible decision making. Structurally, there is an emphasis on informal synchronization and horizontal communication. Organization cultures that are dominated by internal processes values (lower left quadrant) endorse firmness and power through official means like precise communication, and information management. This is referred to as the hierarchical culture since it involves conformity, rules enforcement, as well as attention to technical matters. Coordination is attained through vertical communication, procedures and policies. An organizational culture dominated by rational goals promotes productivity and efficiency, which is achieved through goal setting, instructional communication, planning and centralized decision making. Structurally, the rational goal organizational culture is associated to centralized decision making (Schein, 2004, p 69; Linnenluecke & Griffiths, 2010, p 366). Workers are motivated by beliefs that they will be compensated for competent performance resulting in desired organizational goals (Linnenluecke & Griffiths, 2010, p 365). Theoretical proposition Economic theory The internal business quadrant has its ideologies signifying the economic theory of sustainability and a general omission on the larger environment. This philosophy matches the scientific management that is directed towards the maximization of economic benefits through efficient production methods. The hierarchical structure, the enforcement and conventionality with rules are highly effective under relatively stable environment al conditions and enable maximization of the production of products and services (Wood et al, 2006, p 256). The internal process also matches with the categorization of closed- rational model system that views organizations as tools to attain preset ends with formalized structures to enhance organizational effectiveness and economic performance. The aspect of formalization holds that there are cognitive and motivational of individuals that constrain employee choices and action within the organization and restrain the comprehension and enactment of sustainability. Based on the above propositions, organizations that embrace an internal process culture place value on economic performance and long term prosperity in their quest for company sustainability. Organization seek to maximize production of goods and services and attain efficiency (elimination of goods and services) is valued in a hierarchical culture. It thus becomes essential for firms to increase utilization of its products and services to increase profits. Social theory Theories underlying the human relations quadrant place value on social interaction, employee development and interpersonal relations. Firms that have a human relation values culture pay attention to working conditions, group affiliation and social interaction. The quadrant is parallel to the closed natural systems models, which recognize informal structures and the need to align conflicting goals, as well as, the existence of numerous interests within the organization through informal structures. Past studies reveal that a strong forecast on social (human relations values) within an organization may attract social entrepreneurship. Social entrepreneurs exhibit numerous features conventionally related with new business entrepreneurs like innovation and resourcefulness. Social entrepreneurs invest their resources on corporate sustainability rather than investing in new businesses. However, this view may result in conflicts as to whether to pursue social purpose or invest in new ventures (Hart & Milstein, 2003, p 60). Ecological (environmental theory) Organizations that are characterized by the rational goal quadrant highlight the significance of the wider environment, and the importance of rational planning and organizing in terms of ecological demands. The rational goal matches with systems rationalism ideology that centers on planning, controlling, forecasting, and the design of organizational structure and decision making processes to suit the external environment. Rational goal also matches the open rational system model, which address how to arrange systems in a rational manner while experiencing environmental demands. The model also stresses on efficient use of resources and the adequacy of organizational structures in the light of the environment. Organizations with a rational goal culture stresses on resource efficiencies in their quest for business sustainability. The open system model highlights the significance of external environment in influencing behavior, structure and life alterations of organizations. Organizational learning and adaptation theory holds a similar perspective on the significance of flexible behavior, acknowledgement of the wider economic and social environment and exchanges with the environment through resource dependency. Organizations dominated by open system culture place value on innovations for attaining social and environmental sustainability in their quest for organizational sustainability (Harris & Crane, 2002, p 215). Recommendations In order for Nokia to become sustainable, the company may need to adopt the flowing policies; promote commitment, clarify expectations, build momentum for change, instill capacity for change and implement the action. Fostering commitment Fostering commitment employs informal practices to support the goal of delivering commitment on sustainability. Managers must energize workers to be involved, highlight the significance of sustainability for the firm, and support and encourage organizational members who are making efforts to drive in sustainability. Nokia leaders have to raise the level of awareness of sustainability through information provision in informal ways by bringing sustainability down to the individual level. Managers have to make it simpler for employees to make choices that support sustainability by condoning and encouraging grassroots efforts. This may be through identification of complete changes associated with sustainability that are less challenging, as they may reduce resistance to change. Showing awareness and recognition for attempts to implement sustainability through informal accolades may help build commitment to sustainability (French, 2011, p 362). Bank of America adopted an innovation culture through gestures like recognition. The top management may show signals of sustainability by committing the senior leadership to make public commitment on sustainability, and enact roles and behaviors they wish for workers to emulate. The management also needs to promote commitment through allocation of resources, implementing voluntary initiatives, adhering to recognized set of standards on environment and social conduct, accommodate work life balance (social sustainability) and communicating desired sustainability conduct (Van Stralen, 2008, p 72). Clarification of expectations Whereas informal practices on fostering commitment help to embed sustainability, it is essential for managers to send clear indicators on how things need to be done by seizing employee behaviors in a more formal way. Management has to set goals; organizational, departmental and individual targets for sustainability, develop policies to guide behavior, operationalize goals and procedures into work practices by integrating sustainability values into the Nokia’s mission and vision, business processes and product life cycle. This may be done by assigning responsibility of delivering sustainability agenda on the top management, training workers in systems related to sustainability, and linking compensation to the attainment of set sustainability goals (Ramus, 2001, p 86). It is also noteworthy for Nokia’s management to assess where it stands, where it wishes to go by conducting base line assessments, develop ways to measure progress toward sustainability and monitor performance against pre-set sustainability goals (Nokia Corporation, 2011, p 45). Documentation should also be conducted on sustainability performance and progress. Ford motor company has made a noteworthy progress by embracing business and market oriented strategy to address climate change in its quest for corporate sustainability (Greenleaf publishing, 2003, p 71). Building change momentum Nokia’s leadership should discuss practices intended to develop new ideas and practices required to bring an organization nearer to its long term sustainability goals. This is through raising awareness in order to convince organizational members on the need for sustainability, championing sustainability course of action and inviting input from employees and other stakeholders. Experimenting on ways to support the development of new ways, re-envisioning, sharing sustainability knowledge internally and externally and collaborating with other organizations to attain sustainability goals helps in building change momentum. Instilling capacity for change This entails learning and developing formal support mechanisms for change. In leaning, the management should focus on creating processes and mechanisms together skills related to sustainability. Management may also create new ways to support future sustainability initiatives. For instance, shell and BP are exploring on ways to comprehend sustainability issues better. A call to action recommendation necessitates for managers to implement the sustainability framework and strategies that have been developed. This may be done by filling the gap between the current sustainability culture and the desired sustainability culture (Bertels et al, 2010, p 34). Conclusion In conclusion, sustainability in business is a tricky subject, as it may improve or impair the performance of an organization. The reason is that the major elements of sustainability; financial, social and environmental may result in conflicting interests among different stakeholders of the organization (Gordon& DiTomaso, 1992, p 797). For instance, social aspects of sustainability may entail the use of shareholders’ money, which may not go well with the economic philanthropy of a firm’s existence. Additionally, environmental sustainability may call for additional finances, which may conflict with the economic aspect of the wealth maximization. As such, it calls for firm’s management to exercise caution while exercising the culture of sustainability. Bibliography: Bertels, S, et al (2010) embedded sustainability in organization culture. Accessed on 13 February 2013 from: http://nbs.net/wp-content/uploads/Systematic-Review- Sustainability-and-Corporate-Culture.pdf French, R. (2011) Organizational Behavior. NJ: John Wiley & Sons.364 Gordon, G. G., & DiTomaso, N. (1992) Predicting corporate performance from organizational culture. Journal of Management Studies, 29(6): 783–798. Greenleaf publishing (2003) sustainability, governance and organizational change. Leading change toward sustainability. Accessed on 13 February 2013 from: http://www.greenleaf-publishing.com/content/pdfs/lcch5.pdf. 70-85. Harris, L. C., & Crane, A. (2002) The greening of organizational culture: Management views on the depths, degree and diffusion of change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 15(3): 214–234. Hart, S. L., & Milstein, M. B. (2003) Creating sustainable value. Academy of Management Executive, 17(2): 56–69. Linnenluecke, K.M & Griffiths, A. (2010) corporate sustainability and organizational culture. Journal of world business. 45(1), 357-366 Miron, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2004) Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality, and efficiency compete or complement each other? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 175-199. Nadkarni, S., & Narayanan, V. K. (2007) Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The moderating role of industry clockspeed. Strategic Management Journal, 28(3), 243-270. Nokia Corporation. (2011) Nokia sustainability report. Accessed on 13 February 2013 from: http://i.nokia.com/blob/view/-/1961956/data/1/-/nokia-sustainability-report-2011-pdf.pdf. 1-132 Ramus, C. A. (2001) Organizational support for employees: Encouraging creative ideas for environmental sustainability. California Management Review, 43: 85–105. Ramus, C. A. (2002). Encouraging innovative environmental actions: What companies and managers must do. Journal of World Business, 37: 151–164. Schein, E. H. (2004) Organizational culture and leadership (3rd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Van Stralen, D. (2008) High-reliability organizations: Changing the culture of care in two medical units. Design Issues, 24(1), 78-90. Wood, J. et al,. (2006) Organisational Behavior - Core Concepts and Applications. NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Read More