Organizational Culture Analysis - Essay Example

Cultural Analysis Introduction Organizational culture is defined as the whole set of values, personalities, norms, assumptions, behaviors, beliefs, ideas and tangible and intangible signs of the organization in its internal and external environments of business conduct. Such tangible and intangible artifacts include organizational goals such as mission and vision. Culture is a tool for the manager to inculcate a set of values, beliefs and ideas in the employee whose vision is then transformed into that that of the organization’s vision. According to Edgar Schein organizational culture is “A pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way you perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems" (Schein, 2004). Schein has provided one of the most thought provoking definitions to organizational culture and goes onto claim that of all the attributes of the organization, culture is perhaps the most difficult to transform. He identifies three attributes in the organization culture. Next Geert Hofstede identified five dimensions as the basis for organizational culture (2005). Though Hofstede actually preceded Schein the latter theory’s importance is much greater. Therefore it has been given the preference in this paper. A number of other scholars such as Deal and Kennedy (2000) and Handy produced their theories on organizational culture and have had considerable influence on the subsequent writings and developments on the subject. These theoretical perspectives apart there is a considerable amount of empirical evidence to suggest the significance of various elements of the evolutionary process of organizational culture and their impact on the current thinking albeit these outcomes have very little relevance for this paper here. Therefore these latest developments with extreme theoretical and conceptual implications wouldn’t be considered here. Analysis There are four distinct organizational culture types adopted by analysts and scholars to examine the various aspects of organizational culture in different organizational settings. Academy culture Club culture Baseball team culture Fortress culture Academy culture is centered on the inner core of values of the organization. For example universities, training hospitals, research laboratories and research organizations where core competencies of employees basically determine the culture of the organization, there can be an academically oriented set of values and norms. Club culture promotes cliquish behavior among the organization’s members because such behavior would be based on some regulated normative patterns that would not deviate or diverge from the established rules within the organization. While many professional organizations like partnerships – e.g. engineering, accounting and law firms – come under this category, there are even big business organizations which seek to promote club culture within them. Organizations where baseball team culture exists tend to hire highly skilled employees who command respect and demand for the sole reason that they cannot be easily replaced. Mutual fund managers come under this category of professionals. Fortress culture is all about how the organization runs its business with a view to maximizing gains associated with continuous reorganization. Big vehicle manufacturing firms tend to resize themselves constantly by laying off employees. However it must be noted here that this categorization doesn’t have universal acceptance among scholars because many writers on the subject tend to identify some special characteristics or attributes associated with different leadership roles and therefore the current thinking on the subject of organizational culture acquires a more complex dimension. Schein’s three level categorization is based on a cognitive paradigm of thought. In the first category such physical features as the way members of the organization dress, its physical environment including furnishings, office buildings, products and services, founders and even the manner in which members to be involved with others within and without the organization are included. Secondly there is the set of values and beliefs associated with the organization’s mission, vision and other ideological beliefs – e.g. attitudinal perspectives of the members of the organization as expressed through a system of individual values. This distinction is what identifies the organization from the rest. Finally at the third level Schein identifies those implied values of the organization that aren’t amenable to recognition with simple cognitive approaches. In other words they are unconsciously promoted and accepted without being questioned or doubted by all members within the organization. These final attributes of organizational culture have such a significant impact on the organizational goals – e.g. profitability, market share, share price, sustainability and so on. Schein’s exposition of organizational culture along with Hofstede’s has transformed the whole debate thus specifically addressing otherwise ignored but important issues related to the driving force behind the organization’s success. Therefore it’s only a matter of fact that this paper would focus much attention on these theoretical and conceptual frameworks in order to present a more convincing set of arguments on the subject. Empirical evidence too would be cited to reinforce these arguments. Here a distinction ought to be made between organizational culture and corporate culture because confusion might arise when corporate goals are mentioned as desirable objectives to be achieved in accordance with predefined organizational culture. Corporate culture is defined as the personality of the organization represented thorough values, beliefs, norms, and everything about how things are done at the organization. This definition is exactly identical to what has already been given to organizational culture. However this paper doesn’t seek to distinguish one from the other by citing authorities because it’s beyond the remit of this paper. Leadership style and organizational culture are inextricably connected with each other and as such require a deep examination of their interlinks. For instance leadership styles might vary from autocratic to democratic; from transformational to transactional; and from entrepreneurial to paternalistic. Irrespective of the leadership style organizational culture plays such a pivotal role in almost every aspect of the management, marketing, Human Resource Management (HRM) and operations spheres. There are many different leadership styles in the modern business world and almost every one of them has a particular reason or reasons for its existence. It must be noted at the beginning that in a comparative analysis like the present one, a rigorously norm-predicated comparison/contrast study would be more feasible than a prescriptive analysis. Burns (1978) invariably identifies a set of norms for each leadership style, i.e. transformational and transactional. His theoretical conceptual framework of analysis has a universal tone of agreement among scholars though the learning outcomes of research efforts have greatly focused on the contingency model building capacity rather than independent overarching framework creation. In this context the organizational culture plays a very important role in determining the organizational outcomes. Management style is based on meeting contingency demand and not intended to achieve pre-defined long term organizational goals such as profitability, market share and better share price. Thus organizational culture has an inevitable impact on the organization’s communication strategy. In other words horizontal and more hierarchical organizational structure doesn’t allow the management to reach out to lower level employees. Motivation apart these lower level employees need encouragement to perform better. Such encouragement should come from the organizational culture itself. This is essential for the responsibilities to be evenly entrusted to employees and above all to bring about the desired quality management perspectives at the organizational level in the long term. Successful adoption of effective organizational culture that readily accommodates variances within the organization would have a desirable impact on HRM practices and communication. Management style is equally important when it comes to employee motivation. Human Resource Management (HRM) practices adopted within the organization must be in conformance with the organization’s strategic HRM goals. This is in fact the case with big organizations because they need to have a well motivated staff to perform on the lines of international norms in creating brand related values to the customer. The customer’s positive perception of brand equity is perhaps the best barometer of organizational success in a highly competitive industry. Next employee relations in general and motivation in particular at the organizational level have to be examined with reference to the organizational culture. For example a very liberal employee relations policy of encouraging employees to be independent with a degree of freedom given to ensure operational independence is associated with what Hofstede calls “power distance”. According to Hofstede there are five dimensions – power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs collectivism, masculinity vs femininity and short term vs long term – that illustrate how national influences would impact on organizational culture to bring about changes. Though his illustration hasn’t received much approval due to its limitations in a particular organizational setting of multicultural diversity, the theoretical postures have some relevance to the study of organizational culture. In fact his analysis is based on some cognitive perceptions of individuals about the organizational outcomes and therefore there is more or less a cognitive heuristics or biases approach to an otherwise intricate problem of relations. He has gone so far as to attribute a gender role to the behaviors of individuals within the organization so that organizational culture is particularly identified with its various constituent elements. Despite his emphasis on individual preferences and collective behaviors in the organizational setting there is an obvious lack of reference to the specific relations between organizational goals and culture. Though long term and short term orientations of organizations and societies might have some relevance to other parameters like the achievements of targets, thrift has very little relevance or impact because what’s not saved is spent and if a certain society like an Islamic society doesn’t save it will spend that money on purchasing assets such as houses. On the other hand according to Deal and Kennedy (2000) organizational culture is determined by two conceptual paradigms – feedback and risk. For instance when, feedback is quickly carried out, the organization benefits from profits as in the case of speculative efforts of fund managers. In other words quick decisions enable the organization to achieve its goals. Risk factor is taken to mean the level of uncertainty associated with the day-to-day activities of the organization. Deal and Kennedy next proceed to make four classifications based on the above two parameters. The “tough guy macho culture” of the organization is applicable to such situations where there is the need to make decisions fast so that opportunities aren’t lost. However its relevance can be limited to such circumstances as team management activities. Secondly “work hard/play hard culture” is considered to be essential in a situation where risk is inevitable. Next “bet your company culture” might involve such situations as those typical long run projects. Finally ‘the process culture” is all about circumstances where members of an organization have failed to communicate successfully with each other. Indeed except the last situation or culture classification, the other three sound like too commonplace. Therefore there is very little relevance of this theoretical construct in the organizational context. However the last classification can be applied to empirical evidence available in big corporations throughout the world where communication has failed to a certain extent. Communication feedback might fail due to the negative nature of organizational structures such as those vertically organized top-to-bottom structures with long chains of command. Such command structures aren’t beneficial for better communication. Leadership styles that are more democratic in nature encourage communication strategies that require frequent feedback from lower level employees to the top management. The organization ought to adopt some innovative communication strategies to achieve these goals. In such organizations communication flow from top-to-bottom and vice versa can be successful enough to generate some positive interest among employees in the successful management of the day-to-day affairs. Better communication feedback from lower level layers of the hierarchy to the top level of management would necessarily engender positive organizational outcomes such as efficiency or higher productivity gains, better motivation and lower labor turnover and absenteeism. Worker redundancies are often associated with poorly structured layers of authority at the top. Similarly organizational culture identifies such weaknesses of the management as signs of pressure on the management brought about by a relative lack of communication between the top management and the lower levels of employees. In the process the business organization might fail in its efforts to successfully implement long term strategic initiatives though. In this respect effective use of communication techniques within and without the organization is emphasized by strategic management experts in order to achieve these long term objectives. Communication within the organization is necessarily influenced by its leadership style and organizational culture and structure. A vertical top-down structure with an autocratic leadership style is less likely to facilitate efficient communication between different layers of the hierarchy while conversely a horizontal structure with a democratic leadership style would more likely facilitate good communication flow between departments. Strategic long term goals such as market share, profitability, an increase in the share price, quality improvements, customer satisfaction and brand loyalty have to be achieved by adopting such strategies as good internal and external communication practices, employee relations, good motivation strategies and HRM practices, sound financial management including positive cash flows and better overall performance metrics. In a culturally diverse organizational setting these weaknesses are further exacerbated by still lower levels of motivation and mounting friction between the management and the labor force. Cultural diversity occupies a very important place in the organization and its cultural setting. As much as leadership plays a very important role by setting normative standards to be followed by subordinates, cultural diversity plays a very significant role by allowing the workforce to integrate into the culture of the organization without acrimony. Assuming that such a smooth process of acculturation doesn’t occur then there is a doubt about the credibility of the leadership style and the type of organizational culture. Big business organizations in Europe and North America have been virtually dependent on multicultural workforce to carry o with their operations irrespective of the nature of the industry. Ranging from Information and Communication Technology (ICT) firms to biotech firms this cultural diversity is not only apparent but also inevitable. The retailing industry needs culturally diverse people for effective management. Thus cultural diversity is there to stay despite such drawbacks as what Japan did recently to send home those expatriate workers from Latin America. Organizational culture acquires an additional dimension here. Organizational culture in culturally diverse organizational contexts can be more meaningful when it comes to conflict resolution. Though conflict resolution isn’t an exclusive functional area for the manager to be involved in the organization, such mechanisms have a great appeal to the avenge employee given a high level of disagreement in a multicultural work environment. In other words multicultural work environments produce tension and conflict. Therefore such conflict resolution capabilities of the manager aren’t to be questioned or doubted. These capabilities are essential for the smooth functioning of the organization along with a more dynamic organizational culture. Though very few organizations happen to develop their own mechanisms or structures to deal with conflicts within the organization such efforts have to be integrated into the very work environment in which conflicts tend to be peculiar or rather eccentric. Next community outreach is considered to be one of the most important aspects related to the organizational culture. For instance, in the modern context there is a stronger belief in the organization’s ability to incorporate sustainability programs into its mission and vision. Many organizations have their own public relations departments though very few of them happen to function effectively. Public relations are part and parcel of the organizational culture and therefore in well planned community outreach programs at the macro level. Conclusion Organizational culture has acquired such a significant place in the modern context that now its impact on the whole work environment of the organization tends to create some ripple effects elsewhere as well. From Schein to Deal and kenned, the theoretical constructs and its conceptual orientations have produced some far reaching outcomes in the empirical sphere too. Organizational culture is a concept with many connotations and denotations that can be seen in organizational leadership/management styles, cultural diversity programs, communication strategy, employee motivation and employee relations programs, organizational orientation programs, sustainability, community outreach and public relations. The theoretical constructs outlined above adequately capture not only the diverse and complex nature of the concept but also the relevance and the directional thrust of organizational goals associated with culture as the only broadly set parameter of integration at all levels of the organization. When organizational culture is set against the backdrop of leadership and goals its significance is highlighted by the very nature of interconnectedness between these variables that (interconnectedness) otherwise has no meaning. REFERENCES 1. Deal, T. & Kennedy, A. (2000).Corporate Cultures. New York: Basic Books. 2. Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. (2nd ed). Ohio: McGraw-Hill Professional. 3. Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership (J-B US non-Franchise Leadership). (3rd ed). California: Jossey-Bass. Read More