Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values - Assignment Example

Comparison This paper draws comparison between the methodology and conclusions and explains similarities and differences between the article “Organizational culture: An exploratory study comparing faculties’ perspectives within public and private universities in Malaysia” by Ramachandran et al. (2010) and the article “Extending the Scope of Organisational Culture: The External Perception of an Internal Phenomenon” by MacIntosh and Doherty (2007). While the organization selected for examination of organizational culture by MacIntosh and Doherty (2007) had been established for over 25 years, Ramachandran et al. (2010) studied the organizational culture of college universities that were being relatively newly established in Malaysia compared to universities. MacIntosh and Doherty (2007) selected a random sample of clients as participants in the research at five clubs across four different cities located in the province of Ontario, and asked them to complete a survey. Clients were at least 18 years old. Client’s perceptions were measured by focusing on the focal organization’s core values. Core values and many items were retrieved from the original survey conducted by MacIntosh and Doherty (2005). The study used a total of 42 items representing nine corporate values. Data was collected using 113 surveys from participants 59% of whom were women whereas 41% were men. On the other hand, in Ramachandran et al’s (2010) research, HEI is the unit of analysis divided into public and private strata. College universities were chosen because of their evolving OC. Data was gathered from a total of 594 faculty members of which 33.9% were from public HEIs whereas 52.8% taught in the private HEIs. Data was collected with the CVF. Ramachandran et al. (2010) stated that no definition of OC is widely accepted as the term has been defined differently by different scholars and authors. Organizational behaviour is affected by different regional and national cultural groupings. The different types of OCs can be classified by different parameters. Artefacts of an organization can be understood by studying the organization’s espoused values. Every organization is based on certain assumptions that are not challenged and are taken for granted by the employees. Values of an organization are more accessible than its artefacts or assumptions. The theoretical underpinning of this study is based on Cameron and Quinn’s (1999) operational definition. Denison’s (1990) four hypotheses i.e. the consistency hypothesis, the mission hypothesis, the involvement/participation hypothesis, and the adaptability hypothesis focus on different functions of culture. This study chooses competing values framework (CVF) as OC’s measurement tool for different reasons. OC profile is constructed by the four main quadrants that classify core values and comprise distinct CVF cultural types. Numerous assumptions lay the basis of CVF. The outcome of the study conducted by Ramachandran et al. (2010) was that faculty members perceive all four types of OC i.e. clan, adhocracy, hierarchical, and market to be significantly different between the public HEIs and the private HEIs whereas outcome of the study conducted by MacIntosh and Doherty (2007) was that perception of organizational culture of the clients had a significant association with their satisfaction and loyalty with the fitness organization. They stated that organizational culture has an influence not only within but also outside the organization. The image or reputation of a company in the marketplace may be affected by the external perception of culture (Kowalcyk and Pawlish 2002). They found that organizational culture is partly determined by the interaction of a company with the clients. The main conclusions drawn by Ramachandran et al. (2010) were that public and private HEIs are good sources of information for each other with respect to different OC types. Public HEIs need to reduce hierarchical culture whereas private HEIs need to maintain hierarchical culture. Both public and private HEIs need to develop clan, adhocracy, and market cultures. Convincing academics is fundamental to managing culture change. Ownership of public and private HEIs is different. Teaching and research must be core activities in both public and private HEIs, and HEIs must nurture entrepreneurial spirit in the academics. Main conclusions drawn by MacIntosh and Doherty (2007), on the other hand, suggested that the perceptions of organizational culture held by the clients suggested that the corporate values of fitness, peak attitude, and performance were quite noticeable in the way things were in the focal organization. The clients thought about the values of trust, integrity, communication, and innovation as not being readily apparent in the organization. Integrity was the most important value to clients. There was weak association between performance and client satisfaction. One corporate value which the clients perceived to be very evident was peak attitude. Both research studies are similar in the study of perspectives related to organizational culture. The approach adopted in the two studies i.e. studying organizational culture of the chosen organizations by gaining perspectives of stakeholders is also a similarity. The two studies differ in the cultural context as the study by Ramachandran et al. (2010) was conducted in Malaysia whereas the study by MacIntosh and Doherty (2007) was carried out in Canada. The two studies also differ in the organizations whose culture was assessed i.e. HEIs and Canadian fitness organization. The two organizations are completely different from each other in their nature of services and thus are likely to have completely different organizational cultures and stakeholder opinions. The fundamental difference between the two studies exists in their focus. While Ramachandran et al. (2010) have carried out research to study differences in the organizational culture between public and private higher education institutions in Malaysia from the perspectives of faculty members so that empirical insights can be provided upon the differences and thereby an avenue for cross-learning can be paved, MacIntosh and Doherty (2007) carried out research to examine the organizational culture’s external perception by the clients of one company chosen from the Canadian fitness industry. Not only the researches were conducted in two different countries, but the people chosen for perspectives varied between the two studies, with faculty members in Ramachandran et al’s (2010) study being internal stakeholders whereas clients in MacIntosh and Doherty’s (2007) study being external stakeholders. References: Cameron, KS, and Quinn, RE 1999, Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Denison, DR 1990, Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness, Wiley, New York, NY. Kowalczyk, SJ, & Pawlish, MJ 2002, Corporate branding through external perception of organizational culture, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 159-174. MacIntosh, E, and Doherty, A 2005, Leader intentions and employee perceptions of organizational culture in a private fitness corporation. European Sport Management Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1-22. MacIntosh, E, and Doherty, A 2007, Extending the Scope of Organisational Culture: The External Perception of an Internal Phenomenon, Sport Management Review, Vol. 10, pp. 45-64. Ramachandran, SD, Chong, SC, and Ismail, H 2010, Organisational culture: An exploratory study comparing faculties’ perspectives within public and private universities in Malaysia, Organisational Culture, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 615-634. Read More