Discipline and Integration in Corporate Organizational Culture - Coursework Example

Organizational Culture: Its Perspective and Application Culture encompasses the attitudes, values, beliefs, norms and customs of a certain group of people. In organizations, culture is embedded in the internal structure and is relatively easy to draw and describe. There are studies that defined organizational culture as a concept. Most of them depicted it as patterns of shared values and beliefs that over time produce behavioral norms adopted in solving problems (Hofstede, 1980; Kotter, 1992). However, Schein (1990) reckoned a more appropriate definition of culture: a body of solutions to problems that have worked consistently and are taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think about, and feel in relation to those problems. The sum of these shared philosophies, assumptions, values, expectations, attitudes, and norms bind the organization together. Truly, organizational culture may be perceived as the manner in which an organization solves problems to achieve its specific goals and to maintain itself over time, it is holistic, historically determined, socially constructed and difficult to change (Hofstede, 1980). Organizational culture has a pivotal role in many companies as they developed new strategies in organizational management. It is a central aspect to many theories and prescriptions of management. However, despite frequent prescriptions to manage culture in diverse national contexts, little empirical evidence has been forwarded in contexts other than the UK and the US (Harris & Metallinos, 2002). An Overview of Cultural Management in Organizations Hofstede (1980) emphasized the strong impact of national culture in terms of the regional differences, and the following broad categories are suggested for European organizational models, like Germanic, Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon and Latin. The members of the organization bring their own individual experiences, beliefs and values. Individuals are allowed in work-groups within the organization have their own behavioral quirks and interactions which, to an extent, affects the whole system. In addition, a task culture can be devised; for instance, a computer technician will have expertise, language and behaviors gained independently of the organization that set them apart from their colleagues, but their mere presence can influence the culture of the organization. With all this, the senior management may determine the corporate culture that they may wish to impose corporate values and standards of behavior that specifically reflect the objectives of the organization. Hofstede identified five characteristics of culture in his study of national influences: Power distance - The degree to which a society expects there to be differences in the levels of power. A high score suggests that there is an expectation that some individuals wield larger amounts of power than others. A low score reflects the view that all people should have equal rights. Uncertainty avoidance reflects the extent to which a society accepts uncertainty and risk. individualism vs. collectivism - individualism is contrasted with collectivism, and refers to the extent to which people are expected to stand up for themselves, or alternatively act predominantly as a member of the group or organization. Masculinity vs. femininity - refers to the value placed on traditionally male or female values. Male values for example include competitiveness, assertiveness, ambition, and the accumulation of wealth and material possessions. Long vs. short term orientation On the other hand, corporate organizations in the 1980's have been adopting and installing programs of organizational restructuring and re-engineering. Most of the programs are based on the principles and practices of a widely popular management strategy often called Total Quality Management, participative management or "the learning organization," or some other vernacular title for a program of organizational structural and cultural change (Casey, 1999). These changes were then had been aptly devised in different corporate organizational and national settings that deals with organizational behavior. Sharing the common fundamental aims of the reorganization and production of new sets of attitudes, beliefs, and behavior, most organizational change programs commonly aspires to develop on their corporate employees to enable increased productivity and profitability for the organization's benefit as a whole. Pivotal among the new organizational cultural practices and values are the metaphors of "team" and "family." Many companies, from manufacturing operations and supermarket chains, to hospitals and airline companies, promote themselves in the marketplace and to employees as caring, familial communities, inviting both employees and customers to "Come, join our family" through their involvement with the company. At first glance, such an invitation may seem a timely and welcome recognition of relational and affective dimensions of human life that "ought" to be promoted in workplaces historically ridden with industrial conflicts and divisions. Furthermore, team evokes references to cooperation and sharing of skill and labor toward the attainment of shared goals. Both family and team, are, in normative conditions, positive and generative social practices. Therefore, their deliberate installation as part of the new organizational culture fundamentally assumes their reasonable incontestability and universal attractiveness. (Casey, 1999). Forces Affecting Organizational Behavior In dealing with organizations, there are internal and external forces that affect organizational behavior. The internal environment includes such factors as the organization members, the nature of their interactions, and the physical setting in which members operate. Organizational behavior is vital in evaluating the dynamics of an organization because it is described as the study and application of knowledge about how people, individuals, and groups act in organizations. The organization does this by taking a system approach. That is, it interprets people-organization relationships in terms of the whole person, whole group, whole organization, and whole social system. Its purpose is to build better relationships by achieving human objectives, organizational objectives, and social objectives (Clark, 1998). Several conditions in organizations are stemmed from causes like low quality of work life and decreased job satisfaction, which are internal. Rapid change is widely understood as one of the major factors associated with job stress in organizations. These poor performances and efficiency problems precipitated from changing environments and organizational change are significant because they could affect the operations of the company. On the other hand, there are also the external forces that affect the organizational behavior. An organization's external environment is also constantly changing. Both the degree of change and the rate of change are important factors and determine whether an organization's external environment is relatively stable or unstable. External environmental factors most responsible for change include competition, customers, politics, culture and technology. Individuals in organizations must often make decisions under conditions of risk and uncertainty (Anderson 1995, p. 7). These decisions often indicate that these environmental forces cannot be controlled and may in influence the outcomes of their decisions. Recommendations Businesses today have struggled to successfully imitate Toyota in their efforts to implement Toyota Production System (TPS) principles and techniques. The remarkable results, in the research of Rooney (1990), observed transformation to become a model of sustainable change founded on the principles and tools of the TPS executed through the application of Large Scale Change (LSC) and organizational development approaches. This is just a historically command-and-control environment that shifted to a culture of operator engagement that created ownership of the change at the appropriate level of the organization. The operators completely redesigned the manufacturing line and their work in order to improve the overall performance of the line. They built the house in which they would live and they were proud. The performance improvement results exceeded the initial expectations and the initial skeptical reactions had changed (Rooney, 1990). Toyota's success in its transformation relied mostly on developing their organizational culture. The key ingredients that gelled throughout the organization as a result of this effort were: Leadership, Communication, Learning environment, Ownership, Reward and Recognition. The leadership provided a vision and we focused on communicating extensively throughout the flow path system using open dialogue. With an effective learning environment through experiential learning, it transitioned learners to teachers and then to coaches throughout the process. Ultimately the ownership of this flow path was transferred to the operators who run the equipment. The reward for the operators came in two forms. The most obvious was the visibility of the results that they created. They received verbal compliments that were as simple as saying "thank you" from local and distant leaders. To change the fundamental culture of this organization, the management found out that it must blend the technical aspects of the Toyota Production System with the processes of Whole System Transformation within Organization Development. Only then will we be able to surpass the quick-hit results focus and derive fundamental cultural change that will sustain the immediate results long into our future (Rooney, 1990). At present, lots of pressure could also come from the current economic conditions of the country because prices usually go up when inflation rate is up. Naturally, employees are directly affected that's why sooner or later they will demand higher wages. In order to maintain long-term survival and be profitable at the same time, organizations must react to these turbulent external environments where change becomes inevitable, even critical. As organizations react to change and begin to change themselves, the effects of the changing environment and new behaviors begin to be realized internally by the organization. By leading into a culture of systematic inquiry and skillful listening, leaders can strengthen the foundation of their organizations. Accomplishing this requires the shifting of culture wherein leaders should scrutinize how dysfunction shows up within them, their group, and their organizational culture and then seek a systems approach in dealing with these problems within the organization. Thus, in developing a new organizational culture, it is significant to consider not only culture as a concept but also the internal and external factors that affect organizational behavior. As the results of the Toyota research show, the key ingredients for their improvement are leadership, communication, learning environment, ownership, reward and recognition, which are basically imbued in developing organizational behavior. Bibliography Anderson, M. 1995. Managing Change, Diversity, and Emotions. Management Review, vol. 84, pp. 6-8. Casey, C. 1999. 'Come, join our family: discipline and integration in corporate organizational culture', Human Relations, vol 52, no. 2, pp. 155-178. Clark, D. 1998. Organizational Behavior. Big Dog's Leadership Page Website. http://www.nwlink.com/%7Edonclark/leader/leader.html. Created March 19, 1998. Last updated, February 27, 2000. Acquired last August 14, 2005. Ferguson, E. & Cheyne, A. 1995. Organizational change: Main and interactive effects. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, vol. 68, p. 101-108. Harris, L. C. and Metallinos G. 'The fact and fantasy of organizational culture management: a case study of Greek food retailing', Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 201-213. Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, Beverley Hills, CA, Sage Publications. Kotter, J. 1992. Corporate Culture and Performance, Free Press; (April 7, 1992) Rooney, M.J. 2005, Summer. 'Toyota System Production Meets Large Scale Change: A Synergy for Sustainable Improvements', Organization Development Journal. vol.23, no. 2, p. 21 Schein, E., 1992. Organisational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers, San Francisco. Read More