The Concept of Organizational Culture and Its Importance to Any Twenty-First Business Organization - Essay Example

Organizational culture is “a system of shared meaning” (Divedi 9) that the members of an organization hold and that distinguishes the organization from the other organizations. Organizational culture cannot be explained via a rigid definition. It is something that emerges naturally through the conduct of the individuals in an organization and the way they transform themselves (Organizational culture). Change is an integral part of life. Thus businesses are also not excluded from the process of change. Change is the way forward to innovation, achievement and to growth. Managing change is an important task for the managerial personnel in any growth oriented organization. Experts acknowledge the fact that “change is a task fraught with complexity and challenge” (Graetz et al. 2). Completing the change management process successfully is a challenging process and intense. The simplest starting point is to try and gain superior understanding of the problems faced by the organization and identify the variables that are at the cause of these problems. The leaders face various kinds of complexities while they tackle organizational change. They are required to “envision the content of change” (Graetz et al. 2), handle the distinctive features of the process of change; collaborate with the tumultuous process that is going on worldwide, adapt with the stunning technological advancements and employ the dynamic workforce intelligently to fulfill the profit maximization objective. Change management deals with the notion of change and the keys to the approaches to managing change. This essay deals with the concept of organizational culture and examines its importance to any twenty-first business organization. It investigates the existence of any relationship between organizational change and organizational culture as well as discusses whether organizational culture is something that an organization has or organizational culture is something that an organization is. Organizational culture (‘is’ vs. ‘has’): Culture has been regarded as a metaphor for organization which is innovative and helps in developing new forms of understanding. A metaphor lets one to view an entity in the perspective of another. A metaphoric representation tends to hint that we think of an organization as a culture. By taking organizations as culture (organization ‘is’ a culture) one might understand the activities and orientation of the organization better and the nature, behavior and performance of people in their organizational lives and positions of decision-making. Alvesson argues that culture cannot be taken as the final image representing an organization. On one hand a metaphor can be seen as an ornamental tool, on the other, it reflects something more deep and sound. In fact a commonly used metaphor for an organization is the pyramid with a broad base and here comes in the concept of the modifier and the subject. The pyramid shows the relations between the employees at different levels and this is the modifier while the metaphor is the firm or organization viewed as a pyramid. So, one can say that the way the different levels of employees interact, their language, feelings, behaviors and relations acts as the modifier and the intersection between this modifier and the principal subject represents the metaphor. From this point of view the organization ‘is’ culture. Meek’s paper argues that the culture of any organization cannot be considered on unit basis. Culture should be interpreted in terms of conceptual elements. It should be differentiated from social structure. Culture is a term used as an envelope for all the people related problems in a western capitalist structure. Though both culture and social structure are socially created, there is no combined organizational culture which can be manipulated or assessed in order to enhance the effectiveness. Organizations are multi-cultural in nature and the key component of dispute is ‘values’. A cultural framework urges for taking organization as a value but to consider the consequence it deserves (Smircich). Thus from the different theories, there have been two different arguments – ‘culture is something that an organization is’ and it is’ something an organization has’ (Smircich 463). The first concept is similar to what anthropologists think regarding culture. This is based upon the idea that social interactions produces culture and it is not something imported into the organization. Organizational culture is composed of the subcultures that are present in the organization. In other words, the term ‘organizational culture’ is inclusive of the “the atmosphere, ways of doing things, levels of energy and levels of individual freedom” (Senior 154) that is present in the organization. A well known academic researcher had commented in 1981 that the history of an organization is represented by the subculture of an organization. The standards of acceptable behavior in an organization get modified with the passage of time. For some organizations the history of the organization remains the driving force of the organization and it strengthens the position of the organization such that it becomes able to face the changing environment of the twenty-first century” (Senior 159). It is the set of values and beliefs that gets reflected in the different structures of the organization and its system. The structure as well as the functioning of the organizations is determined by the rationality of the behavior of the people involved in the organization. But it is not rationality only that guides the functioning of the organizations. If they are guided by rationality, the changes that occur in the organizations are greatly influenced by the cultural environment in which the company functions and also the national culture which plays a big role in modifying organizational culture. Organizational culture as a system of values and beliefs There are five key domains that can be recognized in an organizational activity and these can be viewed as the structure of the organization. These key domains are “organizational culture, strategy, structure, power distribution and control systems” (Hayes 18). In this context two contending arguments come up in regard to organizational structure. While some academicians put that organizational culture is something that an organization has, others argue that it is something that an organization is. In the first case organizational culture is viewed as something an organization ‘has’, i.e, possesses, as a variable, such as a tool or skill. It is the by- product of organizational activities. With these variables the organization enriches its values and reserve of information and technical knowledge. Organizational culture is a tool that is utilized for the enhancement of organizational effectiveness. The researchers that seek predictable methods of dealing with the issue of organizational control opine that “organizational culture can be managed” (Witte & Muijen 498). Under this concept, the change in the culture occurs through the directive and intervention by the management personnel. According to them, an organization produces a culture which acts as a “social and normative glue that holds the organization together” (Witte & Muijen 498). On the other hand, when it is argued that organizational culture is something that the organization ‘is’, it is a root metaphor, in the sense, the term ‘organizational culture’ is used as an expressive form. Organizational culture is the manifestation of consciousness of the employees. It is a process that is not the creator of culture, but works for the sustenance of culture. The culture is a form of sense making within the organization which is sustained through a chain of interactions across the different levels of the organization. The culture of an organization is comprised of the sub cultures existing within the organization and the countercultures. From this perspective, change in the organization occurs through the natural evolution of the members and their functioning. All the members influence the culture that exists in the organization. The debate regarding the organizational culture and its management depends on the approach that the researcher believes in. Some academicians “suggest that organizations should be conceptualized as cultures” (Witte & Muijen 497). As Condrey puts it, organizational culture is not a single” piece of the puzzle” (Condrey 328), but is itself the puzzle. “A culture is not something an organization has; a culture is something an organization is” (Condrey 328). The culture in an organization is a blend of beliefs, values, ways of thinking and doing tasks and professional traditional traditions. All these factors interact with one another that resist or enhance change. These blends are not uniform at all levels of an organization. The difference in the level of interaction between these factors leads to the creation of sub cultures within the organization. However, the culture represents the organization and is itself recognition for the organization; and is therefore not a separate possession for the organization. The organizational culture helps the employee to create a stable meaning when faced with an organizational ambiguity or uncertainty. The researchers that that favor the argument that organizational culture is a “system of shared beliefs and values” (Witte & Muijen 497) claim that “culture can only be influenced in an indirect way and is the result of the interaction between the individual and the organizational processes” (Witte & Muijen 498). According to their belief, it is an inconsistent thought that organizational culture can be externally managed or controlled. The organizational culture is a framework of understanding that leads to the interpretation of the organizational phenomena. Culture within the organization is something that is shared with the members, something that is intangible and affects the human behavior. The culture consists of the values, norms and assumptions of the people involved with the organization. Hence culture of the organization is related to the behavior of the employees as well as the employer and affects the human interaction within the premises of the company and also outside it. Culture emerges with time and develops over time. In this context exists a debate over whether organizational culture is something that an organization has or whether it is something that an organization is. Similar to discussions related to climate, organizational culture “is a social construct” (Condrey 329) and is subjected to an ongoing disagreement. The personality patterns of the individuals play a deep role in the creation of the organizational culture. We shall look into the debate in the later part of the essay. For some other organizations, they adapt with these changes so as to bring a cultural shift within itself. These shifts would be from the culture that suits to the conditions that were present in the past to a new culture that would recognize “the conditions of the present and the past” (Senior 160). As has happened in the case of Ford; they have come a long way and now retains no resemblance with the company that existed five years ago. The philosophy of change can be traced back to the works of ancient Greek philosopher, Heraclitus. According to this great philosopher’s words, any individual does not ever “step into the same river twice” (Cameron & Green 15). This might be interpreted in two ways; the first explanation moves in the line that the river, which signifies the external world, never remains the same. It is changing constantly. Owing to this change in the external world, people cannot do the same work time and again in their same process that they used to follow previously. The second interpretation indicates towards the internal change. It says that with the passage of time the person does not remain the same himself. This interpretation invokes the theories of existentialism and philosophical thoughts. But in simpler terms, it tries to explain that change is much more related to the developments that take place in the internal world of the individual daily, rather than to the “external world of facts and figures” (Cameron & Green 15). It is based up on the internal world of the social actors that causes and consequences of change in the external world becomes successful or fails. The perceptions of change differ from person to person depending up on their personality preference. Any individual with the preference for the set “introversion, intuition, thinking and judging” (Cameron & Green 57) (termed as INTJ) would have a different perception of the changes that occur from the individual that has a characteristic preference for “extroversion, sensing, feeling and perceiving” (Cameron & Green 57) (termed as ESFP). Schein presents a different perspective regarding organization culture. The author says that it is difficult to assess whether to take culture as group behavior because one needs to understand how strong the culture of the group is. Some organizations comprise people with a common and strong culture while others are not so strong in terms of forming a culture. Organization change is linked with culture compatibility of groups within organizations or in cases of mergers and acquisitions the cultural compatibility of two organizations matter. In order to bring change in an organization it is important to understand culture as an element of organizational psychology. All the human resource related activities depend upon an understanding of how the culture influences functioning. Hatch and Schultz observe in his study that the influence of top management on culture is considered against ethics. Culture is not considered as a variable induced by the management and it is often used to build organizational identity. At one point it becomes difficult to distinguish between the ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ (Hatch 356). So going by this concept one may say that culture is a part of organization but it is not the whole of it. Managing organizational change should begin with proper identification of the entities who define the culture. Then the managers and leaders should be careful so that they do not impose their own cultures on the subordinates. Changes can be brought about by implementing regulations without affecting cultural values. For this one has to assume that culture is something that an organization has and not what it is. Because for the later, bringing a change would imply changing the cultural identity of the organization. Conclusion There are several factors that influence organizational culture. The national culture, the business, the professional associations and stakeholders form the broader aspects that influence organizational culture. Another aspect that affects the organizational culture is leadership. It is a part of the organization and works towards the formation of the organizational culture. On the flip side of leadership, the other aspect that affects organizational culture is the vision that is held by the members of the organization for the fulfillment of their goals. Together they go through the crises faced by the company and build their strategies that enhance the outcomes of the organization. This is attained through proper interaction and communication among the different horizontals and also within each department. The interactions between the individuals create a healthy environment of communication in the organization. The debate whether organizational culture is something that the organization has or it is something by which an organization can be defined is an ongoing issue. The intention of this paper is not to provide a final solution to this discussion. Rather, what this paper discusses adds on to the contents of the debate. This discussion offers a diverse contribution to the existing debate thereby enriching it with further insights and providing newer angles from which the topic can be reviewed. The fact that has emerged from this discussion is that human behavior is an integral part of organizational culture and plays a major role in shaping the culture. From this perspective, change occurs within an organization as the individuals undergo the changes of time and adapts themselves with these changes. Organizational change is closely related to the organizational culture and such changes can only lead to successful performance of the organization only with proper management of organizational change. Works Cited Cameron, Esther. & Green, Mike. Making Sense of Change Management: A Complete Guide to the Models Tools and Techniques of Organizational Change. Kogan Page Publishers, 2012. Print. Condrey, Stephen. E. Handbook of Human Resource Management in Government. John Wiley & Sons, 2010. Print. Divedi, R. K. Organizational Culture And Performance. M.D. Publications Pvt. Ltd., 1995. Print. Graetz et al. Managing Organisational Change, Google eBook. John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Print. Hayes, John. The Theory and Practice of Change Management. Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Print. Hatch, Mary Jo and Majken Schultz, Relations between Organizational Culture, Identity and Image, European Journal of Marketing, (1997) 31.5/6, 356-365 Meek, V. Lynn, Organizational Change: Origins and Weaknesses, Organization Studies, (1988) 9/4: 453-473 Organizational culture. National Defense University, n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2013. Senior. Organizational Change, 3/E. Pearson Education India, 2009. Print. Schein, Edgar H. Organizational Culture, Sloan School of Management, American Psychologist, (1990) 45.2, 109-119 Witte, Karel. De. & Muijen, Jaap. J. Van. Organizational Culture. Psychology Press, 2000. Print. Read More