When is it more important to have a positive corporate culture in an organisation and when is it less important? Discuss. What is culture? The collective behaviours, values, actions, beliefs, desires and prospects of a group of human beings working in a defined environment. Ravasi and Schultz (2006) define organisational culture as a set of ‘shared mental assumptions’ that guide behaviours in the workplace. The term grew out of discussions around organisational climate in the 1960s and 1970s and corporate culture in the 1980s – nowadays people discuss organisational culture in relation to different types of organisation, including NGOs, schools and churches, although there’s a heavy focus on corporations. Edgar Henry Schein, a former professor at the Sloan School of Management, defined organizational culture as "the basic tacit assumptions about how the world is and ought to be that a group of people share and that determine their perceptions, thoughts feelings and there overt behaviour." He identified three levels of organisational culture: artifacts and behaviours, espoused values and assumptions. He also said that organisational culture is the most difficult organisational attribute to change. Importance of culture in organizations • • • • • • The culture decides the way employees interact at their workplace. A healthy culture encourages the employees to stay motivated and loyal towards the management. The culture of the workplace also goes a long way in promoting healthy competition at the workplace. Employees try their level best to perform better than their fellow workers and earn recognition and appreciation of the superiors. It is the culture of the workplace which actually motivates the employees to perform. Every organization must have set guidelines for the employees to work accordingly. The culture of an organization represents certain predefined policies which guide the employees and give them a sense of direction at the workplace. Every individual is clear about his roles and responsibilities in the organization and know how to accomplish the tasks ahead of the deadlines. No two organizations can have the same work culture. It is the culture of an organization which makes it distinct from others. The work culture goes a long way in creating the brand image of the organization. The work culture gives an identity to the organization. In other words, an organization is known by its culture. The organization culture brings all the employees on a common platform. The employees must be treated equally and no one should feel neglected or left out at the workplace. It is essential for the employees to adjust well in the organization culture for them to deliver their level best. The work culture unites the employees who are otherwise from different back grounds, families and have varied attitudes and mentalities. The culture gives the employees a sense of unity at the workplace. • • • Certain organizations follow a culture where all the employees irrespective of their designations have to step into the office on time. Such a culture encourages the employees to be punctual which eventually benefits them in the long run. It is the culture of the organization which makes the individuals a successful professional. Every employee is clear with his roles and responsibilities and strives hard to accomplish the tasks within the desired time frame as per the set guidelines. Implementation of policies is never a problem in organizations where people follow a set culture. The new employees also try their level best to understand the work culture and make the organization a better place to work. The work culture promotes healthy relationship amongst the employees. No one treats work as a burden and moulds himself according to the culture. It is the culture of the organization which extracts the best out of each team member. In a culture where management is very particular about the reporting system, the employees however busy they are would send their reports by end of the day. No one has to force anyone to work. The culture develops a habit in the individuals which makes them successful at the workplace. Edgar Shein Model of Culture Development Schein described three levels of organizational culture: Basic underlying assumptions These are the foundations on which culture is based. Handy described this as "the ways things get done around here". The underlying assumptions are often difficult to describe, are intangible and are often only really understood by people who've become accustomed to the way the organization works. Imagine you are new to an organization and you find it is taking time to "fit in". That's because you haven't yet got to grips with these underlying assumptions that those in the organization who've been there a while seem to take for granted. Underlying assumptions are usually invisible. You won't find them written down anywhere. People may not want to talk about them. But they exist and are often powerful. Espoused Values These are the public statements about what the organizational values are about. Many organization's now communicate what their "core values" are - the espoused values by which the organization conducts its business. Artifacts Artifacts are the visible signs of an organisation's culture. They are visible; they can be seen, heard and felt. For example, what the dress code is; what kind of offices and layout is used; how employees address each other and how they communicate internally and externally. Sociological Vs Management Comparison 1. Culture has versus Culture is 2. Integration versus Differentiation/fragmentation 3. Culture managed versus Culture tolerated 4. Symbolic leadership versus Management control Culture ‘has’ versus culture ‘is’ The has view holds that every organization possesses a culture which, along with its strategy, structure, technology, and employees, is part of the organizational machine that can be controlled and managed. The alternative view sees organizational culture as something that the organization is. This is also known as the ‘root metaphor’ view. From this standpoint, individuals do things, and work together in certain ways. Thus, they create a culture which evolves spontaneously and is therefore not capable of being managed. It holds that culture cannot be easily quantified or measured, and that academics must study it the way that anthropologists study other societies. Culture is produced and reproduced continuously through the routine interactions between organization members. Integration versus differentiation/fragmentation Joanne Martin (1992) distinguished three perspectives on culture which she labelled integration, differentiation and fragmentation. The managerial integration (or unitary) perspective on culture holds that an organization possesses a single, unified culture, consisting of shared values to which most employees subscribe. These integrating features lead to improved organization effectiveness through greater employee commitment and employee control, as measured by productivity and profitability. In contrast, social science emphasizes two perspectives – differentiation and fragmentation. The differentiation perspective on culture regards a single organization as consisting of many groups, each with their own subcultures. Each of these has its own characteristics, which differ from those of its neighbours. The other social science perspective – the fragmentation (or conflict) perspective on culture – assumes the absence of consensus; stresses the inevitability of conflict; focuses on the variety of interests and opinions between different groups; and focuses upon power differences in organizations. Culture managed versus culture tolerated Since the managerialist perspective sees culture as something that an organization has, it further assumes that it is capable of being managed by corporate leaders. Some companies even have a ‘Director of Corporate Culture’. This has sparked three debates: first, concerning how managers can change their company’s culture from ‘weak’ to ‘strong’; second, how culture can help a company innovate and adjust rapidly to environmental changes; third, the part played by leaders’ visions and styles of management in managing their cultures. This view assumes that senior company executives can and should exercise cultural leadership. Cultural leadership is seen as maintaining, promoting and developing the company’s culture (Trice and Beyer, 1984; 1993). The contrasting, social science view holds that culture is what an organization is, and hence that it is incapable of being managed. Instead, it is to be tolerated and its effects on its members studied. Some ‘culture managed’ writers, such as Fred Luthans (1995), argue that strong cultures can be created by management’s use of rewards and punishments. In contrast, the ‘culture tolerated’ academics argue that employees’ deeply held values and beliefs cannot be modified in the short term using such external stimuli. Symbolic leadership versus management control Symbolic leadership (or the management of organizational culture) is one way of encouraging employees to feel that they are working for something worthwhile, so that they will work harder and be more productive. Burman and Evans (2008) argue that it is only those managers who are also leaders who can impact culture in this way. The managerialist view holds that employees can be helped to internalize organizational values. In contrast, the social science perspective argues that symbolic leadership represents management’s attempt to get employees to direct their behaviour themselves, towards organizational goals.
