INPUT

 

Listening 

1. You will hear four students on an MBA course – Candela, Henry, Sonia, and Omar – discussing their companies’ cultures. For each speaker, decide which aspect of their company’s culture she / he mentions. 

2. Listen again and check whether you have completed the phrasal verbs in the activity above correctly.

 

Reading 

1. What is corporate culture? What would you like to learn about it? Think of five questions you would like to get answers to while reading the following texts from Wikipedia about corporate culture.

 

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

 

Culture refers to an organization’s values, beliefs, and behaviors. In general, it is concerned with beliefs and values on the basis of which people interpret experiences and behave, individually and in groups. Cultural statements become operationalised when executives articulate and publish the values of their firm which provide patterns for how employees should behave.

Firms with strong cultures achieve higher results because employees sustain focus both on what to do and how to do it...

Organizational culture, or corporate culture, comprises the attitudes, experiences, beliefs and values of an organization. It has been defined as the specific collection of values and norms that are shared by people and groups in an organization and that control the way they interact with each other and with stakeholders outside the organization. Organizational values are beliefs and ideas about what kinds of goals members of an organization should pursue and ideas about the appropriate kinds or standards of behavior organizational members should use to achieve these goals. From organizational values develop organizational norms, guidelines or expectations that prescribe appropriate kinds of behavior by employees in particular situations and control the behavior of organizational members towards one another.

Senior management may try to determine a corporate culture. They may wish to impose corporate values and standards of behavior that specifically reflect the objectives of the organization. In addition, there will also be an extant internal culture within the workforce. Work-groups within the organization have their own behavioral quirks and interactions which, to an extent, affect the whole system. Task culture can be imported. For example, computer technicians will have expertise, language and behaviors gained independently of the organization, but their presence can influence the culture of the organization as a whole.

Strong culture is said to exist where staff respond to stimulus because of their alignment to organizational values. Conversely, there is weak culture where there is little alignment with organizational values and control must be exercised through extensive procedures and bureaucracy.

Where culture is strong – people do things because they believe it is the right thing to do – there is a risk of another phenomenon, groupthink. “Groupthink” was described by Irving L. Janis. He defined it as “...a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking that people engage when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternatives of action.” This is a state where people, even if they have different ideas, do not challenge organizational thinking, and therefore there is a reduced capacity for innovative thoughts. This could occur, for example, where there is heavy reliance on a central charismatic figure in the organization, or where there is an evangelical belief in the organization’s values, or also in groups where a friendly climate is at the base of their identity (avoidance of conflict). In fact groupthink is very common, it happens all the time, in almost every group. Members that are defiant are often turned down or seen as a negative influence by the rest of the group, because they bring conflict through reliance on established procedures.

Innovative organizations need individuals who are prepared to challenge the status quo – be it groupthink or bureaucracy, and also need procedures to implement new ideas effectively.

 

CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

 

Several methods have been used to classify organizational culture. Some are described below:

Geert Hofstede demonstrated that there are national and regional cultural groupings that affect the behavior of organizations. Hofstede identified five dimensions 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. However, recent researches have shown that high individualism may not necessarily mean low collectivism, and vice versa. Research indicates that the two concepts are actually unrelated. Some people and cultures might have both high individualism and high collectivism. For example, someone who highly values duty to his or her group does not necessarily give a low priority to personal freedom and self-sufficiency.

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 – describes a society’s “time horizon”, or the importance attached to the future versus the past and present. In long term oriented societies, thrift and perseverance are valued more; in short term oriented societies, respect for tradition and reciprocation of gifts and favors are valued more. Eastern nations tend to score especially high here, with Western nations scoring low and the less developed nations very low; China scored highest and Pakistan lowest. 

Deal and Kennedy defined organizational culture as the way things get done around here. They measured organizations in respect of:

Feedback – quick feedback means an instant response. This could be in monetary terms, but could also be seen in other ways, such as the impact of a great save in a soccer match.

Risk – represents the degree of uncertainty in the organization’s activities.

Using these parameters, they were able to suggest four classifications of organizational culture.

In the Tough-Guy Macho Culture feedback is quick and the rewards are high. This often applies to fast moving financial activities such as brokerage, but could also apply to a police force, or athletes competing in team sports. This can be a very stressful culture in which to operate.

The Work Hard / Play Hard Culture is characterized by few risks being taken, all with rapid feedback. This is typical in large organizations, which strive for high quality customer service. It is often characterized by team meetings, jargon and buzzwords.

The Bet your Company Culture, where big stakes decisions are taken, but it may be years before the results are known. Typically, these might involve development or exploration projects, which take years to come to fruition, such as oil prospecting or military aviation.

The Process Culture occurs in organizations where there is little or no feedback. People become bogged down with how things are done not with what is to be achieved. This is often associated with bureaucracies. While it is easy to criticize these cultures for being overly cautious or bogged down in red tape, they do produce consistent results, which is ideal in, for example, public services. 

Charles Handy (1985) popularized a method of looking at culture which some scholars have used to link organizational structure to organizational culture. He describes the following types.

A Power Culture concentrates power among a few. Control radiates from the center like a web. Power Cultures have few rules and little bureaucracy; swift decisions can ensue.

In a Role Culture, people have clearly delegated authorities within a highly defined structure. Typically, these organizations form hierarchical bureaucracies. Power derives from a person’s position and little scope exists for expert power.

By contrast, in a Task Culture, teams are formed to solve particular problems. Power derives from expertise as long as a team requires expertise. These cultures often feature the multiple reporting lines of a matrix structure.

A Person Culture exists where all individuals believe themselves superior to the organization. Survival can become difficult for such organizations, since the concept of an organization suggests that a group of like-minded individuals pursue the organizational goals. Some professional partnerships can operate as person cultures, because each partner brings a particular expertise and clientele to the firm. 

Edgar Schein, an MIT Sloan School of Management professor, defines organizational culture as “the residue of success” within an organization. According to Schein, culture is the most difficult organizational attribute to change, outlasting organizational products, services, founders and leadership and all other physical attributes of the organization. His organizational model illuminates culture from the standpoint of the observer, described by three cognitive levels of organizational culture.

At the first and most cursory level of Schein’s model is organizational attributes that can be seen, felt and heard by the uninitiated observer. Included are the facilities, offices, furnishings, visible awards and recognition, the way that its members dress, and how each person visibly interacts with each other and with organizational outsiders.

The next level deals with the professed culture of an organization’s members. At this level, company slogans, mission statements and other operational creeds are often expressed, and local and personal values are widely expressed within the organization. Organizational behavior at this level usually can be studied by interviewing the organization’s membership and using questionnaires to gather attitudes about organizational membership.

At the third and deepest level, the organization’s tacit assumptions are found. These are the elements of culture that are unseen and not cognitively identified in everyday interactions between organizational members. Additionally, these are the elements of culture which are often taboo to discuss inside the organization. Many of these “unspoken rules” exist without the conscious knowledge of the membership. Those with sufficient experience to understand this deepest level of organizational culture usually become acclimatized to its attributes over time, thus reinforcing the invisibility of their existence. Surveys and casual interviews with organizational members cannot draw out these attributes – rather much more in-depth means is required to first identify then understand organizational culture at this level. Notably, culture at this level is the underlying and driving element often missed by organizational behaviorists.

Using Schein’s model, understanding paradoxical organizational behaviors becomes more apparent. For instance, an organization can profess highly aesthetic and moral standards at the second level of Schein’s model while simultaneously displaying curiously opposing behavior at the third and deepest level of culture. Superficially, organizational rewards can imply one organizational norm but at the deepest level imply something completely different. This insight offers an understanding of the difficulty that organizational newcomers have in assimilating organizational culture and why it takes time to become acclimatized. It also explains why organizational change agents usually fail to achieve their goals: underlying tacit cultural norms are generally not understood before would-be change agents begin their actions. Merely understanding culture at the deepest level may be insufficient to institute cultural change because the dynamics of interpersonal relationships (often under threatening conditions) are added to the dynamics of organizational culture while attempts are made to institute desired change.

 

EVALUTION OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

 

Arthur F. Carmazzi states that the dynamics of organizational culture are an “evolutionary” process that can change and evolve with the proper psychology of leadership.

At each level of organizational evolution, people will be working, acting, thinking, and feeling at different levels of personal commitment. Carmazzi’s Directive Communication psychology classifies these levels commitment as follows.

- The level of individual;

- The level of group;

- The level of organization.

People rely on personal skill and the direction from leaders. When working on the plane of skill people work at the level of individual. They work because it is required and use and develop their skill because it maintains the security related to their job.

People have an emotional connection to their work. This has further developed their attitude for success. They thrive on an environment of personal growth and others who have the same Attitude. When working on the plane of attitude, people work at the level group. They take on additional tasks and even apply more effort to their job. Unlike those working at the level of Individual, they do not need to be told what to do, only to be guided to a direction.

The Pinnacle of greatness comes when individuals see their work as their purpose. People see a greater purpose to the work they do, something greater than the individual, or the group. The organization is the vehicle to doing and becoming something greater than themselves. When working on the plane of self-actualization, people work at the level of organization. At this level of commitment, an individual will do for the organization the same he would do for himself. The individual and the organisation (and all its components and people) are one.

According to Carmazzi, each culture affects the effectiveness and level of commitment of the people within that culture. And that perpetuates the psychology that creates the culture in the first place. In order to break the cycle and evolve a culture and the commitment of those in it, leaders need to understand their role in the psychological dynamics behind the culture and make adjustments that will move it to the next level. Carmazzi has stated five levels of organizational culture.

The blame culture cultivates distrust and fear, people blame each other to avoid being reprimanded or put down, this results in no new ideas or personal initiative because people don’t want to risk being wrong. The majority of commitment here is at the level of individual.

Multi-directional culture cultivates minimized cross-department communication and cooperation. Loyalty is only to specific groups (departments). Each department becomes a clique and is often critical of other departments which in turn create lots of gossip. The lack of cooperation and multi-direction is manifested in the organizations inefficiency. The majority of personal commitment in this culture borders on the level of individual and level of group.

Live and let live culture is complacency; it manifests mental stagnation and low creativity. People here have little future vision and have given up their passion. There is average cooperation and communication and things do work, but they do not grow. People have developed their personal relationships and decided who to stay away from, there is not much left to learn. Personal commitment here is mixed between the level of individual and level of group.

People in brand congruent culturebelieve in the product or service of the organization, they feel good about what their company is trying to achieve and cooperate to achieve it. People here are passionate and seem to have similar goals in the organisation. They use personal resources to actively solve problems and while they don’t always accept the actions of management or others around them, they see their job as important. Almost everyone in this culture is operating at the level of group.

In leadership enriched culturepeople view the organization as an extension of themselves; they feel good about what they personally achieve through the organization and have exceptional cooperation. Individual goals are aligned with the goals of the organisation and people will do what it takes to make things happen. As a group, the organisation is more like family providing personal fulfillment which often transcends ego so people are consistently bringing out the best in each other. In this culture, leaders do not develop followers, but develop other leaders. Almost everyone in this culture is operating at the level of organization.

 

ELEMENTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

 

G. Johnson described a cultural web, identifying a number of elements that can be used to describe or influence organizational culture:

- The Paradigm. What the organization is about; what it does; its mission; its values.

- Control Systems. The processes in place to monitor what is going on. Role cultures would have vast rulebooks. There would be more reliance on individualism in a power culture.

- Organizational Structures. Reporting lines, hierarchies, and the way that work flows through the business.

- Power Structures. Who makes the decisions, how widely spread is power, and on what is power based?

- Symbols. These include organizational logos and designs, but also extend to symbols of power such as parking spaces and executive washrooms.

- Rituals and Routines. Management meetings, board reports and so on may become more habitual than necessary.

- Stories and Myths. They are built up about people and events, and convey a message about what is valued within the organization.

These elements may overlap. Power structures may depend on control systems, which may exploit the very rituals that generate stories which may not be true.