Culture in Organisational Literature - Essay Example

Running Head: ORGANISATIONAL CULTURAL CHANGE Organisational Cultural Change Organisational Cultural Change Introduction Organisation is not a passive or stable institution. It evolves and grows in an environment of the organisational culture (Heaphy, 2007). Changing the culture of the organisation disrupts the organisation at every level. The discomfort associated with this disruption creates resistance at every level of the organisation (Alvesson, 2002). However, changing organisational culture is difficult if not impossible and requires a different approach to other types of change initiatives. Culture in Organisational Literature During the 1980s and more recently, private consultants advanced the role of culture in explaining patterns of behaviour within the organisation and its importance in changing corporate environments. In-depth study of culture change in the corporate and organisational literature reveals it to be centered on human relations management for higher productivity. Edgar Schein (1985) believes that culture is seen as a "hot topic" within the corporate world because it is perceived that organisations can be more effective if they develop the right type of culture. Some may believe that it is possible to change dysfunctional cultures to those that are better adapted to their environments. However, according to Schein, culture is hard to define and even harder to measure, harder still to determine the effects on the corporate world. Assessing Organisational Culture Organisational cultural change is difficult because it is difficult to assess or measure culture. Schein (1985) three level model appears to provide a meaningful option that is useful for assessing organisational culture. In the model, artifacts are placed at the highest level of the structure. The next level represents values which reflect goals and ideals of the organisation; they are the why behind what people within the organisation do. Finally, at the lowest level of Scheins model we find assumptions. The innermost core of culture, assumptions represent rarely spoken, latent, core beliefs and are therefore the most difficult to assess. It is possible for the three levels of culture to be incongruent. For instance, a company may have an open door policy (artifact) and express a value that everyones opinion is appreciated and sought, but below the surface is the knowledge that the boss is really the only one with whom to share the important information (assumption). Leaders of organisations and the consultants who work with them have learned a lot about behaviour change which is seen at the most superficial level of artifacts but not much about how to create organisational belief and value change. Behaviour change doesnt necessarily mean a corresponding change in values and beliefs. Culture is difficult to assess in organisations because it is multidimensional but most assessment procedures have been unidimensional and have been able to measure only one level of the construct (Mohan, 1993). In addition to this problem, an organisation may be made up of many subcultures. Subcultures develop in groups that have a stable membership and a history of problem solving (Schein, 1985). Each of these subcultures may be distinct from one another. Nevertheless, attempts have been made to assess culture through: (a) Likert-type surveys, which are generally considered insufficient to get at tacit assumptions; (b) analytical descriptives which are used to assess stories and rites but are seen as fractionating the broader culture concept; ( c) ethnographic research which is time consuming but enlightening; (d) historical review of past organisational experiences; and (e) clinical descriptive study generally undertaken by consultants working with the corporation to produce change (Schein, 1990). The assumption level of cultures can be assessed by asking questions to uncover patterns of shared assumptions (Sathe, 1985). These questions identify the background of the founders of the organisation, discover how the organisation responds to crises, determine who the deviants (i.e., rebels of espoused organisational values) are and how the organisation responds to them, and estimate the strength of the culture or cultures by assessing the proportion of people who share beliefs. Assumptions at an unconscious level are difficult to identify but may he more assessable when disrupted (Louis, 1985). This can be done by using outsiders, either newcomers to the organisation or "boundary spanners," consultants or field researchers that spend time in the culture. Louis also describes a probe or field simulation, explained as a group production or montage, that may artificially create instances in which tacit knowledge may be made explicit. Mohan (1993) describes three strategies for assessing organisational culture: 1. Systemic/functional based strategy. This strategy seeks to discover the range, structure, and function of organisational culture as a key variable and assess its effects on the overall organisation. This can be done with quantified measures such as audits. Some examples of a systemic strategy would be to chart the organisational hierarchy or to map the informal patterns of social relationships or career paths. Conducting a systemic audit of dominate values and norms could allow an organisation to uncover varying subcultures. It is possible that organisational leaders may perceive a unified culture throughout the ranks. An audit of values can help to determine if subcultures are challenging or reinforcing professed organisational norms and values. Charting the diversity of subcultures may distinguish four distinct types of cultures (Quinn & McGrath, 1985): rational, a cultural system that emphasizes pursuit of objectives, productivity and efficiency; ideological, a culture system that values intuitive insights, invention, and risk-taking; consensual, a culture system that promotes values of support and concern, in order to achieve high levels of relational maintenance, cohesion, and morale; and hierarchical, a culture system that expects technical knowledge, factual analysis, and execution of regulations for stability and control. Mohan (1993) suggests audits, or lists, of an organisations stories and legends for measuring organisational culture over time. These stories can be seen as having the ability to energize and attract new members while repelling undesirable outsiders. Schein (1985), however, would suggest that identifying values or assumptions through an organisations stories requires utilisation of qualitative method strategies. 2. Cognitive strategy The second strategy for assessing culture, cognitive explanations, is assessed with qualitative methods. Schein (1985) states that "paradigms," or the groups of common conceptualisations that members of a subculture hold about the organisation, should be identified. Interview techniques and observation need to be used to get at these core cultural constructs. Interviews can be used to identify and map shared beliefs about the organisation. Likewise an interview method can be used to construct "cause maps" (Mohan, 1993) by studying how individuals and groups make inferences about cause and effect relationships. Comparing these maps across subcultures identifies areas of convergence. or divergence. 3. Symbolic strategy Much like Scheins (1985) third layer of culture, assumptions, the symbolic frame for assessing culture is the most difficult. Mohan (1993) contends that organisational members invest certain elements or symbols of their world with meanings that extend beyond surface interpretation. The meanings that are assigned to artifacts, ritualized activities, or stories by members can reveal cultural assumptions and patterns. These meanings may be revealed in various ways. One is the recognition of "rites" within the organisation. These may include rites of "passage, degradation, enhancement, renewal, conflict reduction, and integration" (Mohan, 1993, p. 57). They may be transition rites for the organisations life cycle or employees career path and can involve major role changes, such as hiring, firing or promoting. Other less significant rituals occur on a daily basis like chats at the drinking fountain, opening the daily mail, and break time. Some of these rituals, like insider jokes, can help to draw organisation members together while keeping outsiders on the outside. Despite the differences in researcher opinion on how to measure culture, consensus is reached by all on the need to use qualitative methods. Most would agree that several methods should be used in concert: observation, survey, study of written documents, and interviews. Theories of Organisational Culture Change Most organisational change programs share the common fundamental aims of the reorganisation of the workplace and the production of a new set of attitudes, beliefs and behaviour among employees to increase productivity and profitability for the organisation (Casey, 1999). Typically, these reorganisation efforts have been based on a restructuring of a hierarchical management environment to an environment where work teams coordinate, implement, and manage all production. Some of these culture changes occur within organisations because of catastrophic events such as changes in leadership, mergers, bankruptcy, and takeovers, and therefore allow little time for planned evolution. Organisations not faced with these disruptions but wishing to make fundamental changes need to have a basic understanding of the organisational culture and subcultures before attempting change. Claims have been made that approximately half of the organisational changes attempted fail because of "cultural" differences (Bijlsma-Frankema, 1997). Because culture change is very time consuming and requires an estimated 5-10% of a years operating budget mostly allocated for time spent in training (Deal & Kennedy, 1982), it becomes critical that hidden assumptions and "the way things are done around here" are examined within the subcultures of the organisation to assess the resistance to change. Schein (1990) believes the basis for culture develops through social learning. Beliefs are learned through either a social trauma model where anxiety and pain are reduced through learned avoidance and defence mechanisms or a success model where rewards and punishments reinforce beliefs and attitudes. There are two types of anxiety associated with change: survival (If I dont change, Ill lose my job) and learning anxiety (If I try to change, I may lose my identity and sense of competence). For learning to occur, survival anxiety must be higher than learning anxiety. An example of the type of social learning that Schein was suggesting was demonstrated in a Casey’s study. Casey (1999) conducted field research in a large multinational corporation to examine the effects of a new organisational work culture based on "teams" or "family." She refutes the notion that such cultures empower employees and provide meaningful workplace relationships. Employees in the new culture are supposed to "manifest the values of dedication, loyalty, self-sacrifice, and passion for the product and the customer" (p.158). These qualities are displayed in the use of new language that conveys the organisations values and the employees allegiance to those values. She learned that employees appeared to have assumed the habits and values of the new culture in the ten years since its insemination. During interviews, however, it was discovered that employees had varying effects of the acculturation. These included psychic accommodation, or the process of fitting the self into the new normative conditions. A successful employee will chose strategies to fit into the new culture. For many this may include holding an idealized view of the organisation. A second effect is that of psychic discomfort and anxiety. Most employees and managers who experienced this believed it to be transitional and that individual problems associated with it would eventually be managed by successful group processes and by individuals "coming up to speed." Those individuals who are not able to successfully adapt to the changed culture are told that they do not fit in and are encouraged to leave the organisation. In such cases the team or family does not necessarily shelter and protect but can attack members who fail to deliver. The most pervasive effect of the new culture is ambivalence manifested by in­complete internalisation or incomplete rejection of the new cultural values. The people who expressed ambivalence professed to view their subgroup as a family but chose not to socialize with them outside of work, perhaps demonstrating that the changed attitude was only superficial. Schein (1997) believes that new ideas are slow to catch on because learning is a social process and it takes more than just a great idea to advance change. He suggests that organisational learning is a three step process: (a) A new idea comes out of academia. Some practitioners may catch on but might get it wrong when they try to apply it. (b) A commercial consulting company recognizes the potential of the new idea and develops a training program. Problems may occur at this level because the consulting firm will standardize the program so it may not be applicable to individualized circumstances. It is also possible that when management turns over culture change to a consulting firm, the operating culture may think of the new idea as a passing fad. (c) Finally, the organisation may create a learning consortium where everyone learns equally from each other rather than being taught. The speed of adoption of new ideas is influenced by a sense of urgency. As Deal and Kennedy note (1982) "… the attractiveness of the proposed change is significant. Change happens faster when it is perceived that everybody wins. The strength of the culture being changed is another factor" (p.15). Strong cultures are described as those where the same values and beliefs permeate the entire organisation. There are many reasons why people who are part of an organisation are resistant to change. Many of these reasons relate to loss. A major change in the culture typically creates significant individual and collective loss. People involved in culture change may feel out of control and experience a loss of self-efficacy. Change alters relationships with co-workers, objects, and symbols. Deal and Kennedy (1982) recommend rituals for dealing with this sense of loss. "The absence of rituals in modern society and corporations has thrust the brunt of creating meaning into isolated individuals, a task to which only the most heroic among us are equal" (p.82). The difficulty of achieving culture change can actually be seen as a good thing. Culture causes organisational inertia that is necessary to protect the group from short ­term fluctuations caused by perceptions of and pressures from external forces (Deal & Kennedy, 1982). These external pressures may come from the competition which may be based on lower costs or higher quality. Organisations facing competitive pressures will need to look at the competitions organisational culture and their business strategies as well as their outcomes. A second outside force is exerted by the government whose regulations ultimately shape culture. The public or customer creates the third external pressure. Potential and existing customer needs and preferences for the future drive organisations. Trends and perceptions of change in the marketplace fuel many changes (Davis, 1985). To survive forces from the external environment an organisation needs: (a) a sense of mission or reason to exist; (b) concrete goals derived from the mission; (c) the means to accomplish goals, organisational structures, and decision making; (d) ways to monitor progress, and; (e) ways to repair structures and processes if they do not work (Schein, 1990). Organisations also need a common language, ways to define boundaries (how to select members), ways to allocate authority and power, norms for handling interpersonal relationships (sometimes called style or climate), ways to dispense rewards and punishments as well as ways to cope with the unpredictable (Schein, 1985). Leadership and Cultural Change Successful organisational change requires leaders to develop an understanding of the culture and discern when change is necessary. Behaviours must change before a culture can change or evolve. Successful leaders take the time to plan, strategize, and communicate changes to all stakeholders. Kotter (1996) recognizes that culture change is difficult and suggests that anchoring change in a culture comes last, not first in that "most alterations in norms and values come at the end of the transformation process" (p. 157). Kotter further suggests that new approaches usually sink into culture only after its clear they work and are superior to old methods. Sawyer and Rurak (2004) share stories as a way of anchoring culture change in nursing homes using the Eden Alternative philosophy. All case studies emphasize the importance of using consistent language to embed changes in culture and highlight small changes that indicate progress at alleviating loneliness, boredom and helplessness. Cameron and Quinn (2006) present a framework for examining or diagnosing organisational culture. An assessment instrument is utilized to ascertain which of four cultures the organisation currently possesses. Hierarchical cultures, found in large bureaucracies, are characterized by stability and control while clan cultures have more integration and flexibility. In hierarchical cultures, organisational effectiveness criteria are efficiency, timeliness, smooth functioning and predictability; whereas in a clan culture, the most valued criteria include cohesion, high levels of employee morale and satisfaction, human resources development and teamwork. The operational theory that dominates the clan culture most naturally fits with the Eden Alternative philosophy where "involvement and participation of employees foster empowerment and commitment" (Cameron & Quinn, p. 49). Thomas (1996) describes culture change using the Eden Alternative as an ongoing journey. Leadership is required to articulate the vision but it is an unpredictable journey that is different in each facility. Most of all, leaders must have a commitment to improve the quality of life of residents and staff, and to make all of their lives a "life worth living" (Sawyer & Rurak, 2004, p. 155). Conclusion Schein (1999) simply says culture is the way we do things and "culture matters" (p.3). He also describes culture as a "property of a group… wherever a group has enough common experience, a culture begins to form" (p.13). Schein encourages leaders to pay attention to culture because it is a "powerful, latent and often unconscious set of forces that determine both our individual and collective behaviour, ways of perceiving, thought patterns and values" (p. 14). Schein states organisational culture determines strategy, goals and modes of operating in organisations and asserts that leaders must recognize that culture is difficult to change because it represents the "accumulated learning of a group - the ways of thinking, feeling, and perceiving the world that have made the group successful" (p. 21). Success of cultural change is dependent on the leaderships ability to integrate leadership skills, concepts, and competencies with respect for the existing culture of the organisation and community. In order to facilitate change within a culture, the leader must exhibit specific competencies and understand the importance of leadership and the preservation of the culture. References Alvesson, M. (2002) Understanding organizational culture . London: Sage. Bijlsma-Frankeme, K. (1997). On costly frictions between organizational cultures and structure. In L. Pate, R. Golembiewski & A. Rahim (Eds.), Current topics in management. New York: JAI Press Inc. Cameron, K.S. & Quinn, R.E. (2006). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Casey, C. (1999). Come, join our family: Discipline and integration in corporate organizational culture. Human Relations, 52(1), 155-178. Davis, S. (1985). Culture is not just an internal affair. In R. Kilmann, M. Saxton, & R. Serpa (Eds.), Gaining control of the corporate culture. San Francisco: JosseyBass Publishers. Deal, T., & Kennedy, A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Heaphy, E. (2007). Bodily insights: Three lenses on positive organizational relationships . In J. E. Dutton , ed. 8 B. R. Ragins (Eds.), Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and research foundation (pp. p. 47-71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kotter, J.P. (1996). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Louis, M. R. (1985). Sourcing workplace cultures: Why, when, and how. In R. Kilman, M. Saxton, & R. Serpa (Eds.), Gaining control of the corporate culture. San Francisco: Jessey-Bass Publishers. Mohan, M. L. (1993). Organizational communication and cultural vision: Approaches for analysis. Albany: State University of New York Press. Quinn, R.E. & McGrath, M.R. (1985) The transformation of organizational cultures – A competing values perspective. In Frost, P.J., Moore, L.F., Lundberg, C.C., & Martin, J.A. (Eds.) Organizational Culture. Ca., Sage. Sathe, V. (1985). How to decipher and change corporate culture. In R Kilmann, M. Saxton, & R Serpa (Eds.), Gaining control of the corporate culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Sawyer, E. & Rurak, C. (2004). The road to Eden north: How five Canadian long-term care facilities became Eden Alternatives. Ottawa: CHA Press. Schein, E. H. (1985). How culture forms, develops and changes. In L. Pate, R Golembiewski, & A. Rahim (Eds.), Current topics in management. New York: JAI Press, Inc. Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45(1), 271-299. Schein, E. H. (1997). Organizational learning: What is new? In R. Kilman, M. Saxton, & R Serpa (Eds.), Gaining control of the corporate culture. San Francisco: Jessey-Bass Publishers. Thomas, W. (1996). Life worth living: How someone you love can still enjoy life in a nursing home. Massachusetts: Vanderwyk & Burnham Acton. Read More