Analyzing Organization Cultures

Bruce Fortado, Bruce Fortado

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000382006
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Sviluppo organizzativo
• Index: Business

Certain consultants argue leaders can quickly, easily, and considerably alter their organization cultures to improve performance. Conversely, field researchers have described situations where leaders could do little to alter the existing organization culture. Between these extreme positions, a spectrum of varying degrees of leader influence exists, and organizations fall at various places along this spectrum.

This book presents five field studies dealing with team, service, and sales cultures where both expected and unexpected outcomes arose. In multiple instances, leaders hoped showing some employee appreciation would compensate for offering below market average wages. Several leadership groups were prospering based on cost cuts or increased sales. Those below often had their work intensified and they were experiencing greater stress. Eight paradoxical situations were uncovered and the interpretations of the participants were based in part on their personal work histories and the history of their current organization. In each case, evidence of employee informal organization and managerial operating cultures were documented.

Analyzing Organization Cultures uses detailed case studies of five work organizations to offer a comparative approach to analyzing organizational culture. It shows the latest state of knowledge on the topic and will be of interest to researchers, academics, and students in the fields of organizational studies, management history, human resource management, and organizational theory.

1The Migration and Mutation of “Culture”

Bruce Fortado and Paul Fadil

University of North Florida

Introduction

Defining what one will talk about is a traditional starting point. Most words have numerous definitions in large dictionaries. Sometimes, one word or term builds on another. Care must therefore be taken to make sure what people mean.

One must first understand what “culture” refers to before one explores “organization culture.” Readers need to recognize there are multiple academic or “book” definitions of both culture and organization culture. Dealing with such matters tends to excite many scholars and bore most regular people. The focus here will be placed on what has actually happened in the lower levels of organizations. Thus, only a limited amount of space will be devoted to outlining some introductory “book definitions.”

Our analysis will depend heavily on the comparative method. Our real-world examples will be compared to a few historic usages of culture and organization culture. In addition, comparisons will be made of what things were like before and after a cultural change effort was undertaken. Some of our participants compared a current state to ones that existed in prior workplaces or under a different manager in the same workplace. Such comparisons can uncover critical aspects of these cultural situations.

The term “culture” originated in Anthropology and Sociology. We will initially review what “culture” referred to in these disciplines. Next, the Human Relations field research conducted from the 1920s to 1960s will be examined. Subsequently, in the 1980s, consultants told leaders managing their “organization culture” could improve performance outcomes. Culture advocates now exist in many disciplines: including, Organization Development (OD), Operations Management (OM), Marketing and Public Administration. This chapter will show how “culture” has migrated and mutated.

Grasping the Idea of “Culture”

What does “culture” refer to? Anthropologist Edward Burnett Tylor in 1871 authored the first definition. He said culture was “that complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs, art, laws, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” (Hamada, 1994:10). Some scholars have said this definition is largely accepted and followed (Maccoby, 1994:267). Others argue “culture” has “no fixed or broadly agreed meaning even in anthropology” (Alvesson, 2002:3). It is important to understand this disagreement exists. We will make no attempt to resolve this matter. Our aim is just to grasp what culture generally refers to.

All of the knowledge that others pass on to a newborn child over time is culture (Benedict, 1934:3; Trice, 1993:20). Children are taught language in oral and written form. They learn how to dress and cook. They are instructed how they should and should not act. They are shown how tools are made and used. They are taught about math and science. They get exposed to art, music, song and drama. They identify useful ways of solving the commonly encountered problems in life. These are all parts of “culture.”

Humans must deal with a surrounding environment. The techniques, activities and symbols that are used by a group of people, in other words their habits, are summed up under the term “culture” (Chapple, 1943:24). When facing the difficulties of surviving in a complex and changing world, culture gives members of a group the best-known methods to date (Turner, 1978). It also provides the best explanations for questions about unknowns and the nature of human existence. Culture is what makes a group distinctive. This includes patterns of belief, values and action (Whyte, 1961:58). Culture provides a group identity. Group members are also identified by their culture. Culture consists in no small part of the knowledge that has been built up over time. Each new generation learns from the prior ones and when possible improves upon their work. By doing these things, culture provides a sense of order, continuity and confidence. Aspects of culture are learned, shared, transgenerational, symbolic, patterned and adaptive.

A person can better understand “culture” when one visits a foreign country (Whyte, 1961:57). The initial confusion should give way to insightful comparisons of the foreign and home cultures. Cultures are often studied by examining artifacts (e.g., technology and art), symbols (e.g., objects, settings and functionaries), organizational languages (e.g., jargon, gestures, songs, humor, gossip, rumors, metaphors and slogans), shared stories (e.g., legends, myths and sagas) and rituals (e.g., ceremonies and rites) (Schein, 1985; Trice & Beyer, 1993).

Some scholars have stressed the unique aspects of cultures, while others have explored common dimensions that span many cultures (Benedict, 1934). These dimensions have included the nature of spiritual beliefs, relationships, reality/truth and time (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961). When you are a part of a culture, many things are taken for granted. This means the underlying assumptions are not easy to bring to the surface. Members believe their way of doing things is the right way and other ways are inferior. This frame of mind is called “ethnocentrism.” Overall, both the unique aspects of a culture and common cultural dimensions deserve study.

The Existence of Subcultures

In large cultures, there are normally subcultures (Arnold, 1970; Martin, 1992:71–117). Many countries have regional and religious subcultures. Patriotic and revolutionary subcultures may exist. Teen, gang and criminal subcultures often form (Cohen, 1955). Professional and occupational subcultures commonly arise (Hughes, 1958; Trice, 1993).

Subcultures have common themes and interests that unite their members. They often face similar problems, which they can deal with better as a group. Being a member of such a group is a part of a person’s identity. It is prestigious to be a subcultural leader.

There can be subcultural interests that are in opposition to the surrounding culture or other subcultures (Hebdige, 1979; Yinger, 1982). However, all subcultures are not oppositional in nature (Martin & Siehl, 1983). Most people belong to numerous subcultures. Determining whether these groups have any basic conflicts will help one grasp a situation. When people have multiple identities and roles, tensions can exist.

Political Processes Impact Culture

Political processes can create and alter aspects of a culture. Since culture includes what one should and should not do, the laws are a core component. In democratic and republican forms of government, there are many aspects of culture that operate on a day-to-day basis with little, if any, government influence. Some totalitarian governments have tried to exert control over culture via means such as burning books, massive censorship and extensive propaganda. Certain forms of religion have been repressed or banned. Enemies may be identified to take the blame for certain problems. This can unify and direct the energies of zealous insiders. Extreme methods of observation and enforcement can be used. Wrong thinkers have been expelled, imprisoned, tortured and in some cases killed. Genocides have been carried out to “cleanse” certain societies.

Some groups have been labeled “cults.” A cult of personality may arise around certain leaders. Members often enjoy their identification with a cause and the status being an insider provides. Outsiders may question the devotion the insiders give their movement and its leaders. They might call them “fanatics.” The terms “brainwashing” or “coercive persuasion” were used to describe what certain communist regimes did with prisoners during the 1940s and 1950s (Schein, Schneier, & Barker, 1961; Winokur, 1955). Obtaining a public confession of guilt is a quite different matter than “re-educating” someone. Although the results were uneven, and varied greatly in duration, the Chinese did succeed in using peer pressure on prisoners to accept core aspects of Maoist doctrine.

In “free” societies, such activities are strongly condemned. Nevertheless, it should be acknowledged that free political processes regularly involve “talking points” or “spin.” This is propaganda. Threats often result in core cultural values and symbols being used to foster unity and muster the resolve to resist. Terrorists are imprisoned. The differences are largely one of degree. In free societies the leaders can influence culture, but do not try to totally control it. The will of the majority should rule. Yet, members of the various minority groups ought to have basic legally protected rights and privileges.

Cultures Are Always in a State of Flux

In practice, disputes regularly arise. Changes in culture take place over time as conditions change and innovations are made. At the same time, it is important for many aspects of culture to persist. This provides continuity. Further, each generation need not reinvent the wheel. Some people often feel uneasy with the old ways being changed very dramatically in a short period of time. They fear core values will be compromised. Another group may be impatient with the resistance they encounter in trying to enact progress. Each generation wants to make its mark and feels frustration when there is opposition to their efforts. This is a difficult balancing act for any group.

In summary, cultures are the joint product of the interactions and interpretations of members of a group. Leaders determine some aspects, like the laws, but many aspects arise elsewhere. Once a culture has been established, it tends to shape the subsequent interactions and interpretations. Subcultures normally exist within large cultures. Cultures evolve as new environmental challenges arise and new habits develop. Stable aspects of a culture or subculture are mutually acceptable. This view of culture will be termed the “interaction perspective” (Blumer, 1969; Rock, 1979; Whyte, 1961:15).

The Human Relations Perspective Era (1920s–1960s)

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, many employers adopted paternalistic practices: such as, providing company housing, stores, and churches. Leaders often said the company was “a family.” These paternalistic cultures varied considerably. Some were far kinder and less intrusive. However, many proved to be exploitative (Jacoby, 1985).

Some early management literature focused on the benefits of “formal organization.” This included rules, procedures, organization structure, supervision, appraisals, compensation schemes and disciplinary systems (Barnard, 1938). The aim was to control behaviors within very narrow limits (Whyte, 1961:81).

Human Relations researchers seldom used the term “culture” (Chapple, 1943). Yet, many of their work studies relied on Anthropological and Sociological concepts and methods. Trice and Beyer (1993:23–7) therefore identified them as pioneers in conducting organization culture research and change efforts.

During the 1920s, Scientific Management incentive pay schemes were explored via observation and interviewing. Mathewson (1931:7) showed massive output restriction was taking place in 105 establishments. Some finished goods were banked for later. Some employees chose to work at a leisurely pace. Others loafed or slept for a portion of the workday. This restriction took place for a number of reasons: including, fear of an incentive rate cut, fear of unemployment and unresolved grievances.

The Hawthorne Studies

A series of lighting experiments were conducted at the Western Electric Hawthorne plant from 1924–1927 by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939:14–18). The first experiment involved three departments. A production baseline was determined. Next, the level of illumination was raised in three increments. The output in one group bobbed up and down. Efficiency in the second group increased more or less continuously, but not solely based on the level of illumination. In the third group, greater efficiency was recorded by lighting levels, and these did not always fall off with a decrease in illumination. The need to control other factors that affected output was noted.

The second experiment relied on two groups taken from the same department. A test group and a control group were created. The groups were put in different buildings to reduce the potential for competition impacting the results. By comparing the production levels as the level of lighting was varied in the test room, it was thought the best level of lighting would be revealed. As the test room lighting was incremen...