1-3

A number of typologies of organizational culture have been published in Western Europe over the past 20 years (Deal/Kennedy 1982; Handy 1993; Trompenaars 1993; Hall 1995; Goffee/Jones 1998; Cameron/Quinn 1999; Fernandez/Hogan 2003 etc.). Goffee and Jones' Cultural Model A key weapon in the war for talent[1] in the 21st century is going to be organisational culture. In the sellers market for highly skilled labour, Chambers et al cite culture as a key value proposition for talented individuals assessing potential employers. In The Harvard Business Review, Goffee and Jones[2] compare business communities to social communities. The practice of holding organisations together and retaining talent is therefore similar to those used by these other communities within towns and villages. Goffee and Jones describe organisational culture as communities. The communities to which they refer are similar to those which exist in everyday organisations. They divide organisational culture into two types of human relation: sociability and solidarity, and display this on a four-box matrix.[3] The matrix identifies four types of organisational culture: Networked, Mercenary, Fragmented and Communal.

2-3

According to Goffee and Jones, a community with a high degree of sociability boasts a large number of close friendships and a convivial atmosphere. Often colleagues arrange outings and functions outside of the workplace, and close friendships build up relatively easily. This brings a number of benefits. It provides an enjoyable working atmosphere and often encourages teamwork and creativity. It is also true that this type of environment encourages individuals to go beyond explicit responsibilities to help others. However, the downside of a sociable climate is that the performances of poorer performing individuals are intentionally masked by friends. On the other hand, a community with strong solidarity is practically devoid of personal ties, but strong professional bonds exist. The advantages of solidarity are that work is done effectively and relationships are mobilised in the event of outside pressure. The drawback of such an atmosphere is that it is only effective if it is focused on the right strategy. Furthermore, roles are clearly defined in an atmosphere of solidarity and this prevents the kind of altruistic behaviour that occurs in a sociable situation. The cultural types in the matrix can be described in the following ways: Networked Networked organisations are characterised by a lack of hierarchy. In its place, friendship groups and cliques tend to dictate the rules of working and socialising within the organisation. Mercenary

3-3
An organisation with a mercenary culture is characterised by a clearly defined hierarchy and a definite separation between personal and work life. The personal aspirations of individuals usually correspond with the objectives of the organisation. Fragmented The fragmented culture has low levels of personal and professional interaction. Workers have no allegiances to their colleagues and often work behind closed doors or at home. Communal A communal culture develops out of organisations where employees work together, live together and spend weekends together. That is, employees are close friends, and have developed mutually beneficial professional objectives. The authors believe that there is no one size fits all model for corporate culture and that leaders should attempt to create a culture that best suits the business environment. For example, the authors suggest that, to increase sociability, managers can take the following steps:[4]

promote the sharing of ideas, interests and emotions by recruiting compatible people increase social interaction among employees by arranging casual gatherings inside and outside of the office reduce formality between employees limit hierarchical differences act like a friend and set good examples by caring for those in trouble

Similarly, they suggest methods for creating an environment of solidarity:

develop awareness of competitors throughout the organisation create a sense of urgency stimulate the will to win encourage commitment to shared corporate goals

In conclusion, the authors state that managers must be able to appreciate the extent of sociability and solidarity in their organisation to compete for talent in the modern economy. That is, they must attempt to gain a feel for the organisation and become aware of the fit of the organisational culture to the business environment. If they do not, this will almost certainly affect their ability to retain talent and compete. They note that there is no right type of culture to ensure that an organisation holds on to talent. Culture is affected by external sources like competition but it is also the product of decisions made at the strategic level. Goffee and Jones believe that managers have to be aware that they can alter the culture by taking a variety of steps, such as recruiting compatible people to ensure that ideas and knowledge are shared. In short, Goffee and Jones believe that culture has a considerable effect on an organisations ability to create a value proposition so that it can hold on to talent. Every organisation is capable of manipulating culture to its advantage, but it must be acutely aware of the business climate and existing culture before this becomes a viable proposition.