CHAPTER FOURTEEN ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

research methodology adopted. Redding (1994) proposes a two-dimensional

classification scheme for research in this area based upon the degree of
interpretation or description in the study, with the second scale reflecting micro to
macro levels of analysis. Cray and Mallory (1998) suggest that it is possible to
address many of the earlier criticisms of research in this field by classifying studies
according to their relationship to theory. In doing so, they offer three approaches that
can be identified from the literature:
1 Nclive comparative. This approach regards culture as the explanatory variable
for any differences observed. The writers use the term nave to reflect the
lack of any theoretical basis to the work. The emphasis in such studies is to
compare issues such as how managerial functions differ between cultures.
2 Culture free. An approach taking contingency theory as the basis of seeking to
explore the differences and similarities between cultures. The notion of
contingency allows the perspective of cross-cultural studies to be undertaken
and the impact on a variety of structural dimensions associated with organizing
and managing to be explored.
3 Culture bound. This approach draws on a broad range of theoretical models to
explore and explain differences between cultures.
Each of these categorization approaches has its own strength and they are not auto-
matically mutually exclusive. Each could be used for different purposes; for example,
the Cray and Mallory approach sets out to provide the basis for their cognitive model
of international management. This uncertainty in how to classify studies of culture
reflects the relatively recent exploration of this concept, together with the growing
complexify of international operational activity and human multicultural experience
which inevitably complicates attempts to theorize in this field.
Many of the most popular frameworks we discuss later in this chapter reflect a
rationalistic and functionalist approach to culture. These approaches have been criti-
cized for reducing culture to a mere variable in their attempt to try to understand
what function culture fulfils in an organization (see Schultz, 1995; Rowlinson and
Proctor, 1999) and what culture is likely to predict success. Moreover, such
approaches can imply that culture serves merely as an alternative mechanism for
manipulating employees through ideological control and values engineering' (Morgan,
1986/2006: p. 150). Alternatives to this reduction of culture to a managerial tool,
which incidentally (and inappropriately) negates the difficulties in changing and
managing organizational culture, are metaphorical and symbolic conceptions which
focus more on the organization as a whole and on the unexplored meaning of
overlooked or unexplained phenomena, respectively (see Schultz, 1995; Morgan,
1986/2006; Alvesson and Berg, 1992). These approaches appear much more focused
on understanding the reality of experiences in organizations through studying culture
rather than predicting specific outcomes. Postmodern treatments of culture also exist,
which challenge the unitary nature of culture and the assumption of fixed and shared
meanings, and instead locate cultural dynamics in the verbal and literary discourse
among organizational members (see Alvesson and Berg, 1992; Hatch and Cunliffc,
2006; Rowlinson and Proctor, 1999). Some of these criticisms are picked up again in
the section on sub- and countercultures below.
LEVELS AND DIMENSIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL
CULTURE
it is possible to distinguish different levels in the literature on cultural analysis.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

Typically, these levels range from the easily accessible and assessable, visible and
tangible, to hard- to-access and difficult to assess, invisible and intangible aspects of
culture. Rousseau (1990), for example, distinguished the following elements along this
continuum: material
86 PART FI VE INFORMAL SYSTEMS AND DYNAMICS WITHIN ORGANIZATIONS

Figure 14.2 Schei ns three l evels of culture
Greater level of awareness
Taken for granted
Visible but often undecipherable
artefacts, patterns of activities, behavioural norms, values and fundamental
assumptions. A similar and very widely used model by Edgar Schein ( 1985), one of
the most influential organizational and management scholars in the area of culture,
distinguishes between three levels of culture: artefacts, values and assumptions (see
Figure 14.2). For Schein, the essence of culture is located at the level of basic
assumptions which reflect how members of a culture experience reality, how they
perceive the physical and social world, and how they think and feel. These
assumptions are taken for granted, and are rarely questioned. Consider how hardly
anyone ever considers if and why things fall to the ground - subjective knowledge
and assumptions about gravity typically remain at a subconscious level. However, also
consider how less acculturated members of a culture (for example young children)
frequently ask questions about such fundamentals. Children asking about falling things
are quickly labelled nave by more acculturated members of a culture (i.e., adults).
Similarly, an organizational newcomer who questions why nobody challenged the
sales director on overly optimistic revenue forecasts may be called nave if such
challenges of senior executives are not culturally sanctioned.
A cultures assumptions provide the basis for and interact with values, Scheins
next level of culture. These values are the social norms, principles, standards, and
objectives that arc valued by cultural members for their intrinsic (not instrumental)
worth. These values are more accessible because they are revealed by members'
behaviours and priorities. The set of cultural values often also indicates what is seen
as morally right and wrong in a particular culture. Even though these values often
remain subconscious, members can more easily become aware of them than of their
underlying cultural assumptions. In particular, members become more readily aware of
such values when they are challenged during times of change or when someone
violates conventions. Good examples abound in Sacha Baron Cohens movies Borat
(2006) and Bruno (2009) which also show the confusion, embarrassment, and emo-
tional and behavioural responses that can ensue when individuals challenge cultural
values and violate cultural norms, or through deliberately behaving in ways that take
merely espoused (cultural) norms and values literally.
Norms are particularly important aspects of such cultural values. Norms and their
formal counterpart, rules, communicate expectations and provide for a means of
cultural and social control (see Chapter 7). The behaviours prescribed by norms can
typically be traced to valued outcomes.
Values are linked to artefacts, Scheins third cultural level, in that values-congruent
behaviour expresses and manifests the cultural values and assumptions located at the
other levels. This can happen through deliberate expressive actions (for example, a
manager distributes a memo specifying a dress code for the unit), through unintended
expressive actions (e.g., a member interprets the ambiguous actions of a senior man-
ager as an explanation to a newcomer in culture-consistent ways), or through other
actions that manifest cultural assumptions and values (for example, all employees
CHAPTER FOURTEEN ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

stand patiently in line in the canteen but encourage a senior manager who enters to
go to the top of the queue). Similarly, repeated culturally consistent behaviour can
leave traces of culture. For example, mounds of cigarette butts under a no smoking
sign in a plant indicate that some formal rules can be and are frequently broken.
Anything observable linked to behaviour of culture members can be seen as such
artefacts (see Hatch and Cunliffe, 2006) including objects (e.g., office layout,
furniture, parking arrangements, dress and uniforms), verbal expressions (e.g.,
stories, myths, jargon, metaphors and theories used, speeches, formal written
communication), and activities (e.g., ceremonies, rituals, customs, communication
patterns at meetings), especially repeated or collective activity patterns.
Schein (1985) also identified six dimensions that, he suggests, reflect the composi-
tion of culture within an organizational context:
1 Behavioural regularities. This reflects observable patterns of behaviour. It
might include induction ceremonies, in-group language and the ritualized
behaviour that reflects membership of particular organizations.
2 Dominant values. These are the specific beliefs expressed by groups and
organizations. For example, an organization might attempt to create a quality
image by adopting a number of specific initiatives, including publishing a
policy on relevant processes and activities.
3 Norms. These are general patterns of behaviour that all members of a group are
expected to follow. For example, many retail chains encourage employees to
use specific customer greetings including smiling and making eye contact.
4 Rules. Rules are specific instructions about what must be done, whereas
norms are sometimes unwritten. The rules are the must dos of the
organization set out by management. However, because they must be
followed, employees may simply comply with them in order to avoid
punishment.
5 Philosophy. In this context these reflect the underlying beliefs that
individuals hold about people in general. Given that an organization is
controlled by the managers who run it, the underlying philosophy often
tends to reflect their values.
6 Climate. The physical layout of buildings, recreation facilities, management
style and the design of public areas all help to create the atmosphere or
climate within the company.
Each of these six dimensions of culture is a complex idea in its own right. They do,
however, offer descriptive dimensions that can be helpful in beginning to tease out
how culture influences organizations and how in turn organizations can influence
culture. This circularity is reflected in Figure 14.3.
The circularity displayed in Figure 14.3 indicates that culture produces particular
behaviour and associated belief patterns, which in turn influence what actually hap-
pens within the organization. Actual events are then measured against management
objectives, with the consequences feeding back into culture. The implication of this is
that if managers perceive that a particular culture achieves the objectives being
pursued, it will be reinforced. If it does not contribute to the achievement of objec-
tives, then managers will attempt to change it.
CULTURAL FRAMEWORKS
The issue of organizational culture has a long history in management and organization
studies, but took centre stage in the mainstream management literature in
PART PV INFORMAL SYSTEMS AND DYNAMICS WITHIN ORGANIZATIONS

the early 1980s. Many contributions during the late 1970s and 1980s were aimed at
explaining the immense success of Japanese companies in providing low-cost yet
high-quality products on world markets and particularly in the US. Along with
attempts to understand this success as a function of superior quality management
(e.g., Crosby, 1979; Deming, 1986; Juran, 1982; see Adam and Swamidass, 1989, for
a review), a range of authors addressed the cultural aspects of the Japanese success,
and organizational culture more generally, and the recognition of culture as an
important determinant of success continues to today (e.g., Tellis et ai, 2009). The
initial publications that popularized organizational culture as an important issue
include Pascale and Athos (1981) The Art of Japanese Management, which attempts to
describe, translate and apply management practices linked to Japanese culture to
American circumstances, and Ouchis work (Ouchi, 1981; Ouichi and Jaeger, 1978) on
Type Z organizations that are described as combining the best of US and Japanese
cultural characteristics (sec Table 14.3). Also, Peters and Waterman (1982) published
In Search of Excellence which attempted to identify drivers of excellence, many of
which are linked to organizational culture (see the companion website for
more detail on the drivers of excellence). Both In Search of Excellence and Pascale
i4.2 EXTEND
an
^ Athos (1981) The Art of Japanese Management mention the McKinsey 7-S
YOUR LEARNING framework, a tool that outlines the holistic challenges involved in organizing and

Table 14.3 Ouchi' s cultural differences

Figure 14.3 The cycle of culture

Japanese organizations American organizations

Lifetime employment Short-term employment

Slow evaluation and promotion Rapid evaluation and promotion

Nonspecialized career paths Specialized career paths

Implicit control mechanisms Explicit control mechanism

Collective decision making Individual responsibility

Holistic concern Segmented concern

Source: Pugh, D.S. and
Hickson, D.J. (1989)
Writers on Organizations (4th
edn), London: Penguin.
CHAPTER f - UR- - ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE


PART PV INFORMAL SYSTEMS AND DYNAMICS WITHIN ORGANIZATIONS

Quick
Example: Restaurants
Slow
managing successful organizations. At the centre of this framework are shared values (also called
superordinate goals), clearly a relevant aspect of culturc.
At the same time, Deal and Kennedy (1982) distinguished the approach to risk and the speed of feedback
to decisions and actions from the environment as important dimensions to distinguish different types of
organizational culture (sec Figure 14.4). They also introduced the distinction between weak and strong
cultures. A strong culture would be evident if almost all members supported it or if it were composed of
deeply held values and beliefs. Table 14.4 indicates rhose features associated with a strong culture. A weak
culture by comparison is one that is not strongly supported or rooted in the activities and value systems of
the group. Culture strength can be seen as determined by the degree to which core aspects of culture are
shared, and the degree to which individual members are intensely committed to them (Luthans, 1995). This
is fully compatible with the contemporary cognitive conception of culturc as shared cognitions (e.g.,
Horowitz, 2009; Lehman et al., 2004; Nishida, 2005; Weller, 2007).
Figure 1 U.L Deal and Kennedy' s types of corporate cul tures
Low High


Work hard/Play hard culture
Focus is on task achievement
Often very cohesive work units
Stressful environment due to
fast cycle times of many
activities
Tough guy/Macho culture
Stressful because of constant
risk in many activities
Short-term orientation
Focus on present

Example: Police force, surgeons



Feedback


Process culture
Focus on control, formal
systems, details
Value for stability and status quo
Stress comes from
internal politics and
limitations due to excessive
bureaucracy
Example: Large Banks, utilities
Bet your company culture
Stress comes from risk in the
face of high uncertainty
Technical skill is valued
Intense engagement with
environment to influence results
Example: High-tech startup,
oil/mining exploration firm





Table \U.U Deal and Kennedy' s strong cul tural elements

Widely shared philosophy
Concern for individuals \\
Recognition of heroes


Belief in ritual and ceremony


Well understood informal rules and expectations

I

Importance of individual contribution to whole

90 PART FI VE INFORMAL SYSTEMS AND DYNAMICS WITHIN ORGANIZATIONS

Power culture Typically found
in small organizations,
everything revolves around
the focal person(s). All
important decisions are made
by them and they retain
absolute authority in all
matters.
Role culture
This type of culture is based
firmly on the existence of
procedure and rule
frameworks. Hierarchy and
bureaucracy dominate this
type of organization, with
instructions coming down the
organization and information
going back up to more senior
levels.
Task culture The expertise
within this type of
organization is vested in the
individuals within it and it is
they who must be organized in
a way that meets the needs of
the business. This type of
culture is supportive of a
networked or team
organization.
Decision making is frequently
distributed throughout the
net dependent on the needs
of the task.

Breaking the conventions
One of the purposes of retirement parties is to provide
an opportunity for employees to say goodbye to the old
guard and to demonstrate their allegiance to the
remaining team and the firm as a whole. They also
represent an opportunity for the retiree to show that
there is a smooth transition and that the baton of office
has been safely handed on to the next generation. As
such, the speeches and events are usually carefully
scripted and choreographed to meet these demands. At
one such event a retiring General
Motors executive in America broke the unwritten rules
by openly criticizing a senior manager much to the
visible embarrassment of the others in the room.
TASK
1 Is it always wrong to break the conventions
surrounding such ceremonial events? Why or why
not? Under what circumstances might it be
acceptable to do so and why? To what extent would
breaking the rules at such events impact on the
problems' surfaced?





From the items included in Table 14.4 two are of particular interest. First, the hero
is a person who personifies the values and actions expected of the true believer in
that particular culture. They arc used as role models for the population at large.
Second, the use of ritual and ceremony as the basis of reinforcement of the desired
culture is also part of the mechanism for ensuring that it is internalized by individuals.
The Employee Perspective example provides an illustration of problems that can arise
if a convention is broken. Managers frequently seek to inculcate a strong culture in
order to achieve clan control (see Chapter 12). A strong culture which is highly
supportive of management's objectives makes the organization easier to manage as
more of the collective effort and energy is channelled towards meeting business
objectives. However, strong cultures are more difficult to change, which can create
problems if a lack of fit between the current requirements and culturally supported
behaviours develops.
Another framework of organizational culture types, based on the earlier work of
Harrison (1972), is offered by Handy (1993) which describes the following four
manifestations of culture:
1 Power culture. Typically found in small organizations, everything revolves
around the focal person(s). All important decisions are made by them and they
retain absolute authority in all matters. As a diagram, Handy describes this
culture as a web (Figure 14.5). The success of power culture depends on the
capabilities of the focal person in technical, business and management terms.
2 Role culture. This type of culture is based firmly on the existence of
procedure and rule frameworks. It is typified by a Greek temple diagram
(Figure 14.6). The hierarchy and bureaucracy dominate this type of
organization, with instructions coming down the organization and
information going back up to the senior levels.
3 Task culture. The expertise within this type of organization is vested in the
individuals within it and it is they who must be organized in a way that meets
the needs of the business. The description used by Handy to illustrate this
culture is that of a net (Figure 14.7). This type of culture is supportive of a team
organization. Decision making is frequently distributed throughout the