ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 1

Organizational Culture Analysis of Transitioning Teams

at a Small Consulting Firm

Hannah Elise Jones

Pepperdine University
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 2

Organizational Culture Analysis of Transitioning Teams at a Small Consulting Firm

Great Place to Work (GPTW), is a small research and consulting firm based in San

Francisco, California. This analysis will focus specifically on the newly formed Consulting

Services team as a way of assessing and understanding the challenges of their recent merge from

four teams in to one. Formerly called Advisory Services, the four teams that made up GPTWs

client-facing group were responsible for partnering with companies through survey and

consulting projects to assess and improve their organizational culture. The teams struggled to

maintain consistency and effectiveness in engagements with clients because of silos and

communication challenges internally. This long-standing issue drove management to make

significant design changes to this area of the business to improve internal functioning and by

extension, the client experience. At the end of 2016 all four Advisory Services teams were

completely collapsed to form regionally specific cross-functional pods under the umbrella of the

new Consulting Services Team. Each pod was assigned a senior consultant to serve a partner

role, managing the business in that region.

This change went into full effect in January of 2017, and the first few months of the

transition have presented significant organizational effectiveness challenges. This paper will

examine this transition first from an open systems perspective, considering how Consulting

Services is influenced by external systems and internal sub-systems, and second from a culture

perspective, which will consider how the culture of both the team and GPTW as a whole have

shaped the transition to date.

In the open systems theory all organizations are open to their environment and must

achieve an appropriate relation with the environment if they are to survive (Morgan, 1997, p.

39). The transition to the pod structure is an example of how GPTW was adapting achieve this
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 3

appropriate and more effective relationship with the wider environment. Based on consistent

employee and client feedback, leadership knew that internal silos were preventing client-facing

teams from delivering high-quality service, which was inhibiting external competitiveness as a

professional services organization. Additionally, the need for growth in order to remain

competitive and financially stable inspired the idea of developing more self-contained teams with

a regional emphasis that could one day turn into new regional offices. These two factors, both

heavily influenced by the client environment, and the competitor environment, drove leadership

to implement the pod structure.

From an internal point of view, the change was necessary because the interrelated sub-

systems within the organization were breaking down in ways that were inhibiting work. While

the original concept of the functionally specific teams seemed effective for a small organization,

several events occurred that progressively made the internal sub-systems dysfunctional. First,

was the growth of product offerings over time. Originally offerings were straightforward and

roles and responsibilities were clear. But as new offerings and services were developed the roles

of the various teams were not always clarified, and the processes that developed were not

entirely effective. The lack of oversight across all four original teams allowed these

inefficiencies to emerge and persist. A second significant issue that drove the breakdown in

internal sub-system functioning, was the increasing complexity of the work. As clients grew in

size and scope the projects became more complicated and it became more challenging for the

teams to understand what their peers did. This lack of common understanding about the job

function and the capabilities of each team lead to individuals making commitments to clients on

behalf of the organization that were often not feasible or were taxing for particular teams. This
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 4

common problem lead to frustration and conflict internally, which shaped the relationships teams

had with one another.

This is an example of the challenge the GPTW client-facing teams had in evolving their

working system to deal with the challenges posed by the environment (Morgan, 1997, p. 41).

As the variety in the system increased, in the form of more complex and customized client

projects, the teams were not able to integrate their adapting roles, which inhibited the entire

groups ability to respond to the client environment effectively. The transition to a pod structure

is an attempt to establish congruencies or alignments between different systems and to

identify and eliminate potential dysfunctions (Morgan, 1997, p. 42). It is an example of a

multidisciplinary project team being leveraged for the purposes of system integration.

While the intention and logic of the restructuring are clear, and many employees agree

with the overall approach, the implementation has been impacted by the culture evolution

occurring concurrently at GPTW. In 2015 a new CEO came to GPTW, which began a culture

change across the organization. As Schein says, culture and leadership are two sides of the same

coin, and one cannot understand one without the other (2009, p. 3). The new CEO brought in a

new President, and promoted an internal EVP of Consulting Services. These three leaders have

the most influence on the culture of the organization overall, and specifically Consulting

Services which reports into the EVP and is responsible for delivering the large-scale consulting

projects sold by the CEO, President and EVP. These three leaders in particular, the focus of the

term leadership in this analysis, play a part in reinforcing or changing elements of the existing

culture, most of which has occurred without discussion or shared awareness. This interplay of

culture creation, reenactment, and reinforcement creates and interdependency between culture

and leadership (Schein, 2009, p. 3) that is central to this analysis. Much of the recent culture
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 5

change at GPTW is attributed to new leaders and tension has emerged in various ways across the

organization as employees attempt to adapt. These tensions are some of the top challenges facing

the successful implementation of the pod structure.

The tensions experienced between pod members and leadership is best understood using

Scheins three levels of culture: attributes, espoused values, and tacit assumptions. The expressed

cultural attributes across the client-facing teams varied before the pod integration, particularly in

regards to working habits and patterns. However, many organizational culture attributes were

pervasive across teams and remain central to employees experience at GPTW. Appendix A lists

these key organizational culture attributes. Pre-transition, employees experienced close

relationships within their teams, and had adopted working behaviors, particularly around roles

and communication, that met the needs of the team. While this was comfortable behavior,

employees acknowledged that it was contributing to the cross-functional breakdowns that were

occurring, and saw the pod restructuring as an opportunity to build new relationships that better

served all functions. Pre-transition there was concern, but also excitement about the possibility of

building a better team.

When the transition actually began, however, little emphasis was placed on relationship

building or process change. Pods were not provided with much time to come together and define

their new working relationship. Instead, most of the time in transition activities was focused on

clients, account management, time tracking and other technical issues or changes. Almost all

employees involved in the restructuring were placed under a new direct manager, but little time

was spent developing this crucial relationship, as 1:1 meetings focused on resourcing questions

and client updates. At this point, three months into the transition, many Consulting Services

employees have expressed frustration that working relationships haven't evolved, and the new
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 6

cross-functional pods are not any more informed or effective than the separate teams were

previously.

In examining how the relational and collaborative elements of the transition have been

superseded by a highly technical, business-centric focus, it is essential to consider the driving

assumptions of the leadership involved in the transition. Appendix A outlines several important

leadership assumptions that were derived from an assessment of cultural strengths and

weaknesses as compared to espoused organizational values. These assumptions are neither

positive or negative in nature, but do point to areas of disconnect between leadership and

employees, particularly Consulting Services employees. Three key assumptions will be

addressed here: 1) Positivity drives us forward. Negativity causes dissent. 2) We are experts.

If we show up strong everything else will fall into place. 3) Business can be done well without

personal relationships.

In the context of the pod transition, the assumption about positive and negative

expression has inhibited some employees from speaking up about their questions and concerns.

Many employees who do speak up express frustration at not feeling heard, as leaders remain

intensely focused on growing client accounts. The impact this has on the group is one of

discouragement around lack of change and persistent uncertainty about how work will be

delivered. This experience is perpetuated by the assumption that if we show up and sell strong,

everything else will fall into place. The emphasis leadership has placed on pitching, selling, and

developing accounts is important to grow the business, but also takes energy and focus away

from some needed internal improvements. This assumption is likely the driving reason for the

lack of internally focused change management in the pod transition. Finally, the assumption that

business does not require personal relationships, is a departure from previous leadership styles in
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 7

the organization, most of which emphasized human connection. This change has left many

people seeking more forms of connection, and was one reason why many employees were

excited by the prospects of strengthening team relationships through the pods. Overall, the

relational orientation across GPTW is high, and the sharp departure from that style of leadership

is causing challenges across the business as people assess what it is they need from their leaders

and peers to feel both connected and effective.

These assumptions illustrate a lack of cultural compatibility between leadership and

Consulting Services employees. Cultural compatibility can be understood through the Competing

Values Framework (Cameron and Quinn, 2011). Leaders at GPTW can be placed in the Market

culture category, while most Consulting Services employees fall in the Clan or Adhocracy

culture categories (Appendix B). This lack of congruence was apparent in the earliest days of the

leadership transition, and the CEO has been aware of the challenges it poses for the organization.

However, there has been no formal culture change or alignment effort to address these gaps. This

lack of attention to culture overall, has created challenges in process and organizational change

efforts, like the pod transition. Even as important progress is made in various ways, it is

challenged by an undercurrent of tension between competing perspectives on what the

organizational culture should and can be, and how that culture will support the business in the

future.

References

Cameron, K. & Quinn, R. (2011) Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gareth, M. (1997). Images of Organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schein, E. (2009) The Corporate Culture Survival Guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 8

Appendix A: Notes on GPTW culture using Scheins culture assessment approach

Note: As I was working through the key assumptions I realized I was articulating the assumptions from
the perspective of senior leaders, not from the culture generally. This realization was interesting and
indicative of the culture change we are going through organically as a result of leadership changes at the
top of our organization. For this reason I added a column that shows the impact the key leadership
assumption is having on employees, which is based on my experience as an employee. This
differentiation was an important distinction in the culture analysis.

Artifacts: Communication happens by email most

Office Environment
Colorful office with decorations
Employee welcome banners
Small space
Some disarray in open spaces
Pictures of employees on the walls
Values posted
GPTW affiliate things posted on walls
Fortune magazine covers on walls
Team spaces are clear in some cases
White boards with lots of writing
Few closed offices
Open desks
Snacks in kitchen
Feels lived in'
Relationships
People talk with each other
There are strong personal relationships
among coworkers
Relationships are strongest within
teams
There is a low power distance
Teams are small
Relationships in general are informal
Frequent social events
Most people are friends on Facebook
Spouses and families are introduced or
come to office
Celebrate life events of coworkers,
baby showers, weddings, etc.
Work anniversaries are celebrated
publicly
Behaviors and Habits
Working hours and location are flexible
Many people work from home
frequently, particularly Fridays
Generally people work a 9-5 schedule,
but others are accommodated
frequently
Communication is strongest within
teams, many of whom have their own
expectations and norms for
communication, specific to the team
It is hard to get people to stick with
specific behavior change around
communication
We have a hard time sticking to one
tool for communication
There is a lack of follow-through on
things generally (internally)
Inclusion is high
Frequent meetings without much
structure
Flexible and forgiving with time
Lack of agenda-setting
Conflict adverse generally, over-
emphasize the positive
Communication is generally open, but
known for letting big news drop on
people out of the blue
Poor internal communication of change
generally due to speed
A lot of jargon is used around culture,
our methodology and the list
High mission orientation
Strong work ethic from some, not from
others - internal customer service varies
Client first mentality among leaders
Rites and Rituals
GALF
Kwirky Contest
Welcome Banners
Annual Swag
Birthday Off
New Hire Lunch
Launchpad Meetings
Shout Outs and Mission Moments
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 9

Espoused Values and Assumptions:

*Key tensions between employees and leaders that are addressed in the culture analysis are highlighted in yellow.

Espoused Values Strengths Opportunities Key Assumptions - Leader Impact of A

Excel Empowered by the mission Work/life balance has Working long and hard is an Many emplo
people work hard and bring the decreased, particularly since indicator of people doing their harder, not n
best of themselves. new leadership arrived. There is best work. balance betw
little clarification of or alignment and having t
around what it means for obligation is
individuals to to their best work.

Individuals strive to think and
act as owners of the business
by making intelligent choices to
serve the client and support
our people.
We try to think and act as Being committed to the Some emplo
owners of the business but business means operating in strategy is fi
different people have different the interest of our growth and chasing the
ideas of what this means beyond financial health. developing a
just profitability, there are consistent w
questions of strategy and misalignmen
approach involved. of the organ

Our history and brand strength
give us a great deal of
credibility in the market and
with clients.
We say we are comfortable and We are experts. If we show Employees f
confident in being experts, yet up strong everything else will not understa
we do not equip people with the fall into place. acting irresp
tools and information they need things things
to feel that way in all cases. delivered. M
stress as a r

We take intelligent risks to
grow and fulfill our mission
through commitment to our
teams and our clients.
Not all employees are equally All change should serve the While emplo
confident in the rapid prototyping customer. purpose of th
and innovation process we are perception a
engaging in around new not being pla
products and services. people intern
changes.

Care Employees support one We say we give and receive the Positivity drives us forward. Employees s
another in their professional gift of feedback but we are Negativity causes dissent. challenges,
roles often. feedback shy and conflict conversation
adverse. As an organization we
struggle to address performance
issues, and sometimes end up
working around people rather
than confronting things head on.
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS 10

Espoused Values Strengths Opportunities Key Assumptions - Leader Impact of A

We respect and value each Each leader can recognize Employees k

other for our unique gifts by employees in ways they feel camaraderie
acknowledging personal are appropriate. their teams b
accomplishments, talents, and often. This re
interests. prevalent pe
leaders.

We actively support each other
personally and professionally.
Not all senior leaders model this Working long and hard is an Many leader
behavior which causes tension indicator of people doing their employees,
between values and behaviors. best work. time modelin
Some employees feel that consistently
issues of work/life balance inhibit there is tens
their ability to be successful what it mean
personally or professionally. commitment

We celebrate and reward Each leader can recognize Successes a

contributions in meaningful and employees in ways they feel on a small o
personalized ways. are appropriate. leaders do n
or recognitio
celebrate ea

One Team, One We are aligned around one
Mission mission and employees act in
accordance with that value,
regularly espousing the
mission, often speaking of it as
a movement.
We say we have a focus on If we drive toward our Employees m
showing up consistently to the mission by selling more work is happening
client as one team, but we don't we will be successful. even if they
always back that up with strategy or th
consistent communication implementat
internally across teams. There the mission
are ways in which the mission employees f
seems to get more attention individual ch
than the team. be seen as u

Employees care about the
success of the client and build
strong relationships with clients
to support them.
We say we have a focus on If we drive toward our Employees f
showing up consistently to the mission by selling more work they perceiv
client as one team, but we don't we will be successful. in clients mo
enable that through effective teams and in
technologies.
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS
Espoused Values Strengths
Employees are very supportive
of one another. Similar to
celebration and recognition,
support is carried and
sustained at a peer-to-peer
level.
We actively seek to involve
others. Our collaboration, while
confined to certain parts of the
business, is effective.
There are high amounts of
trust in teams. Some teams
are incredibly high-functioning
and operate with great levels
of trust that enables amazing
work.
We do important work
together, but don't take
ourselves too seriously by
having fun and maintaining a
casual office envionrment
where we emphasize
relationships.
11
Opportunities Key Assumptions - Leader Impact of A
We say we live by the statement By making the business Employees f
I care if you succeed but we do successful showing that we they perceiv
not always provide employees care. in clients mo
with the tools and resources teams and in
they need to do their job.
Teams that do not collaborate We value expertise and Employees r
with others (non-client facing efficiency. organization
teams) tend to become siloed collaborating
and sit apart from other groups within their o
in the organization. perception th
valued as m
so some em
to collaborat
There is less trust between Employees should support Some emplo
teams, and from some groups of the decisions of leaders, and expressed c
employees up to leaders. We have faith that they are doing not feel like
say we trust the intentions of the right thing. the overemp
others, but there is often back- the cultural-t
room conversation about conversation
leadership decisions, comments Positivity drives us forward.
made like I hope they know Negativity causes dissent.
what they are doing. There are
concerns about commitment and
vision.
We say we don't take ourselves Business can be done well Employees f
too seriously, but there are without personal connect with
leaders seem too more than relationships. lead to leade
others. Some do not create and disconn
room for lightness or personal
connection, which gets
magnified by the fact that we
emphasize it in other parts of the
organization.
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS
Espoused Values Strengths
Integrity We hold ourselves
accountable for our actions
through consistent internal
customer service in many parts
of the organzation.
Our actions match our words
internally, as employees
support each other on a peer-
to-peer basis.
We model the behaviors we
expect from others through
leadership and autonomy at an
individual level. People are
generally empowered to do
what they feel is right.
Be Curious Innovation occurs in small
teams. Our best ideas come
from small collaborations or
work teams.
12
Opportunities Key Assumptions - Leader Impact of A
We say we own outcomes, Positivity drives us forward. Employees b
whether wins or losses, as one Negativity causes dissent. continued pe
unified team, but there is a suppress co
tendency to blame clients for our not feel hear
challenges and mistakes. We
also often celebrate wins as a
whole team effort, but don't take
the time to examinee our losses
effectively and take corrective
action.
We say hold ourselves Positivity drives us forward. Employees b
accountable for our actions but Negativity causes dissent. continued pe
our tendency to avoid feedback suppress co
makes it challenging to hold not feel hear
each other accountable for our
responsibilities or our mistakes.
There is debate on whether our We are experts. If we show Employees f
actions match our words up strong the rest will fall into not understa
externally as we begin to sell place. acting irresp
new products that some people things that c
do not believe we are prepared employees e
to deliver. result of this
There is inconsistency in some People who are leaders Employees w
parts of the organization when it model positivity and is inauthenti
comes to model behavior. business-orientation their current
consistently. disconnecte
immediate te
leadership.
We say challenge the status quo We value expertise and Innovation is
but we tend to overemphasize efficiency. happening in
the positive in communications, organization
rather than the constructive, Positivity drives us forward. people are a
which inhibits some innovation Negativity causes dissent.
from occurring broadly.
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS
Espoused Values Strengths
We challenge ourselves to
learn and grow by trying new
things in our business on a
regular basis.
Within teams, individuals feel
comfortable challenging each
other on ideas and ways of
doing things.
Select individuals are
championing the development
of a learning mindset across
the organization.
13
Opportunities Key Assumptions - Leader Impact of A
We say we continually challenge We are action oriented and We may mo
ourselves to learn and grow but quickly test things in the which cause
we don't provide time for market. We do not dwell in erodes confi
reflection and documentation the past.
after we try something.
We say we approach Employees should support Employees s
interactions in the spirit of the decisions of leaders, and opinions abo
genuine inquiry, but more often have faith that they are doing feel they are
than not people are defensive the right thing. pace of chan
when recommendations for become dise
change come from outside their
immediate team. There is a Positivity drives us forward.
sense that people are often too Negativity causes dissent.
busy to change their ways so
they resist and assume
something incorrect about the
person delivering the change
suggestion.
We say we learn from every We are action oriented and Employees p
outcome whether success or quickly test things in the time as time
failure, but we rarely take the market. We do not dwell in client. There
time to reflect on our processes, the past. time internal
in success or failure, as an processes.
organization. Teams and
individuals may do this, but it is
not standard practice across the
organization.
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANALYSIS
Appendix B: Notes on GPTW culture using Cameron and Quinns Competing Values
Framework
Clan (Collaborate)
Many mangers in the organization operate from a collaborative perspective,
serving as mentors and team builders when they can
There is a strong value placed on commitments and loyalty across the
organization, this is important to the CEO
Employees operate from a highly relational and supportive orientation
The clan theory of effectiveness is used externally to sell to clients, but it is
less pervasive internally - Human development and participation produce
effectiveness
The organizational values of Care, One Team, One Mission reflect clan
aspirations and values
Hierarchy (Control)
Some organizational leaders show exhibit market tendencies also exhibit the
hierarchy tendencies of coordinating and monitoring
Managers do play an organizing role, but the low power distance and high
level of autonomy prevents employees from seeing this from a hierarchical
perspective
There is a strong emphasis from leadership on efficiency and timeliness
Some teams, mainly in data and production, are more hierarchical and
consistency and uniformity are their main value drivers
14
Adhocracy (Create)
The CEO has visionary tendencies, but is primaril
Innovation is discussed a great deal, but it is not y
the innovation that exists is primarily driven by co
rolled out or standardized in the organization
Some teams, mainly in consulting, see transforma
drivers, but this is not true across the organization
The organizational value Be Curious represents
Some actions taken by market-focused leaders em
(creating new standards, anticipating needs, findin
continuous improvement), but investments are not
culture of adhocracy
Market (Compete)
Organizational leaders primarily fall into the mark
drives, competitors, and producers
Profitability and goal achievement are strong valu
The market theory of effectiveness is embraced by
competing and customer focus produce effectivene
The organizational value Excel represents marke