Culture Overview on Project management and organizational culture According to PMBOK Guide (2008, p.

5), presenting a global standard of project management, "A project is a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service or result", while "Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements" (PMBOK Guide 2008, p.6). The above description provides a possibility to differentiate a project from operational work. Project management seems to be a relatively young area of knowledge, though its roots are go far into ancient ages, when management of unique activities happened, e.g. construction of pyramids (Cicmil 2009, p.79). Nevertheless, the modern PM appeared with formation of the society of large-scale projects, standardization and bureaucracy (Cicmil 2009, p.79). Besides project management, there are also higher levels of control program and portfolio management. The complexity increases from project to program and then to portfolio management (PMBOK Guide 2008, p.7). There is a number of reports describing importance of project management for organizations in terms of increase in resources control and transparency, decrease in risk (Cicmil 2009, p.80), (Cervone 2006). But these are qualitative descriptions that are always subjective and raise additional concerns. There are also quantitative measures of project management efficacy established in construction business: "a 10% reduction in the schedule for a typical project should result in a 3% cost saving to the owner of the project" (Modern management systems 1992, p.11). Though having a positive influence on organization performance, implementation of a new PM methodology may face serious roadblocks. Nguyen (2007, p.1) mentions the following barriers for successful projects executions in developing countries: slow adaptation to project management techniques, political and social systems, cultural blocks and lack of financial support. Poor project performance is explained in the first place by lack of effective project management training for project managers (Nguyen 2007, p.1). The other serious obstacle for successful project management systems implementation is lack of senior management support due to fear to loose their control over projects, and their concept of "inapplicability" of the project management methodology, that is related to transparency and accountability aspects of managing projects. Besides, the following areas appeared to be important obstacles: lack of team work, ineffective management of subcontractors, rigid vertical organization structures (Nguyen 2007, p.2). Most of the obstacles listed have origin in organizational culture. Implementation of a new methodology is an example of change management ( Change management 2010). And as Graham wrote, success in implementation of organizational changes rests mostly on people's costbenefit analysis: people accept changes easily in case they see some personal benefits and they reject it if they don't (Graham, 1989, p.209). This should lead us to a conclusion that

organizational culture is the main factor, influencing project management methodology implementation, especially considering another "project" definition that includes people "A project is a set of people and other resources temporarily assembled to reach a specified objective, normally with a fixed budget and within a fixed time period." (Graham 1989, p.1). It is obvious, that a project manager cannot be the only responsible for success or failure of projects and PM methodology implementation. Each project is influenced by a wide number of factors including: project manager, project team, stakeholders, objectives and scope, communication, risks (Carmichael 2003, p.7). In fact, PM methodology implementation is strongly affected by organizational culture (Mochal 2003). For example, employees may feel free to avoid following standard project processes and fail to do thing in time without any fear to be punished. This illustrates that training project managers within organization is only one example of culture influence, others are: process orientation, governance (how employees follow processes), roles and responsibilities of employees, company structure (Mochal 2003). Harold Kerzner even proposed an idea that "project management is a culture, not policies and procedures" (2004, p. 366). In this regard Andersen conclude that "the project manager must quickly develop a suitable organizational culture within the project" (2001, p.1). It is also important that the project manager takes into account culture of different organizations and even sub-cultures of the departments involved into the project (Elmes & Wilemon, cited in Andersen 2001, p.1). In Graham's opinion project management in mainly about managing people, rather than processes (Graham, 1989, p.viii). Moreover, the author wrote that project managers can only be successful, if they are able to motivate people and coordinate project activities with people's values, so that projects help achieve personal goals. In this regard teamwork gains the most attention. Kerzner supports this opinion defining that successful project management is not about creating paperwork, but about executing the methodology by the corporate culture, which transforms into cooperative culture in a company excellent in project management (2001, p.81). Though Kerzner points out that cooperative cultures require effective management support at all levels (2004, p. 77). Organizational culture is defined more or less as environment of interaction between different people rules, norms, leadership, structures, routines that "guide and constrain behavior" (Schein 2004, p. 1). Hofstede described culture as "software of the mind" "patterns of thinking, feeling and acting mental programs" (2005, p. 3). Organizational culture provides "internal" and "external integration" helping employees to deal with each other and the organization with the external environment (Daft 2006, p. 424). Daft mentioned that organizations seriously face culture when they try to implement new strategies or programs that interfere with their basic norms and values (2006, p. 423). Organizational culture types and dimensions were thoroughly discussed in the works of Hofstede, Deal and Kennedy, Handy, Schein, Carmazzi (Organizational culture 2009). Schein defined organizational culture as follows: "culture is a way in which a group of people solves problems and reconciles dilemmas" (cited in Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1998, p.6). By Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner "culture comes in layers, like an onion" and cultural "norms and beliefs sink down into semi-awareness" (1998, p.6). The core of the onion is unquestioned reality, what is taken for granted (1998, p.7). Johnson and Scholes proposed a structured model for description of organizational culture that gave a possibility to explore it from different perspectives, so that ways to effectively influence it can be developed (Johnson & Scholes 1992, cited in The Cultural Web 2010).Picture The Cultural Web (Johnson & Scholes 1992, cited in The Cultural Web 2010).

The six elements presented on the picture above (Picture 1) provide grounds for influencing the cultural paradigm. "The six elements are: 1. Stories - The past events and people talked about inside and outside the company. Who and what the company chooses to immortalize says a great deal about what it values, and perceives as great behavior. 2 Rituals and Routines - The daily behavior and actions of people that signal acceptable .behavior. This determines what is expected to happen in given situations, and what is valued by management. 3. Symbols - The visual representations of the company including logos, how plush the offices are, and the formal or informal dress codes. 4. Organizational Structure - This includes both the structure defined by the organization chart, and the unwritten lines of power and influence that indicate whose contributions are most valued. 5. Control Systems - The ways that the organization is controlled. These include financial systems, quality systems, and rewards (including the way they are measured and distributed within the organization.) 6. Power Structures - The pockets of real power in the company. This may involve one or two key senior executives, a whole group of executives, or even a department. The key is that these people have the greatest amount of influence on decisions, operations, and strategic direction." (Johnson & Scholes 1992, cited in The Cultural Web 2010) Asking questions to yourself, the employees, company partners and customers about the above six elements of the Paradigm helps to build a complete picture of the current organizational structure (Johnson & Scholes 1992, cited in The Cultural Web 2010). Further on this picture is used in order to organize change management initiative, correcting the strategic direction of the organization. Change management tools were also described in detail by Johnson and Scholes (Johnson & Scholes 1999, p.2). Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner examine culture within three categories and seven dimensions (1998, pp.8-10). 1. Relationships with people o Universalism versus particularism o Individualism versus communitarianism o Neutral versus emotional o Specific versus diffuse o Achievement versus ascription 2. Attitudes to time o Attitudes to time 3. Attitudes to the environment o Attitudes to the environment The four types of organizational culture can be described as follows (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1998, p.158). 1. The family 2. The Eiffel Tower 3. The guided missile 4. The incubator These four cultures are best understood on the Picture 2 below (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1998, p.159).Picture Four types of organizational culture (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1998, p.159). "Three aspects of organizational structure are especially important in determining corporate culture (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1998, p.157). 1. The general relationship between employees and their organization.

2. The vertical or hierarchical system of authority defining superiors and subordinates. 3. The general views of employees about the organization's destiny, purpose and goals and their places in this." The four culture types appear on a kind of cultural "plane" based on egalitarian hierarchical and person task oppositions. Family culture represents close "family" relationships between employees, but it is also highly hierarchical, where power is accumulated in hands of "fathers" (managers or owners). A lot of information is taken for granted and "father" "elders" always dominate the opinion. The Eiffel tower culture is impersonal. It is much about clear roles, rules and bureaucracy. It can be compared with military organization. The guided missile culture is also impersonal and task oriented like the Eiffel tower. But it is egalitarian at the same time, which means that roles do not mean much. People change roles and do whatever and how they like in order to reach the goal. Means are less important. So, this culture tends to motivation and enthusiasm. The incubator culture is "self-fulfillment" and "self-expression". It frees employees from routine and aims on creativity at work. Emotions and spontaneous ideas are norms for such a culture. The incubator is a personal and egalitarian culture that focuses on innovation (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1998, p.158-177).Harrison and Handy (cited in Andersen, 2001, p.2) developed a quite similar to Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner typology of cultures: power, role, task, person. Power culture can be closely compared to the Family, Role culture to the Eiffel tower, Task culture to the Guided missile and Person culture to the Incubator (Andersen, 2001, p.2). The plane of organizational culture is also presented in a work of William Schneider (cited in Suda, 2007, p.4). His plane is based on axes of oppositions actuality possibility (what content organization prefers) and personal impersonal (process of making decisions by an organization), which results in four core culture types: cultivation, competence, control and collaboration. These four core cultures by Schneider are not too far from Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner and Harrison and Handy models described above: Control Eiffel tower Role, Competence Guided missile Task, Cultivation Incubator Person, Collaboration Family Power. Though being characterized by open and direct communications Collaboration culture differs clearly from Family and Power culture models, which have strong vertical power axis supporting "fathers" or "elders" (Suda, 2007, p.6). The models by Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner and Harrison and Handy overlap with the Culture Paradigm by Johnson and Scholes on the elements of Control Systems, Organizational and Power structures, which makes possible to use both models for triangulation purposes. But such elements as Stories, Rituals and routines and Symbols remain unique and can be figured out only with the use of the Paradigm model (The cultural web 2010). Still these elements can play its role in project management. As an example, Craig gives a recommendation "Ritualize your job life" (2005). Craig mentions that rituals should be followed by the project manager rather than fought against. The idea by Craig refers to the nature of the project manager's job, which supposed leadership. But to lead means to understand people's mind and emotions, while usage of established rituals provide such tools (Craig 2005). Though organizational culture got a lot of attention in management and academic literature, Burchell and Gilden noticed (Burchell & Gilden 2008, p.1052) that project management literature paid little attention to cross-cultural aspects. There is also no consensus yet about project management culture (PMC) definition and assessment tools (Du Plessis, Hoole 2006, p.44). Project management is

considered mostly processes rather than people oriented, so that cultural issues and social activities necessary for successful projects implementation are ignored (Burchell & Gilden 2008, p.1053). Moreover authors of an article in PM Network postulated that "project management methodologies neutralize cultural differences and promotes one standard everyone can model" (No boarders 2005, p.35). Du Plessis & Hoole proposed the following dimensions for project management culture assessment: project process, people in project, project systems and structure, project environment. The authors based their concept on a basic definition of organizational culture, proposed by Deal and Kennedy: "the way we do things around here" (Du Plessis, Hoole 2006, p.44). Burchell and Gilden discussed an issue of interaction between western project managers and their Asian project team. In their work they chose a cultural model proposed by Kets and Vries (Kets & Vries, cited in Burchell & Gilden 2008, p.1055) that consisted of 9 dimensions and 18 continua: environment, action orientation, emotion, language, space, relationships, power, thinking, and time. The highest gaps in cultural dimensions between western project managers and their Asian team members were associated with power, time, emotion, and thinking (Burchell & Gilden 2008, p.1062). The authors concluded that the "Wheel of cultures" model by Kets and Vries could be used for further cross-cultural studies in project management (Burchell & Gilden 2008, p.1063). PM methodology implementation is tightly connected to project management maturity (PMM) a measure for companies' status and progress in project management implementation. It was proposed by Harold Kerzner (2001) and gained substantial interest, so that more 35 PMM assessment models were created (Warrilow 2009). Increase in PMM is claimed to "establish sustainable PMC" ( Advancing Project Management Maturity Results in Improved Organizational Performance 2006). Project management maturity models are instruments to appraise ability of organizations to successfully manage projects (Harrison, M et al. 2003, p.1). There are six levels of maturity: Level 0 No process, Level 1 Awareness process, Level 2 Repeatable process, Level 3 Defined process, Level 4 Managed process, Level 5 Optimized process (Warrilow 2009), (OGC 2008). Though PMMM gives a useful quantitative tool, it should not supersede behavioral component of PM implementation, which is mostly done by senior managers (Kerzner 2004, p.367). Project management maturity is also sometimes confused with project management culture. Scott (2009, p. 9) writes that "OPM3