Organizational Change - Chapter 4.pdf

Chapter 4: Culture and change The informal organization Formal organiza$on: the visible part, the informal organiza$on: the invisible part. See =gure 4.1. The meaning of culture Culture according to Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952): culture consists in paCerned ways of thinking, feeling and reac$ng, ac...

Chapter 4: Culture and change The informal organization Formal organiza$on: the visible part, the informal organiza$on: the invisible part. See =gure 4.1. The meaning of culture Culture according to Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952): culture consists in paCerned ways of thinking, feeling and reac$ng, acquired and transmiCed mainly by symbols, cons$tu$ng the dis$nc$ve achievements of human groups, including their embodiment in ar$facts; the essen$al core of culture consists of tradi$onal ideas and especially their aCached values. Schein (1992) refers to organiza$onal culture as: the deeper level of basic assump$ons and beliefs that are shared by members of an organiza$on, that operate unconsciously and de=ne in a basic ‘taken for granted’ fashion an organiza$on’s view of its self and its environment. Culture is deep-seated and therefore likely to be resistant to change. However, Bate (1996) argues that: ‘culture can be changed, in fact it is changing all the $me’. Much depends on the perspec$ve adopted and the type of change proposed. Three perspec$ves can be iden$=ed: That culture can be managed. That culture may be manipulated. And that culture cannot be consciously changed. Advice on how to achieve culture change is plen$ful. However, there is general agreement that there is a need to: 1. Assess the current situa$on. 2. Have a good idea of what the aimed-for situa$on looks like. 3. Work out the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of moving the organiza$on, or part of it, away from its current culture to what is perceived to be a more desirable one. 4. Intervene to bring about cultural change. 5. Monitor outcomes and adjust as needed. The ingredients of culture At the most basic level we can list some characteris$cs of culture and descrip$ons of culture can be framed in terms of these characteris$cs. For instance: Artefacts, Language (in the form of jokes, metaphors, stories, myths and legends), behaviour paCerns (in the form of rites, rituals, ceremonies and celebra$ons), norms and behaviour, heroes (past and 28 present employees who do great things), symbols, beliefs, values and aLtudes, ethical codes and history. The characteriscs of organizaonal culture 1. Innova$on and risk taking – the extent to which employees are encouraged to be innova$ve and take risks. 2. ACen$on to detail – the degree to which employees are expected to analyse and have aCen$on to detail. 3. Outcome orienta$on – the degree to which management focuses on results or outcomes rather than on the techniques and processes used to achieve those outcomes. 4. People orienta$on – the degree to which management decisions take into considera$on the e:ect of outcomes on people within the organiza$on. 5. Team orienta$on – the degree to which work ac$vi$es are organized around groups rather than individuals. 6. Aggression – the degree to which people are aggressive and compe$$ve. 7. Stability – the degree to which organiza$onal ac$vi$es emphasize maintaining the status quo in contrast to growth. Schein (2004) suggests three levels that are from the shallowest to the deepest: - The artefacts level (the visible organiza$onal structures and processes such as language, environment, rituals, ceremonies, myths and stories). The espoused values level (the organiza$on’s strategies, goals, philosophies). The basic underlying assump$ons level (the unconscious, taken-for-granted beliefs, percep$ons, thoughts and feelings that are the ul$mate source of values and ac$ons). Objectivist and interpretive views of culture Objec$vist or func$onal view of culture -> treats culture as a cri$cal variable that partly explains why organiza$ons di:er in the ways that they operate. Alterna$vely, culture can be de=ned as a set of behavioural and/or cogni$ve characteris$cs such that culture sits alongside structure, technology and the environment as one of the variables that in8uence organiza$onal life and performance. In summary, this view of culture changing cultures is not that diJcult if certain procedures are followed. The cultural web The cultural web is a useful tool that can be applied as a way of revealing organiza$onal cultures. Johnson et al. (2008) explain the di:erent elements of the cultural web as follows: - - The rou$ne ways that members of the organiza$on behave towards each other and that link di:erent parts of the organiza$on make up ‘the way we do thing around here’. However, they can also represent an approach to how things should happen that is extremely diJcult to change and highly protec$ve of core assump$ons in the paradigm. The rituals of organiza$onal life, such as training programmes, promo$on and appraisal procedures, point to what is important in the organiza$on and reinforce ‘the way we do things around here’. They signal what is important and valued. 29 - - - The stories told by members of the organiza$on to each other, to new recruits and to outsiders embed the history in the present and 8ag up important events and personali$es, as well as mavericks who ‘deviate from the norm’. The more symbolic aspects of organiza$ons, such as logos, oJce furnishings, $tles, status di:eren$als and the type of language and terminology commonly used become a shorthand representa$on of the nature of the organiza$on. The control systems, what gets measured and the reward systems emphasize what it is important to monitor in the organiza$on and to focus aCen$on on. Power structures: the most powerful managerial groupings in the organiza$on are likely to be the ones most associated with core assump$ons and beliefs. The formal organiza$onal structure or the more informal ways in which the organiza$ons work are likely to re8ect power structures and, again, to delineate important rela$onships. The cultural compass The compass model of culture and its associated culture typologies have been developed through an apparent interest in cultural di:erences in ‘partnerships’, by which she means inter-company rela$onships typically in the form of alliances, mergers or acquisi$ons and which are based on two components of behaviour. The =rst of these is asser$veness, which is the degree to which a company’s behaviour is seen by others as being forceful or direc$ve. The second behavioural component of culture is responsiveness, which is the extent to which an organiza$on’s behaviour is seen by others as being emo$onally expressed. Compeng values framework Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1983) proposed a compe$ng values model as a way of understanding varia$ons in organiza$onal e:ec$veness. - - - The human rela$ons model: 8exibility and a focus on people. Morale, cohesion, team spirit and training and development are being valued. The open systems model: 8exibility with an external focus. It is about being adaptable, looking for growth and acquiring resources, with the focus being more on the organiza$on than the people. The ra$onal system model: external focus and control. Managers emphasize planning, goals, target seLng and monitoring in the pursuit of eJciency and produc$vity. The internal process model: a people focus with control. Informa$on management and communica$on are valued in the pursuit of stability and control. 30 Organizational culture types Culture as structure Charles Handy (1993) suggested four organiza$onal culture types: - - - - The power culture – power cultures are those in which a single person or group dominates. Handy refers to this culture as a web with a spider in the middle and is connected to all movement elsewhere in the web. Decision making is centralized. Decisions are taken on the basis of in8uence rather than through a logical ra$onal process. The strength of the culture depends on the strength of the centre and the willingness of the other members to defer to the power source. The role culture – role cultures work by logic and ra$onality. Ac$vity is controlled more by rules and regula$ons than by personal direc$ve from the top. Emphasis is on de=ned roles and occupants are expected to ful=l these roles but not overstep them. Role cultures 8ourish in stable situa$ons and are the least conducive to change. The task culture – the task culture is represented by a network. The dominant concept in a task culture is project work associated with matrix-type structures. The task culture is not concerned with personal power or hierarchy, but with marshalling the required resources to complete work eJciently and e:ec$vely. Decision making is devolved to the project. The task culture 8ourishes where crea$vity and innova$on are needed (e.g. R&D, marke$ng and new ventures). The person culture – this culture is unusual as it exists only to service the needs of the par$cipa$ng members. It does not have an overarching objec$ve as is found in more conven$onally structured organiza$ons. Person cultures have minimal structures and can be likened to a cluster or galaxy of individual stars. Culture, strategy and environment Deal and Kennedy’s typology. - - The tough-guy, macho culture – people in macho cultures regularly take high risks and receive rapid feedback on what they do. The stakes are high and there is a focus on speed rather than endurance. Burnout, internal compe$$on and con8ict are normal. Thoughguy cultures can be highly successful in highrisk, quick-return environments but are less suited to long-term investments. High turnover of sta:. The work-hard/play-hard culture – this culture exists where there is low risk but quick feedback on ac$ons. Persistence, keeping at it and working to recognized procedures are typical of work-hard/playhard cultures. The culture emphasizes the team because it is the team that makes the di:erence, not the achievements of single individuals. 31 - - Bet-your-company culture – typical of organiza$ons where the risks are high and the feedback on ac$ons and decisions takes a long $me. Invest heavily in projects which take years to come to frui$on. All decisions are carefully thought through. Decision making tends to be top down, re8ec$ng the hierarchical nature. Bet-your-company cultures lead to highquality inven$ons and major scien$=c breakthroughs, but are vulnerable to short-term economic 8uctua$ons. The process culture – low risk and slow feedback on ac$ons and decisions. Working with liCle feedback, employees have no sense of their own e:ec$veness or otherwise. They tend to concentrate on the means by which things are done rather than what should be done. Values tend to focus on technical perfec$on, working out the risks and geLng the process right. Emphasis on job $tles and status and the signs that symbolize them. Process cultures are e:ec$ve in a stable and predictable environment, not in changing circumstances. Scholz (1987) used three dimensions to bring culture and the internal and external environment together: - The external-induced dimension of organiza$onal culture draws Deal and Kennedy’s four culture types. The internal-induced dimension iden$=es three culture types (produc$on, bureaucra$c and professional) that derive from organiza$onal structure characteris$cs. The evolu$on-induced dimension goes beyond earlier models in its rela$onship to the strategic orienta$on of the organiza$on and its environment. From these, =ve culture types are iden$=ed: 1. 2. 3. 4. Stable, with a $me orienta$on towards the past and an aversion to risk. Reac$ve, with a $me orienta$on towards the present and an acceptance of ‘minimum’ risk. An$cipa$ng, also oriented towards the present but more accep$ng of ‘familiar’ risks. Exploring, with a $me orienta$on towards the present and the future and an acceptance of increasing risk. 5. Crea$ve, looking forward to the future and accep$ng risk as normal. 32 Organizational culture and change Cultures in defence against, or in support of, change Segmentalist cultures: - Compartmentalize ac$ons, events and problems. See problems as narrowly as possible. Have segmented structures with large numbers of departments walled o: from one another. Assume problems can be solved by carving them up into pieces that are then assigned to specialists who work in isola$on. Divide resources up among the many departments. Avoid experimenta$on, con8ict and confronta$on. Have weak coordina$ng mechanisms. Integra$ve cultures: - Combine ideas from unconnected sources. See problems as wholes, related to larger wholes. Operate at the edge of competencies. Measure themselves by looking to visions of the future rather than by referring to the standards of the past. Create mechanisms for exchange of informa$on and new ideas. Recognize and even encourage di:erences, but then be prepared to cooperate. Are outward looking. Organizaonal learning and types of change Single-loop learning is indica$ve of a situa$on where goals are de=ned and a person works out the most favoured way of reaching the goal. In single-loop learning, while many di:erent possibili$es for achieving personal or organiza$onal goals might be considered, the goal itself is not ques$oned. Single-loop learning is also referred to as individual learning (learning which an individual achieves but that seldom disseminates into the organiza$on in any coherent way). Segmentalist culture. 33 Double-loop learning ques$ons are asked not only about the means by which goals can be achieved, but about the ends, that is, the goals themselves. Johnson (1990) refers to this type of learning as organiza$onal relearning, which he says is a ‘process in which that which is taken for granted and which the basis of strategic direc$on – the paradigm – is reformulated’. Cultural change to e,ect organizational change Schwartz and Davis (1981) thought culture could be changed and devised a way of measuring culture in terms of descrip$ons of the way management tasks are typically handled in company-wide, boss-subordinate, peer and interdepartmental rela$onships as a way of assessing the degree of cultural compa$bility with any proposed strategic change. The relevance of culture change to organizaonal change Assessing cultural risk helps management pinpoint where resistance to change could occur because of incompa$bility between strategy and culture. This allows managers to make choices regarding whether to: - Ignoring the culture – can be dangerous and seems likely to carry a high risk of future problems such as disrup$on to opera$ons and lack of progress. Manager around the culture – a real possibility given that there are, in most cases, more ways than one of achieving desired goals. Changing the culture (to =t the strategy) – popular form of management interven$on. However, this can be a diJcult and lengthy process, par$cularly if culture is strong. Changing the strategy to =t the culture, perhaps by reducing performance expecta$ons. Uncrical approaches to culture change The following six steps relate to transforma$on of a supply chain (Halm, 2014): 1. Iden$fy a best prac$ce opera$ng model to create a vision of what the new supply chain con=gura$on would look like. 2. Implement a comprehensive governance system for the change project. 3. Aggressively transi$on to the new organiza$on structure involving new jobs, new job descrip$ons and new appointments, and rapid ac$on to =ll new jobs. 4. Pro-ac$vely manage stakeholders, employee engagement and communica$ons. This involves tailored communica$ons with stakeholder groups, engaging employees. 5. De=ne and implement new business processes and allocate personal accountability. 6. Develop employee capabili$es and reinvent the culture using teamwork and alignment mee$ngs to enable employees to converse around accelera$ng project performance. 34