As we prepare to head down to
the stretch this semester, I thought of a rather novel way to get my spouse involved in my classwork. My wife Sharon, who should be awarded some
type of degree (or medal) for being very patient and encouraging over the last
couple of months, has agreed to be interviewed on the subject of organizational
culture. Sharon has had the unique
opportunity to work for a medium-sized corporation in the technology field, as
well as smaller, faith-based, non-profit organization. My focus for this discussion is to compare
the organizational culture of both groups, especially from the stand-point of
the inherent differences that would exist because of diversity in
organizational type. I have changed the
names of the organizations that will be discussed for privacy considerations.
When formulating my
questions for the interview, I wanted to base those questions on two
areas. First of all, I wanted to explore
the idea that organizational culture influences organizational effectiveness
(Denison and Mishra, 2010). The other
area would be how an organization’s culture might affect transfer of knowledge
and learning within the organization (Lucas & Kline, 2008).
Sharon’s former employer
(Company A) was a medium-sized organization based in Birmingham, with
approximately 300 employees. The company
specializes in business process management with a focus on electronic document
imaging systems. Company A is an
operational division of a larger international corporation (Corporation A),
that provides technology and processing solutions to organizations in the
public, educational and financial sectors.
Sharon’s position at Company A was Marketing & Events Manager. Her current employer (Company B) is located
in a suburb of Birmingham. The
organization is a local, faith-based, non-profit organization with almost 100
employees. Her current position is Web
& Print Manager for the Communications Department at Company B.
DT: Tell
me some of the differences between how you think the culture of Company A was compared to Company B? And when I say culture think along the lines
of the attitudes, values, beliefs and behavior of the people you have worked
for and worked with.
ST: Okay, I’ll start with Company A. It was
basically what anyone would think of a larger company. It was very “corporate.” A bunch of “suits.” You sort of got the idea
that you were not a person to the company, but just a cog in the wheel. The attitudes of both managers and other
employees were very business-like. Sometimes it was very noticeable that there
was little or no concern for us all as people.
And I guess we were all expected to be the same way. The managers in my area and the upper
managers were totally driven by results.
I think a lot of times that was the only thing they cared about. I would say they did not motivate us to do
our jobs for rewards and recognition or for having a happy experience. They were all about the bottom line and they
didn’t care who the stepped on to get that.
DT: How does that compare to Company B?
ST: Its night and day! The reason that Company B exists is to help
people in our community, to give them support.
It is not all about money. I
think it’s about a desire to use our work to serve and the rewards that we all
get inside by doing that. And all of the
people I work for and work with are very much like me. And I think it is a much more positive place
to work. We all seem to care about one
another and help out when we need to so we can make sure that we get our work
done. It is like a that we are all in
this for the same reasons. Since most of
my co-workers and I have a lot of things in common, and we are not just focused
on taking home a check every two weeks, I guess we have the same thoughts about
what we do and where we are headed. I
love going to work every day not just because I enjoy my work, but because I
enjoy being around the people I work with.
DT: Do you think that the things you just told me
about both of the companies (organizational culture) has a positive or negative
effect on how you do your job and how successful you are at your job?
ST: When I feel good about going to work and
being around a group of people, that motivates me. I dreaded going to work every day when I was
with Company A. It became an office full
of sad-looking people. But I love my job
now and I love going in everyday and spending time with all the people I work
with. And I think they feel the same
about me. Since we all really work well
together without a lot of conflict and knowing we are all working for the same
thing, our interactions with each other and even with people outside really are
almost always positive, upbeat, cooperative and friendly. My job allows me to really do my job without
a lot of negative influences, that my co-workers trust me to do my job, as I
trust them. Now that’s not to say that
there are never disagreements, but even then, I think we work through them much
quicker because we usually do work great together. Maybe it is just that we have compassion
about each other as people. And I am talking about co-workers and managers
alike.
DT: Do you think that a positive work environment
where everyone is on the same page makes it easier to accomplish the goals that
you have personally and the goals that the organization has for everyone?
ST: Absolutely.
We all work together to make things happen. And I have been able to learn a lot about
things that I did not have any experience in.
I think most everyone else feels the same way. We get a lot of personal satisfaction from
doing our work and we can learn and grow very easily. We don’t get pigeon-holed into a single
thing. Like I said there is not a lot of
conflict. I don’t have some of the tension and stress that I’ve had in other
jobs. We all treat each other with
kindness and respect. Our mangers act
like this and I think that they try to set an example for all of us to
follow. We expect this from each other
now. And I don’t mean that we demand
it. I guess since we’ve learned that our
work environment has worked so well, that anything other than acting that way
would “upset the apple cart.”
DT: You talk a lot about how much you all think
and act alike and that this helps to foster a positive environment. Do you think that a good work environment
like you have helps to keep good people working there?
ST: Well, I’ve been there seven years and have no
desire to leave. My boss has been there
12 years. And our creative technical
director has been there 10 years. That
is just in my area. There is very little
turnover with the people who have full-time jobs. And all the part-time workers hang on as long
as they can in hopes of a full-time position opening up. I think when you like where you work, like who
you work with and your job makes you happy, there is no reason to go anywhere
else. I don’t think I ever want to go
back to work in “corporate America.” It
is just so cut-throat. Everyone is out
for themselves, and there are some selfish and self-centered people out
there. There are so many great things
about working at Company B. I would
probably give up a chance to go somewhere else, doing what I do now, making
more money. There are some thing that
are worth more than money. I am happy
where I am. And I feel like that all of
our employees are part of something much bigger and more important than
ourselves. That is very satisfying.
DT: Anything else you’d like to add?
ST: I think that is about it. Desperate Housewives is on right now anyway!
DT: Thank
you!
From the interview, we can see
that a highly-positive work environment that is fostered by a positive
organizational culture has many advantages.
It would appear that shared mission and purpose of Sharon’s current employer
has a positive impact on organizational effectiveness (Denison and Mishra,
2010). It can be deduced from her
story that Company B’s employees work well individually and collectively to
accomplish goals. And, management does not hinder their efforts in any
way. The company’s culture is such that
tasks should be easier to complete and
collaboration will usually be cooperative and successful (Denison and
Mishra, 2010). Looking at the
knowledge transfer and learning activities of this positive environment, it
would most likely result greater levels of learning across the company. Employees would likely not be resistant to
sharing knowledge with others, and this sharing can only serve to make the
company stronger (Lucas & Kline, 2008).
References
Denison, D.R. & Mishra,
A.K., (1995). Toward a theory of
organizational culture and effectiveness.
Organization Science, 6, 204-223.
Sorenson, J., (2009). Note on
organizational culture. Harvard Business School, 1-6.
Lucas, C., & Kline, T.
(2008). Understanding the influence of organizational culture and group
dynamics on organizational change and learning. The Learning Organization, 15(3), 277-287.
David,
ReplyDeleteI was a little disappointed when I realized your interview with your wife was not going to be about the organizational culture in your marriage. That would have been some fun reading!! :)
It sounds like the two organizations Sharon discusses are at opposite ends of the Hofstede Model (Hofstede, 2009). It is interesting that the results-orientedness of Company A is one thing she disliked about the company. Hofstede's model states that strong cultures are results-oriented. Perhaps that is easier to swallow when the same company is also employee oriented, where Company A was job-oriented? It is definitely interesting to see the night and day difference between the two organizations.
I'm sure her happiness at her current job makes the marriage organizational culture a little easier too.
Brenda
David, it is nice to hear from Sharon! Even though Company A’s culture was not a good fit to Sharon’s personality, can we say it had a weaker culture than Company B? Employee involvement may be an interesting variable when comparing these two companies as well. I think the industry of the companies (tech vs. nonprofit) clearly had an important influence on the resulting culture. If you picked a few of Hofstede’s organizational culture dimensions, where do you think the two companies would fall (process/results, job/people, etc)?
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comments Brenda and Courtney!
ReplyDeleteBrenda: Very funny about the organizational culture of the marriage. :) It would take someone much smarter than myself to make a fair and balanced analysis of that. As to your questions, you make a good point about Hofstede's model and strength of culture. His position on this concept is very likely correct (and who am I to say that it is not). I would propose that strong cultures can be forced due to the fact an organization IS results-oriented. Much like the "top-down" aspects of a hierarchy, I believe that there are negative results of this same concept with organizational culture. Could a company that had a more flexible or adaptable culture without losing sight of the reality of expected results be more productive and generate higher levels of satisfaction?
Courtney: Maybe the culture of Company A is not weaker than Company B. Company A had its strengths in culture, but perhaps the way that culture was influenced or managed by executives altered the overall perception by employees. Sharon was not alone in her view of the company, as she saw many of her friends and co-workers have short tenures with the company. At Company A, senior managers "ruled the roost." There was little interaction within their own departments. So there was very little dynamic communication. And this seeped down to the middle managers (i.e. Sharon's supervisor). In Hofstede's model, this would be an indication of a large power distance (2006).
Within Hofstede's six dimensions, Company A would appear to be results-oriented, but in fact, was highly process-oriented. Company B is results-oriented without a doubt.
Company A would lean heavily toward being job-oriented, as Company B, with its its foundation of benevolence, is almost exclusively employee-oriented.
Tight control was a hallmark of Company A's culture, probably interrelated with it being process-oriented. Company B's culture is characteristic of loose control. Perhaps this is due to the fact that many of the positions are creative, whereas Company A's were highly technical.
Thanks again to you both.