Corporate
Culture
This week I read an article called
“Winning Strategies” by Mark Evan Furman whereby he discusses the importance of
“defining strategies and educating employees” (Furman, p. 69, 1998). In it, Furman (1998) advances the concept of
“operating metaphors” (p. 70) which he says “define relationships between
people by viewing the mission and doctrines of the corporation through other
clearly defined cultural abstracts, such as family and team” (p.70). In other words, the “corporation must
determine the metaphor which matches its strategies for accomplishment of the
corporation’s mission” (Furman, p. 70, 1998).
Care must be taken to educate employees on how to achieve the company’s
beliefs. (Furman, 1998).
In understanding company culture, it is
important to view how the concepts advanced by Furman (1998) coincide with the
Star Model. According to Galbraith
(2002), the concept of company culture and education of employees fits into the
“People” element of the model. According
to Galbraith (2002), it is the role of human resources to bring awareness to
company culture and to select and train employees.
No doubt anyone who has worked for a
large corporation can attest to countless training videos or staff meeting about
their company’s values. For example, at
a company like 3M you might here about “entrepreneurship” “since people at 3M spend 15 percent of their
time on projects of their own choosing” (Galbraith, p. 7, 2002).
Achieving a successful corporate
culture can be challenging. According to
the Business section of the Connecticut Post Online article on February 26,
2009 titled “Creating Corporate Culture,” management’s role is “[e]verything from how people are
selected, trained, evaluated, and compensated needs to be in alignment for the
culture to form and produce a consistent output” (¶ 8).
Company culture is important to
companies because it defines their objectives.
For example, a retailer may want to offer a pleasant shopping experience
in order to build rapport with customers, which in turn, product higher
sales. Such companies that employ the
selection and training of its people as Galbraith (2002) advocates are likely
to better results because their employees are better trained and able to meet
the demands of the corporation.
Citations:
Galbraith, J.R. (2002). Designing
Organizations: An Executive Guide to Strategy, Structure and Process. pp.
73-90.
Furman, M.. (1998, June).
Creating corporate culture. Incentive, 172(6), 69-70. Retrieved February 4, 2012, from
ABI/INFORM Global.
Connecticut Post Online. (2009, February 26). Creating Corporate Culture. Section Business.
Joshua, the article you read seems very interesting. In your opinion do you think that organizations should spend a lot of time and resources on training employees so they can have a sense of loyalty?
ReplyDeleteDo you think that educating employees will give benefit the company's bottom line? Often times, I see that employees who are trained and educated leave their jobs and go to other places where their training and education benefits them more financially. This is specially true when their current position will not augment their salary to reflect their higher level of knowledge. Have you seen this happen in organizations you have worked with?
Xiomara,
ReplyDeleteYou raise some very relevant issues. I am still a big believer in companies providing training. By training the employee you engage them and acclimate them to the companies beliefs and values. If the company is not going to invest in the employee, why should the employee invest in the company? Companies like 3M and Johnson and Johnson value their employees and, in turn, I believe the companies are better off because of it. For example, if you visit Johnson & Johnson's company website you can read all about how they value their employees and strive to help them manage work and family. (Johnson & Johnson Company Website).
One of the most difficult aspects of employment is balancing work and family. Maybe I am not the best example, as I tend to be a workaholic. But, if you enjoy the company you work for and they are willing to invest in you, then I don't mind putting in the long hours. I suppose if I wanted to work less I may not have chosen a professional career. But, that being the case, the companies I have worked for have invested a great deal in my development. In turn, I felt more loyal to them and willing to work harder and longer.
The point you raise about employees leaving after training and going elsewhere is certainly a valid concern. Training employees is expensive. While no one knows the real cost, it is often said that a law firm spends somewhere around two to three times what a first year associate makes. And, in law, it is common for associates to leave after only a few years. But, in that case the lawyers really "burn out" from working 60-70 hour weeks.
In today's current economic climate, I would venture to say that the feeling out there in the business community is to cut costs and do things cheaper. However, I feel this approach is misguided. Human capital is something that needs to be nurtured and developed. Companies that fail to invest in their employees are companies that seek short term profits over long term success.
Citations:
Johnson and Johnson Company Website. Retrieved from http://careers.jnj.com/right-place-for-me.