Among this week’s reading, Sorenson’s article Note on Organizational Culture resonated most clearly with me. It was helpful to me to return to the notion of first defining the meaning of “organizational culture” before trying to understand how it occurs and why it is important. Sorenson focuses on the belief that an “organizational culture consists of a set of basic assumptions that have developed as a consequence of the organization’s attempts to adapt to internal and external problems” (Schein, 1992). However, after spending the last four years in the culture of my own very challenging organization, I would argue that in addition to developing FROM attempts to adapt to internal and external problems, some organizational cultures can CREATE internal and external problems! And if this is true, Sorenson’s idea that “cultures are more likely to persist if they are institutionalized” means that problems and “bad” aspects of organizational cultures (even strong ones) are also likely to persist. Which in the case of my organization is not such a good idea.
In searching for academic articles which support the idea of the importance of organizational culture (good or bad, strong or weak), I found an article by authors and organizational culture consultants Jennifer A. Chatman and Sandra Eunyoung Cha. As consultants, Cha and Chatman have often been asked by clients to “set up our culture” as if culture is a piece of computer software or a new office chair. Their article, Leading by Leveraging Culture, emphasizes that leveraging culture is just one of many “key leadership tools” and that by “actively managing culture, an organization will be more likely to deliver on its strategic objectives” (Cha and Chatman, 2003).
Cha and Chapman point out that an organization’s leadership carries the heaviest burden of shaping an organization’s culture - even one that had already been well shaped when that leader arrived on the scene. Cha and Chatman write that once the leader of an organization decides to use culture as a tool for shaping the organization, the leader must “they regularly review their own behavior to understand the signals they are sending to members” (Cha and Chatman, 2003).
Yet both articles note that while leaders may play the largest role in shaping an organization’s culture, the organization’s members actually have the greater role in carrying out and maintaining the aspects of the culture. Leaders may set the tone, but strong cultures feature what Sorenson calls a widespread “consensus and endorsement of organizational values and norms” which “facilitates social control within the firm” (Sorenson, 2009).
The “takeaway” from reading these articles is that my understanding of my own organizational situation is a little clearer: it's not ALWAYS the boss's fault. Leadership sets the tone of a culture, but employees are responsible for executing the culture and maintaining it over organizational generations, all the while keeping a watchful eye on how leadership is holding up its end of the organizational culture bargain.
References
Sorenson, J. (2009) Note on Organizational Culture, Harvard Business School, pp. 1-6 (full article)
Cha, S.E. and Chatman, J.A., Leading by Leveraging Culture, California Management Review, 45(4) Summer 2003 (pp. 20-34).
Peggy, what do you think that leadership can do to maintain a positive organizational culture when they a bit of the outsiders looking in? Since the employees are the ones that are responsible for executing the culture and maintaining over organizational generations. I believe that in MOST cases, leadership is responsible for the tone of the culture. The way leadership treats their employees contributes to the positive or negative culture. This is what I have experienced in current and past organizations.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Xiomara, that leadership is responsible. As the literature I cited states, employees are always looking at leadership to see if they are walking the walk and talking the talk. Leaders do, indeed, set the tone of the culture, and their treatment of employees has a lot to do with that tone.
ReplyDeletePeggy, you make a great point. There can also be negative consequences of organizational culture! Can you provide some examples of how your organization's culture has created challenges? You note that in addition to bosses, employees can also be responsible for perpetuating an organizational culture. In what ways have you seen this take place in your own organization?
ReplyDeleteThanks, Jessica. I can provide such examples. As a school that is part of a worldwide network of Sacred Heart Catholic schools, my organization has created a culture of "Sacred Heartedness" that encompasses everything from curriculum to how employees communicate with one another. Unfortunately, when there are breakdowns in communication, employees often find it difficult to be open about such breakdowns because complaining about a lack of communication might be perceived as "not Sacred Heart-like." And, even as new employees come in (and by no means is everyone Catholic or even Christian) that culture of "being Sacred Heart (which has many, many positive aspects) is perpetuated...including the negative elements.
ReplyDelete