An Analysis of Organisational culture through the Organisation Theory

Introduction

The concept of organisational culture started receiving attention in the 1970s when the view of organisations shifted from machine-like entities towards the recognition that human factors affected organisational progress and processes (Kissack and Callahan 2010). Since the 1970s, organisational culture has been researched, studied, and conceptualised in different ways and from varied perspectives. Generally, culture is said to be a set of shared assumptions, values, language, rituals, and artefacts that determine how people function and interact within organisations (Lowe et al. 2012). Most organisational culture literature notes that organisational management usually changes and manipulates culture to align with strategic plans for optimal performance (Sulkowski 2014). In the current hypercompetitive business environment, organisations use organisational culture to distinguish themselves from competitors and gain competitive advantage. Given this critical role of organisational culture in enhancing organisational performance, the aim of this essay is to analyse organisational culture through the three perspectives of the organisation theory (modernist, symbolic-interpretive, and postmodern perspectives). The essay first analyses organisational culture through each perspective in a general way, but later focuses on specific theories and establishes how these theories relate to organisational culture. The essay will also identify the differences between these three perspectives in the understanding of organisational culture as a tool used by organisations to enhance their performance.

The Case: Deloitte UK

Deloitte UK is an advisory and consulting firm that employs people from all over the world as long as they have the required intellectual capital, curiosity, and imagination. Despite the different cultures the employees have, Deloitte believes that an organisation means people working together for a shared purpose and therefore its employees are everything to the organisation, and hence the company encourages its employees to work in their unique ways to create, collaborate, innovate and deliver in everything it does (Deloitte UK 2020). Deloitte values individual point of view and the diverse ways of being and working, and believes in order to be better, work must be designed around its employees (Deloitte UK 2020). Trying to manage employees from different cultures necessitates that the culture of the organisation allow all employees find identity. In this essay, it will be interesting to see how the culture of individual employees affects the culture of the organisation, and how the culture of Deloitte affects the culture of the employees and how the interaction of individual culture and organisational culture affect organisational performance.

Analysis through each perspective

In the modernist perspective, an organisation has culture which is an instrument or a function that organisational leaders manipulate to help the organisation adapt to external realities (Hatch 2018). During the modern period, researchers and practitioners focused on organisations through objective measures: they sought to measure culture and used the findings to enhance organisational effectiveness (Clegg et al. 2015). Statistical methods were used and therefore the researchers achieved comparative and multivariate studies. Researchers from this perspective rely on notions of the positivist research tradition and therefore prefer scientific methods while emphasising scientific objectivity (Kissack and Callahan 2010). The survey research strategy is commonly used for data collection so that through the findings, organisational culture can be categorised as either strong or weak. If the culture is found weak it is said to be insufficient for organisational effectiveness and therefore it has to be managed for the organisation to meet its goals (Hatch 2018). If organisational culture is found to be strong, the organisation focuses on ways of maintaining or improving it for superior organisational performance.

The main modernist theorists of organisational culture are Edgar Schein and Geert Hofstede. From Hofstede’s perspective, a country’s national culture can affect the culture of an organisation. Hofstede identified five dimensions of national culture that affect organisational culture namely power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity and femininity, individualism versus collectivism, and long-term versus short-term orientation (Dartey-Baah 2013). Power distance relates to the extent to which are willing to accept unequal distribution of power and status: in low power distance cultures, people hardly accept unequal distribution of power while in high power distance cultures, people respond well to authority and therefore leadership is accepted as a way of managing organisational performance (Kissack and Callahan 2010). Uncertainty avoidance is the extent to which people are willing to accept uncertainty in their environment. Cultures with low uncertainty avoidance are more curious, open and willing to accept, for example, new technology while countries with high uncertainty avoidance would be unwilling to accept new technology which detrimentally affects their development. This trickles down to organisations and their culture. Masculinity and femininity affects what is important is the society: masculine cultures value achievement of goals and career advancement while feminine cultures value relationships and services. Individualism and collectivist relates to how people approach their tasks: individualistic cultures approaches tasks individually for personal gain while collectivistic cultures place value on community and relationships with each other. Long-term and short-term orientation affects the rewards that a company receives; for example, cultures that value hard work believe they will gain long-term rewards while other cultures may value strategies through which they gain short-term rewards. Hofstede argues that national culture affects organisational culture; for example, the US has an individualistic culture and therefore companies in the US will adopt the individualistic culture. On the other hand, China has a collectivist culture and therefore Chinese organisations are more likely to adopt the collectivist culture. Chinese organisations can therefore encourage teamwork in order to enhance employee productivity and ultimately organisational performance. With employees from both US and China, and the fact that Deloitte is based in UK, an individualistic country and weak uncertainty avoidance, Deloitte has to create a culture that considers all these factors, which implies that its culture is created around those of its employees.

Unlike Hofstede, Schein focuses on culture at the organisational level rather than at the national level. Nonetheless, Schein focuses on measuring culture. Schein sees culture as assumptions within an organisation which are then manifested as values and behavioural norms recognised by organisational members (Kissack and Callahan 2010). Schein also emphasises that culture is different between organisations and it is adhering to organisational assumptions that produce artefacts of culture.

In the symbolic-interpretive perspective, organisational culture is a system of knowledge, a manifestation of unconscious human processes, or pattern of symbolic discourse (Hatch 2018). The symbolic-interpretive perspective aims at counterbalancing the functionalist-positivist paradigm and defines organisational culture of the natives’ point of view. From the subjective ontology and interpretive epistemology, Basson and Botha (2012) argue that reality is relative to individuals and can only be understood from their point of view, which justifies the need to define organisational culture from the point of view of employees within that organisation. However, an organisation hires and fires employees, which implies that organisational culture keeps changing thus can be said to be a process of sense-making constructed and reconstructed through interaction (Clegg et al. 2015). From the symbolic interpretive perspective, Chia (2003) also notes that organisational culture has multiple meaning depending on how people within different organisations make sense of the world around them. Generally, the symbolic-interpretive perspective holds that culture is the essence of an organisation (Hatch 2018).

Symbolism focuses on the process of meaning construction (Kissack and Callahan 2010) but then meaning depends on the context (Chia 2003). This implies that organisational symbols only have meanings in their particular contexts and have stories behind them (Clegg et al. 2015). These symbols are open to multiple and contradictory readings based on the source telling the story and how he/she understands the symbol. In addition, symbolic interpretivists believe that the meaning of a symbol is a result of interaction between people. Some organisations share stories with new recruits as a way of orienting the recruits to the organisation and such storytelling can be seen as a symbol of knowledge development within the organisation. According to Hatch (2018), many organisations have three types of narratives including personal narratives, generic narratives and situational narratives. Through personal narratives, organisations are able to tell the life history, visions, and dreams of the founders of the organisation so they are passed to the subsequent generations. Through generic narratives, organisations are able to communicate their operational strategies and business plans while through situational narratives, organisations are able to share histories of critical events and to explain why things are done the way they are done within the organisation. Through these narratives, employees are able to understand and pass the culture of their organisation thus the narratives are cultural resources for the organisation. With a better understanding of organisational culture, employees perform better: for example, through personal narratives they understand the vision of the founder which enables them to align their goals to those of the founder, which promotes performance. At Deloitte, culture is used as a driver of performance. The primary performance-driving symbol at Deloitte is values and their visible expression in behaviours, and as a result, the company has been able to acquire a high-performance culture which meshes with business strategy.

The postmodernist perspective is a critique of the modernist and symbolic-interpretive perspectives and therefore deconstructs these perspectives arguing that organisational culture does not exist but a mere illusion used by top management to manipulate and control employees within an organisation (Lash 2014). Postmodernists believe that cultures are always in flux thus would lead to ambiguous interpretations or loss of meaning among future generations (Kissack and Callahan 2010). According to postmodernists, organisational culture can undergo three types of change namely apparent change, revolutionary change, and incremental change (Hatch 2018). Apparent change happens within a culture but the change is not significant thus cannot be noticed. Revolutionary change occurs when a new strategy is introduced which then clashes with the previous culture thus changing the culture of the organisation; for example, when an organisation adopts a new technology that completely changed how people were previously working. Incremental change occurs when new values are imposed but these are kept with the old values.

How each perspective contributes to the topic

The modernist perspective believes that organisational culture is a tool that an organisation can use to manage organisational performance and therefore in studying the effect of organisational culture on organisational performance, culture will be used as the independent variable while performance will be used as the dependent variable. This implies that organisational performance will depend on the strength of organisational culture. The modernist perspective also identifies five dimensions of culture (power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs. collectivism, masculinity vs. feminism, and long vs, short-term orientation) which can be used as the study objectives aiming at establishing how each dimension contributes to organisational performance in the selected firm. When conducting the study on the effect of organisational culture on organisational performance, it would also be ideal to find out if national culture compares to organisational culture in the selected company; this way, it will be possible to understand the extent to which companies do or do not reflect national cultures. With the advent of globalisation, countries are no longer operating independently and therefore it would be necessary to find out if globalisation has changed organisational cultures. Further, it is important to investigate whether organisations in the same country have the same culture given that Hofstede asserts that national culture trickles down to organisations; that is, can cultural understandings be generalised to organisations within a particular country

The symbolic interpretive perspective holds that culture is the essence of organisation. From this perspective, it will be important to find out if the selected organisation has symbols its uses ingrain its culture to new recruits and the context under which such symbols were formed. The symbolic interpretive perspective also maintains that culture is constructed and reconstructed through interaction (Hatch 2018) and therefore it would be important to find out the interactions that resulted to the formation of the symbols used by the organisation. It will also be important to find out how the symbols and their interpretation by employees affect the behaviour of employees and ultimately organisational performance. It will also be important to investigate the contradictions around the symbols, stories and narratives that surround the culture of the selected organisation and how they affect employees understanding of the organisation and their roles.

The postmodernist perspective questions the modern and symbolic interpretive notions of organisational culture and raises important points to consider when conducting research on organisational culture in the present times. According to Lash (2014), the reiteration of the logo, the repeated story, and the ceremonial construction of basic values are the organisational model of organisational culture as opposed to some hidden pattern of meaningful interpretations. In light of this critique of the symbolic interpretive perspective, it would be important to take a critical look at the modernist and symbolic interpretive perspectives of organisational culture which maintain that culture can be manipulated by management at will. For example, the modernist perspective asserts that culture is a tool that can be manipulated by management to enhance organisational effectiveness while the symbolic interpretive perspective maintains that organisational symbols have meaningful interpretations. Therefore, from a postmodern perspective, it is important to find out how the management can manipulate a symbol with a meaningful interpretation. As earlier mentioned, the symbolic interpretive perspective examines culture from a native’s point of view (Hatch 2018) and therefore, it would be important for postmodernists to investigate whether culture can be understood from an outsider’s point of view or it is only an insider who can generate more insight.

How specific theory from each perspective relates to the topic

This theory assumes that countries have one commonly shared culture and the culture of a nation affects the culture of an organisation (Hatch 2018). From this theory, a key question would be; do organisations within the same country have similar cultural dimensions? It would also be necessary to find out why culture differs between organisations in different countries amid the advent of globalisation that has resulted in shared culture globally.

This theory holds that the understanding of organisational symbols depends on context (Hatch 2018) and therefore a major question would be; does symbolism cause ambiguity in the interpretation of organisational culture? Does symbolism imply that some employees could have a better understanding of the organisational culture as compared to others? How would this affect organisational productivity

The deconstruction theory would be used to understand how organisational managers use culture to manipulate employee for optimal performance while cultural dimensions such as repeated stories and basic values remain the same for these organisations. In addition, the deconstruction theory would be used to explain why organisational culture is always in flux given factors such as globalisation and technological advancement that has allowed people to interact virtually. Through the deconstruction theory, it will also be possible to explore how organisational culture changes over time

Summary: differences between the perspectives in understanding the topic

The aim of this essay was to analyse organisational culture through modernist, symbolic interpretive and the postmodern perspectives. From the modernist perspective, organisational culture is an instrument or a function that organisational managers use to enhance organisational effectiveness. This implies that managers have the ability to control organisational culture for optimal organisational performance. Within this perspective are two major theories, Hofstede’s and Schein’s theory. According to Hofstede’s theory, organisational culture is influenced by the culture of the nation from which the organisation recruits employees while Schein’s theory maintains that culture can be measured. From this perspective, the essay assumes that organisational culture is an important variable in managing organisational performance. The symbolic-interpretive perspective on the other hand, organisational culture is a manifestation of human consciousness within an organisation and therefore culture can be understood based on how people within an organisation interact and the context under which they interact. From this perspective, organisational culture is a symbol that an organisation uses to distinguish itself from competitors. Unlike the modernist perspective that asserts that managers use culture to manage organisational effectiveness, the symbolic interpretive perspective asserts that organisations use symbols to help others understand their culture. In addition, the modernist perspective maintains that culture can be observed objectively while the symbolic interpretive theory maintains that culture is subjective. Further, the modernist perspective maintains that culture can be measured and categorised while the symbolic interpretive perspective theory holds that culture cannot be directly seen but rather seen through symbols and practices that cannot be measured. Unlike these two perspectives, the postmodernist perspective holds that culture is fragmented and in flux and is shaped through human interactions. This perspective also maintains that culture is self-contained thus is cannot be fully explored. Therefore, organisational culture is a complex concept which can be analysed using multiple perspectives and has different meanings depending on the adopted perspective. As such, it is important to clearly delineate the perspective through which organisational culture is defined when exploring the influence on organisational culture on organisational performance.

Reflections on Hofstede’s theory

Hofstede’s theory maintains that national culture affects organisational culture in that organisations tend to company the culture of the country they are based in. In the advent of globalisation, companies hire people from different countries and expand their operations in various countries across the world. Therefore, a key question would be how hiring employees with diverse cultures and establishing subsidiaries in different countries affects the culture of a particular company. According to Hofstede, employees should show culture-specific behaviours (Dartey-Baah 2013), which implies that employees from diverse cultures cannot work together in a company unless a shared culture is created. Therefore, Deloitte must create a shared culture, where all employees find a sense of belonging regardless their individual culture for optimal performance. With values as the main symbol that drives performance, Deloitte should consider the values of individual employees when defining organisational values to ensure all employees embrace these values and express them in their behaviour.

Reflections of Organisation and Environment

From the contingency theory, organisations deal with various influencing factors and the most successful organisations are those that are able to match their internal structures to match environmental characteristics (Cohen and Olsen 2015). Therefore, the contingency theory holds that there is no one best way to manage an organisation as long as a company is able to manage its approach with the situation of the environment. Cognisant of this, Deloitte holds that a high-performance culture is a competitive weapon but cannot simply happen without the company adapting its culture to match the dynamic business environment. In other words, Deloitte maintains that high-performance culture is not a roll of the dice but a product of behaviour, processes, and symbols that are controlled by an organisation to contribute to the company’s performance. This means that for Deloitte, organisational culture, which is primarily symbolised by organisational values, is not static but changes with changes in the business environment for increased performance.

Reflections on Organisation and technology

From the postmodernist perspective, technology is a means of controlling behaviour and disciplining employees which is to some extent true to Deloitte given the company uses social media platforms to manage hold meetings with its employees from different countries. For example, the company has CCTV surveillance cameras in its physical stores which help to monitor the behaviour of employees. The postmodernist perspective also holds that technology can imprison employees which is to some extent true to Deloitte. For example, employees know they are being watched given there is a camera installed and therefore they are likely to change their behaviour just to match what is required by the organisation. If this is the case, employees will not behave voluntarily but because they feel obliged because there are systems put in place.

Reflection on Organisation and Power

From the strategic contingencies theory, power is the ability to protect an organisation from uncertainty and to provide something that an organisation needs. For Deloitte, people in the management have the power to control the behaviour and values of employees through creating and encouraging a shared culture among employees. However, it is not only those in management that can control behaviour within an organisation. For example, through deploying expatriates, Deloitte can shape the behaviour and values of its employees if the behaviour of the expatriate is more rewarding than that of the employees. This is so because the employees will tend to copy the behaviour and values of the expat for similar or even better results. This way, the expatriate even if held no management position will be able to influence the values and behaviour of employees, which will ultimately reflect in a change of the organisational culture.

Reflections on Organisational Change

From the modernist perspective, change is a function that helps an organisation transition from one state to another for better performance (Kissack and Callahan 2010). In the context of organisational culture, hiring employees from diverse cultures can be an opportunity for the company to change its culture for optimal performance. At the same time, if the company designed new values, it will call for change in organisational culture to ensure the behaviour of employees reflect the change in values for the company to achieve the set objectives. From Lewin and Kotler’s perspective, change can be planned and implemented in a rational way. For example, if Deloitte adopted a new technology, it would have to rationally take its employees through a three-step change process (unfreeze, move, and refreeze) to prepare employees for the change, help them transit and finally help them get comfortable with the new way of operating (Cummings et al. 2016). This way, employees would not undergo cultural shock which would help them retain or improve their productivity.

Reflection of the Workbook

The workbook presented the idea that organisational culture is dependent of individual culture and nation culture and is dynamic depending on changes in the business environment. My position having undergone this course is organisational culture is a tool for enhanced organisational performance but this can only be attained if an organisation is bale to create and maintain a high-performance culture. In a high-performance culture, an organisation must consider the values of individual employees and create a shared culture where all employees find a sense of belonging, which would enhance their productivity as opposed to when they do not identify with the adopted values. However, from the power perspective some people are more influential than others which implies that the cultures of some employees could be considered superior as compared to those of other employees, which affects the extent to which the values of all employees are presented in the organisational culture. In essence, the values of leaders are more likely to be adopted as compared to those of followers forcing those in subordinate positions to behave in the ways of their leaders. This implies that even in a shared culture, the values of some employees would have more weight depending on their positions in the organisation. From the contingency theory, there is no best way to manage an organisation which in this case means that an organisation could today emphasise on some values and on others tomorrow based on the situation in the environment. In addition, based to technological changes in the business environment, an organisation today could value face-to-face meetings and in future value virtual meetings, which would largely affect organisational culture. Therefore, organisational culture is though influenced by personal and nation cultures is largely dependent on changes in the business environment and other factors such as the strategies adopted by an organisation.

References

Basson, M. and Botha, C., 2012. Towards meaning: Symbolic interactionism and workplace bullying. In BULLYING: An assault on human dignity (pp. 77-91). Brill.

Chia, R., 2003. Organization theory as a postmodern science. The Oxford handbook of organization theory, pp.113-140.

Clegg, S.R., Kornberger, M. and Pitsis, T., 2015. Managing and organizations: An introduction to theory and practice. Sage.

Cohen, J.F. and Olsen, K., 2015. Knowledge management capabilities and firm performance: A test of universalistic, contingency and complementarity perspectives. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(3), pp.1178-1188.

Cummings, S., Bridgman, T. and Brown, K.G., 2016. Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management. Human relations, 69(1), pp.33-60.

Dartey-Baah, K., 2013. The cultural approach to the management of the international human resource: An analysis of Hofstede's cultural dimensions. International Journal of Business Administration, 4(2), p.39.

Hatch, M.J., 2018. Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. Oxford university press.

Kissack, H.C. and Callahan, J.L., 2010. The reciprocal influence of organizational culture and training and development programs. Journal of European Industrial Training.

Lash, S., 2014. Sociology of postmodernism. Routledge.

Lowe, S., Magala, S. and Hwang, K.S., 2012. All we are saying, is give theoretical pluralism a chance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 25(5), pp.752-774.

Sulkowski, L., 2014. From fundamentalistic to pluralistic epistemology of organizational culture. Tamara: Journal for Critical Organization Inquiry, 12(4).

Dig deeper into An analysis of how the airline industry can leverage digital marketing to spark with our selection of articles.