HOW DOES A CULTURE INFLUENCE THE ORGANISATIONS THAT

OPERATE WITHIN IT. HOW IT MAY BE APPLIED TO BUSINESS

PRACTICE.

COURSE CODE A41OC

COURSE TITLE: ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE

PROGRAMME : Msc BUSINESS PSYCHOLOGY

HABIBU FATIHU HAMZA

HW PERSON ID: H00144557

SECOND SEMESTER 2012/2013

BIENG A COUSEWORK SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL OF

LIFE SCIENCES IN HERIOT WATT UNIVERSITY,DUBAI CAMPUS.

21st MARCH, 2013.

INTRODUCTION.

The organizational culture is the way of life

followed consciously or subconsciously in the day-to-

day activities of the organization (Ashby, 2000).

Martin’s (1992) identified three different perspectives

that provide a more comprehensive examination of

organizational culture as follows (1). The integrated

or unified perspective, (2). The second one is

differentiated perspective, and (3). The third is

called fragmented perspective.

Organizational culture is influence by so many factors

among those that this essay will view are the

management practice of the organization, technological

progress, the national culture, the customs, dominant

personalities of the founder or senior manager, the

community in which it operate

A general understanding of an organization’s

culture is often indicative of successful transition

from newcomer to full member. Most definitions of

culture exist, but most agree that culture includes an

organization’s assumptions, practices, and habits which

reflect the values and beliefs of it is collective

membership.

Although organizational scholar’s argue that

culture is something that organization performs or does

rather than something it has (Pacanowsky and O’Donnell-

Truijillo, 1983), most researchers avoid such

distinctions and simply examine manifestations of

organizational culture (Hofsetede 1997).

MANIFESTATION OF ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE

An organization’s culture is manifested in various

ways including artifacts, individuals, language,

language or stories, norms, and rituals ((Pacanowsky

and O’Donnell-Truijillo, 1983). Each of these

contributes to member’s understanding of organization’s

values.

The organizational culture’s physical

manifestations are typically referred to as artifacts.

This includes objects which communicate organizational

values such as the company logo, historic objects,

buildings and documents. For example, the metallic

lettering with a slanted E in Dell’s corporate symbol

suggests a value of innovation and cutting – edge

technology.

THE PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE.

Martin’s (1992) explicated three different

perspectives that provide a more comprehensive

examination of organizational culture as follows:

a.The first perspective is the integrated or unified

perspective, using this perspective, one examines

areas of consensus and consistency across the

organization. the focus is on values and beliefs that

are embraced by nearly all organizational members.

This perspective looks for umbrella culture that

encompasses all organizational members.

b.The second one is differentiated perspective, which

focuses on inconsistencies across the

organization .the inconsistencies result in subgroups

or subcultures within the umbrella culture. Each

subculture likely has it is own unified culture

(mini-culture) with clarity and consistency within

it, but the various subcultures differ from each

other as a result of different experiences and

interpretations. As a result, there may be conflict

between subcultures.

c.Martin’s third perspective is called fragmented

perspective. This culture is complex and filled with

ambiguities. There is very little consistency or

consensus; when it occurs, it is temporary with a

return to ambiguity and inconsistency. There is no

shared understanding of these parts of the culture.

A study of the formative years of

Microsoft Corporation supports the value of viewing

organizational culture from all the three perspective

(Andrews, and G. L. Peterson, 2000). From an integrated

perspective, there were a number of shared values at

Microsoft at the time. For example, the presence of

multiple and up-to-date technological gadgets in each

office emphasized a value of cutting edge technology

and creative thinking. The lack of clocks and

unassigned parking spaces indicated valuing working

long hours. Those who bought into the dominant

integrated culture considered Microsoft a great place

to work and saw themselves as future millionaires,

while those who were less enamored by it saw it as a

“velvet sweat shop” with “golden handcuffs”. A

fragmented perspective provided a frame for viewing the

issue of speaking to the case-study authors. Current

employees were warned to clear any statements they made

with the corporate communication department. Former

employees were sometimes concerned about negative

consequences from having spoken to the authors and

checked to make sure that quotes could not be

attributed to them. It is difficult to determine what

these experiences mean in a great place of work.

Combining the three perspectives provides a more

complex and complete understanding of Microsoft culture

than any one perspective.

THE MANAGEMENT PRACETICE AS AN INFLUENCIAL FACTOR TO

ORGANISATION CULTURE.

An important indicator of an organization’s

culture is it is management theory or philosophy. Each

management theory has assumptions that indicate certain

values. To the degree that the management theory

pervades organizational attitudes and practices, it is

part of it is culture.

An explanation on how the four main management

theories can influence the culture will be given now.

For example, classical management theory is the oldest

of the theories developed around the turn of the

twentieth century the time of Industrial Revolution.

Well-known explications of this approach include

Taylor’s (1911) scientific management, Fayol’s (1949)

industrial management, and Weber’s (1947) bureaucracy.

Although there are important variations across the

approaches, they all represent very structured, fairly

rigid, and autocratic approaches to management. They

assume that employees are motivated primarily by

financial gains and must be carefully monitored and

directed to maintain standards and productivity.

Research designed to support classical

management theories led to the development of the human

relations management theory after World War ii. One part of the

famous Hawthorne studies (Roethlisberger, 1941)

attempted to find the optimum lighting to increase

productivity, but instead found that workers developed

social relations with co-workers that influence

productivity norms. In the end, the researchers

concluded that pay and directives from management were

insufficient to explain employee motivation and

productivity; social relationships were important

motivators. Listening to employees and social

interactions between employees were important aspects

of organizational management.

During the second half of the twentieth century,

the human resource management theory gradually developed. In

part based on psychological findings such as Maslow’s

hierarchy of needs, researchers and managers began

recognizing that employees were motivated by factors

other than money or social relationships (example,

McGregor, 1960). As the workforce shifted from

manufacturing jobs to information and service jobs,

employees become more concerned about opportunities for

advancement and the ability to find fulfilling work.

Human resource management focused on providing

employees opportunities for job enrichment and added

responsibility to make work more fulfilling.

Teamwork as a management theory holds somewhat

different assumptions about employees. Teamwork can be

an organizing structure in which people work in groups,

and/or a philosophical approach. Generally, management

sets a broad goal or vision, but team members make

decisions, possibly including hiring or firing

decisions and setting schedules. Rewards are given at

the group rather than individual level. For example,

teamwork at the Harley Davidson Corporation was

associated with increased group cohesion, productivity,

and commitment (Chansler, Swamidass, and Cortlandt,

2003). Alternatively, teamwork can create an oppressive

work atmosphere when group pressure becomes a form of

concretive control (Barker, 1993). In an electronics

company, the team developed rules that were more rigid

and oppressive than those of management, including

publicly posting tardiness and attendance records and

requiring team members to work long hours to meet

productivity goals.

Although many organizations include combinations

include combinations of these management practices, the

particular approach has important implications for the

for the organization’s culture. The practices, rituals,

and norms of a classically managed organization are

quite different from those of a teamwork organization.

Members learn to work with the management culture. If

the organization’s culture changes over time or differs

from one department or division to another, it can be

challenging to make sense of that culture. In the

scenario, the culture of library materials been kept

mostly as hardcopy books and journals in the early

ninetieth centaury has been changed with the

advancement in the information technology in the

twentieth century now most of the reading materials are

in softcopy, students can access them via internet.

This change in culture caused universities to improve

their internet service so that students can access

those materials 24 hours a day and universities without

such facilities to lunch them.

TECHNOLOGY AS A FACTOR OF CHANGE TO CULTURE

The last few decades have seen remarkable changes

in information and communication technologies.

Computers made the typing pool obsolete. Technology has

changed organization’s cultures by changing the

organizational practices, rituals, and norms.

Technology allows for more varied work practices which

change organizational structures. In some

organizations, field workers no longer needed to report

to the office as often because they submitted reports

and responded to supervisor inquiries electronically;

field and office workers have different experiences as

a result (Rosenfeld, Richman, and May, 2004). Field

workers emphasized productivity and following rules and

procedures closely while office workers felt more

pressure and time urgency, perhaps due to the

supervisor’s presence.

NATIONAL CULTURE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

Because organizations exist in a context, the

organization’s culture is influenced in part by the

national culture. According to Hofstede (1997),

national cultures can be described along four primary

dimensions:

(1) Individualism versus collectivism describes the

degree to which the culture focuses on individual

rather than group needs and accomplishments.

(2) Masculinity versus femininity indicates whether or

not the culture emphasizes stereotypical gender

roles, and segmentation between work and non-work.

(3) Power distance relates to whether the culture

accepts and emphasizes status differences and

resulting inequities or not.

(4) Uncertainty avoidance describes whether the culture

encourages information sharing to manage uncertainty

or tolerates ambiguity.

Along these dimension, the United States is

more individualistic, masculine, with moderate

power distances, and fairly high uncertainty

avoidance. Japanese culture is more collectivistic,

Denmark is more feminine, Finland has more power

distance, and Israel is higher in uncertainty

avoidance

Although oversimplifying national cultures which

are more diverse than this typology recognizes,

particularly if significant migratory populations form

subcultures, this does provide a basis for examining

how the external culture influences the internal

organizational culture. In organizations located in a

highly masculine, highly individualistic, low-power-

distance national culture, internal organizational

culture would be expected to favors those same value.

The culture may be evident in gendered occupations,

independent offices, and informal supervisor-

subordinate communication. In this way the

organizational culture reflects the national culture.

CUSTOMS CONTRIBUTE TO THE CULTURE OF AN ORGANISATION.

Often companies evolve their own customs. For

example, until a few years ago, the Bluebird Beverage

Company paid it is employees in cash. On payday, the

employees lined up at the cashier’s window and were

handed their envelopes by the paymaster, who was

protected by an armed guard. To allow for the time it

took to obtain the pay envelopes, lunch break was

extended for fifteen minutes. When the company shifted

to payment by check, the paymaster went to each

department and distributed the checks. Although there

was no longer the need to line up at the window, the

workers expected to continue to get a longer lunch

break on payday. They considered it an entitlement and

it has remained a custom of that company.(Ashby, 2000).

DOMINANT PERSONALITIES AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE.

Often an organizational culture is created by a

dominant person such as a founder or a top manager. His

or her personality sets the organizational culture for

good or bad. In some companies, every decision-

important or trivial-must be made by the senior

executive.

The experience of White Plastics exemplifies this.

When Larry White started this business, he made all the

decisions and knew what was happening in all aspects of

the operation. As business expanded, he began to lose

touch with some of the activities. So he could not keep

informed, he required that all copies of all

correspondence be sent to him every day.

Today, 40 years later, his current successor still

gets a file copy of every letter, fax, and memo. He

rarely has time to even glance at them, yet the

practice continues. When this was brought to his

attention, he refused to change the practice. He

commented: it helped my predecessor and it may come in

handy sometime. (Ashby, 2000).

HOW COMMUNTY INFLUENCE THE ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE.

The community in which a company is located

often influences it is organizational culture.

Companies that open facilities in areas that have

different customs and work practices from those at the

home base have to accommodate local customs. When the

North Atlantic Constructors, a joint venture of four

Midwestern Construction companies, opened it is New

York City office, they established a workday schedule

that started at 8 a.m., the usual starting time in

their home areas. They were shocked to learn that

virtually all New York opened at 9 a.m. in order to

compete for good workers in the city, they had to

adjust their working hours to the usual local hours of

9 a.m. to 5 p.m .(Ashby, 2000).

CONLUSION.

The essay reviewed and discussed some of the

theories and researches made by the psychologist and

management scholars on the how does a culture influence

the organization that operate within it. The

perspective of organizational culture was discussed.

The ways in which management practice influences

organizational culture has been stated, also national

culture and organizational culture differences has

been stated and how former influences the latter.

REFERENCES

Andrews, P. (2000). Part a. Inside Microsoft. In G. L.Peterson (ed.), Communicating in organizations: a casebook.(pp. 17-24).Allyn and Bacan.

Ashby, F. C. (2000) Revitalize Your Corporate Culture.New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited.

Baker, J. R. (1993).Tightening the iron cage:concertive control in self-managing teams.Administrative Science Quarterly , 38, 408-37.

Chansler, P. A., Swamidass, P. M. and Cortlandt, C.( 2003) Self-managing work teams: an empiricalstudy of group cohesiveness in “natural work

groups” at a Harley-Davidson Motor Company plant.Small Group Research, 34, 101-20.

Hofstede, G. (1997). From fad to management tool.In Cultures and organizations: software of the mind (pp. 178-204). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Kramer, M. W. (2010) Organizational Socialization.Cambridge CB2, UK 1UR,UK: Polity Press.

Martin, J., (1992). Cultures in organizations: threeperspectives. New York:

McGregor, D. M. (1960). The human side of enterprise.New York: McGrawHill.

Oxford University Press.

Pacanowsky, M. E. and O’Donnell-Truijillo, N.(1983). Organizational communication as culturalperformance. Communication Monographs, 50, 126-47.

Roethlisberger, F. J. (1941). The Hawthorneexperiments. In management and morale. Cambridge, MA. HarvardUniversity Press.