Drawing on Appropriate Theory Examples Essay Example For Students

Drawing on Appropriate Theory Examples Essay Whether culture management can ever be truly effective and, if so, Which management strategies are most likely to succeed. Taylor describes culture as the complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society, Taylor (1871/1958:1). Considering the early days of anthropology, culture was the understanding of what was distinctively human, what separates humans from other animals and hence what defines our similarities. Growing interest within this field brought about an association of ultra with particular groups of people. This association caused anthropologists to talk about groups as it they were cultures and shifted the touch to anthropology from the general understanding of human kind as species, to the distinctive characteristics of particular groups, and thus to human differences. A comparison of the definition of Taylor and a definition from American anthropologist Melville Horsepower helps illustrate this shift, a construct describing the total body of belief, behavior, knowledge, sanctions, values, and goals that make up the way of life of a people. Horsepower (1948:625). The shift that refocused culture to the culture of groups, in anthropology, has been repeated within organizational culture studies, there has been a shift from culture as an organizational unity, to culture as a means of explaining differences between various subgroups of the organization. Considering different perspectives on organizational culture, researchers Who take an anthropological stance, organizations are cultures (Bate 1 994) describing something that an organization is (Smirch 1983) and thus, Scheme explains: an organization comprises a pattern Of shared assumptions invented, covered, or developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration that has worked well enough to be considered valued, and therefore is to be taught to new members of the group as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems. (Scheme 1992, p. 247) In this paradigm, organizational culture is both defined and restricted by group parameters, tort example concepts or ideologies, and by normative criteria that provides the basis for allocating status, power, rewards, friendship, punishment, authority and respect. Culture determines what a group pays attention to and monitors in the external environment and how it responds to this environment. Thus, as Bate (1994) notes, for those who take an anthropological stance, organizational culture and organizational strategy are linked and interdependent. Culture, therefore, is not a separable facet of an organization, it is not readily manipulated or changed, and it is not created or influenced by leaders. For the writers described by Bate (1394) as scientific rationalists, organizational culture is but one aspect Of the component parts Of an organization, a facet that an be measured, manipulated and changed as can organizational variables such as skills, style, systems, strategy and staff (Peters Waterman 1982). In this paradigm, organizational culture is primarily a set values and beliefs articulated by leaders to guide the organization. Scientific rationalists strategies for change focus on modular, design-and-build activity often related to structures, procedures and rewards (Bate 1994, p. 11). Discussion, within this paradigm, within organizational culture is usually from the perspective of managers and often emphasis the leaders role in creating, influencing or transforming culture: leaders help to shape the culture. The cultu re helps to shape its members culture, then, attain at the apex of the leaders responsibility hierarchy (Hampered-Turner 1990, up. , 9). After the consideration of organizational culture as unitary I will now discus the possibilities of pluralist sub-cultures within the one organization. Writes on this subject may adopt a fragmented or anarchist perspective and claim that consensus fails to coalesce on an organization-wide or sub cultural basis, except in transient, issue-specific ways (Frost et al. 991, p. 8). A Unitarian perspective underpins various category descriptions of organizational culture. A good example of this is Handy (1 993), who believes an organization will display either a role, task, power or person orientated culture Writers with a unitary perspective believe in a top-down leadership of change or maintenance of an organizational culture. The unitary viewpoint Of a single culture makes it possible for the manager to efficiently control or influence the direction of the organization. Those against the unitary perspective believe that an organization is made up f diverse sub-cultures and take a pluralist stance. Their belief is that success is achieved through effective leadership and management of diversity and maintaining or change the culture of the organization is attained through programmer specifically designed for different segments of the organization. The anarchist perspective argues that in any case, all organizations are comprised of individuals who bring with them their own values and assumptions and thus there really can be no underlying cultural unity at any level except on a transient basis (Frost at al, 1991). Such fragmentation may be found even in rotationally structured firms for, in their study of twenty organizational cultures, Hefted et al, (1990, p. 31 1) found: shared perceptions of daily practices to be that core of an organizations culture employee values differed more according to the demographics criteria of nationality, age, and education than according to membership in the organization per SE. The anarchist perspective of organizational culture implies the impossibility of effecting culture change through concentrated efforts, but it also highlights the centrality of effective communication and management diversity if the loosely pulled organization is to remain functional and not break apart (Wick 1991). If individual values and assumptions are evident within the organization, managers must be aware of these to make certain individual behavior is driven by the organizational culture to ensure individuals do not act in a counter. Culture way. An example of an individual acting in a counter-culture way was apparent within the video Inside the Enron Scandal. Due to the violation of an individuals own moral framework, Enron were reported and brought down for their many scandals. This case illustrates that culture can be directly linked to this, The individual believed that the actions of the management within Enron were morally wrong. Another example within General Motors includes the story of the quality cat Howe Make whose job to patrol the factory exhorting workers to produce higher quality. General Motors employees reacted to this by producing their own quantity cat that chased Howe Maker-n off the factory floor. There is also a question of stability within an organizational culture. The fragmentation perspective, which takes on a postmodern view of organizational culture focuses on the inconsistency of an organizational culture. Joanne Martin (1983) writes: When two cultural members agree on a particular interpretation of, say, a ritual, this is likely to be temporary and issue-specific congruence. It may not reflect agreement or disagreement on other issues, at other times. Subcultures, then, are recapitulated as fleeting, issue-specific coalitions that may or may not have similar configuration in the future. This is not simply a failure to achieve sub cultural consensus in a particular context; from the Fragmentation perspective this is the most consensus possible in any context. (Martin 198352-64). She is stating that coalitions can never stabilize into unified or sub-cultures cause its important issues are always changing. Consider H.L.a Harts Critique of Austin Positivist Theory EssayTheir benefits must be notable by the members of the culture for this to happen, This will result in new values dropping to the level of unconscious assumptions. Chines model not only takes into consideration that culture is driven from inside out, but he suggests that it may be driven trot outside in. We can see that the arrows on his model point both ways. He is showing that the artifacts can be interpreted to transform the values an assumptions, showing the influence of management is possible. A study on MUM by Greet Hefted in the sasss brought about the theory that differences in the attitudes expressed by the managers of IBM could be categorized into four dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism and masculinity. This was the result of Hefted making comparisons across the international affiliates of MUM. He conducted a series of interviews with some 1 16 CO IBM employees from 72 countries. When considering Power distance we are analyzing the willingness Of members of a nation to accept an unequal distribution of wealth, power and prestige. Power distance may well be determined by the Structure Of the organization. For example within a flat organizational structure, power between the members Will be more equal. Uncertainty Avoidance focuses on the level Of tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity within the society i. E. The structuring of activities. If an organization has unstructured activities, this suggests a low uncertainty avoidance. An organization that is very control and rule-orientated expresses gig uncertainty avoidance. Individualism focuses on the degree the society reinforces individual or collective, achievement and interpersonal relationships. In the U. S cultures individualism is seen as a source of well being. Masculinity focuses on the degree the society reinforces, or does not reinforce, the traditional masculine work role model to male achievement, control, and power. There is more emphasis on work goals and earnings in highly masculine cultures; where as physical environment and relationships are more dominant in less masculine cultures, As with all theories, Hypotheses dimensions are subject to criticisms. Many writers believe that a survey to measure culture was inappropriate as it was carried out on group date, The very special nature of the IBM study has confused or enraged many who have learned from statistical textbooks that factor analysis has been done On individual data. They Would find it inconceivable Or Wrong to do it on group level data. (Sundergrad, 1934). We also need to consider is the study of one company a good representation about entire national cultures? Is the data for this analysis now out of date and obsolete? The external environment and the way it impacts on companies change as time passes by. And one last point to consider, Will all companies fit within just four dimensions? After thoroughly analyzing the different theorists on the topic of culture we can see that all their theories, too certain extent, allow an analysis of the conscious and viewable aspects of the culture, for example the physical analysis. Do not believe the cultural web gives an in-depth analysis on the underlying assumptions; however Johnson (1999) does bear these in mind and states that it is possible to identity the assumptions after a cultural web analysis takes place. It is Scheme who takes a step further and suggests for a fuller understanding, of he organizations culture, all three levels, this theory, should be complete. Have already discussed the theories of analyzing which culture an organization has; now will discus a theory of how best to influence and manage culture, Jennifer Chatham and Sandra Enough Chaw believe that powerfully effective cultures display three criteria: a high level of agreement, a high level of intensity, and an emphasis on innovation. They refer to three tools that leaders can use to help develop, manage and change their companys cultures to meet these three criteria: recruit select people for cultural fit, manage culture through colonization training and manage culture through the reward system. Chatham and Chaw understood one can promote powerful culture by emphasizing person/culture fit in addition to person/job fit. Townies (1989) suggests the growing trend in the use Of systematic selection and appraisal schemes not only seek to improve competitive strength and efficiency but also, and more importantly, seek to control employees. An example Of a company Who have taken this on board are Hays Recruitment. When interviewed by them for my placement year went through a series of personality tests. These tests would eve Hays an understanding of my values and beliefs, the results then could be compared with the culture adopted by Hays to ensure was likely to fit in and accept the overall culture which would have t o adopt in my placement year. Training employees about the values, expected behaviors and social knowledge will help create a bond between members so that employees will hold each other accountable for upholding the values. Also a sense of belonging can be very motivating. Working for a fruit packing company, found myself as an outsider. The existing staff had formed their own bond and was unwilling to allow anyone else within it. This drove me away from the company. In this situation management would be needed to influence the attitudes and values, possible through training, of the staff to prevent further high levels of turnover. Linking the informal cultural reward system to the formal company reward system Will ensure a clear, consistent and comprehensive message of company values. Seating arrangement in accordance with levels of sales in staff meetings is a good example Of this (Chatham and Chaw, 2002, up. 2-3). If there is a belief that culture can be managed, new forms Of managerial influences and control within organizations Will develop (Peters and Waterman 1982). If culture can influence behavior via values and norms, then management of these values and norms is possible to ensure other organizational performance outcomes are achieved. As have already discussed, this control can be achieved through recruitment and selection as well as other managerial tools. However an understanding of Chines work suggests norms and values are grounded in deeply rooted basic assumptions and therefore managing culture will be strictly limited. The influence exerted by the manager, on organizational culture, depends on any factors, Consideration must be given to the history of the organization, technology, goals and objectives, the size, location, management and staffing and the overall environment, Trust demonstrated by open plan offices and individual appraisal may not co-exist smoothly with each other. This ambiguity was well represented in the Channel 4 documentary The Gilded Cage. An influence or change in culture is evident in many case studies, for example British Airways, however as Smith and Peterson (1988, p 121) point out major changes in culture have been successfully accomplished but they are rare. Managers deed to assess the interests of both employers and employees in order to achieve a balance; in turn this may lead to more commitment, which leaves the manager in a better position to influence. Managers have placed too much emphasis on culture as an entity.