Culture

Culture; corporate culture: notion, research into corporate culture

Formation and maintenance of corporate culture

Acculturation problems

Culture

Individuals interact in networks or groups which carry expectations, rules, norms and ideals. These regulative practices are based on assumptions about the order of things, values, ethical beliefs, and attitudes toward status and authority – all characteristics of the misleadingly transparent concept of ‘culture’. Meanings about the world and its objects are constructed in social interactions within or between cultural groups and then serve to identify the group both socially and globally.

So what is culture? Here. We will define it as a system of activities and discourses, which have been codified and crystallized by usage, and which reflect the conventional practices of a group. All collectives develop a culture over time – a nation has a culture, as does an organization, a fan club or a gang. Complex societies have a diversity of cultures, including those of minority groups, such as ethnic cultures and gay cultures. The more complicated a culture becomes, the greater the chance that groups will break apart to form subcultures, which may be alternative (different from the mainstream but not challenging it), or oppositional (different from the mainstream and attempting to change it).

As regards the culture of business or government organizations, this is manifest in such factors as the organization’s objectives and ‘mission’, the hierarchy (allocation of roles in order of seniority), the internal and external patterns of negotiation, and the management of conflict. The organization’s public image is also significant in making cultural values apparent and known to others. This is achieved through various community-oriented projects and ecological initiatives, encompassed under the umbrella term Corporate Social responsibility (CSR).

Up to the 1970s researchers mentioned the notion of organizational or corporate culture. For example, one of the first studies, remotely related to culture in an organization was conducted by M.Sherif in 1936 where he mentioned the notion of social norms [Sherif M.and others. Intergroup conflict and cooperation. Norman, Okla.: University Book exchange, 1961]. In 1939 Lewin and Lippitt used the notion of organizational climate. In 1951 Levin wrote about group atmosphere, Cartright and Sander in 1953 – about group thinking. By the late 1960s, the terms ‘culture’ and ‘climate’ in organizations frequently occurred in works by many scholars as interchangeable ones.

It is possible that the idea of corporate culture originates from experiments, conducted in 1925-1932 in Illinois. Then anonymous questionnaires among factory employees revealed unofficial norms of behaviour that in some cases prevented the factory management to improve the factory performance. The experiment made the scientists consider more closely the influence of interpersonal relations and group communication on productivity.

In 1957, Chris Argyris elaborated the fundamental issues of the corporate human relations theory that were used in 1960 by Douglas McGregor in his X and Y theories. The proponents of the X theory believe that employees make use of every possibility to shun their responsibilities and work only to get money. Therefore, they should be controlled and threatened with sanctions – this is the only chance for a company to perform well. According to the Y theory, work is the only human state, employees are inherently disciplined and will be loyal to a company if its policy can provide their professional growth and combine it with the company’s goal. Employees are eager to be creative and responsible for what they do.

In the 1970s, the idea that companies have their own cultures was expressed by several researchers, e.g.P.Turner, C.Handy [the Gods of Management. N.Y: Penguin Books, 1978], A.M.Pettigrew [On Studying Organizational Cultures// Administrative Science Quarterly. 1979. #24. P.570-581].

The fundamentals of the corporate culture theory, according to many scholars, were laid by the anthropologist Clifford Geerts in his The Interpretations of Cultures in 1973.

In the 1980s, the issue of corporate culture became the centre of scientific research (this is actually the time when culture studies developed into a separate branch of scientific research).

Some authors (T.Peters and R.Waterman) believe that corporate culture plays a vital role in uniting people and has material consequences, as well as a company management can identify and use corporate culture to enhance the company’s performance.

The works on organizational climate, organizational cognition, importance of a company’s history and a company’s founders claim that a corporate culture is a collective conscience of an organization and and managers can manipulate and control it.

In 1979, A.Pettigrew published an article on culture (see above) where he proposed an anthropological theory of culture and showed that related phenomena (symbols, myths, rituals etc.) can be used in the organizational research.

At the same time The Organizational Dynamics Journal devoted an issue to culture problems and pointed out that managers should necessarily be aware of corporate culture and its importance.

Actually, these two publications became a starting point in the corporate culture research as it is understood nowadays.

In the 1980s, the focus of attention in corporate culture research shifted from power and regulations onto values and norms (the result of culture studies influence). It used to be believed that in companies decision-making is based on rational behaviour,, now it is believed that decisions are grounded on convictions and beliefs.

In Ukraine, this area of research is quite new, while in the USA the researchers are L.Smircich, J.Martin, E.H.Schein, J.Morgan, M.R.Louis. This branch of research is also being developed in Russia (S.T.Zarzhevskiy – thesis, A.G.Kleshchyov, V.A.Spivak, B.A.Sukharyov, V.Ye.Reva etc.)