INTRODUCTION 497 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1999, 8 (4), 497502

Organizational Culture
Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium LTP, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Since In search of excellence (Peters & Waterman, 1982) researchers as well as practitioners have been interested in organizational culture. Although much confusion and discussion about the concept remains, organizational culture as a concept has not disappeared from organizational literature and practice. Organizations and their managers still want to have an impact on organizational culture, whether by consolidating it or by changing it. But management of organizational culture is a controversial topic. Some authors think that organizational culture can easily be managed (Anthony, 1994), whereas for others this is seen to be much more difficult (Burack, 1991; Nord, 1985; Trice & Beyer, 1990). According to these authors, organizational culture management is constrained by such diverse factors as the multiplicity and complexity of sub-cultures, conflicting political interests, bad timing, and communication failures. Organizational culture pragmatics argue that organizational culture can be, should be, and has been managed, and they often offer guidance how to do this. Organizational culture purists find it ridiculous to talk about managing organizational cultureorganizational culture cannot be managed, it evolves (Martin, 1985). This debate of organizational culture management seems to depend on the organizational culture approach the researcher believes in. Some researchers suggest that organizations should be conceptualized as cultures. They favour the view that organizational culture is part of what an organization is rather than something an organization has (Smircich, 1983). Those researchers who argue that organizational culture is a socially constructed system of shared beliefs and values would find it inconsistent to think systematically managing or attempting to control the organizational culture phenomenon. They claim that organizational
Requests for reprints should be addressed to K. De Witte, Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, 3000 Leuven, Belgium. Email: karel.dewitte@psy.kuleuven.ac.be 1999 Psychology Press Ltd

Karel De Witte

Jaap J. van Muijen

498

DE WITTE AND VAN MUIJEN

culture can only be influenced in an indirect way and is the result of the interaction between the individual and organizational processes. Other researchers who are searching for more predictable methods of organizational control believe that organizational culture can be managed. These researchers follow the opinion that an organization has a culture or produces a culture, and usually define organizational culture as the social and normative glue that holds the organization together (Deal & Kennedy, 1982). It is not the intention of this special issue to give final answers to this ongoing discussion. Rather, the intention is to contribute to the debate by offering diverse contributions. In this Introduction, we first offer a framework on organizational culture and will then site the different contributions within this framework. Figure 1 gives an overview of the different elements that should be taken into account when dealing with organizational culture. The model refers to formation as well as to the change or development of organizational culture. This model integrates literature as well as practical experiences within consultancy projects with the aim of changing the organizational culture. The outside frame of the figure refers to the influencing factors in the broader environment, which influence the organizational culture. Influencing factors closer to the organization can be found on the next frame. These are influenced by the broader environmental factors. When an organization is founded, organi-

A FRAMEWORK FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

NATIONAL CULTURE P PRESSURE, CRISIS O U INTERACTION BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL AND ORGANIZATION O E S C T T E L E S S

B S I

U N E S S

V S O N I I

O C E S S S E LEADERSHIP PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS FIG. 1.

A K H O D R

A conceptual model for understanding organizational culture.

INTRODUCTION

499

zational culture forms and develops from the interaction between individual and organization. This is visualized by the horizontal line in the middle of Fig. 1, which represents different organizational processes, such as operational processes, selection, training, evaluation, R&D, maintenance processes, etc. The organizational culture can be tasted and smelled through these different business- and personnel-related processes. Finally, we find the outcomes of organizational culture: What is the impact on the individual members of the organization?

The Environment

From the literature it becomes clear that a diverse constellation of variables has an influence on the organizational culture. The different influencing factors, both in the broader and the more direct environment of the organization, are visualized as surrounding influences. In fact, the organization should be aware of the different variables at any moment. As this may be not realistic, it seems us that different variables are controlled for at different moments. Some are continuously present and other variables are regularly emphasized at different moments or phases of the organizational life cycle. Influences that are mentioned in the literature are the national culture, the evolution of the business, professional associations, and stakeholders.

The Organization

The following influencing factors are situated in the more direct environment of the organization. The importance of a vision is often emphasized in the literature (Frohman, 1997; Katz & Miller, 1996; Kotter, 1996; Simpson & Beeby, 1993). This vision should be inspiring and challenging (Nixon, 1992). Kotter (1996) mentions the following criteria for an effective vision: conceivable, attractive, realistic, directed (targeted), flexible, and communicable. Rites of rationalization and legitimation (Beyer & Trice, 1988) help the individuals understand the content and reason of the vision. These sensitizing acts legitimate the thinking, making it appear worthwhile, acceptable, and necessary. The development of a clear vision is often difficult for managers. Different authors stress the importance of leaders in the organization (Frohman, 1997; Kotter, 1996; Simpson & Beeby, 1993; Zamanou & Glaser, 1994). Through the last decades organizations have learnt that good management is one of the most important factors for optimal daily functioning. They have more experience in controlling the current situation than in changing it into new required directions, although the latter is required more and more nowadays. An organization not only needs leaders at the top, but at all levels (Kotter, 1996)! Some authors underline that a change in leadership is required to realize significant organizational culture change (Dyer, 1985; Gordon, 1991), whereas for others

500

DE WITTE AND VAN MUIJEN

organizational culture can be changed by a relatively stable leadership team (Lundberg, 1985). According to Gagliardi (1986), substantial organizational culture changes require a change in leadership, whereas incremental changes can be guided by the current leaders, who demonstrate new competences and distribute appropriate reconciliation myths to reduce conflict. The perception of a crisis or the experience of pressure (e.g. productivity) will challenge the existing organizational culture. Lundberg (1985) makes a distinction between precipitating pressures (e.g. atypical performance demands, stakeholder pressures, organizational growth and decrement, resource deprivation) and triggering events (environmental calamities, environmental opportunities, internal revolutions, and external revolutions). A triggering event is a stimulus that leads to the release of the tensions built up by the precipitating pressures.

Organizational culture is a complex phenomenon. Organizational culture is manifest in behavioural norms, hidden assumptions, and human nature (Kilmann, 1985). Also, Schein (1985) suggests the usefulness of viewing organizational culture from different levels, namely artifacts and creations, values, and basic assumptions. The degree to which an organizational culture is consciously and overtly rather than unconsciously and covertly manifest, influences how easily organizational culture can be managed and changed. When organizational culture change involves changing surface-level behavioural norms and artifacts, it can occur with relative ease. At the deepest levels of organizational culture, namely assumptions, ideologies, and human nature, it is very difficult and time consuming to create organizational culture change (Kilmann, 1985). The process of identifying and changing organizational culture is affected by the level of organizational culture under consideration. A top-down approach to organizational culture change is feasible if the focus is on behavioural norms and not on assumptions. However, top-down approaches generally result in overt compliance and not covert acceptance, and might be difficult to sustain. Therefore, a combination of top-down initiation with participative feedback sessions to define the new behavioural norms through dialogue with the organizational members is to be preferred. Managing the deepest layers of organizational culture clearly requires a participative approach, which results in overt commitment and covert acceptance. Participative approaches to changing underlying assumptions are difficult and time consuming to implement, but are likely to result in changes that last and are felt in everything the organization members do. As Kilmann (1985, p. 365) writes, executives may try to dictate a new culture by making dramatic changes in their own behaviour and symbolic gestures and fiery speeches, but

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE FORMATION AND CHANGE

INTRODUCTION

501

only when work group members encourage one another to be receptive to overtures by other groups will culture change take place.

Outcomes

Brown (1985) finds the following outcomes in the literature: conflict reduction, co-ordination and control, uncertainty reduction, and a higher motivation among the employees. The evolvement of an organizational culture consistent with the vision and strategy leads to an effective and competitive organization. It is difficult to describe this competitive advantage in hard business facts, because it differs from organization to organization. Each contribution investigates the relation between different elements of the framework. Koopman, Den Hartog, and Konrad et al. refer on the one hand to the national culture and on the other hand to leadership. Differences in leadership prototypes mirror differences in national culture. Leadership is needed for changing organizational culture, but leadership itself appears to be influenced by national culture. Ruigrok and Achtenhagen analyse four cases of change in organizations and study the role of organizational culture in this change process. In addition, the influence of the business and international orientation are under scrutiny. Peir, Gonzalez-Roma, and Caero report on a change project of managerial culture. The importance of dialogue, mentioned previously, as a step in changing the organizational culture is clarified and how this can be realized in practice is demonstrated. Van Muijen et al. describe an instrument to measure organizational culture and investigate the influence of national culture and sector on organizational culture. Vandenberghe and Peir describe the impact of organizational culture on the individual members of the organization. Finally, De Witte & van Muijen offer an overview of critical questions for research as well consultancy on organizational culture. The practitioners might be less concerned about some theoretical problems, and the researchers might have other concerns from the practitioner. We have not tried to reduce the complexity of the phenomenon of organizational culture. We hope the contributions will be helpful in thinking about organizational culture and will give some guidance for practitioners and researchers, particularly in avoiding possible pitfalls. But the reader looking for a definitive answer will encounter another illusion.

CONTRIBUTIONS

502

DE WITTE AND VAN MUIJEN

Anthony, P. (1994). Managing culture. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Beyer, J.M., & Trice, H.M. (1988). The communication power relations in organizations through cultural rites. In M.D. Jones, M.D. Moore, & R.C. Sayder (Eds), Inside organizations: Understanding the human dimension (pp. 141157). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Brown, A. (1985). Organizational culture. London: Pitman Publishing. Burack, E.H. (1991). Changing the company culturethe role of human resource development. Long Range Planning, 24(1), 8895. Deal, T.E., & Kennedy, A.A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Dyer, W.G. (1985). The cycle of cultural evolution in organizations. In R.H. Kilmann, M.J. Sax, & R. Serpa & Associates (Eds), Gaining control of the corporate culture (pp. 200229). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Frohman, A.L. (1997). Igniting organizational change from below: The power of personal initiative. Organizational Dynamics, 25(3), 3953. Gagliardi, P. (1986). The creation and change of organizational cultures: A conceptual framework. Organizational Studies, 7, 117134. Gordon, G.G. (1991). Industry determinants of organizational culture. Academy of Management Review, 16, 396415. Katz, J.H., & Miller, F.A. (1996). Coaching leaders through culture change. Consulting Psychology Journal Practice and Research, 48(2), 104114. Kilmann, R.H. (1985). Five steps for closing culture-gaps. In R.H. Kilmann, M.J. Saxton, & R. Serpa & Associates (Eds), Gaining control of the corporate culture (pp. 351369). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Kotter, J.P. (1996). Leiderschap bij verandering . Schoonhoven, The Netherlands: Academic Service. Lundberg, C.C. (1985). On the feasibility of culture intervention. In P.J. Frost, L.F. Moore, M.R. Louis, & J. Martin (Eds), Organizational culture (pp. 169185). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Martin, J. (1985). Can organizational culture be managed? In P.J. Frost, L.F. Moore, M.R. Louis & J. Martin (Eds), Organizational culture (pp. 186199). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Nixon, B. (1992). Developing a new culture for organizations in the 90s. Management Education and Development , 23(1), 3345. Nord, W.R. (1985). Can organizational culture be managed: A synthesis. In P.J. Frost, L.F. Moore, M.R. Louis, & M. Martin (Eds), Organizational culture (pp. 187196). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Peters, T., & Waterman, R. (1982). In search of excellence. San Francisco: Harper & Row. Schein, E.H. (1985). How culture forms, develops and changes. In R.H. Kilmann, M.J. Saxton, & R. Serpa & Associates (Eds), Gaining control of the corporate culture (pp. 1743). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Simpson, P., & Beeby, M. (1993). Facilitating public sector organizational culture change through the process of transformational leadership: A study integrating Strategic Options Development and Analysis with the Cultural Values Survey. Management of Education and Development , 24(4), 316329. Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 339358. Trice, H.M., & Beyer, J.M. (1990). Using six organizational rites to change culture. In R.H. Killman, M.J. Saxton, & R. Serpa & Associates (Eds), Gaining control of the corporate culture (pp. 370399). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Zamanou, S., & Glaser, S.R. (1994). Moving toward participation and involvement: Managing and measuring organizational culture. Group and Organization Management, 19, 475502.

REFERENCES