Archives

Dec '03 Aug '03 Nov '03 July '03 Mar '03 Oct '03 Jun '03 Feb '03 Sept '03 May '03 Jan '03

December ' 03

Apr '03

2008 2006 2005 2004

2007 2002

Articles
Case Analysis Of Organizational Culture Misconceptions - Rick Delbridge he concept of organizational culture is one of the most commonly used and yet poorly understood in the business world. Unfortunately, it has become such a catch-all term that the expression `culture' now means everything and nothing. While reflecting upon an organization's culture, it is important to be clear as to exactly what is being discussed. Since the initial popularization of the concept by management gurus such as Peters and Waterman and Deal and Kennedy, organization theorists have given a greater subtlety, rigor and sophistication to our understanding of the key aspects of culture. Students reflecting upon the HP case will find it helpful to be precise in how they use certain terms and ideas within their overall conception of the company's culture. In this regard, it is useful to draw on Schein's work in differentiating the levels at which culture may be considered.
T

Schein (1985) distinguishes three levels of culture: artefacts, values and basic assumptions. Artefacts are the physical manifestations of an organization's culturethe visible level of its social and physical environment. This includes both the written and spoken language used in the organization and the overt behavior of its members. The second level refers to individual's values and beliefs and refers to the ways that these inform employees' perceptions and actions. More fundamentally, but unobserved, at the deepest level are the basic underlying assumptions that guide behavior. These are the unconsciously held, learned responses of individuals that are taken for granted. These are the essence of what `culture really is.' It is instructive to consider exactly what aspects (or levels) of HP's culture Fiorina has been engaged in changing or at least influencing. In comparing and contrasting the `HP Way' with the `Fiorina Way,' students should reflect upon Schein's levels and distinguish between organizational rules, systems and structures and the deep-seated personal beliefs and values of individuals. There are important ethical questions over whether corporate control should be attempted through the manipulation of employees' values. Furthermore, organization theorists have increasingly coalesced around the view that organizational culture is largely `unmanageable' or at least that culture lies beyond the "control" of managers. This is because any organization is likely to have members with very different views of what the key characteristics of the culture are. Further, research suggests that organizations are often home to a variety of `sub-cultures.' Some scholars talk of the "socially constructed" nature of culture. That is, the meanings understood by individual members are formed through social interactions that give commonly accepted definitions. These understandings are `created' and will shift and change depending upon the organizational context, individuals involved and the nature of their interactions. For these reasons, and in challenging the unitarist assumptions of management consultants who assume that organizational culture is necessarily unifying,

scholars such as Linda Smircich (1983) have argued that it is more appropriate to consider organizations as cultures rather than to treat culture as an organizational variable. In other words, the organization is a culture (or cultures) rather than has a culture. This underscores the limitations of management's opportunity in regard to constructing or changing an organization's cultural characteristics. To conclude that culture is unmanageable is not to negate the opportunity for managers to exert influence. Indeed, the importance of `leadership' is another aspect of organizational culture that analysts agree is important. However, the recognition of the socially and collectively constructed nature of employees' cultural understandings emphasizes the importance of symbols such as stories, rituals and physical manifestations of organizational values. A leading organizational theorist Gareth Morgan (1997) has argued that managers can exercise significant impact, `Managers can influence the evolution of culture by being aware of the symbolic consequences of their actions and by attempting to foster desired values.' Of course, Fiorina has a major problem in seeking to promote change because HP has such a well-established set of myths and stories that support and reinforce the HP Way. Any manager seeking such influence must be aware of the context and history of the organization. This is clearly indicated in the case study when the son of one of the founders argues that Fiorina's changes are contrary to the HP Way. More generally, students must reflect upon the contested nature of organization. As an outsider brought in to HP, Fiorina would have faced significant challenges. She would have had to become familiar very quickly with the organization and its internal politics. Her appointment is likely to have been contentious within the senior management levels of HP. It cannot be denied that there could be some in the company who wish that she would fail. Detailed ethnographic studies of attempts to manage culture change have shown the complexity of the problem. Watson's (2001) case study demonstrated how a `discourse' of culture change, personal and employee development came up against alternative discourses that reflected established corporate interests in cost measurement and tight management control. This is the obverse in some ways of the situation at HP, but note that Watson reports how the `progressive' ideas around change and development became destabilized when the expectations they created were undermined by corporate policies leading to redundancies. Finally, there is the question of the relationship between culture and organizational performance. The nature of causality of these relationships is difficult to determine but conventional wisdom suggests that superior performance may accrue when an organization's structure, strategy and culture are a good fit and complement each other. This was regarded as a key strength of the HP Way. A key doubt surrounding the changes made by Fiorina is the extent to which they challenge the core values of HP's own employees. For example, what are the likely implications of increasing job insecurity within an organization that relies upon employees' discretionary effort and willingness to collaborate and share knowledge? Can organizations seeking innovativeness and populated by highly trained professionals move toward greater corporate control and more instrumentally oriented management systems? References 1. Morgan G (1997), Images of organization (2nd edition), London: Sage. 2. Schein E (1985), Organizational culture and leadership: A dynamic view, San Francisco: Jossey-Boss. 3. Smircich L (1983), Concepts of culture and organizational analysis,

Administrative Science Quarterly, 28: 339-358. 4. Watson T (2001), In search of management: Culture, chaos and control in managerial work, (2nd edition), Harlow: Prentice-Hall. The author is Professor at Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University and Fellow, Advanced Institute for Management Research, United Kingdom. The ICFAI University Press . All Rights Reserved. Case Analysis Walking the `Culture Tightrope' - Ranjan Varghese he HP case exemplifies companies that conform, by and large, to general patterns of organizational life cycle, revealed in the work of many research scholars. Of these, Larry Griener's work is the most remarkable one. While analyzing the case, we will examine the following factors, though not necessarily in the same order:
T

Impact of HP's culture on organizational performance. Culture's dominance over structure in managing HP. The life cycle stages of HP. Change in organizational strategy and its impact on culture. Leadership change in HP and its consequences.

The creativity and dynamism of two zealous entrepreneurs gave birth to an organization that grew to serve customers worldwide through mobilizing over 1,40,000 employees. HP, under the leadership of Lewis Platt, successfully passed through critical stages of growth during which issues of control, autonomy and leadership are acid tests for all organizations. The employees internalized doctrines about the company's values as depicted in the charter of corporate objectives drafted and institutionalized by the founders. The culture influenced the employees so much that they were willing to suffer pay cuts and other monetary disadvantages. Thus, the culture enabled organizational objectives assume priority over individual goals and aspirations when need arose. HP's culture has been characterized by an implicit message of lifetime employment, team orientation, open door policy and encouraging innovation. Most importantly, it is about sharing the benefits of profit and growth with organizational members and all other necessary conditions for producing happy and zealous employees. The rich fruit of this culture is evident from the fact that HP could achieve revenue and earnings growth steadily for many decades. The company's business domain being information technology (IT), its production processes are essentially knowledge driven. The renewing of minds by the concerned employees is an integral input for creating knowledge, and HP's culture was a fertile ground for facilitating the same. Culture and performance: The strong culture of an organization is a driving force for heightened employee performance. On the other hand, a strong structure may place people in a narrow functional mindset. Culture empowers people but structure might disarm them of necessary will and determination to think and act out of the box. This behavioral mode is critically important for a knowledge driven organization like HP. However, the top management was afraid whether the team

orientation at HP had slipped into a mere consensus based mode of behavior. Fiorina's radical measures: The question now is whether the painful separation of large number of employees at HP was inevitable or not. The first casualty of most strategic shifts as witnessed in the recent past at many organizations, are the employees. The leadership change in HP had deep ramifications on its culture and performance. Carly Fiorina took bold decisions to shed the excess fat in the form of human resources. This strategic decision is not uncommon in organizations that function in an uncertain external business environment. Such decisions can also stem from internal uncertainties due to human obsolescence. Mammoth organizations like HP may reach a stage wherein older employees become psychologically worn out and unfit to skillfully manage growth while dealing with external uncertainties. In HP, where lifetime employment was assured, employees with lot of seniority might have accounted for a significant percentage of the workforce. This would have consisted of a cross-section of people from lower level knowledge workers to higher-level managers. It is evident from the case that the team-orientated decision and work process in HP had melted down to a mere consensus based approach. Therefore, shaking up the human resources was thought to be necessary to achieve employee diligence and sharpening of minds to tackle new challenges and opportunities. Effectiveness of Fiorina's strategy One is tempted to think that Fiorina was influenced by bounded rationality. Decisions driven by bounded rationality tend to neglect the complete and accurate picture of reality. The decline in HP's growth was primarily due to the global slowdown in the IT sector. The reactive strategy focusing on the workforce that was adopted by Fiorina might have definitely shaken the organizational members from sleep. However, other options could also have been considered. An example that can be cited here is that of Coca-Cola. This company has always been embroiled in a battle with Pepsi for marketshare and growth. This battle was powered by a narrowly driven strategy without considering choices other than competing with Pepsi on the marketing turf. A former CEO of Coca-Cola understood the underlying weakness in this strategy. He realized that the top management was influenced by bounded rationality in resorting to this stereotyped strategy. However, the outcome was not at all positive to drive the company towards growth. He then insisted that his subordinates visualize a strategy to increase cola consumption in the US consumers. The decision to install vending machines on a wider scale was the result of such a powered thinking. This course of action paid great dividends and gave breakthrough results to Coca-Cola. The trap of success: A common reason for organizational failure is `falling into the trap of success.' Living on past glory makes companies complacent and shortsighted, blind them to external changes. This may persuade people to standardize the output process around success formulas. The outcome may be insensitivity to gradual change. A management scholar has drawn an analogy of such a situation to a frog living in cold water initially. But when the temperature started rising gradually, it could alert itself to escape so as not to perish. If this adaptability is lost, organizations will become anxiety driven and devoid of initiative. Future Initiatives to Help HP turnaround Fiorina must act prudently so as not to undermine the benefits of HP's strong culture. She must consider other options to stay ahead instead of merely steering around success formulas such as shedding the workforce. The action to stir up the salespeople by linking their pay to targets is well thought out. However, different incentives must be thought of for those who innovate at the workplace as well. A proper succession planning process must be put in place to groom dynamic people from within to steer the company in hard times. In conclusion, Fiorina must link the strategy with the culture instead of weakening

it. One must always bear in mind that it is easy to demolish but difficult to build. The author is Associate Professor - Marketing Research & HR at School of Communications and Management Studies (SCMS), Cochin. The ICFAI University Press . All Rights Reserved. Case Analysis Is that all there is to it? - Ren J Tissen he HP case clearly describes the problems that a company and its leadership face when trying to break up an existingoften long-lastingcorporate culture and replacing it by a new one. The challenges generally associated with cultural changes are enormous and even if they are overcome, do not guarantee a better than before performance.
T

In the case of Carly Fiorina, the opposite seems to be the result: the company does significantly less well than before, thus fuelling the belief of people resistant to change that any intervention by the top management in the very roots of the company (and thus in its psychological genes), is useless and even counterproductive. Companies can only be successful when building further on the existing culture, by building further on the people in such a manner that theyand only theybelieve to be in their own interest and subsequently in that of the companies' they work for. Yes, you canfor example ask people to hand in part of their salary but, you cannot then fire them without eyebrows being raised. One can install a more `tight ship' style of leadership, but cannot ignore the existing ways of working of people at HP by simply imposing your will. Imposing your will on people in today's companies as CEO, and thus on an existing culture, is even harder than it used to be 10 years ago. Nowadays, people have come to realize that the average lifespan of the leadership of a company has shrunk tremendously. Once appointed, a CEO only lasts a couple of years and the chances of him or her being replaced forcefully when even the slightest shortcoming in performance is detected, has gone up manifold. "We will sit this one out" is not an uncommon phrase in many companies today. Is Carly Fiorina therefore wrong in her approach? I would not immediately say so. But her approach hardly has to do with cultural change. Her style of leadership is one not too different from the ones being adopted by most company executives following the `free for all' growth years of the late 1990s, i.e., of the boom economy generally described as the `new economy' and/or the economy of unparalleled opportunities. Leadership is now all about the power to enforce focus and better performance, to exercise control, to make people do what they need to do. It is no longer about support and guidance, about talent and development, or about long-term results. It is `now' that counts, tomorrow may never come. Ricardo Semler with his open and supportive Semco management stylesimilar to the old HPhas given way to Germany's top woman CEOJudith Maierwho indeed runs a tight ship: you come on time, you go on time, you take orders and obey, you perform or else. Is it a coincidence that what used to be called `macho management' is currently being adopted by some of the highest level female executives? Is it a coincidence that it is not just them, but their people who want clarity and decisiveness, rather then being confronted with the overalland always changingcomplexity of business performance and of being consulted for solutions? Or is this new style of leadership directly related to the personal risks that many executives increasingly have to face? Can you blame them for taking control, when their heads are on the

block? Nonetheless, will it lead to better company performance? At least HP is not a showcase for the positive. However, the true, almost fundamental, problem underlying the issue of culture and leadership is that of the increasing inhumanity of companies towards their employees, no matter how highly educated and trained they may be. And of the danger of the very same people whom companies call their human `resources' turning against their companies, not just through strikes but also with a view on overthrowing its leadership. Strange as it may seem, in one of my forthcoming books,1 written together with Jonathan Ellis, we point out that the current corporate trend to not only `standardize, mechanize, procedurize and control' production processes, but to do the same with their (client) service development and delivery processes (which in many companies are known as `office jobs'), drives out the freedom of people to think, act and coordinate according to how they see fit. In all probability, people will not accept the new reality and support a culture change in organizations. There is a danger that employees will have to deal with increased anxiety and underperformance. Could HP under the leadership of Carly Fiorina suffer from the early stages of corporate inhumanity? Ellis, Jonathan & Tissen, Ren, `The Inhuman Touch,' Scriptum Publishers, The Netherlands (will appear first in Holland, early 2004).
1

The author is Professor of Business Management, at Nyenrode University, The Netherlands. The ICFAI University Press . All Rights Reserved.