7. Three ways to work on organizational culture

Organizational culture is often seen as an elusive and diffuse reality, difficult to work on. Nevertheless, management literature in recent years has been very good at describing the importance of this factor in the architecture of an organization. We see three methods to focus on it, either to strengthen the culture or to change it for the better.

A first method is indirect and implicit. It focuses on changing the other building blocks of the organization. Whatever model one uses as a framework for organizational architecture, the elements of the 7-S model ( McKinsey - (1) ) keep coming back. This method therefore focuses on changing or reinforcing strategy, structure, systems, knowledge or people. Everything except the culture itself (directly) or the leadership. The disadvantage of this method is that it takes a very long time to achieve results. This method will certainly prove insufficient to realize important changes. It is although necessary to eliminate the internal contradictions in the organization’s architecture. All factors that give a dissonant or opposed signal to the desired culture are inhibiting factors. It is difficult to realize a culture of flexibility if the systems mainly contain procedures, and trust will remain an utopia if the strategy continues to be based on top-secret treatment.

The second method (explicit but indirect) is based on the role of leadership. In this approach leaders are explicitly selected for their capacities as a culture medium. This implies not only an adjusted and clear exemplary behavior, but also an active attitude in working with principles. To put this into practice, a good understanding of the 'Principal Leadership' that S. Covey (2) put on the map is needed. This method is a necessity because, under a culture-oriented leadership, leadership will never be experienced as credible, but also because of this shortcomming,  employees lack the framework that should serve as a reference point in collective behavior. In the practice of organizations this method is used fairly frequently, but often with a difficult 'unproductive approach. Too often the focus is on formulating and communicating values. As long as these are unilaterally established, and above all, are not translated into concrete principles, they usually remain a dead letter.

The third method (explicit and direct) is especially useful if a noticeable change or strengthening of the culture is needed. It focuses on the participatory definition of principles (an intelligent combination between top-down and bottom-up) that are necessary to realize the mission and strategy. This method assumes strong acceptance of both mission and strategy to be really powerful. The methodology must also be closely aligned with the change methodology that is appropriate in a learning organization. This goes further than the well-known model of Kotter (3) , but you will find more information about this elsewhere on this BLOG.

Conclusion: eliminate the contradictions with method 1; use method 3 if an explicit approach is needed, and provide method 2 for permanent maintenance.

(1)     Peters T., Waterman R., In search of excellence, Harper & Row, New York, 1983

(2)     Covey S., Principle Centered Leadership, Simon & Shuster, London …, 1992

(3)     Kotter JP, Leading Change, Harvard Business Review Press,  2012

Hugo Der Kinderen