I've worked for a variety of organizational structures in the course of my career. Something I've noticed, is that cultures vary from one place to another. There are tons of books out there explaining culture, how to pick and create the culture you want, and the importance of being in an organization with a culture that fits your work style. There are 263 books on Amazon.com that are about organizational culture. Don't read them all, I will summarize culture for you in this one blog.
I developed this theory one night while on a business trip, sitting in a hotel room, working on my masters. Culture is a continuum. On one side is "likability", and on the other is "effectiveness". Each organization is located somewhere on this continuum. The closer an organization gets to one side, the farther they get from the other side.
In the example above, I am using two organizations to show how the continuum works based on my experience. On the right, is the Army while I was mobilized. On the left is big book publishing before the Internet dramatically changed how they must do business.
The Army placed a higher value on individuals being effective than it did on individuals being liked. As a high performing organization, a unit would have high morale coupled with high effectiveness. The reason an organization can have both of these, is because the culture supports the enforcement of norms. Everyone knows how to act, and what is acceptable group behavior. If someone steps outside of the acceptable group behavior, anyone on the team will confront the person, and guide them back. I witnessed this in action many times, and rarely saw someone hold a grudge as the result of being corrected. This is how the culture worked.
In publishing, the focus was on being liked. When confronted with a decision related to a project, it was generally acceptable to either extend a deadline, hire more resources, or change the scope to meet the output. Rarely did I witness anyone be pushed to be effective. The value of the individual was how they interacted, and how nice they were. Everyone likes to work with nice people, but when it comes to getting stuff done, it was often difficult to say to someone "you had a month to do this 1 hour activity, why do you need another week?". That would be rude. It was better to hand wring, commiserate, and implement an alternate plan.
When starting at a new organization, it is very important to arrive on the left side of the scale, and determine where on the continuum the organization operates. Once you determine this, start working your way right until you are assimilated into the organization. If you start your new job on the right side of the continuum, and the organization is way on the other end, you risk damaging relationships. In the worse scenario, you may generate a "t-cell response" and be treated like an organizational germ. Now that isn't fun.
What other factors impact culture? Is there a vertical line to add, or additional aspect that is at the macro level?
If you like this post, please share with your social network using the buttons below.
______________________
I developed this theory one night while on a business trip, sitting in a hotel room, working on my masters. Culture is a continuum. On one side is "likability", and on the other is "effectiveness". Each organization is located somewhere on this continuum. The closer an organization gets to one side, the farther they get from the other side.
In the example above, I am using two organizations to show how the continuum works based on my experience. On the right, is the Army while I was mobilized. On the left is big book publishing before the Internet dramatically changed how they must do business.
The Army placed a higher value on individuals being effective than it did on individuals being liked. As a high performing organization, a unit would have high morale coupled with high effectiveness. The reason an organization can have both of these, is because the culture supports the enforcement of norms. Everyone knows how to act, and what is acceptable group behavior. If someone steps outside of the acceptable group behavior, anyone on the team will confront the person, and guide them back. I witnessed this in action many times, and rarely saw someone hold a grudge as the result of being corrected. This is how the culture worked.
In publishing, the focus was on being liked. When confronted with a decision related to a project, it was generally acceptable to either extend a deadline, hire more resources, or change the scope to meet the output. Rarely did I witness anyone be pushed to be effective. The value of the individual was how they interacted, and how nice they were. Everyone likes to work with nice people, but when it comes to getting stuff done, it was often difficult to say to someone "you had a month to do this 1 hour activity, why do you need another week?". That would be rude. It was better to hand wring, commiserate, and implement an alternate plan.
When starting at a new organization, it is very important to arrive on the left side of the scale, and determine where on the continuum the organization operates. Once you determine this, start working your way right until you are assimilated into the organization. If you start your new job on the right side of the continuum, and the organization is way on the other end, you risk damaging relationships. In the worse scenario, you may generate a "t-cell response" and be treated like an organizational germ. Now that isn't fun.
What other factors impact culture? Is there a vertical line to add, or additional aspect that is at the macro level?
If you like this post, please share with your social network using the buttons below.
______________________
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.