List of stories

• Is it allowed to define more than one culture?
• No interest in strategic planning and culture. So let it be!?
• Contradictory demands.
• Do mergers fail due to conflicting cultures?

Is it allowed to define more than one culture?

When discussing with a CEO an assignment, we asked him how many subcultures he thought that there existed in his company and how many he thought that there needed to exist in order to meet his objectives in the best possible way? He was dead surprised that we suggested that there could exist more than one culture and therefore literally asked us whether it was allowed to have more than one culture in his company. Given that part of our definition of culture says that it encompasses “ the way people relate to their work” the answer was a whole-hearted yes. There would be something rotten in the state if so to speak those working on the conveyor belt would relate the same way to their work as top managers. It is the challenge to have that part of the culture the same where no functional diversity is required. But in all cases where the different work challenges require differentiation, one better ensure that they are put in place if they don’t yet exist. One of the outcomes of the assignment was that this CEO was very much appreciated and respected. At the same time the complaint was that he was way ahead of everybody else. As a consequence he adjusted his leadership style.

No interest in strategic planning and culture. So let it be!?

A successful CEO recently told us that he was neither very interested in strategic planning nor in culture. He thought that the only thoing that coumnts was to be open to their environment and to remain flexible so that he could react quickly when new, unexpected opportunities presented themselves. This is not the place for a description of strategic planning, but this CEO was clearly basing himself on a strategy, although not on strategic planning. In order to realize this strategy successfully a number of cultural characteristics should be in place, such as A goal oriented culture on D1; means versus goal orientation An external directed culture on D2; internally versus externally directed A professional culture on D4; local versus professional Given that he was successful, we may assume that these cultural characteristics were in place. Does this mean that strategy and culture should be of no interest to him? Of course it should be! By monitoring the culture of his company he would have an early warning system in place allowing him to countervail dysfunctional changes proactively.

Contradictory demands.

Although top management normally has more influence on its actual organisational culture than rank and file people, this does not mean that everyone behaves in line with the wishes of top management. Divergent behaviour often occurs, even if top management’s wishes reflect a correct insight into the requirements which the organisation should meet. This example relates to D3; loose versus tight work discipline. Note that work discipline is not the same as self-discipline. While self-discipline is a characteristic of people’s personality, work discipline describes a characteristic of the organisational culture. Work discipline is defined here as the extent to which people adhere to rules and/or work standards. The greater the work discipline, the more people will check whether rules and/or standards are being met. Control can be exercised from above; it can also be internalised by employees. In Japan the cultural need for structure makes that employees internalize work requirements for control, being an example of national culture influencing organizational culture. Thus, there was this company where work discipline among higher management was much tighter than elsewhere in the company. Normally on expects the culture to be more loose the higher one comes in the hierarchy. This exception was due to the fact that higher management still had some executive responsibilities. In particular these related to the procurement of very large loans. Given the high risk run by each higher manager separately, tight work discipline in this case appeared to be functional. Yet the top manager simultaneously wanted higher management to show a more innovative attitude given their other responsibilities. This rarely goes hand in hand with a high degree of work discipline. We fear that the ideal society does not exist on earth. People are always obliged to make choices, unless management can hive off these different functions in separate parts of a company, creating different sub-cultures, and then ensure that there is good cooperation between them. The top manager concerned did not realise that his requirements were, in terms of organisational culture, contradictory. This was solved by rearranging and restructuring the company.

Do mergers fail due to conflicting cultures?

One may describe culture as the personality of an organization. That doesn’t imply that culture equals personality. Incompatibility of personalities may hold true, without implying that this holds equally true for cultures. Nevertheless, incompatibility of cultures is often given as a reason why mergers failed. If this is so repeatedly given as the reason for failure, why then do we so often find significant differences between subcultures in one and the same organization? Apparently the question in this case is not whether there are differences, but whether these differences are functional or instead dysfunctional given what the client wants to realize. It is possible that the cultures of the two parties merging are quite similar, yet making it unlikely that the merger will succeed. It all depends on the content of their cultures. Thus, the more strict both cultures score on D3; loose versus strict work discipline, and the more local both cultures score on D4, the more problematic it will be to realize a merger successfully. The positions on two more dimensions have a similar impact. In the case of two different mergers taking place recently, clients wanted to start working on efficiency right away. The quick scans indeed showed that their cultures were scoring too loose on D3; loose versus strict work discipline, as they were both operating in a saturated market. The scans also showed that the cultures scored too local and/or not professional enough on D4. As a consequence clients were informed that they first should start working on increasing professionalism. Only after integration had been successfully concluded should they start working on efficiency.