Organizational Culture

Culture as it relates to workplaces is perceived in different ways. A one man business may have culture, so also a PLC. A corporate body has again its own culture, so it is true with a public organization. For the layman, however, culture is nebulous. Yet, from anthropological and historical sense point of view, culture tells about the way members of a certain group of people interact with one another and with outsiders and how they achieve what they often do.
Culture, therefore, in the view of some authorities in the field, is how an organization has learned to deal with its environment. It is a mix of assumptions, thoughts, beliefs, behaviors, stories, myths, metaphors, symbols, artifacts and other ideas that fit together to define what it means to work in a particular organization, or conveyed to people throughout an organization over time.
Culture, hazy as the word is, yet confirms that the culture in one organization may be as closely similar to another organization as possible, or it may be entirely different. However, growing economies like Ethiopia would be better seen as modernizing if their culture orientations tilt towards the intrapreneurial organizational culture than the hierarchical or the traditional organizational culture.
Of course, deeper studies could show marvelous trends how corporate cultures operate because of competition and globalization factors, and how they differ these days even in similar organizations given that their outlook to certain basic assumptions or result-focused achievements remain the same. To illustrate this a little further, if we take commercial banks as a case study, we soon realize that, although the ultimate result of banking services is to maximize profit and minimize cost, no bank would claim among the ranks, that it has similar corporate culture. This does not suggest though that commercial banks should not forge similar corporate culture throughout their life span. Nonetheless, their distinct corporate culture orientation could be a mark of their service excellence in times of competition. In other words, the fact that they all are commercial banks does not prevent them from developing their distinct corporate culture that is attractive to their environments. Personally I stand for that.
Sometimes as it concerns artifacts, that one sees, hears, and feels when one encounters a new group with an unfamiliar culture that include products, services, and even behaviors of group members, one may notice the mannerism of dressing of CEOs and that of their staff. In one company the style could be expensive, while in the other it could be casual. Naturally, what is preferable could be best answered by customers. So this is an instance of two differing cultures of similar organizations.
There are companies that advocate for espoused values, that is, values as designed by the founders, or as could be reflected in their visions pronouncements and transformed into their mission statements. The beauty of this could be seen in the active transformation of these ideals into result-oriented achievements. I would like to quote with due respect the maxim of a private bank, which is used as a vehicle of delivery of its vision and mission in the fulfillment of its goals, that runs, “there is no commitment without involvement.” The question that lies here is exactly how does it fulfill such a big statement? For that particular bank, to transform such a commitment into reality means, to adjust from the traditional corporate culture to the new intrapreneuiral corporate culture; in fact which it did to a great extent, from what I know. While the guiding principles of the traditional corporate culture are restrictive, in a sense, a kind of ‘adhere to the instructions given, etc.,’ the intrapreurial corporate culture is conducive to creativity, flexibility, independence, ownership, or risk taking.
For that bank, while there is still room for further improvement, it could be classified as one of those modernizing corporate bodies to be emulated on its endeavors for succeeding in result-oriented achievements, such as efficiency, effectiveness in the application of customer prone technology. Since for every success there is somebody behind it, modern corporate bodies like it combine scientific approach to management with behavioral approaches enabling the staff to be part and parcel of the decision making process, and allow the quality control system to pass through the conscious workers who feel strong belongingness to their company and not to be left alone to a few people above them.
Therefore, to give blessings to one aspect of corporate culture, and what I see as relevant in the case of the Ethiopian total development efforts, is a culture that allows to bring together management and workers in cohesive work groups, like team work, workers empowerment, etc., which allows at the same time increase of productivity. The Japanese have used it, and some of our modernizing organizations are using it. So why not others try it? Competitive advantage is easier through intrapreneurial corporate culture and image when workers feel like partners in the business, they become more productive and committed to their jobs, and the development efforts will be result-oriented, smoother and direct. Likewise, the probability of attrition and or layoff will be at a minimal level.