Culture and Orgainzation

Organizational is comprised of core values, beliefs and basic assumptions within organizational life which helps guide and coordinate member behavior. Edgar Schein, a preeminent scholar of organizational culture research, argues that people can come to know organizational culture based on three levels of awareness known as: artifacts, values and beliefs, and basic underlying assumptions.

The values are the principles or standards which could include rules of conduct, respect, honesty, kindness, sharing and appreciation.

Schein (as cited in Baumgartner, 2009) describes artifacts as follows: ‘At the surface we have the level of artifacts, which include all the phenomena that one sees, hears, and feels when one encounters a new group with an unfamiliar culture. Artifacts would include the visible products of the group such as the architecture of its physical environment, its language, its technology and products, its artistic creations, and its style as embodied in clothing, manners of address, emotional displays, myths and stories told about the organization, published lists of values, observable rituals and ceremonies, and so on’.

“Artifacts are the physical manifestations of an organization. They include factors such as dress codes, myths, rituals, and tangible items such as awards, product displays, logos, furnishings and decor. Observable artifacts represent the more visible level of culture within the organization” (ejlister, 2015).

There is a flaw to studying observable artifacts. The possibility of making incorrect conclusions exists if we are not aware of how they relate to basic assumptions. This is especially true for organizational stories shared that are problematic. Lessons of a story will not be interpreted if persons do not understand the basic assumption behind it (Schein, 1990).

Shared Basic Assumptions are the deeply embedded, taken-for-granted behaviors which are usually unconscious, but constitute the essence of culture. These assumptions are typically so well integrated in the office dynamic that they are hard to recognize from within.

A company’s soul is its personality, its culture, and the values by which it stands; derived from a company’s core beliefs, this intangible asset determines the effectiveness of strategies and the ability to achieve authenticity. Culture consists of group norms of behavior and the underlying shared values that help keep those norms in place (Nelson, 2013). Defining and implementing desired norms of behavior requires wisdom, time, and some intellectual curiosity and emotional investment to understand what motivates employees to perform consistently well, even beyond expectations (Kotter, 2012). “Every company and team has its own identity--a soul waiting to be discovered and used to unlock human energy and unleash new economic value” (Lapin, 2012). While one culture will not work for every company, successful companies determine the desired culture, design, implement, and nurture it. Leaders must revisit their mission, and answer pertinent questions: Why are we in this business and why is our company here? What is the higher purpose for which our organization has come into being? The company’s existence is no accident of circumstance; it is here to do something no other organization can do (Lapin, 2012). Every company has a culture (Moberly, 2014).

Thus, the true culture of the organization cannot be understood by solely looking at the artifacts. To understand more, it is necessary to look at the next level. Espoused beliefs and values are goals, values, aspirations and ideologies shared by everyone in an organization. Normally, these values are laid down by the leaders or founders of the organization (Schein, 2010, p.25). However, espoused beliefs and values can sometimes be mutually contradictory (Schein, 2010, p.27). Thus, the organization’s culture is only understood just on the surface level. Basic underlying assumptions, which are unconscious and taken-for-granted beliefs and values provides for a deeper understanding of an organization’s culture. Schein concluded that the essence of a culture lies in the pattern of basic underlying assumptions (Schein, 2010, p.32). If the basic underlying assumptions are not deciphered, it will be hard to understand the artifacts and espoused beliefs and values correctly.

In the modern, world the bonds of organizations share our lives: from being born in a hospital, entered into the registry of birth, marriages and deaths – which tracks the entire populace and changes in it. “Almost every aspect of our everyday life – and, indeed, our deaths - will be shared by organization of one kind or another. “ (Clegg. et al, 2011 p.6). Humanity is the linchpin of any establishment, which itself was made for human beings. Range of organizational culture, which they bring to the organization is very wide, it is determined by the uniqueness of each person. Genetic base is unique to each individual, and explains some of the differences of people. Individuals who fall into the cycle of different environments and situations can change their individual characteristics. One of the definition of organizational culture is that “Organization culture a set of shared, often implicit assumptions, beliefs, value, and sense making procedures that influences and guides the behavior and thinking of organizational members, and is in turn continuously enacted and reinforced - or changed - by the behaviour of organizational member” (Martin and Fellenz, 2010 p.481). The following essay will evaluate that how far individuals can determine an organization’s culture by using theories, which will serve to demonstrate

A definition of culture is the total of knowledge, beliefs, experiences, values, attitudes, religion, hierarchies, objects and possessions obtained by a group of people through generations. Elements of culture include language, symbols, values, norms, laws, and beliefs. Culture can also by the “totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought” (Culture, 2010, pg. 5)

In the globalized world we live in today, “No one man is an island” the same can said about the countries. Every country is interconnected with trade routes, internet and roads. The world has made great strides to connect everything and everyone, but how has that affected culture? Culture is defined as the quality in a person or society that arises from a concern for what is regarded as excellent in arts, letters, manners, and scholarly pursuits. (Dictinary.com), so how has worldwide organizations like the U.N, The WHO, and the World Bank changed the shift of culture, from a country’s or community’s individual culture to a more globalized and unified culture? Have there been differences between developed counties and developing countries?

In their landmark book, Corporate Cultures, first published in 1982, the authors describe culture in the following terms: "Values are the bedrock of any corporate culture". They go on to add: "As the essence of any company 's philosophy for achieving success, values provide a sense of common direction for all employees and guidelines for their day-to-day behaviour" (Deal and Kennedy, 1982)

Every country will have a background in religion and culture that the people are living in has always been followed under the threshold of this generation to another generation. What is a culture? Why everyone should live the same culture and that culture has one? What are people thinking about the culture in which they are under? However, culture is what can connect with people and over time it became a habit in person 's life.

One of the most influential and central concepts of anthropology is the nature and concept of culture. The concept and idea of culture dominated 20th century thought, and can be used as an explanation as well as an object of fascination for many anthropologists today. While there are various theories and approaches to culture and the interpretation of it, I would solely like to examine the Cultural Relativist approach, and the Boasian thinkers associated with this particular approach. I would also like to examine how the current time period in which the cultural relativist approach emerged truly conflicts with the dominant politics. In specifics, I would like to examine Franz Boas himself, but most notably Ruth Benedict, and the paradoxes that have occurred within the period after her publications.

Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1962) identify over 150 scientific definitions of the concept of culture. Indeed, many authors have tried to define culture and this is why there are so many definitions and that a unique one is hard to find. First of all, Kroeber and Kluckholn (1952) assume that culture is a suite of patterns, implicit and explicit, “of and for behaviour acquired and transmitted by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievements of human groups, including their embodiments in artefacts” (p.47). Later, Hofstede adds that culture is “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one category of people from another” (Hofstede, 1991, p.51). This definition is the most widely accepted one amongst practitioners. For Winthrop (1991), culture is the distinctive models of thoughts, actions and values that composed members of a society or a social group. In other words,