Defining Qualities: Flexibility and discretion; internal focus and integration. About clan culture: A clan culture is people-focused in the sense that the company feels like one big happy family.
This is a highly collaborative work environment where every individual is valued and communication is a top priority. Clan culture is often paired with a horizontal structure, which helps to break down barriers between the C-suite and employees and encourage mentorship opportunities. These companies are action-oriented and embrace change, a testament to their highly flexible nature. Benefits: Clan cultures boast high rates of employee engagement , and happy employees make for happy customers.
Drawbacks: A family-style corporate culture is difficult to maintain as the company grows. Plus, with a horizontal leadership structure, day-to-day operations can seem cluttered and lacking direction.
Young organizations that are just starting out put a heavy emphasis on collaboration and communication, leadership looks to employees for feedback and ideas and companies prioritize team-building. For companies with a large percentage of employees working remotely like HR tech provider Hireology , creating an empathetic and communicative company culture is key to success.
How to create this culture within your organization: To cultivate a clan culture within your company, your first step is to turn to your employees.
Step two: take their thoughts into account and put them into action. Defining Qualities: Flexibility and discretion; external focus and differentiation. About adhocracy culture: Adhocracy cultures are rooted in innovation. To do so, they need to take risks. Adhocracy cultures value individuality in the sense that employees are encouraged to think creatively and bring their ideas to the table.
Because this type of organizational culture falls within the external focus and differentiation category, new ideas need to be tied to market growth and company success.
Benefits: An adhocracy culture contributes to high profit margins and notoriety. Employees stay motivated with the goal of breaking the mold. Plus, with a focus on creativity and new ideas, professional development opportunities are easy to justify. Adhocracy cultures can also foster competition between employees as the pressure to come up with new ideas mounts.
Adhocracy cultures are commonplace within the ever-changing tech industry where new products are being developed and released on a regular basis. The cultures they build typically reflect this. Likewise, some company cultures include showing reverence and deference to a founder or owner which can prevent leaders and employees from speaking up about ideas that might create greater efficiency or profit.
Although nonprofit organizations are technically corporations, their goals, motivations and interests usually differ from their for-profit counterparts. Nonprofit corporate cultures may emphasize personal and social values more than efficiency and profitability. Nonprofits often have people who work for less money and put in more hours than they might in a for-profit.
A culture of personal dedication and passion based on beliefs may drive a nonprofit. Some nonprofit cultures are more relaxed than for-profit corporations because they are not bottom-line driven.
Nonprofit employees may face less pressure and enjoy the fact that their work serves a social or charitable purpose. Government agencies are also organizations with cultures. These can be imagined as the skins of an onion, symbols representing the most superficial, and values the deepest, layers of culture, with heroes and rituals in between figure 1.
Symbols are words, gestures, pictures or objects which carry a particular meaning, only recognized as such by those who share the culture. The words in a language or jargon belong to this category, as do dress, hair-do, Coca-Cola, flags and status symbols.
New symbols are easily developed and old ones disappear; symbols from one cultural group are regularly copied by others. This is why symbols represent the outer, most superficial layer of culture. Heroes are persons, alive or dead, real or imaginary, who possess characteristics that are highly prized in a culture, and thus serve as models for behavior. Founders of companies often become cultural heroes. In this age of television, outward appearances have become more important in the choice of heroes than they were before.
Rituals are collective activities, technically superfluous to reach desired ends, but within a culture considered socially essential: they are therefore carried out for their own sake. Ways of greeting and paying respect to others, social and religious ceremonies are examples. Business and political meetings organized for seemingly rational reasons often serve mainly ritual purposes, like allowing the leaders to assert themselves.
As such they are visible to an outside observer; their cultural meaning, however, is not necessarily visible and lies in the way these practices are interpreted by the insiders. The core of culture is formed by values. Values are strong emotions with an arrow to it: a minus and a plus pole, such as evil versus good, abnormal versus normal, ugly versus beautiful, dangerous versus safe, immoral versus moral, indecent versus decent, unnatural versus natural, dirty versus clean, paradoxical versus logical, irrational versus rational.
Values are among the first things children learn—not consciously, but implicitly. Because they were acquired so early in our lives, many values remain unconscious to those who hold them.
Therefore they can only rarely be discussed, or directly observed by outsiders. They can only be inferred from the way people act under various circumstances. This includes the way they answer questionnaires, although their answers should not always be taken literally. Interpreting answers to questionnaires is a main task of cross-cultural researchers who nowadays have many statistical tools at their disposal to help them.
Two large research projects into culture differences Hofstede ; Hofstede et al. National cultures oppose otherwise similar individuals, institutions and organizations across countries; the pioneer study on national cultures was based on different national subsidiaries of one large international business company.
Organizational also called corporate cultures oppose different organizations within the same countries. The path-breaking study in this field used different organizations or parts of organizations in two countries: Denmark and the Netherlands. Figure 2 illustrates when and which of our mental programs were acquired. We humans are born incompletely programmed; during the first ten years of our lives we possess an amazing capacity for absorbing complex, diffuse and implicit mental programs.
One example is learning a second language: when someone speaks another language accent-free, he or she almost surely learned it as a child. With the onset of puberty, our ways of learning become more explicit and focused; we can still learn foreign languages, but we will almost always retain an accent. As mentioned above, our early programming includes most of our basic values.
We acquire these mental programs from our social environment, the family, the neighborhood, and early schooling. The right-hand column of figure 2 shows which levels of culture we acquire, and in which period.
We are born boy or girl, and within a nation. Gender and nationality are therefore most decisive for our basic values.
The school period mostly bridges puberty; the kind of school students attend relates to their social class, and influences their future occupation. Our school education mixes both values and practices. Cultures of work organizations are acquired through socialization at the work place, which most people enter as adults—that is, with their basic values firmly in place.
A business culture like the culture of banking, or of tourism can be placed somewhere between the occupation and the organization level. National cultures differ mostly at the level of values, while organization cultures differ mostly at the level of the more superficial practices: symbols, heroes, and rituals. So national culture differences are rooted in values learned before age 10; children learn them from parents who also acquired them before age ten, so they are quite stable and take generations to be changed.
Organizational cultures are rooted in practices learned on the job, and they can change much faster. Their implications for management are quite different, as will be shown later. My own cross-cultural research in the s started from a large database of employee value statements more than , questionnaires collected in subsidiaries of the IBM corporation in 40 countries Hofstede Being trained as a psychologist, I initially tried to analyze the data across individuals, but after a long struggle I discovered that they made much more sense if I compared mean answers across countries.
When I did that, I could relate the differences between country cultures to basic dilemmas of human societies, which had been described 20 years earlier in a review of the anthropological and sociological literature Inkeles and Levinson [].
These dilemmas corresponded with dimensions on which each country could be scored. The dimension approach to culture research has since become a paradigm for empirical cross-cultural research.
Dimensions are a conceptual way of dividing complex realities into separate basic elements. Many thinkers about the social world have divided it into categories, but the dimensions in this case are not born from armchair reflection but from empirical research, using the methods of modern statistical analysis.
The social world is like a cake that can be cut in different ways: the way we divide it into dimensions depends on our intended purpose for them. Moreover, dimensional models depend on the level of analysis. As will be shown below, dimensions for comparing societies countries are completely different from dimensions for comparing organizations, and these are again different from dimensions for comparing individuals.
Dimensions for comparing societies belong to anthropology, for comparing organizations to sociology, for comparing individuals to psychology. Applied disciplines like management studies, political science and economics that operate at more than one level of analysis run a danger of confusing dimensions from different levels. The most recent version of the Hofstede model for comparing national societies consists of six independent dimensions, rooted in differences between national cultural values.
Scores on each dimension on a 0— scale are available for between 76 and 93 countries Hofstede, Hofstede and Minkov The dimensions have been labeled:.
Several of the dimensions have been replicated in major surveys by others among different kinds of respondents Hofstede, Hofstede and Minkov, , The ranking of countries on the dimensions has been quite stable since the first data were collected. More important, the dimensions were validated against a large variety of cross-national data from other sources.
Hofstede , lists more than significant correlations for the first five dimensions. Examples are:. These societal-level dimensions have been applied in literature from a surprising number of different disciplines and areas, like:. Our research project into organization culture differences Hofstede et al. On the IBM national culture dimensions these two countries scored fairly similarly: both belong to the same Nordic-Dutch cluster.
0コメント