Corporate Culture is the Answer to Depersonalised, Bureaucratic Work
Corporate culture refers to the way employees do things around the company, and displays a system of shared beliefs and values that work together with individuals, organizational structures, as well as, systems to produce norms. This implies that corporate culture has a significant effect on employee behavior, perception, and work attitudes. Bureaucracy on the other hand, comprises of written and inflexible rules, laws, and regulations together with systems of administrations that are distinguished by clear hierarchies of authority. In such instances, corporate culture represents the company’s personality, and therefore, appeals to the non rational, affective, and emotional elements within the employees.
Max Weber was interested by authority and power together with the insidious preoccupation with modern trends of rationalization; this prompted him to investigate the operations of modern large enterprises in terms of administrative, economic, and political realities. He described bureaucracies as organized in terms of rational principles , such as offices being ranked in hierarchical order, and how they operate is characterized according to inter personal rules (Sullivan, 2009).
Governance of the managers applies methodical allocation of areas, as well as, delimited spheres of duty. Appointment and recruitment is made using the specialized qualifications instead using the inscriptive criteria. This type of coordinating actions of large number of individuals is increasingly becoming the dominant structural feature of the modern forms of organizations. It is through bureaucracy that large scale planning for the modern economy and modern state has remain to survive, as well as, enabled heads of state to centralize and mobilize resources for political power that have been dispersed in a number of variety of centers during feudal times (Basu, 2004).
It therefore, implies that it aids mobilization of economic resource which remained unutilized during the pre modern times. Bureaucratic organizations are instrumentally privileged in shaping the modern polity, technology, and economy, and therefore, this means that bureaucratic organizations are technically advanced to other types of administrations just like machinery production is superior to handmade methods (Sullivan, 2009).
However, there are certain disadvantages of the bureaucracies systems of corporate culture, such as presence of ambiguities in calculating results. Bureaucracies make calculability of outcomes unwieldy and stultifying when dealing with personal cases. This makes bureaucratic and modern rationalized systems of law into becoming incapable of dealing with individual personal differences and particularities (Basu, 2004).
Bureaucratization and rationalization are inescapable of modern methods of organization that have greatly enhanced the efficiency and effectiveness of organization and production, as well as, enabled unprecedented domination of humans over the nature’s world. The capitalist industrial organization according to the sphere of economic production has led to tot eh expropriation where the employee is the means of production, and therefore, the modern industrial worker contrasts with the handicraft artisan, who deals with his own tools and sets his own production and selling limits (Styhre, 2007).
Bureaucratic formal of organizational culture acts both as an expression and agent of key modern social innovations, which are clearly manifested within the non inclusive terms through which people are involved in an organization. The way people get involved themselves in organizations epitomizes, as well as, institutionally embeds the critical and most overlooked cultural point of reference of modernity, in which people undertake actions that are tuned towards a delimited and well specified path , however, they have to sacrifice by suspending and isolating their other social and personal considerations. This therefore, implies that organizational involvement of people qua role agents instead of qua person’s aids in unleashing formal organization from being bound to indolence of the human body, as well as, languish the process of psychological or personal re-orientation (Styhre, 2007).
Bureaucratic organizational cultures have rendered it possible to address some of the shifting contingencies, which underlies the modern life through re assembling and reshuffling the roles and role patterns by which the system is made. This implies that the unique historical adaptive capacity of the bureaucratic systems remains. However, hidden behind the ubiquitous presence of standard and routine procedures are mistakenly exchanged for the quintessence of the bureaucratic form (Manning, 2003).
Bureaucratization is a sociological concept that emphasizes that increased rationalization is inherent in social life, and therefore, cages people into systems that are founded on teleological efficiency, control, and rational calculation. This implies that the modern society is increasingly becoming more characterized by movements in the motivation of individual worker behaviors. It is imperative to argue e that social actions are becoming increasingly base on efficiency rather than the older types of social actions that were purely based on kinship or lineage, and therefore, behavior is goal driven instead of relying on tradition and values (Manning, 2003).
Corporate culture comprises the behaviors and beliefs of the people within an organization, and determines how the organization’s employees, as well as, the management handle and interact with outside business deals. Organizational culture of a company organically develops over time emanating from the cumulative traits of the individuals that the organization employs. This could be reflected the employees’ dress code, hiring decisions, business hours, treatment of clients, client satisfaction, turn over, office set up, employee benefits, as well as, all aspects of the organizations operations (Cremer, 1993).
The main rational reason of examining corporate culture is the relationship between performance and organizational culture, and garners more interest due to the managerial implications related to control, which can easily be communicated, developed, and illustrated using vivid and clear anecdotes.
Corporate culture refers to the unique dominant patterns of shared beliefs, values, assumptions, and the particular norms that shape the path of socialization, language, symbols, and practices of the group of people that constitutes the organization. The approaches and attitudes that typify the way the employees carry out their various tasks and jobs. This therefore, means that culture id developed and transmitted by individuals either consciously or unconsciously to their subsequent generations (McDonald, Postle & Dawson, 2008).
Corporate culture in the classical sense can be referred to as the way of doing things in an organization, and therefore, there are a number of elements that go in helping to determine on what and why to do certain things , and in a certain way. This implies that culture is something that exists and influences how work is done in organizations, which in turn critically affects the overall corporate success or failure, who fits and who does not, as well as, determines the entire mood of the whole organization (Cremer, 1993).
Corporate culture is quite influential during periods of organizational change, such as company mergers where there are possible cultural clashes with the partnering companies. Other notable examples are during growth or any other kind of strategic change, which will imply that the incumbent corporate culture will become inappropriate, and hence would hinder growth and progress rather that promote it (McDonald, Postle & Dawson, 2008).
In static work environments, corporate cultural issues takes center stage in being responsible for absenteeism, low morale, or even hog employee turnover, and thus such instances have adverse effects on the organizational productivity. With all the elusiveness, corporate culture has a great influence on the organizational work, as well as, productivity and output. The elusiveness of corporate culture is important for developing approaches and strategies that plays a key role when planning organizational change (Styhre, 2007).
One element of corporate culture is the control systems that specifies the ways in which the company is controlled, and therefore, includes control structures in quality systems, financial systems, as well as, reward systems. The control systems therefore specify the procedures and processes that require either weakest or strongest controls or whether the organization is tightly or loosely or controlled. It also specifies how the employees get rewarded or punished for either the good or poor work that they do (McDonald, Postle & Dawson, 2008).
However, the performance and corporate culture link can be elusive and ambiguous because of lack of a clear definition of corporate culture. On the other hand corporate culture can be conceptualized in response to observable values and norms that can typically be stressed through quantitative measurement schemes, which in turn helps to examine behavior instead of phenomenological meaning (Basu, 2004).
Corporate culture is definitely a solution to the problems associated with depersonalized bureaucratic work, since it debilitate the negative aspects of the bureaucratic control systems. Most bureaucratic actions are characterized by insincerity, incompetency, and incoherent managerial actions, which end up creating unhappy and unhealthy work environments, which in turn consistently works to destroy the corporate value, as well as, illuminates disrespect towards the worth of the individual employee.
Basu, R. (2004). Public administration: Concepts and theories (5th ed.). New Delhi, India:Sterling Publishers.
Cremer, J. (1993). Corporate culture and shared knowledge. Industrialand Corporate Change, 3, 35 1-386.
Manning, S.S. (2003). Bureaucracy: Theories and forms with moral implications. Chapter 8 In Ethical leadership in human services: a multi-dimensional approach (pp. 177-194).Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon
McDonald, A., Postle, K., & Dawson, C. (2008). Barriers to retaining and using professionalknowledge in local authority social work practice with adults in the UK. British Journal of Social Work, 38 (7), 1370-1387.
Styhre, A. (2007). The innovative bureaucracy: Bureaucracy in an age of fluidity. New York, NY: Routledge
Sullivan, M.P. (2009). Social workers in community care practice: Ideologies and interactionswith older people. British Journal of Social Work, 39 (7), 1306-1325.
- Changing culture – Part one: What is organizational culture? (eryceyl.com)
- Corporate Culture & Leadership (projektajdid.wordpress.com)
- Corner Office – Mark B. Templeton (egrossinfo324.wordpress.com)
- Corporate Culture and Leadership (encikalim404.wordpress.com)
- How to change corporate culture (examiner.com)
- Organizational Culture (oolalaoolala.wordpress.com)
- A Corporate Culture Channel: How Increased Shareholder Governance Reduces Firm Value (clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu)
- New Business Book Now Available Now in Paperback (johnrchildress.com)
- Cultures and Subcultures: Harmonization or Sub-optimization? (keithstalder.com)