Given the importance that today is being given to the development of organizations, it is accepted to analyze and extend a debate on some basic aspects related to the issue of organizational culture.
In this sense, sometimes groups and individuals with at least a medium degree of preparation in contemporary aspects of administration (practical and theoretical) are encountered, and yet, in seeking to define it, obvious confusion arises.
The concept of culture in its broadest sense is a term used by the social sciences such as: psychology, sociology, philosophy, anthropology, ethnography.
This is a qualitative concept of social life, but what culture is it talking about? The term comes from the Latin "culture" and means cultivation, elaboration.
The ARISTOS dictionary states that culture is synonymous with cultivation and adds the meaning of this term “Result or effects of cultivating human knowledge and exercising intellectual faculties. As can be seen here, this concept can be associated with that of instruction.
A summary of the long definition of culture given by the Philosophical Dictionary of M, Rosental and P.Indin would be "Set of material values, as well as the procedures, obtained by man to create them, apply them and transmit them in the process of historical practice social ”(…) Culture is a historical phenomenon that develops depending on the change in social economic formations”
The Vox Compact dictionary of the Spanish Language proposes, “Temperament, natural inclination of each one. Condition of things. ”
In cultural anthropology there are also countless definitions. It is important to talk about looking for an approach or point of contact between the definitions that this science gives and the incidences that they may have in the management sciences, the essence of which is the search for the term culture from the organizational point of view.
The various theories proposed by anthropology are actually complex and they suggest that they can distinguish two currents such as:
An Integral system of the socio-structural system.
An independent system of idea formation.
From these two currents different schools of thought arise, among them, anthropology, which considers culture as a socio-cultural system and is divided into four schools, these are:
Functionalist
Functionalist-Structuralist.
Ecologist-
Historical Adaptationist - Dysfunctionalist
Functionalist School its basic postulate states that if social organizations and cultural manifestations do not attend to the levels of individuals and do not satisfy the interests of the members of society, they tend to disappear.
In short, from this perspective, organizations as sociocultural systems must reflect in their structures, processes, forms, and policies the fact that human beings tend to satisfy their needs through work and participation in organizational life.
Functionalist-Structuralist School, reinforces the assumption that organizations are functional sociocultural systems and are necessarily in harmony with the microsystem at the cultural level, organizations are deeply infiltrated by the values of the environmental social system and this link is very close and necessary for the organization, in order to legitimize its objectives and activities. However, this approach does not prevent some theorists of this school from recognizing the development of other value systems, ideologies or characteristics within organizations.
Ecological-Adaptationist School, recognizes organizations as an open sociocultural system that interacts with the environment. Organizations reflect differently their values and the culture of society, here is a difference with the Functionalist-Structuralist School. For ecologists, the culture of society is only one of the many contingency values that can influence organizational structures and processes.
These values of the society constitute a determining value of the value system of the organizations that operate within its radius of action.
The Historical-Difuncionista School, exposes the different cultural transformations based on historical factors. In this case, she considers that the time, place and circumstances surrounding the creation of an organization can give rise to certain values and ideology that will influence the functioning of the organization, passing the framework of its utility on the survival and adaptation plans.. She considers that in order to understand the essence and analyze the formation, development and decline of any phenomenon, it is necessary to study history.
However, the culture seen as the formation of ideas also represents four schools:
Cognitive
Structuralist
Mutual Equivalence
The Symbolic
Cognitive School, implies a new plane of analysis, In this sense Goodenough (1982), expresses the way in which a group of people has organized their experience of the concrete world, in such a way that it confers a structure as a phenomenal world of forms that is, their perceptions and concepts. Here, from a business point of view, it emphasizes two basic aspects, the organizational climate and organizational learning.
Structuralist School. In essence, they include the assumptions of Functionalist anthropology schools of thought
Structuralist.
School of Mutual Equivalence., These theorists consider culture as a system of cognitions that allow workers to mutually predict their behaviors and thus function in society despite motivations and divergent goals. Here the emphasis is on the usefulness of participation and that the acts are based on the assumptions of the participants regarding the probable behavior of others. In this type of school, the contributions of Ouchi (1982) and Robbin, (1994) are considered valuable.
The Symbolic School considers an organization by virtue of the particular conjugation of its past, its sociocultural context, its technology and the influence of its former leaders. They can create and maintain their own meaning system, symbols largely shared by the members of the organization, so this system serves to interpret and make sense of the subjective experiences and individual actions of the members, as well as to request or streamline your commitment to the organization.
As can be seen, there are several currents that provide a series of differentiating points of view, which at the same time serve to examine and locate the different conceptualizations of the term culture present in the theory of organizations and in works that deal with management and that Rather, they allow a conception of the concept of culture within the organization and its implications for it.
In addition to these currents there are some definitions that from the organizational point of view have been given by different authors, at different times. Here some of them are exposed.
In this sense, Smirchich (1983) expresses that organizational culture is a concept derived from the intersection of two theories: culture and organization. What is an Organization according to different authors?
For Haas and Darabek (1973) it is "A discernible system of relatively permanent and complex interaction, from this point of view organizations can be reserved as series of standardized interactions between actors".
According to Argyris (1975) “when they are closely observed they reveal themselves composed of human activities at various levels of analysis.
Personalities, small groups, intergroups, norms, values, attitudes, all of this exists on an extremely complex and multidimensional pattern ”.
For Schein (1992) organizations are “Complex and plural social formations made up of individuals and groups with relatively fixed and identified limits that constitute a system of roles coordinated through a system of authority and communication and articulated by a system of norms and values that they integrate the activities of their members in order to achieve previously established goals of relatively stable and continuous duration and are immersed in an environment that influences them. ”
According to Gutiérrez (1994) “System of coordinated social relations in a structured framework, whose performance is based on the work of teams based on objectives to be achieved, based on the use of resources and their own culture, constantly interacting with the environment".
Mello (1995) expresses "They are, therefore, inherent in the concept of system (1) interdependence between the parts, (2) interaction between them, and (3) globality of form." "You can add a fourth (4), the emergence of emergent properties that do not have the parts separately."
When analyzing the different definitions, we consider making the following clarifications:
- There are different forms and expressions for its definition, including analogies. Although there is no generalized nor universally recognized criterion for this term, all specialists agree that it is essential for the development of investigative processes in all branches of scientific knowledge.. Different specialists look for the general definition, in correspondence with the branch of knowledge. The definition is circumstantial, it is used according to the objectives of the analysis and the informative interest for its application. A person, a group, a department within an organization, a company, a community, a country - they are systems, since they are made up of organs or parts that must work in a coordinated and comprehensive manner. Finally, every organic system,It is made up of organs that must act in harmony for the performance of a function or purpose. The characteristics of this function and the role of each component organ, for the realization of the purpose of the system, determines the type, degree and complexity of the interdependence between the parts and between the parts and the whole.
From the above definitions and those provided by other authors, it can be summarized that an organization is:
- A social system An order for the achievement of objectives A deliberately structured system of activities An identifiable boundary limit A complex, diverse and harmonious set An open system
And with three basic characteristics:
- Tendency to maintain and protect a stable state. Potential to increase its internal capacity and its amplitude to influence its own culture environment.
Below are some definitions of culture, related to the field of organizations; considering the concept in its real and broader meaning, that is, not only as a set of knowledge or, related to activities normally called cultural (music, dance, etc.), but as a synonym of idiosyncrasy.
There are multiple and different definitions, among them are the following:
For Petigrew (1979), "the culture of a company is manifested by symbols: language, rites, myths, etc., which is created and disseminated by certain managers to influence the behavior of company members."
For Ouichi (1981), "A series of symbols, ceremonies and myths that communicate to the company staff the values and beliefs that are most deeply rooted within the organization."
Mintzberg (1984), "Organizational Culture is the assumption by members of the organization of a peculiar way of behaving, which differentiates it from others, along with the material objects of the organization".
Anzinzu (1885), "Set of basic principles and beliefs of an organization that are shared by its members and that differentiate it from other organizations".
According to Pumpin et al. (1985), "The set of norms and values and ways of thinking that mark the behavior of employees at all levels and thus give their image to the company".
Ansoff (1985), "I call a group's culture the set of norms and values of said social group that determine their preferences for a specific type of strategic behavior."
Galeano (1985), “the creation of a system of symbols that are shared and recreated without ceasing, when it is a living system”.
Schein (1985) calls Culture "a model of basic assumptions - invented, discovered or developed by a given group as they learn to cope with their problems of external adaptation and internal integration - that have exerted sufficient influence to be considered valid and, consequently, be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel these problems. ”
Robbins (1989) calls it "Perception shared by all members of the organization: System of shared meanings".
Barnertt (1990) "set of ways of behaving, that is, behaving and thinking, which are necessary in a given group."
Otero (1994), “It is given by the interinfluence system, norm, values, the way of acting and reacting, the language, the forms of communication, the style of behavior, the history shared by the members of the organization and the interaction with the environment. ”
Cruz, T. (2000) “It is a learned way of doing in the organization, which is shared by its members, consisting of a system of values and basic beliefs that manifests itself in: norms, attitudes, behaviors, behaviors, the way of communicating, interpersonal relationships, leadership style, shared history, the way of fulfilling the mission and the realization of the vision, in its interaction with the environment, in a given time.
Alabart and Portuondo (2001) “is a set of paradigms, which are formed throughout the life of the organization as a result of the interactions between its members, these with the structures, strategies, systems, processes, and the organization with its environment, from which a set of references are formed, which will be valid to the extent that they guarantee the efficiency and effectiveness of the organization. ”
Once some theoretical elements around the term culture have been offered, as well as different definitions from the point of view of the organizations, some considerations are exposed that serve as analysis, reflection and debate in the effort to seek a clearer understanding of such a complex phenomenon such as organizational culture, which can help understand why certain things happen in a certain way in organizations and contribute to some extent to organizational improvement:
1. The subject of it is complex, not easy to understand, which has become topical, from which a profuse bibliography has been derived that develops cultural analyzes in their link with organizational effectiveness.
2. On multiple occasions, there is debate with groups and people of at least a medium degree of preparation in contemporary theoretical-practical aspects of Administration and, when seeking to delve into the elements related to the concept of Organizational Culture, significant confusion arises, regarding their definitions.
3. The term culture can bring confusion for non-specialists in it, as well as having different interpretations according to different contexts and realities.
4. The definitions of organizational culture share common concepts, in most cases and underline the importance of unconsciously shared basic values and beliefs and their effect on human behavior.
5. Certain disciplines such as Psychology, Anthropology, Sociology, among others, have developed a variety of useful concepts for understanding the behavior of individuals in companies; But the dynamics of change, sometimes failure, and above all, the fact that things seem meaningless are done, are still unknown.
6. The existence of some basic knowledge about the term Organizational Culture is observed in Cuban leaders, although total understanding cannot be said, if there is a consensus of its existence and importance. This, among other causes, is largely due to the Country Management Training System, publications by Cuban and foreign authors, and even exchanges with other cultures, inside and outside the national territory.
7. In approaching the culture of the organization, the influence that the national culture exerts on it cannot be ignored, since an organization is also made up of the traditions, habits, values, beliefs, idiosyncrasies, etc., that characterize the human society in a certain country to which it is integrated. In fact, numerous investigations have shown that the National Culture exerts more influence on individuals than the culture of the organization to which they belong.
8. There are some studies that try to characterize the culture of the Cuban Nation; But there is still nothing definitive in this regard, although due to the personal appreciation of each Cuban, many - not to absolutize everyone - can make a more or less complete description of their fundamental features: language, history, traditions, images, customs, stereotypes and symbols among others.
9. Regarding the diagnosis of Organizational Culture in general, it is observed that there is no coincidence in the process to obtain the information, since different routes are used, as well as there are few that describe the steps to be carried out, in such sense only the elements to be taken into account by the researcher are indicated.
10. To a great extent, the authors who study the subject do not come up with complete processes for the study of culture, this may be determined in the first place, because the subject of organizational culture is very complex given that the elements analyzed are mostly abstract and second because the procedures are diverse and changing, synthesized from the continued experience of the researchers.
11. Every study in the organizational field, which aims at changes or development, must have an analysis of the situation of the current state of phenomena and the diagnosis of organizational culture does not escape them.
12. The involvement of the organization's staff in the study of organizational culture is a necessary factor, since it is aimed at understanding the complex processes that occur in organizations to act towards improving the results of the organizations. themselves. Experience has indicated that people only develop their full capabilities when they believe in what they do, and this in turn serves their personal fulfillment and the objectives of the organization.
13. The role of the external agent in a diagnosis is essential, he must be convinced that the client (organization) is aware of what he is going to reveal, and that this information will help him in his projections and in the results to be achieved. at the organizational level.
14. In order for an organization to know its potential and be able to decide which strategic alternative to take based on realistic analysis, it must study and understand its own culture, which of course is not easy, and requires effort and patience, including mistakes such as: Arrive at incorrect conclusions regarding culture, to carry out this type of analysis without being clear on the subject, which I do not know is convinced of the need for change, and who is not prepared to know any information.
15. A planned organizational change is only lasting and permanent self-managed when working with the culture of the organization and influencing it to impact and energize the changes.
16. Carrying out studies in organizations that provide more specific elements of analysis of their real and desired functioning is a central element in any process of change planned to make it more durable.
17. For the study of the organizational culture it is necessary to measure the essential, but not visible, aspects, constituted by the, values, beliefs, basic perceptions, that take shape in the manifestations in the organizations through procedures; organization charts; technology; decision-making processes and information control systems; rites; behaviors; habits; behaviors; oral, gestural, written form of expression; weather; speed; group cohesion; motivation; as well as: logo; ways of dressing; Organization, among others Some are easier to measure as well as the instrument to be used for this purpose, not being so in those that are related to the socio-psychological aspect at the individual and group level.
18. Only an in-depth study of the organizational culture reveals its essential content, beyond what is perceived primarily by external manifestations.
19. Organizational culture can be studied within a consulting process, a strategic design / structures or in any process of change in which you want to know certain elements that prevent or favor it.
20. Every cultural diagnosis requires the analysis of its impact on the result achieved in the organization, in this case with organizational effectiveness. For which there are certain procedures. In this case, Cruz, T (2000) and Alabart, and (2002) can be cited
21. Strategic designs must take into account the projection of the desired culture, as a dynamic factor of change.
In Cuba: there are few organizations that diagnose and offer details about the organizational culture. In this sense, Cuban authors have elaborated guides or methodological models to investigate it, including: Otero (1994), Narbona (1991), T, Cruz (2000), Alabart and Portuondo (2001)
Bibliography
Alabart Y Portuondo (2002) "Contribution to the study of organizational culture in the Cuban business sector". Doctoral thesis
Cardona, J. (1996): Create and Survive. How Businesses Evolve and Thrive. Díaz de Santos, SA, Madrid.
Cruz, T. (2000): The Business System, Culture and Consulting. Management Brochures. No.3. CCED. MONTH.
…………… (2000): Methodological Foundations for the Study of Organizational Culture. Doctoral thesis.
…………. (2001): Organizational Culture. Collective of authors. Management Consulting and Organizational Change ”Editorial“ Félix Varela ”, C. Habana.
………….. (2002):. The Directorate for Values ”. "Towards a Culture of Integration and Commitment" published in the book "Management: from Purpose to Action". Editorial Félix Varela C. Habana.
Drucker, P. (1993): Culture of Organizations. Use them not Lose Administration and Future. Ed. The ´90 in Adelante Sudamericana, Argentina.
Otero, D. (1994): Organizational Culture. Support Material for the Master in Management Consulting. CEEC, C. Habana.
Pérez, J and Galis A. (1991): Guide for the Inquiry into Organizational Culture Version II. CETED. University of Havana.
Robbins, S. (1987): Organizational Behavior. Concepts, Controversies and Applications. Sixth edition. Prentince _Hall Hispanoamericana, SA, Mexico.
Schein, E. (1985): Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey¬Bass.
