It provides a methodological procedure for the diagnosis of business culture, which, based on the definition of the state of variables such as: climate, values, attitudes, assumptions and beliefs shared by members of a group within the organization allows detecting the incidence of this phenomenon in the implementation of business strategies and consequently the influence that this exerts on competitiveness.
The proposed procedure has been applied in organizations of various sectors such as Tourism, Fisheries Association and others, allowing to detect the validity of the same and in turn perfecting it in each case, being its last application in the University of Holguín Oscar Lucero Moya being able to verify that it exists relationship between the variables culture, strategy, competitiveness.
methodological-perspective-for-the-diagnosis-of-organizational-culture-1INTRODUCTION
At the present time, given the economic, political and social situation that exists worldwide, the need to improve the competitiveness of companies has become widespread. Cuba is no exception, as an underdeveloped country, it seeks answers more in line with its specific conditions and for this it requires more up-to-date and real approaches.
Naturally, the improvement of business competitiveness is a complex problem, so it needs to be approached in a comprehensive manner, that is, from a perspective that considers all the factors that have to do with its improvement.
From the Japanese success and later from other Asian countries, a questioning of the traditional forms of management that until then had been applied in the developed business world begins, whose genesis is in the studies of Taylor, Mayo and others, criticized old paradigms and other new forms of management are introduced where an important weight is given to the participation of workers in decision-making, to leadership, to the formation of solid values where a vision of the future prevails, considering that Productivity depends essentially two engines: pride in belonging to the company and enthusiasm for work.
If we think about which are the management paradigms that have prevailed in the Cuban business reality, we find realities such as:
Produce at all costs without taking into account the costs, authoritarianism, traditionalism, lack of training, dogmatic emulation.
It is in this context that we consider it feasible to carry out a study of business culture, identifying strengths and weaknesses for the adaptation of our companies to an increasingly dynamic environment. Taking as a starting point that the changes that have occurred in our country have had a direct impact on business life.
Precisely a weak or deficient culture causes stagnation and decline in companies, bringing with it phenomena such as job dissatisfaction, staff fluctuation, unproductive companies.
Yvan Allaire and Mihaela E. Firsirotu talk about how success and organizational vitality depend on the development of appropriate cultures and values.
Deal and Kennedy view culture as an investment that produces money.
Despite the importance of the subject and the strength it has taken on a global level, in the studied literature a methodology that is accessible to our business realities has not been found.
That is why in this work we propose to submit for your consideration a methodological model that allows us to diagnose this phenomenon in the Cuban organizational context.
To carry it out, a wide bibliographic search was made and a set of methods were applied, both typical of cultural studies such as ethnographic and clinical as well as theoretical knowledge methods such as analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, historical logic and modeling, as well as empirical methods such as expert judgment, observation, questionnaires, surveys, interviews, scales, etc., using the mode and the median as statistics.
Organizational culture. A definition.
The concept culture in its broadest sense is a term used by the Social Sciences such as Psychology, Sociology, Philosophy, Anthropology, Ethnography. Thus, for example, in contemporary Marxist literature there are different definitions of the concept of culture, which are the result of the research that around this problem has been carried out in the last 15 or 20 years.
In Cuba, the theoretical problems related to the essence, function, elements, and features of culture have always had a special dedication in the tradition of Marxist thought. From the first representatives who paid attention to these issues, Mella, Villena, Marinello, to our top leaders have reflected in this regard.
Thus, Carlos Rafael Rodríguez has defined that "culture is above all a way of life" or has subscribed to the idea that "culture is everything that is not nature" but more than compendiating concepts, he has offered profound reflections on content and forms. of culture, its functions, projection, ideology, etc. (Carlos Rafael Rodríguez, 1990)
From this point of view we can expand by saying that the concept of culture fixes above all not the quantitative aspect, but the qualitative aspect of social life; culture is the quality of history at a given moment in its development.
From the point of view of cultural anthropology, there are also countless definitions, let us analyze some of them, trying to find an approach or points of contact between the definitions given by this science and the impact that they may have on the science of the Directorate taking as a premise the search for a deep knowledge of the term business culture (which has not been treated directly by Marxist philosophy).
Let us then analyze the various complex theories about culture proposed by cultural anthropologists, for this we base ourselves on the distinction made by Yvan Allaire and Mihaela E. Firsirotu (1992) in their book "Organizational Culture"; According to these authors, among the theories of these phenomena, we can distinguish two currents, theorists who consider culture as an integral part of the socio-structural system and those who see it as an independent system for the formation of ideas.
From these two aspects several schools of thought emerge. Anthropologists for whom culture constitutes a sociocultural system are divided into four schools, these are: the functionalist school, the functionalist - structuralist, the historical - dysfunctionalist and the ecological - adaptationalist.
Culture as the formation of ideas is represented by four schools, three of these schools of thought propose that culture is situated in the spirit of the bearers of culture and within these we have: the cognitive school, the structuralist school and the equivalence school. mutual and finally the symbolic school that proposes that culture is a system of collective meanings and symbols.
This classification carried out by both authors provides a number of different notions that at the same time served to examine and locate the concepts of culture present in organizational theory and in works that deal with management, in turn, it will allow us to reach a judgment about of the concept of corporate culture and its implications in business life.
For the moment, some of the elements that these theories provide us for business life will be limited.
The fundamental postulate of Malinowski's functionalism says that if social institutions and cultural manifestations do not serve the interests of individuals and do not satisfy the needs of the members of a society, they have to disappear. (Malinowski, 1982)
From these perspectives, organizations as sociocultural systems must reflect in their forms, structures, policies and processes the fact that man tends towards the satisfaction of his needs through work and participation in organizational life.
Based on this assumption, we could ask ourselves to what extent do the organizational structures and management processes constitute the social manifestation of the participants' needs?
The functional - structuralist school reinforces the assumption that organizations are functional sociocultural systems and are necessarily in harmony with the macrosystem at the cultural level, organizations are deeply infiltrated by the values of the environmental social system and that this link is very close and necessary for the organization, in order to legitimize its goals and activities, however, this approach does not prevent certain theorists of this school from recognizing the development of other value systems, ideologies or specific characteristics within organizations.
The ecological-adaptive school starts from recognizing organizations as an open sociocultural system that interacts with the environment, from this dialectical interaction with their environment, organizations reflect in varying degrees the values and culture of society, although here these authors establish a difference with the previous school for functionalists - structuralists, the values of society constitute a determining value of the value system of the organizations that operate within it.For adaptationist ecologists, the culture of society is nothing more than one of the many contingency values that can influence these organizational structures and processes.
The historical - dysfunctionalist school, this school explains cultural transformations based on historical factors, that is, the time, place and circumstances surrounding the creation of an organization can give rise to certain values and ideology that will continue to influence the functioning of the organization far beyond its usefulness on the planes of survival and adaptation.
Returning to the currents that organizational cultures conceive as systems of ideas, we will analyze the assumptions of the cognitive school, which implies a new plane of analysis of culture.
According to Goodenough, he states:
"… the way in which a group of people has organized their experience of the concrete world, in such a way as to give it a structure as a phenomenal world of forms, that is, their perceptions and concepts…" (Goodenough, 1982)
This concept from the business point of view points to two important aspects: the organizational climate and organizational learning.
The school of mutual equivalence; This point of view gives us a totally different concept. For these theorists, culture is a system of cognitions that allows employees to mutually predict their behaviors and thus function in society, despite such divergent motivations and goals. It is based on a utilitarian participation of the employees and that the acts are based on the assumptions of the participants regarding the probable behavior of others, in this sense the organizations are divided into two groups with marked differences: those that are rational tools that require little personal investment and that are always easy to leave and those with which the members become institutionalized because the organization demands of them a great consecration and a great identification.On this idea we consider valuable the contributions of Ouchi (1982) on Japanese organizations and the contributions of Robbins (1994) when he cites in his book "Organizational Behavior" a series of North American companies of excellence where culture has become institutionalized.
The symbolic school for its part considers that an organization by virtue of the particular conjunction of its genesis, its past, its sociocultural context, its technology and the influence of its former leaders, can create and maintain its own system of symbols. and meanings largely shared by the members of the organization, therefore this system would serve to interpret and give meaning to the subjective experiences and individual actions of the members, as well as to request or rationalize their commitment to the organization.
In our way of seeing each of these currents represents a valid point of view for the analysis of this complex phenomenon and extrapolate it to business life, they will be taken up during the development of this work to substantiate some questions that we intend to clarify and will be the starting point for the development of a work methodology.
In addition to these trends, we intend to analyze some definitions that from the business point of view have been given at different times by various authors.
The culture of an organization is a concept derived from the intersection of two theories: that of culture and that of organization. (Smirchich, 1983)
Indeed:
If culture is from the anthropological or functionalist perspective, an instrument required for the satisfaction of needs or values, the organization is understood as a basic principle for the achievement of objectives (…) in both cases the consequences pursued are the causes of culture and organization as crystallization of the environment.
If culture is from the most relativistic and dialectical perspective, an adoptive mechanism, complex of elements, the organization is understood as flexible design. In both cases the object is focused on the system, that is, its optimization is contingent or dependent on various options, adjustments between parts.
If culture has been approached as a shared set of beliefs and symbols, the organization has been treated as a network of meanings and images more or less shared by staff.
Another of the meanings of the concept of business culture is the result of the work of some business science theorists who in the last twenty years have dealt with the subject, such as:
Pettigrew (1979), the culture of a company is manifested by symbols, languages, rituals, myths, which are created and spread by certain managers to influence the behavior of the members of the company.
Ansoff (1985), denominated culture of a group to the set of norms and values of a social group that determine their preferences for a concrete type of strategic behavior.
Barnertt (1990), takes as a company culture the set of ways of behaving, that is, of behaving and thinking, which are necessary in a given group.
Katz and Khan (1970) define “every organization creates its own culture or climate, with its own taboos, customs and styles. The climate or culture of the system reflects both the norms and values of the formal system and its reinterpretation in the informal system (…) as well as reflects the internal and external pressures of the types of people that the organization attracts, of its work processes and distribution physical, communication modalities and the exercise of authority within the system ”.
There are other definitions that analyze the culture of a company such as the norms that are developed in work groups (Homans, 1950) or the dominant values accepted by a company (Deal and Kennedy, 1982), the philosophy that guides the policy of a company. company with respect to its employees and / or clients (Ouchi, Pascale and Athos, 1981), the rules of the game to progress in the company (Scheín 1978, Vanmaanen 1976, Ritti and Funkhouser 1982), the environment or climate that is established in a company by the physical distribution of its members and the way in which they relate to customers or other third parties (Taquiri and Litwin, 1968).
According to Scheín, who is considered a classic on the subject, states that all these definitions manage to reflect some element of the culture of the company but none of them is the essence of it, which is why in our work we develop our research from the This author's results, since in our opinion in his book "Business culture and leadership" includes in his analysis all or most of the previous concepts, as well as the main contributions that the cultural anthropologists cited here make based on the concept Culture Business We also consider it appropriate to work with the definitions of Stephen Robbins and the criteria of Menguzzatu and Renau (1992) discussed in “The Strategic Management of the Company. An innovative approach to management ”which will be cited in due course.
According to Scheín (1985) he states:
I will call culture: “A model of basic assumptions - invented, discovered or developed by a given group as they learn to face their problems of external adaptation and internal integration, which have been exerted enough influence to be considered valid and consequently be taught new members how to perceive, think and feel these problems "
Cultural Training Process.
How does the process of cultural formation happen?
When a given group of people has shared a significant number of important experiences in the process of solving internal and external problems, it can be assumed that such common experiences, over time, have given rise to a shared vision of the world around them and the place they occupy in it. Therefore, for the emergence of a given culture, it is necessary at least the existence of a group and that it has shared a sufficient number of experiences to reach this shared vision, which must have exerted its influence for a sufficient time to reach be taken for granted and detached from consciousness. Culture, in this sense, is a learned product of group experience (see figure 1). It exists where there is a group and it has a significant history.
Of course, this set of individuals that make up various groups in the organization are the product of a larger system that is society and as such is influenced by the formation of a set of attitudes that in turn are conditioned by assumptions, norms, beliefs. and values that it has formed. In turn, these individuals are integrated into organizations today considered as mini-companies. Once inside them, the process of learning the social norms that prevail there continues and that condition the behavior models that will be assumed as correct in that business context.
Factors that influence the emergence and formation of culture.
Now what are the factors that influence the emergence and formation of a culture.
According to Yvan Allaire and Mihaela E. Firsirotu, (1992) the writings of management and organization theory contain profound differences regarding the factors identified as dominant influences on the development of culture and the structure of a social system. They consider as the three main factors:
The values and characteristics of the surrounding society.
The past of the organization and the orientation given to it by the former leaders.
Contingency factors such as technology, the characteristics of the industry.
After an extensive bibliographic search, it has been determined that among the factors that could be cited as influencing the process of cultural formation of a company and on the basis of which the diagnosis of culture could be carried out, are those related to the environment (external factors) and the intrinsic factors of the company and organization (internal factors) (see figure 2).
Levels at which culture manifests.
Culture manifests itself at different levels (figure 3), these range from visible artifacts to underlying assumptions.
Artifacts are visible but often undecipherable. We have classified these as external and internal. Within the first group we analyze the architecture, aesthetics, decoration, cleanliness, distribution and location of the premises, the slogans and others.
Within the internal artifacts we analyze the technological capacity of the group, the written and spoken language, its artistic productions, policies, laws, business rules, mission, goals, objectives and strategies, history, myths, legends and traditions. As the last visible artifact within the inmates, we analyze the express behavior of its members, in this case it is necessary to determine when this behavior responds to underlying assumptions or is the product of contingency factors, in the latter case these behaviors do not constitute a manifestation of culture.
When we analyze the express behavior of group members in search of behaviors that respond to the existing culture, we analyze indicators such as:
- Ways in which hierarchy is expressed Functioning of organizational structures, training and education of new members How rewards and punishments are distributed How strangers are received What style prevails and what is the attitude towards management processes, for example Delegation of authority How customers are treated
In the case of external artifacts we analyze how they are and in the case of internal ones how they work.
The second level that allows a greater degree of understanding is the analysis of the core values that derive from the principles that operate day by day and on the basis of which the members of the culture guide their behavior. In a sense, all cultural learning ultimately reflects the individual's own values, his or her idea of what "should" be as opposed to what is. These values are manifested in the decision-making process and as part of these within the process of identification and selection of the mission, goals, objectives and strategies. The values can serve as a guide to act in situations of uncertainty. For example, some time ago did Cuban companies value quantity or quality in the production process? Let us reflect on how this guided the conduct of managers.
The last level of analysis is constituted by the presumptions, these tell us why things work in a certain way.
To explore these deep levels, typologies or dimensions are required for the analysis, logically these would vary depending on the research object, Scheín proposes a set of dimensions that we consider valid for any study.
Relationship with the environment:
Nature of reality (truth), time and space.
assumptions about time.
assumptions about space.
Nature of the human race.
Nature of human activity.
Nature of human relationships.
Now, what impact does business culture have on change processes and on organizational effectiveness?
The literature on organizational efficiency is relatively voluminous. Many authors talk about business efficiency based on profit, sales, billing, and the like. Other authors suggest financial criteria such as cost per unit, percentage of profit on sales, etc.
What has downplayed these types of criteria as viable measures of effectiveness is (1) the discovery that an apparently rational organization behaves in such a way that it appears to be completely inefficient if the only criteria is to increase profits or performance. productivity, and (2) that an organization actually has multiple purposes and functions, that some are in conflict with others, and that the organization tolerates those conflicts and functions in spite of them.
One way to solve this dilemma has been to define effectiveness according to systemic criteria, if it is recognized that every system has multiple functions and that there is an unpredictable environment, the effectiveness of the system can be defined as its ability to survive, adapt, maintain and grow, regardless of the roles they perform. Several authors, among them Argyris (1975), Trist (1975), Kahn (1970) and Bennis (1962) among others have explicitly defined this definition.
Let's analyze Bennis's approach when introducing the concept of health. “If we see the organization as a set of organic and adaptable structures that allow problem solving, then the inferences made to determine its effectiveness have to be made based on the processes that the organization uses to solve its problems and not with based on static measurements of some result even though these types of static measurements are useful. In other words, a single measure of organizational satisfaction or efficiency taken at a given moment in the life of the organization cannot identify valid indicators of an organization's health (Bennis, 1962).
Bennis proposes three criteria to determine organizational health:
1- Adaptability: as the ability to solve problems and react flexibly to the changing demands of the environment.
2- Sense of identity: knowledge and vision on the part of the organization, to determine what it is, what it pursues and what it does.
3- Ability to see reality: the ability to search, adequately perceive and correctly interpret the real properties of the environment, particularly those that are important for the functioning of the organization.
4- Integration: refers to a state of integration between the parts of the organization, in such a way that there are no conflicting ends between them.
In summary, a systemic criterion to determine organizational effectiveness must be a multiple criterion that includes adaptability, a sense of identity, the ability to see reality and internal integration.
We can say that there is a tendency among management and organization theorists to measure administrative effectiveness based on the use of human assets, among them, in addition to Argyris, Bennis share this point of view Etzioni (1960), Likert (1975), McGregor (1971) among others.
Likert considers as variables that some factors intervene, such as qualities of the human organization: level of trust and interest, motivation, loyalty, performance and capacity of the organization to communicate directly, intervening effectively and reaching appropriate decisions. These variables reflect the internal state and health of the organization.
Attending to the criteria of Argyris, Likert and others, Negandhi (1973) suggests the following variables (see figure 4).
For his part, Scheín, when referring to the assumptions related to nature and the environment, raises:
Business health can be understood as the ability of the company to accurately judge its initial assumptions about its relationship with the environment in order to know if they continue to agree with the environment and if it evolves. (Scheín, 1985)
According to this author, these assumptions determine the existence or not of a strategic orientation, which influences the business situation, allowing us to determine whether the organization is in a state of decline, stagnation or, on the contrary, in a flourishing stage.
According to Yvan Allaire and Mihaela E. Firsirotu, traditionally the means used to obtain excellent results, the methods that serve to restructure, revitalize or transform the companies and the measures that must be taken to effect a serious reorientation, abound in references to the fundamental principles of the strategic management: selection of markets, acquisitions and sales, financial restructuring, ultimately structural changes.
However, every day it is more frequent to find more subtle concepts in the vocabulary of those who participate in these operations. It is said that success and organizational vitality depend on appropriate cultures and values.
For these authors, culture constitutes the basis of organizational functioning, it is the invisible source where strategy, structure and systems acquire their energy. The success of transformation projects depends on the talent and aptitude of the management to change the driving culture of the company in time and in accordance with the strategies, structures and formal management systems.
In the business world change is a constant today, there is no management book that does not talk about change, its cost and its advantages, in turn there is a group of factors that influence that change is normal and above all necessary For example, with the globalization of the economy, companies are faced with a greater number of competitors, each of whom can introduce product and service innovations to the market.
The speed of technological change also promotes innovation, product life cycles have gone from years to months, and the time to develop new products and introduce them has also decreased.
All of which demands a new way of doing things and with it the culture developed by each group within the organization is changed.
However, is culture susceptible to being changed?
The importance of culture is most obvious when an organization has to go through a process of change.
According to Deal and Kennedy (1988), culture constitutes the most important barrier to effecting processes of change.
According to Scheín (1985), if the concept of a resurgent culture is considered, it is possible that the practical impossibility of transforming cultural assumptions must be faced, or that a dynamic theory must at least be developed.
Continuing with this criterion, it warns that when a company faces a crisis that encourages the need for change, it will begin at the level of strategy, structure and procedures, when deciding which elements need to be changed or preserved, they constitute one of the biggest strategic problems that managers They must be faced at this stage, however, when the organization is in the maturity and decline phase, the culture tends to become partially dysfunctional and must be changed in some areas, which is a major problem for management.
Robbins (1994), for his part, considers that it is possible to change the culture of an organization.
Yvan Allaire and Mihaela E. Firsirotu (1992) affirm that change is radical when it contemplates not only the formal characteristics of the organization (strategy, organizational structure and management system) but also and inevitably, the basic values and the system of meanings. tell the culture of the company.
With the previous comments we have substantiated the unquestionable role that corporate culture plays in the face of the phenomena of survival, adaptation and growth of an organization. Culture must achieve an adaptive relationship with the structure, it is necessary that culture and structure intermingle that support and reinforce each other, in turn culture, structure and environment must also achieve an adaptive relationship, if there is a change in one of these three systems and a change strategy is not drawn up for the rest according to that change, once the relationships between them become dissonant and desynchronize, which brings with it a loss of efficiency and effectiveness of the organization, making it impossible for its ability to survive, adapt, stay and grow.The realization of a radical change in a company is a very difficult task, it is the supreme test of the skills of a leader, characteristics such as intuition, experience, attitudes are useful attributes but they will reach their maximum development when supported by a subtle understanding of the mechanisms put into play in the transformation of a social system.
To carry out a process of change we must start from a knowledge of the state of the variables from which we can identify the culture of an organization and for this we propose the following methodological model.
He himself part of concentrating his level of analysis on the groups that make up the organization and as such he conceives the following steps:
Determine the cultural characteristics of the region in which the organization is located.
It is about knowing what are the traditions, ideologies, religions, folklore, customs, idiosyncrasy, language of the local population.
Determine the characteristics of the branch to which the company belongs:
Policies, laws, regulations, standards, types of products or services provided by the organization.
Observation of external visible artifacts.
The architecture, aesthetics, decoration, cleanliness, distribution and location of the premises, the slogans and others.
Analysis of the environment - history of the company.
The history of the organization, its founders and leaders, the main events it faced from its emergence to the present day and what solution was given in each case are analyzed.
Determination and characterization of groups and leaders.
The strategy can be specified and carried out satisfactorily only through the efforts of the members of the company (or internal actors) thanks to the neutrality or participation of external actors (Menguzzato, 1992).
Within this step, we recognize the actors who have a decisive influence on the implementation of the strategies, trying to identify the possible behaviors and actions of these that can become support forces or forces that hinder the implementation of the strategy and in this sense We begin with the physical delimitation of the groups, classification and identification of the stage of development in which they are, external conditions imposed on the group, demographic phenomena, among others. Then we analyze the informal structure through sociometry, identifying if the leaders constitute popular elements and even if they are considered leaders, diagnosing within each group the state of variables such as: climate, value system, attitudes, norms,degree of commitment to the objectives and goals of the organization, which characterizes the elements contained in the socio-structural factor.
Formulation of the cultural paradigm of each group.
With the information obtained in the previous step, the assumptions on which each group operates, which interrelated constitute the cultural paradigm, are identified.
Identify if there is a common corporate culture or subcultures by group.
It is analyzed whether all the groups share the same presumptions and ideologies or, on the contrary, if in addition to the differences due to the trade or profession they have a different vision of the world that surrounds them, and there may be stronger subcultures that put the host culture in crisis.
Analysis of the impact of the diagnosed organizational culture on business performance.
Supporting the idea that to carry out a true Strategic Management it is not only important to diagnose the state of the hard variables but also the soft variables, which constitute dynamic competitive advantages, in this we intend to determine the degree to which the organizational culture affects the strategy, which is called the risk of the organizational culture on the strategy.
For this we used the criteria of experts in the application of three matrices, which allowed us to reach important conclusions.
The first one is a 5 x 5 matrix (see figure 5) for the analysis of the culture of the company, on the horizontal axis the capacity for business action is measured and on the vertical axis the capacity for creative vision.
| Dreamer: It is characterized by a high degree of Vision, imagination and creativity, but with a very low degree of action. In this type of culture, opportunities are perceived that cannot be constantly exploited in a practical way, either because they are not adapted to the real possibilities of execution or simply due to lack of action. | Entrprenaurial: It is characterized by the achievement of a high level of action and vision in all areas of the company. It is characteristic of companies that perceive they constantly seek and take advantage of opportunities with high creativity and initiative for action. |
| Bureaucratic: This type of culture arises from the need to increase control, which brings with it routine norms and procedures, is characterized by managers and cadres without motivation, very limited to "you can not" all this leads to "strategic paralysis" and operational slowness there is rigidity of thought and there is great inefficiency. | Routine: In this type of culture, the management of the company dedicates most of the time to routine tasks, operational decisions and sometimes tactics, but almost never to planning and making strategic decisions. Managers working under pressure always resolve urgent issues and problems and put off what is important. |
The second applied matrix is a 20 x 20 matrix (see figure 6) of evaluation of the strategy formulation process, on the vertical axis it measures the degree to which the strategy is analytical and based on facts and on the horizontal axis it measures the degree to which the process is oriented towards consensus and implementation.
Finally with these two criteria we go to a 2 x 2 matrix (see figure 7) called the Organizational Culture / Strategic Risk matrix, which measures the effectiveness of the strategy on the vertical axis and the adjustment of the organizational culture on the horizontal axis. the potential strategic effectiveness of that strategy is classified as high or low on the vertical axis and the compatibility of the strategy with the established organizational culture or its adjustment is classified as good or bad on the horizontal axis. This matrix is based on the criteria obtained in the two previous matrices, through which a qualitative evaluation is made in the case of the adjustment of the organizational culture, based on the demands that the strategies demand and the four criteria that according to Bennis demonstrate the health of an organization.
CONCLUSIONS
We can conclude by stating that the concept of corporate culture arises from the need to seek an interpretive paradigm that allows broadening the understanding of organizational reality, the bases of this paradigm are in the studies of First of May and Barnard (1930) and then of Peters, Waterman (1982) and Scheín (1985), the latter somewhat motivated by phenomena such as the Japanese miracle and the economic and industrial growth of other Asian countries and the successes of some North American companies, which made evident the insufficiency of traditional paradigms for understanding the organizations and at the same time made it necessary to better distinguish in this field the explanatory variables of the difference between excellence and mediocrity.
The changes that have been taking place in the business world have been characterized by their speed, novelty, depth and breadth, as a consequence the company and the Cuban businessman face new challenges, but the Cuban company has its own peculiarities so it does not We can ignore their values, norms, skills, language, history, elements among others, essential that are part of their culture.
The proposed methodological model allows us to:
- Analyze an organization from the global point of view and its operation in a given environment; In this sense, it supposes the definition that the company gives to its environment and the way in which they understand that they must survive, adapt or grow in it, which determines their basic mission, the main objective, the central functions of that organization. Analyze group relationships allowing us detect the state of variables such as: climate, values, attitudes, assumptions, beliefs, as well as common language, conceptual categories, group limits and criteria for inclusion and exclusion, how power and hierarchy are distributed, intimacy, friendship, love, rewards and punishments as well as the ideology that prevails in the groups.Analyze the individual from the point of view of their productivity and job satisfaction.
Bibliography
- Abravanel, Harry. Organizational Culture. - - Colombia: Editores Legis, 1982 - - 202p.Alabart Pino, Yesmín. Definitions and manifestations of the Business Culture: brochure- Holguín, University. - - 3pm Berger, Brigitte. The business culture.- - Mexico: Ediciones Gernika, 1993.- -310p.Champy, James. Reengineering in management: How to modify management work to redesign successfully.- - Colombia: Editorial Norma, 1995.- -244p.Champy, James.Reengineering./ James Champy, Michael Hammer.- - Colombia. Editorial Norma, 1995.- -285p.Cortejo, Miguel Angel.All the secrets of excellence.– Mexico: Editorial Grijalbo, 1995. - - 268pMarín Marín, Henry. Culture, power and organizational change. DYNA Magazine. (Colombia.) - - 1994. 50p.Menguzzato.The Strategic Direction of the company: an innovative approach to management./ Menguzzato, Renau.- - - (Spain: sn, 1994?).- - - 360p.High - Velocity: culture change a handbook for managers / Prince Princhett… (et al.).- - Texas:.. Princhett and ron pound, 1994. - -35p. Robbins, Stephen. Behavior: Concepts, controversies and applications.– Mexico. – Editorial: Prentice Hall Hispanoamericana, 1991.– -742p.Schein, Edgar. Corporate culture and leadership. pi, sf. – 328p.Taps Cott, Don. Change of business paradigms / Taps Cott, Don and others.-Santa Fe de Bogotá. Colombia: Mc Graw Hill International, 1995. – 365pSchein, Edgar. Corporate culture and leadership. pi, sf. – 328p.Taps Cott, Don. Change of business paradigms / Taps Cott, Don and others.-Santa Fe de Bogotá. Colombia: Mc Graw Hill International, 1995. – 365pSchein, Edgar. Corporate culture and leadership. pi, sf. – 328p.Taps Cott, Don. Change of business paradigms / Taps Cott, Don and others.-Santa Fe de Bogotá. Colombia: Mc Graw Hill International, 1995. – 365p
