Organizational culture comprises a complex system of study and analysis because it is an abstract and immaterial concept, but at the same time, real and perceptible to the members of the group where it develops and lives.
Being a social phenomenon that has recently become even more important due to technological advancement and the globalization of the economy that are today the distinctive features of the world of organized work. In this context, a fundamental concern on which the priority objectives of organizations -both public and private- seem to have focused has been to develop, based on culture, on the one hand: anxiety-reducing mechanisms that guarantee the preservation of balance and the stability of formal systems, and on the other: the construction of shared meanings that crystallize in the desired behavior of its members.
Culture refers to the way things are done, beliefs, behaviors, behaviors, symbols and rites that give identity to the organization, in this sense the first step to face the path to a new culture has to do with the recognition of current cultural factors that want to be maintained, those that want to be modified, and those that need to be changed.
The search for methodological models in the organizational sphere to address the phenomenon of culture reveals some important considerations: on the one hand, the almost non-existent dissemination of original works by Latin American authors that specifically address the issue of organizational culture; and on the other hand, the existing disparity between the abundant theoretical production that has gained momentum in scientific journals -mainly North American-, and the scarce methodological design that puts the concepts that form the construct of culture as an object of study on firm ground.
This task is not easy, since talking about organizations and culture implies at the same time, referring to the environment that surrounds the organization, the ideological characteristics of its founders, the turn of the organization, the community that surrounds the organization, the organizational environment that prevails in the environment (competition, political, economic, technological and even religious aspects) that in one way or another affect the entity in its evolution; while on the other hand, in the internal sphere, the way of being of the organization is determined by: the organic structure, the way of leadership, communication and information, the administrative style, the way of working and production, are just some of the many factors to consider when diagnosing an organization's culture, and that they are not static and much less quantifiable.
Although the organizational culture has a permanence in time, it is relative, since the individual not only learns it, internalizes and reaffirms his behavior, but can also transform it. From this perspective , the various aspects of the social environment appear as factors of change, which require a capacity for innovation and adaptation in the individuals involved in the face of new forms of coexistence and different organizational models.
Some organizations show interest in diagnosing the organizational culture responding more to the pressing need of companies to know themselves, define themselves or redefine themselves, with the sole purpose of successfully coping with the demands of the environment in which they are immersed. This is the pragmatic approach that has visualized culture as the factor of incidence to achieve changes and impregnate them with meaning, a sense that points to the objectives of companies and their aspirations for competitiveness and development, leaving aside the human aspect of the individuals that comprise them and the understanding of culture at its deepest level.
The diagnosis of organizational culture is an analytical process that allows knowing the real situation of an entity, at a given moment. This study helps identify problems that must be corrected and opportunities that must be seized. But how to do it and where to start? The answer to this question is that when speaking of organizations as dynamic, changing and dependent entities on both the internal and external environment, there is not, nor will there be, a cookbook or methodological guide that raises the o the ways to carry out an organizational culture diagnosis. Approaches to this are derived from the experiences that some consultants and researchers have obtained, after having designed and applied various diagnostic techniques and models in specific organizations., in a given time and space; Obtaining, of course, the results of the statement that the entity presented at that time. The diagnosis is a continuous work that requires verification and / or modifications to obtain more reliable results.
The phases that make up the diagnosis are:
- Pre-diagnosis: This stage includes reading the information from the company's office, visits and observations (participants or non-participants) obtained from visits to the entity, interviews and comments with the management team and information from key informants of the organization.
- Diagnosis: It consists of putting into action and applying research instruments and techniques, both qualitative and quantitative, previously selected according to the needs of the organization and corroborated in the pre-diagnosis stage. This work can be temporary or permanent, depending on the budget and interest of the organization under study. In this phase, the interpretation and analysis of the results is carried out.
- The post-diagnosis: It is the more or less periodic review and previously established in the work schedule, of the results obtained from the proposals or alternatives suggested to the senior management according to the interpretations of the results obtained in the diagnosis stage. It is advisable to carry out several evaluations a year to be able to carry out corrections, or modifications to what is proposed.
The selection of the research techniques to apply must be analyzed and discussed with the general management of the organization.
The variables to study in the diagnosis of organizational culture can be combined, or respond to the analysis needs that the company requires; however, the main study factors are listed below with their respective diagnostic review topics:
- The environment: It includes the community or neighborhood where the organization is located, the policies that they impose on the company, according to their business and responsibility, levels of security or insecurity in the neighborhood, road access, traditions and customs of the town.
- Leadership: Type of leadership, profile, aptitudes, attitudes and abilities, capacity for socialization and interaction, congruence of attachment in their work development with the ideological-conceptual aspects of culture, gift of command, charisma, ideology and idiosyncrasy, and as appropriate the case, detection of heroes.
- Communication: Rituals, customs, celebrations, interaction between employees and employee-leaders, information regarding ideological-conceptual elements (mission, vision, philosophy, values, etc.), traditions, language (includes codes, symbols, myths and legends, history, as forms of the oral tradition of the organization), means and channels through which the conceptual identity of the company is made known.
- Sense of belonging and identity: Loyalty, commitment, attachment, motivation towards work, perception and opinion regarding the organization, link or disconnection between the work, family and personal environment of the employee.
As mentioned, one of the main contributions to the diagnosis of organizational culture are the studies carried out through case studies in various organizations, based on these ideas, it is possible to retake or rebuild useful aspects or paradigms for our own diagnosis, depending on, I emphasize, the requirements or research needs in the entity under analysis.
For this reason, below are some examples of studies carried out in various organizations that have provided very useful concepts and assessment guides for diagnosing organizational culture. It should be noted that they are not the only studies carried out so far, but they have been milestones and benchmarks in this regard.
I will begin by mentioning the study of the dimensions of culture by Hofstede (1980), “… with the intention of evaluating the cultural dimensions of 50 countries, he carried out an investigation that included more than 116,000 people. The idea was to know how the basic values of each country influence organizational behavior. Hofstede took five dimensions: distance from power, aversion to uncertainty, individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, and long-term projection. "
In this vein, another study that evaluates cultural dimensions is that of Trompenaars (1982), who coordinated an investigation similar to that of Hofstede, which included 15,000 administrators from 28 countries and identified five dimensions of culture:
- Universality vs. Particularity
- Individualism vs. Collectivism
- Neutrality vs. Affectivity
- Specific or diffuse relationships
- Personal fulfillment or attribution
“The Hofstede and Trompenaars research suggests that the culture of each country greatly influences the culture of their organizations and therefore organizational behavior. Multinational organizations that have subsidiaries in several countries use the indicators from these investigations to be able to adapt the cultural aspects of their networks to the various countries where they are located in order to achieve efficiency in their operations around the world. "
For his part, André Laurent (1983), in his research on cultural diversity in administrative styles, proposes ideas about administration in Western countries, asking the managers of organizations in these countries to respond to several statements related to 60 situations of work, this is an extract of the results obtained:
Affirmation:
"The main reason there is a hierarchical structure in the organization is so that everyone knows who has power over whom."
Results:
° Countries where managers expressed a high level of agreement: Japan, China, Indonesia.
° Countries where managers expressed a low level of agreement: United States, Germany, Sweden.
Interpretation:
Countries with a high level of agreement reflect a culture oriented towards interpersonal relationships.
Low-agreement countries reflect a task-oriented culture.
“Laurent concludes that the national origin of European, American and Asian managers significantly influences their views on the management style of an effective manager. In general, the perception that managers have of the organization as a political, authoritarian, role-formalizing or hierarchical relationship system varies according to their country of origin. "
For her part, Dr. Yesmín Alabart (2000) carried out an investigation based on organizational diagnosis in Cuban organizations to measure the degree of productivity, openness to change and sense of belonging among the members of an organization. It was also determined that culture organizational has a significant impact on business performance.
“The authors of this work delved into the organizational culture in Cuban conditions in order to contribute to its study and greater knowledge in the country, for which they developed an investigation leading to a doctoral thesis that should demonstrate that: 'if a methodology supported by relations of coherence, organicity and adaptability between management style, soft variablesand hard and of these with the environment, as premises for the organic and dynamic functioning of the organization, it will be possible to diagnose which of these variables affect the cultural product of this, and consequently, define actions that allow effective results. ' The conception of a model endorsed by the relevant statistical analyzes and its corresponding methodological procedure, as well as its application in various business entities, demonstrated the feasibility of its application and its practical utility. "
During the development of the study, a series of variables were proposed for analysis, the so-called soft variables (values, beliefs, attitudes, paradigms), and the hard variables (structures, strategies, systems, processes and trades). In the same way, a methodology based on the description and analysis of the following factors was proposed, in which both soft and hard variables are interspersed:
Environment surrounding the entity: This section describes the culture of the region in which the organization is located, as well as the social, economic, political and technological variables.
Characteristics of the branch to which the organization belongs, if the organization is governmental, philanthropic, commercial, financial, etc; in relation to the rules, policies, laws and regulations that are imposed on it.
Symbols and signs, both outside and inside the organization.
History of the company, in relation to the origin of the founder and the history or development of the organization.
Determination and characterization of groups and leaders, both formal and informal.
Values, both those expressed, apparent, operational, as well as those expressed in attitudes and behaviors.
Identification and definition of a common corporate culture, or the prevalence of subcultures by group.
After having carried out this review of methodological contributions in regard to the subject, we can realize that carrying out an organizational culture diagnosis must be adapted to the culture of our nation, at first, and later adapt, or else design research strategies according to the prevailing work culture in said environment, which by the way, is the subject of another diagnosis that allows us to outline and characterize the cultural personality of both the company and its members.
Definitely, and depending on the motivations or needs involved in carrying out an organizational culture diagnosis, we can realize that the main thing before starting or selecting a paradigm or diagnostic model is to consider the research objectives, limits and scopes, the factors or variables to be analyzed, and above all to determine to what extent the existing culture guarantees the adaptation of the entity to increasingly dynamic and changing environments where the human factor is a key element in promoting the organization.
