Joumat of Management Studies 23:3 May 1986

0022-2380 $3.50

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND WORK GROUP BEHAVIOUR: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

P. AMSAI'1

National Institute of Bank Management, Pune, India

ABSTRACT

This paper reports on a research study about the organizational cultures of a number of textile manufacturing plants from both the public and the private sector in Ahmedabad, India. These plants were shown to vary along one aspect of their work-group behaviour, namely the rate of 'loitering' among loomshed workers. The concept of'culture' is defined in terms of the shared beliefs, values, norms and traditions within the organizations. Methods of observation and informal open-ended interviews were used to identify elements and/or dimensions of organizational culture, which were subsequently measured through structured interviews with loomshed workers. The study shows a definite relationship between 'culture' and 'loitering'; however, the critical elements of culture influencing loitering behaviour vary from public to private sector plants. The implications of the findings of the study for the plants under reference, for production organizations in general as well as for organization theory are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

IN recent years, the term 'culture' has been increasingly in vogue in studies of organizational behaviour because of the growing realization among organizational scientists and management consultants that the culture of an organization has as much influence on corporate effectiveness as the formal structure of jobs, authority, technical and financial procedures. Although the term culture is normally used to refer to the intangible aspects of an organization such as its beliefs, rituals, customs and traditions which its members have built up over the years for coping with the situation, there is still a conceptual ambiguity surrounding the usage of the term culture in organizational studies. According to Smircich (1983), the concept has been used in a variety of ways depending
Addressfor reprints: Dr. P. Amsa, National Institute of Bank Management, Post Bag No. 1, Kondhwe Khurd, Pune 411 022, India.

348

P. AMSA

on the different ways of conceiving 'organization' and 'culture' themselves, but she (1983, p. 347) discerns two main research approaches among organizational culture studies: the first where culture has been used as a 'critical variable' (culture as something which the organization has) and the second where culture has been used as a 'root metaphor'(culture as something which the organization is). The present study, which set out to measure the organizational culture of a number of textile mills in India, in order to explain their differences in one aspect of their organizational functioning, belongs to the first research tradition: it treats culture as a variable (or as a set of variables). The aspect of the organization's functioning studied was a specific work-group behaviour, namely 'loitering'' ' among loomshed workers. An attempt was made to see if observed differences in the rate of loitering across the mills were related to their differing cultures.

THE RESEARCH SETTING

The study described in the paper was carried out in the textile mills of Ahmedabad which is one of the biggest textile centres of India. The textile industry is among the oldest and largest manufacturing industries in India, employing a sixth of the national manufacturing labour force. It is more than 100 years old and occupies a dominant position in the industrial structure of India. At the time of this study (1981-3), Ahmedabad had about 65 mills, most (about 95 per cent) of which were composite mills producing both yarn and cloth; the remainder were only spinning mills. About 80 per cent of these mills were privately owned; the rest belonged to the public sector. These mills produced both cotton cloth and non-cotton and blended fabrics. The public sector mills produced mainly cotton cloth of coarse and medium variety. These mills, barring a few, did not employ modern technology, and their managerial practices were quite traditional. The Ahmedabad textile mills employ a total labour force of 150,000 in three shifts. The average worker is not highly educated, is unskilled and socially backward compared to his counterpart in other industries and elsewhere in India. The labour market shows an over-supply as elsewhere in India, where the rate of unemployment even among the educated is high. The workers are unionized, but there is only one major trade union, the Textile Labour Association (T.L.A.). The T.L.A., which is in effect a federation of smaller unions, represents more than two-thirds of the Ahmedabad textile industry's workers and has a favourable reputation with employers. The history of industrial relations in the Ahmedabad textile industry is less stormy than elsewhere in India. The involvement of the average worker in trade union activities is lower than in most other parts of India. The typical weaver is assigned a set of four looms. The loom is prepared for weaving by 'gaiting'. A beam is gaited into brackets at the back and each warp thread is passed through the eye of the one of several 'healds', then through

WORK GROUP BEHAVIOUR: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

349

a reed to keep it in place. Finally, it is connected to a roller on the front which takes the woven cloth. A bobbin containing weft is placed in a shuttle from which it is ejected when empty or when the thread breaks. The non-automatic looms stop when the bobbin is empty and the bobbin has to be removed and replaced by hand. The actual hand operation, shuttling, is a short one, taking only approximately 20 seconds. It occurs at intervals of from three to ten minutes, depending upon the amount of yarn which can be wound on the bobbin. This requires that the looms remain under constant observation by the weaver. Most looms are also fitted with warp motions (a mechanical device that stops the loom automatically when a warp thread breaks). Then the weaver has to knot the broken thread before he re-starts the loom. When a weaver is occupied with any other task, looms awaiting shuttling or knotting have to remain idle, causing loss in production and hence the weavers' absence from the looms by loitering can be detrimental to production. The effect of the weavers' absence on productivity depends on the rate of warp/weft break. The rate of warp/weft break, to a large extent, determines the workload of a weaver. One popular notion among many Ahmedabad mill managements, during the period of this study, was that there was high rate of loitering among their loomshed workers and that this adversely affected their production. However, there were no reliable data to confirm or disconfirm their beliefs. This created a lot of estrangement and lack of trust between management and workers. Therefore, the original motivation for the study was to: (a) develop an objective estimate of the rate of loitering and its impact on production and (b) identify the critical determinants of loitering in order to be able to design an intervention strategy for solving the problem. MEASUREMENT OF LOITERING AND ITS EFFECT ON PRODUCTION Nine mills, six from the private sector and three from the public sector, which were largely comparable with regard to their production technology and compensation policies, were selected for the measurement of loitering among their loomshed workers. The number of weavers in these mills ranged from 100 to 150 in each shift. The mills were working in three shifts and only the first and second shift weavers were selected for the study. The measurement used the 'work-sampling''^' method. From the data so collected the rate of weavers' absence on the looms due to reasons related to 'work' (e.g. going to collect weft, going to repair shuttle, going to repair loom belt, etc.) 'employment' (e.g. going to the pay-office, labour office, etc.) and 'other reasons' (e.g. mainly personal reasons like going to the toilet, going for drinking water, going for relaxation, etc.) and the consequent loss in efficiency due to these three classes of reasons were computed for nine mills.

350

P. AMSA

The range of weavers' absences due to the reasons under the three categories was as follows:

Work-related reasons 1.0 - 2.4%

Employment-related reasons 0.0 - 0.3%

Other reasons (personal reasons) 0.3 - 5.5%

The variation in the range under the 'work-related' and 'employment-related' reasons can be explained on the basis of the mills' differences in machinery conditions and other facilities required for carrying out the work. However, the range in the rate of weavers' absence due to 'other reasons' is worth noting. It can be safely assumed that there need not be wide variations across the mills as far as actual personal needs of the workers are concerned. Therefore, a higher absence rate on account of'other reasons' is indicative of a higher rate of loitering in that mill. As far as the actual loss in efficiency was concerned, the efficiency loss on account of'personal reasons' ranged from 0.1 per cent to 1.7 per cent; therefore the maximum extra production loss due to loitering was only 1.6 per cent. Though the problem seems to be limited, some managements were concerned about an efficiency loss of more that 1 per cent especially when this loss was converted into monetary terms. However, not all cases of management concern seem justifiable.

MEASUREMENT OF CULTURE

Out of the nine mills where the rate of loitering was measured, two H.L.M.s, (high loitering mills) one each from the private and public sector, and two L.L. M.s (low loitering mills) also one each from the private and public sector, were selected for further enquiry into the determinants or correlates of loitering. Informal open-ended interviews and personal observation were used to collect ideas for any elements of organizational culture, such as beliefs, values, norms and traditions that might be in some way related to the loitering phenomenon. Based on these ideas, a structured interview schedule was prepared for measuring organizational culture, more specifically, the sub-culture of the loomshed, which is nothing but a micro-culture influenced by the larger culture of the organization. The items in the interview schedule were independently judged by eight judges for their face validity, i.e. to determine whether the items were good enough for what they are supposed to measure. These items aimed at measuring the following elements of sub-culture.
Beliefs

Widely shared beliefs among the workers regarding: (1) Supervisors' concern for production and discipline among the workers;

WORK GROUP BEHAVIOUR: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

351

(2) The cost of loitering to workers: (a) by way of punishment by the management and (b) by way of loss in production and the resultant loss in wages (the workers were paid piece-rates: beyond a required minimum level of production, their wages were proportional to the amount they produced); (3) Quantum of workload.
Values

Widely shared values among workers regarding the desirability of discipline among workers.
Norms

Work-group norms regarding appropriate on-the-job behaviour.

Tradition

The tradition of loitering in the department.

Sample and Procedure

From the four mills identified above, a sample of, on average, 40 loomshed workers from the first and second shifts was selected for the study. The sample constituted about 12 to 20 per cent of the first and second shift loomshed workers in these mills. In interviews, workers responded to each of the statements in the schedule, on a binary yes-no scale, expressing their agreement or disagreement with the item. The items asked for an assessment of the overall situation prevailing in the department, not of the respondents' own personail beliefs, values and opinions. In other words, each respondent was asked to give his assessment of what the majority of his co-workers believed, valued or experienced.

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION

The data gathered through the interviews were analyzed to see whether the mills with high and low rates of loitering differed in terms of their cultures. The results are listed in table I separately for public and private sector mills. Only those questions are shown for which the difference between H.L.M. and L.L.M. for either the public sector, or the private sector, or both, is at least statistically significant at the 5% level. (The difference in the proportions of H.L.M. and L.L.M. was tested by means of Z-test under the assumptions of normality).
Public Sector Mills

The categorization of the mills into public and private sectors for the purpose of studying their cultures was done on the presumption that in India, the fact

352

P. AMSA

Table I. Differences in sub-culture between high and low loitering mills in public and private sectors Public Sector Mills H. L. M. Percentage of respondents agreeing with the item Sub-cultural dimensions (N = 50) L. L. M. Percentage of respondents agreeing with the item (N = 40) Private Sector Mills H. L. M. Percentage of respondents agreeing with the item (N = 50) L. L. M. Percentage of respondents agreeing with the item (N = 35)

I. Workers' beliefs regarding the supervisors' concern for the workers' production and discipline. 1. In this mill the supervisors do not take much interest to see that the workers do their work well. In this mill the supervisors take care to see that the workers do not waste time while they are at work. Here the supervisors take an interest in solving workers' problems. Supervisors do not take notice of the weavers who go out frequently. In this mill no one bothers if you are away from your machine.

55

24

S.

35

18 N.S.

2.

47

70

S.

82

92

N.S.

3.

41

76

70

80

N.S.

4.

60

33

S.

16

N.S.

5.

62

36

S.

N.S.

II. Workers' belief regarding cost of loitering in terms of punishment to workers. 1. There is nothing that the management can do if a worker is not found at his machine. The management in this mill is very strict about enforcing discipline. In this mill, no one dares to take any action against the workers, especially if they are sitting outside the department.

60

39

S.

N.S.

2.

36

61

S.

28

44

N.S.

3.

60

36

S.

13

N.S.

III. Workers' beliefs regarding 'cost' of loitering in terms

of loss in production.

WORK GROUP BEHAVIOUR: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

353

Table I (continued) Public Sector Mills H. L. M. Percentage of respondents agreeing with the item (N = 50) L. L. M. Percentage of respondents agreeing with the item (N = 40) Private Sector Mills H. L. M. L. L. M. Percentage of Percentage of respondents respondents agreeing with agreeing with the item the item (N = 50) (N = 35)

Sub-cultural dimensions

1.

The production in this

mill does not suffer much

2.

even if a few workers spend some time away from their looms. The output is so good in this mill that even if a worker remains away from his machine for some time, it does not affect his production.

60

33

S.

42

S.

59

21

S.

54

S.

IV. Perceived work-load. 1. There are lots of complaints about the workload in this department. 2. The workload is so high in this mill that the weavers do not get sufficient time for going out even for their personal needs. The workload in the department is not manageable.

30

72

S.

38

65

S.

25

64

S.

40

79

S.

3.

29

27

N.S.

16

62

S.

V. Work-group norms. 1. The workers who are hardworking and sincere are considered to be 'management chamchas'.[4) 2. The workers who have good relationships with the supervisors are ceilled 'men of management'. The people here feel that there is nothing wrong in going out from time to time if it does not affect the work.

57

33

S.

46

S.

64

30

S.

47

13

S.

3.

30

26

N.S.

37

S.

354
Table I (continued)

P. AMSA

Public Sector Mills H. L. M. Percentage of respondents agreeing with the item (N = 50)

Private Sector Mills L. L. M. Percentage of respondents agreeing with the item (N = 35)

Sub-cultural dimensions VL The tradition of loitering in the department. 1. For a long time nobody in this mill has taken his work seriously. 2. The practice of taking frequent rest-breaks among the workers is not new. It has been there in the mill for quite a long time. 3. The practice of taking frequent rest-breaks is a way of life in this department. 4. The practice of weavers spending time in chitchatting in the canteen and other places has become a tradition here. H. L. M. L. L. M. S. N.S. = = = = Mill Mill The The

H. L. M. L. L. M. Percentage of Percentage of respondents respondents agreeing with agreeing with the item the item (N = 40) (N = 50)

57

27

S.

N.S.

64

36

S.

27

S.

55

45

N.S.

33

S.

47

42

N.S.

33

S.

with highest rate ofloitering. with lowest rate of loitering. difference is significant at the 5% level. difference is not significant at the 5% level.

of a mill being public or private wotild make a difference in their cultures. Public sector mills, because of being owned by the government, are more bureaucratic in character and their employees enjoy more job security compared to the private sector mills. Also, historically, these public sector mills were one time sick mills in the private sector which were nationalized in 1967 and were entrusted to a public sector corporation called the National Textile Corporation (N.T.C.) which was set up to run these sick mills and nurse them back to health. These factors would probably lead to the emergence of different kinds of cultures in the public and private sectors. Table I shows that H.L.M. and L.L.M. in the public sector differ markedly with regard to the following dimensions of their sub-cultures: (1) Workers' belief regarding (a) supervisory concern for workers' production and discipline.

WORK GROUP BEHAVIOUR: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

355

(b) the cost of loitering by way of punishment from the management, (c) cost of loitering by way of loss in production and the consequent monetary loss to the workers. (2) Work group norms. In the high-loitering mill, the majority of the workers believed that their supervisors were not genuinely concerned about either production or the workers. An attitude of apathy coupled with powerlessness and helplessness prevailed among the supervisory staff. They believed that management could not do anything against the workers in the case of misconducts like loitering. There had been a long tradition of loitering in the mill and successive managements had not been able to contain the problem. It may be mentioned that the top management in public sector mills changes quite frequently. This had contributed to the above attitude among the supervisors. The workers could readily perceive this attitude of the supervising staff. Consequently the workers knew that certain misconducts on their part, like loitering, were not costly for them since they would not elicit any punitive action from management. Similarly, they believed that loitering was not costly for them since it did not affect production seriously. It is interesting to note that the majority of them have no complaints about the workload in their department. Over and above these, some of the social norms among the workers were also conducive to loitering. For instance, some of the work-group norms discouraged workers from having too good relationships with management. On the other hand, the low-loitering mill in the public sector presented a different cultural profile. Here the workers believed that the supervisors in general were somewhat concerned about production and the workers' problems. Supervisors in general were largely successful in communicating their concern not only for production but also, to some extent, for workers' problems. Supervisors no doubt exercised a 'close' supervision to ensure that workers did not waste their time but, at the same time, they did not heavily enforce the workers' discipline. It may be noted here that the researcher's enquiries with the supervisors and management from both mills revealed that the rate of punishment in the form of shouting, oral reprimands, warning notices and fines was comparatively lower in the low-loitering mill. The management was perceived as capable of taking disciplinary action against the workers in the case of misconduct on their part. As far as the effect of loitering on production, the workers in the low-loitering mill believed that their frequent absence from the looms would result in a loss of production, which would in turn result in a monetary loss for the workers. As far as the workload was concerned, the workers believed that the workload was high: they did not get sufficient time for going out for their personal needs and they therefore complained more about the workload in their department than their counterparts in the high-loitering mill. The workers entertained fewer misgivings about workers having a good relationship with management. However, a good proportion of the workers

356

P. AMSA

in this mill, like their counterparts in H.L.M., reported the existence of a tradition of loitering in their department, though these mills did not show statistically significant differences on all the questions relating to the existence of a loitering tradition. The findings regarding the cultural profile of the public sector high-loitering mill were not surprising when considering its lower productivity and profitability, but the findings regarding the cultural profile of the low-loitering public sector mill were rather surprising. The low-loitering mill, despite being a public sector one with all its attendant problems, seemed to have a more productivityorientated culture than the high-loitering mill. It appears that at some point in the history of the mill, management was able to redirect the culture towards productivity. The corporate performance of this mill was in fact, slightly better than that of the high-loitering mill, though it was still not satisfactory.
Private Sector Mills

The H.L.M. and L.L.M. in the private sector also presented different cultures, though not always on the same items as the public sector mills. As can be seen in table I, the following were the dimensions on which these mills showed marked differences in their cultures: (1) Workers' beliefs regarding (a) cost of loitering by way of loss in production, (b) quantum of workload; (2) Work-group norms; (3) The tradition of loitering in the department. As in the case of the public sector mills, a large percentage of the workers in the private H.L.M. believed that loitering was not costly for them since it did not affect their production, while L.L.M. workers were almost unanimous in their belief that loitering would very seriously affect their production. Regarding the workload, the H.L.M. workers thought that it was m2inageable and they had no complaints about it while the majority of L.L.M. workers thought that their workload was not manageable and they had complaints about it. In the H.L.M. sincere and hard work on the part of a worker was discouraged by other members of the group while there was no such practice in the L.L.M. A considerable proportion of H.L.M. workers felt that there was nothing wrong in going out from time to time, if it did not affect the work, while L.L.M. workers did not subscribe to this view. As far as the tradition of loitering is concerned, a good proportion (33 per cent) of H.L.M. workers reported that there was a tradition of loitering in the mill which had almost become a way of life in their department, while such a tradition was conspicuous by its absence in the case of the L.L.M. The dimensions of culture, viz. 'supervisory concern for workers' discipline' and the 'cost of loitering to the workers by way of punishment' which were

WORK GROUP BEHAVIOUR: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

357

prominent in differentiating the public sector mills are conspicuous by their absence in the case of private sector mills. The supervisors in both H.L.M. and L.L.M. in the private sector were highly concerned about the workers' discipline and their production. They supervised the workers closely and kept a watch on them to see that they did not waste time on their jobs. Their managements were also perceived as being very strict in enforcing the discipline and they could take action against the workers for their undisciplined behaviour. In other words, the perceived cost ofloitering to the workers by way of punishment was high in both the H.L.M. and the L.L.M. This would mean that supervisory concern for workers' 'discipline' and 'strict enforcement of discipline' alone were not sufficient to contain the problem ofloitering among the workers. Obviously, other dimensions of the culture like 'work group norms', 'tradition ofloitering', and 'perceived high cost ofloitering' had more influence on workgroup behaviour. The only dimension of culture on which the H.L.M. and L.L.M. in both the public sector and the private did not differ was workers' attitudes regarding 'discipline'. Workers in all types of mills regarded''discipline' as something desirable in their work-situation. This fact that even the H.L.M. workers cherished 'discipline' could be explained in two ways: the first explanation could be that the workers valued 'discipline' only at an affective level, and this value was not getting expressed in their behaviour for certain reasons; the second explanation could be that the workers were only paying lip-service to a 'socially desirable phenomenon' and that they have not internalized this value. Anyway, the value of discipline among the workers did not emerge as a dimension of sub-culture determining the loitering behaviour. To sum up, the study has shown that the mills which were different with respect to 'loitering behaviour' among their members were also different with respect to their beliefs, norms, values and traditions. In other words, the loitering phenomenon is in some way related to the culture of the mill; however, critical elements of culture which would affect the loitering behaviour varied from mill to mill.

CONCLUSION

Though the study was undertaken to identify the organizational correlates of loitering with a view to identifying the intervention strategies for solving the problem, it has implications not only for the mills in question but also for the management of production systems in general as well as for organizational theory.
Implications for the Mills

The study has shown that loitering behaviour is not determined by a simple cultural element but by a set of such elements, though the criticality of each

358

P. AMSA

element varies from organization to organization. This necessitates a multipronged intervention strategy aimed at dealing with critical cultural determinants in a given organization. In the case of the public sector mill, the critical cultural correlates or determinants identified were: (1) Supervisors' concern for production and discipline among the workers; (2) Cost of loitering to the workers by way of punishment; (3) Work-group norms. All these are amenable to intervention by management. This intervention should aim at: (a) Countering the workers' attitude of apathy and indifference towards their work; (b) Countering the supervisors' attitude of helplessness and powerlessness to improve their supervisory styles. The work-group norms and the tradition ofloitering are to some extent interlinked because tradition provides people with a 'mindset' for evolving norms as to what is right or wrong, good or bad, desirable or not in a given situation. The attitudes of the supervisors and their styles of relating to workers can initiate, over a period of time, changes in worker behaviour paving the way for the creation of more productivity orientated traditions and work-group norms. This is possible only when the effect of the changed attitudes and behaviour on the part of the supervisors outweighs the effect of workers' traditions and work-group norms. In the case of the private sector high-loitering mill, the intervention for controlling loitering needs to be initiated at the shared perception among the workers regarding the 'cost of loitering' by way of its impact on production, the 'work-group norms' and the 'tradition ofloitering'. The perceived low cost of loitering on production can be interpreted in two Ways: (1) In reality, loss in production due to their frequent absence on the looms may not be high, if warp/weft breaks are low. If objective measurement shows that the production loss due to loitering is high, the workers can be educated about this through proper communication between supervisors and workers. If the production loss is really low, the management does not have to be unduly concerned about the problem of loitering in the mill. In fact the rate of warp/weft break is a management problem and not a worker problem. It looks (as is frequently the case) as though management in at least some mills blames the weavers' loitering for production loss which is in fact caused by reasons the workers cannot control. (2) Secondly, it is possible that the loss in monetary reward to the workers due to loss in production on account of their loitering is not so substantial

WORK GROUP BEHAVIOUR: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

359

as to be of any concern to the workers. Though all the workers were paid piece-rates the salary differential between a most efficient worker and a least efficient worker in these mills appeared to be too low to motivate them for more production. This suggests that management needs to take a closer look at the incentive system for production. One suggestion which emerged out of this study was to reorganize the loomshed workers to create internally structured and internally led small workgroups on the pattern of socio-technical groups formed by Rice (1958). Presendy weavers who each run four looms, are in their formal role relationships, independent isolates. Informally they make supportive and mutually helpful relationships with each other, taking over each others' looms, so that they can spend long periods of time outside the sheds. The creation of small work-groups to attend to the entire work on a group of looms can take advantage of these supporting relationships, especially if the groups are formed on the basis of sociometric choice.
General Implications for Management of Production Organizations

Even a cursory look at the management of discipline cases in Indian organizations, in general, would reveal that the problems of discipline are viewed from a narrow individuadistic micro-perspective and the general tendency among Indian management is to deal with indiscipline cases individually even when their numbers are quite large. Indiscipline is seen as something to be remedied through intensive control over individuals. The individuals are reprimanded, warned, and fined for indiscipline in the hope that they will improve their behaviour, but this rarely has the desired effect; and repeated recourse to such action by management makes the matter worse. Indiscipline, even when it pervades the entire organization, is seen as a micro-individualistic problem and not as group behaviour beyond the idiosyncratic characteristic of the individuals who form the group. The correlates of such behaviour can often be traced beyond the individual personalities to a wider system level, the group or the organization. An analysis of the relevant characteristics of this system, maybe its structure, or culture, will reveal the critical elements related to the problem behaviour in question, which can be solved with an appropriate intervention. It is appropriate in this context to refer to an observation made by Miller (1975) in his 1970 follow-up study of Rice's 1954 weaving experiments in Ahmedabad mills. He observed that where work groups retained their autonomy, and supervisors and managers conceived the task as providing the necessary boundary conditions, the results of the original experiments were fully sustained: indeed productivity was as high and the quality of cloth produced even higher in 1969-70 than it had been in 1954. On the other hand, in locations where supervisors were working on the assumption that poor performance of a work group was not a phenomenon for which the group, through its leader, could be held accountable, but rather something

360

p. AMSA

to be remedied through intensive control over individuals, productivity was lower than it had been in 1954 and signs of stress more pronounced. The present study shows that the determinants of an apparently micro-level problem like loitering are related to the culture of the organization and that the intervention for controlling the problem is required primarily at the collective level including supervisory behaviour and not at the individual worker level. Another implication of this study for the management of production systems in general is that it has hinted at a supervisory style which is more conducive to workers' productivity. The analysis of the supervisory styles in public sector mills indicated that a supervisory style characterized by 'task-orientation coupled with concern for the individual' was primarily responsible for the low rate of loitering among L.L.M. workers. This could be fairly true for most other Indian organizations, and perhaps for the organizations in some other parts of the world also. However, we need more empirical evidence from other organizations, to generalize these observations.
For Organization Theory

Although Barnard and Selznick had raised the issue of culture in the study of organizations as early as the 1950s, academics rarely referred to values and culture until the early 1980s (Peters and Waterman, 1982, p. 104). However, the cultural approach to the study of organization is not really new. The Ahmedabad textile industry itself has been studied in this way by Rice (1958) of the Tavistock Institute in London. The Tavistock approach of the 1950s was a holistic approach which we now call 'cultural' and the principal elements that shaped Rice's approach to organizational analysis included the concept of socio-technical systems and the examination of groups and enterprises as wholes (Miller, 1976). The present study treats culture as an organizational variable and then examines its relationship to one aspect of the organization's functioning. Its main contribution lies in establishing a definite relationship between the subculture of a department and a specific work-group behaviour, thereby showing that the behaviouraJ phenomenon at one system level in an organization can be explained not only with reference to the characteristics of that level but also in terms of the characteristics of other related macrosystems. There are many ways in which the traditional concerns of organizational theory can be addressed by a cultural approach as well as by a sociological, macro-approach or a psychological micro-approach. In fact a cultural perspective may provide the necessary linkage between the traditional macro- and micro-analysis of organizations (Morey and Luthans, 1985). The study showed that the high loitering rate among the work group coexisted with the tradition of loitering in the department, in both public and private seictor mills. There seems to exist a circular relationship between culture and behaviour, past behaviour affecting future culture. As mentioned elsewhere, the study has shown that a supervising style characterized by task orientation coupled with some concern for the individual

WORK GROUP BEHAVIOUR: AN EMPIRIGAL STUDY

361

was responsible for the low rate of loitering among the workers in the public sector L.L.M. It raises an important theoretical issue regarding the nature of an appropriate supervisory style conducive to productivity and satisfaction among the workers, particularly in the Indian context. The supervisory style characterized by task-orientation coupled with some concern for the individual which the low-loitering mill supervisors were employing, comes closer to a leadership model called 'nurturant-task' style proposed by Sinha (1978). He argues that in the case of Indian workers who relish dependency and personalized relations and the supportive care of a benevolent guide, the nurturant-task leadership style characterized by 'task-orientation having the mix of nurturance' (caring for subordinates, showing affection, etc.) is the appropriate leadership style at least in the low productivity phase of an organization. However, this observation should not be taken to mean that this study provides empirical support for the leadership model suggested by Sinha. A more intensive study of the nature of the supervisory style employed by the supervisors of the low loitering public sector mill and its impact on production and satisfaction among the workers will be needed before arriving at any such conclusion. Finally, it is worth noting here that the operationalization of the concept of culture employed in this study has not been able to capture the concept with its entire complexity and therefore, there is a scope for refining it to make it more reflective of the diversity and complexity of the concept and then relate it not only to certain aspects of the organization's functioning, but also to the various stages in an organization's growth such as maintenance and development. This can be a task for future researchers.

NOTES [1] Dr. P. Amsa is presently a member of the faculty in the area of Human Resource Development, at the National Institute of Bank Management, Pune, India. His principal interests are in the areas of sociology of organizations, training and counselling. The present study was conducted during 1981-3 when he was with the Human Resources Division of the Ahmedabad Textile Industry's Research Association (A.T.I.R.A.), Ahmedabad. [2] 'Loitering" is the unauthorized absence of the employees from their assigned place of work (from the machines, or from the seat, etc.). The employees would report for work, but would frequently leave the place of work (machine or seat) without authorized reasons, but would be available somewhere on the premises of the establishment itself It is therefore different from absenteeism where the employee does not turn up for work at all. In this study the focus was on the loitering behaviour of the weavers in the textile mills, where each weaver was attending four semiautomatic looms. [3] In the work-sampling technique which was employed in this study, a trained observer made periodic observations by taking rounds in the loomshed to identify the number of looms remaining idle because of weavers' absence and ascertained the reasons for the absence with the help of a pro forma specially developed for the purpose. This

362

p. AMSA

would provide data for calculating the rate of weavers' absence on account of various reasons relating to 'work', 'employment' and the 'person' and the percentage loss in efficiency because of each type of absence. [4] The word 'chamcha' is a derogatory term used by the workers in India to refer to their co-workers who get on too well with their supervisors and who try to win their favour by 'buttering them up'.

REFERENCES MILLER, E. J. (1975). 'Socio-technical systems in weaving, 1953-1970: a follow-up study'. Human Relations, 28, 348-86. MILLER, E. J. (1976). 'The open system approach to organizational analysis, with specific reference to the work of A. K. Rice'. In Hofstede, G. and Kassem, M. S. (Eds.),
European Contributions to Organization Theory. Assen/Amsterdam, T h e Netherlands: Van

Gorcum, 43-61. MoREY, N. C. and LUTHANS, F . (1985). 'Refining the displacement of culture and the use of scenes and themes in organizational studies'. Academy of Management Review 10, 219-29.
PETERS, T . J . and WATERMAN, R . H . (1982). In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America's

Best-Run Companies. New York: Harper and Row.

R I C E , A. K. (1958). Productivity and Social Organization: The Ahmedabad Experiment. London:

Tavistock Publications.
SINHA, J . B. P. (1978). The Nurturant-Task Leader: A Model of the Effective Executive. New

Delhi: Concept Publishing Company. SMIRCICH, L . (1983). 'Concepts of culture and organizational analysis'. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 2 8 , 3, 339-58.