Key DEBATE 167 KEY DEBATE is this possible? ‘There are many tools and techniques for analysing organisational cultures, Denison Consulting,’ based in ann Arbour, Michigaa, employs the Denison model 1m help clients diagnose ther cultures. Denison argues that there are four key cultural traits that affect performance measures such 28 pro- lity, soles giowth, quality, and market valve, Founder Dan Denison explain ‘Generally speaking, an organisation's sense of Mission and its Adaptability can forecast its growth rate fairly weil & growth company ses its vision on ‘external markets, and is sensitive to the changes in the market. ts actions are formed by the market and it clearly understands the significance of fs ‘existence in the marke. Ifa corporation has ston Involvement ond. Consistency, and the company culture {3 very “internal.” the company may not ‘row quiokty, but performance indicators such a5 quality and efficiency are typically pretty goo. Innovetive companies abvays get high scores in ‘aspects of Adeptability and Involvement. A cor pany witha strong Mission and Consistency wil have Steady performance over @ long time peviod “These traits are further broken down into 60 items, ‘measured via a five-point Likert scale io @ survey hat °° anagers can complete. The results produce a oic- ture of the culture. Denison argues that the highest- ‘performing firms are these that score high on all four Bf the key trite It abso suggests that survey results fan be used to identify the weaknesses in an organ- * gation’s culture, track changes in the culture and © nerichmark against other companis. However, Mats Abvesson® suggests that there is 4 tendency to sinplify and tevialise what organisa, onal culture means. Managers often falt victim to ‘sins’ that include: Relying cultore: Seeing’ culture as. someting “thing-tke” thal, for example, directly inks to per formance or can be readily managed. What really ‘radtters i the meaning shared by 2 collective and ‘that is wore eomplex ies. Essentialising eultare: Describing culture in terms of a few exszntial tats. The danger is a ‘too 1f organisational culture is so important an influence on strategy, then understanding what it is and its influences are of key Understanding organisational culture Imporiance. But strongly ordered and superficial view on culture’. “The need is for 2 more careful interpretation and 2 recognition of variations within a culture. Consensvalising culture. ‘Shared meanings do not necessarily imply consensus end harmony «.. 20 ‘orgenisation may be characterised by shared ideas and beliefs about the significance of sot interest, fierce internal competition and a view of corporate Tite as fairly harsh and jungle-ike.” Totallsing culture: Assuming that a culture can be | captured ‘once and for all” when ‘it is the shered ‘meanings on a specific topic that is of interest to ‘pay attention to’ such as core competences or the: future of an industry. Unitying culture, ‘Eqvating cultural boundaries ‘with formal or legal ones, as imptied by terms such 2 corporate culture or national culture.” ‘Aivesson grants, however, that there are ‘sometimes pragmatic reasons... {for simplifications ond the | expression of something accessible ~ wiich often Teads to some of the sins above... My point is, fhowever, that the traps and temptations should be handled with great care and care taken that they are snot “priviteged”.” | | | | j ‘soces 1. wwmideringconolng.core, | 2, Kaj Vy "he yin‘ Yang. of export cate’, Hard Etsise Reva Cis, enday 2008 9. 79-52. a. Ne Avesan, Understanding Grgorstonl Gar, Sapp, 2002, | pp 18-3. Questions 1 Which of Alvesson’s ‘sins’ apply tothe Denison model? 2 ‘To what extent do Alvesson’s sins apply to the cultural web? 13-1, as Alvesson suggests, pragmatically some of the sins are dfftcutt fo avoid, how ean ‘managers avoid ‘privileging’ them? 4 Undertake a cultural analysis of an organisa- tion. To what extent cid you find yourself committing any of the ‘sins’?