“Organisations Need Strong Culture”. Consider This Statement in Relation to How We Understand and Make Sense of Culture in the Post-Bureaucratic Era.

In this essay about managing culture in the post-bureaucratic era, I am going to argue how the practices of managing culture have changed in this era and how they differentiate oneself from the bureaucratic era. Furthermore I describe the cultural influences especially in organizations and how the importance of those influences changed over the time. In the first section I am going to explain the content of managing organization culture to get a first insight in the topic and to express the knowledge about the influences of the culture in an organization. In the next chapter I separate between two perspectives of the cultural organizations and explain which of the both are relevant for the assignment question. The next step of my

Once completing the quiz “What’s the Right Organisational Culture for Me?”(Robbins, DeCenzo, Coulter & Woods, p. 46), I found that my personal score of 24 placed me in this more humanistic style of organisational culture. According to Robbins et al (2016, p. 46), scores more than 22 “indicate a preference for informal, humanistic, flexible and innovative cultures”. The quiz itself looked into the seven main pinpoint of organisational culture; “innovation and risk-taking, attention to detail, outcome orientation, people orientation, aggressiveness and stability.” I think that organisational culture is integral to the businesses productivity because of its ability to reflect communal shared values, principles, traditions, and practices that influence the way an organisation’s employees and other members conduct themselves.

All Organisations posses a distinct form of culture with some having more than a single culture. This culture is usually very difficult to measure, change and most especially change.

Organisational culture is a set of beliefs and values that effects the behaviour and thinking of organisation members and it can be a starting point for mobility or can create an obstacle to progress. Also, these are the basic areas of change and organisational evolution. (Hill & Gareth R Jones,

Within the field of management, the success and failure of the modern business organisation has been largely depicted by the intricate concept of culture. Organisational culture, a concept borrowed from borrowed mostly from anthropology typically is defined as a complex set of values, beliefs, assumptions and symbols that define the way in which an organisation conducts and manages its business (Barney 1986). Management is not just an act of change, but the responsibility for and control of a company or similar organisation (Willmott 1983). It is the management of organisational culture that merely drives the

Describing and identifying the importance of abstract terms is a difficult task because their meaning rely more on substance than form. For this and other reasons, individuals as well as organizations tend to overlook or underestimate their importance for a successful career and for the effective functioning of an organization. “Organizational Culture” is one of those terms, we can’t see it, but we can feel and experience it, and it has a profound impact in the way people behave in an organization. It denotes the attitudes, experiences, beliefs, and values of the work group or team within the organization, which to an extent affect the organization as a whole.

Coined as “the way we do things around here” (Deal and Kennedy, 1983, p. 501), culture encompasses how an organisation is run, its “personality”, and the norms, values, beliefs and attitudes (Armstrong, 2010) that reflect the organisation’s mission, aims and goals.

2. "Organisations need strong culture". Consider this statement in relation to how we understand and make sense of culture in the post‐bureaucratic era.

In this essay, I am going to argue that the contextual changes within organizations require innovative ways of managing corporate cultures, particularly seen in the changes in post-bureaucratic eras. I shall illustrate the contextual importance of managing cultures and the ethical considerations that arise from the manipulation of culture. In Section One, I shall demonstrate the management of cultures within the bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic eras, referencing Bolin & Harenstam (2008), Brewis (2007) and McKenna, Garcia‐Lorenzo & Bridgman (2010) research findings. By particularly exploring Rosen (1988) and Van Maanen (1991) individual organizational context for section two, I intend to present the different practices of managing cultures

In this essay, I intend to argue that from a time of structured bureaucracy to an aeon of flexibility and the stripping down of hierarchical order, the principles in managing culture have evolved. Nevertheless, as practices have changed, the results are analogous in that culture is developed in order to control an organisation. Organisation culture is the deep, normal assumptions, beliefs, and shared values that delineate organizational membership (Clegg et. al. 2011). I altercate that an enjoyable and gratifying culture has become a foundation for individual satisfaction and contentment, ultimately leading to workplace efficiency and productivity. I will validate this in Section one by reconnoitering on Fredrickson (2003) and comparing it to Sudnow (1967). Conversely, a free form culture is still delimited by control and bureaucracy within and this is demonstrated by Rosen (1988) and Parker (1992) in Section two. In the final section, with Ojo (2010), I will exemplify how in the post-bureaucratic period, there is an imperative liaison between organisation culture and performance.

Rather than using rules and acting as a bureaucracy to achieve the corporate goals, a culture aims to act as guidance and shape the organisation almost in the way of a soft bureaucracy. Instead of controlling employees through rules, organisational culture aims to determine the behaviour of employees and implement control in a very subtle way (McAuley et al, 2014), to ensure that the values and norms are consistent and behaviours are attached to meaning that reflect and pursue the goals of the organisation.

Organisational culture shared among all the members, with its values, principles, traditions and methods of working. It determines how an organisation functions, from industry side to individually. It could be an important asset which, if not managed well, can be a critical liability for the organisation. While a healthy and positive organisational culture could increase relationship between employees and employer, and together achieve the maximum performance for the company, a deleterious culture would lead to the downfall of the organisation, and eventually collapse. It is an advantage that requires good management skill, coordination and communication in order for the organisation to utilize it well. Beaudan and Smith (2000) at Ivey Business Journal stated that corporate cultures are mature and complex organisms. One must carefully and smartly shape the culture, and it is wise to nurture corporate culture as an asset, rather than a risk and liability. This essay explains both beneficial and negative sides of organisational culture, along with case studies supported.

The classic Phrase by Mckinsey organisation, “the culture is how we do things around here” is taken as reference by many great people. It’s true that culture exist in an organisation which influences the work being done and also affects the success or failure of the project.

The culture of an organization can be defined by the ‘way they do things’, this means the way they make decisions, operate and how they choose and achieve their objectives. As culture is a set of values and practices, changing it may be difficult and a long process, especially if the change is organized by a new chief executive.

As mentioned earlier, the assumptions that underpin ‘organisational culture’ as a concept are widely different between researchers. A number of scholars have