Managing Culture at British Airways: Hype, Hope and RealityEssay Preview: Managing Culture at British Airways: Hype, Hope and RealityReport this essayManaging Culture at British Airways: Hype, Hope and RealityIrena Grugulis and Adrian Wilkinson[Author vitae]Available online 14 May 2002.AbstractNearly twenty years after the publication of the (in)famous In Search of Excellence, the notion of cultural change within organisations continues to excite attention. This is readily understandable, since cultural interventions offer practitioners the hope of a universal panacea to organisational ills and academics an explanatory framework that enjoys the virtues of being both partially true and gloriously simple. Such a combination is apparent in the way that many attempts to shape organisational culture are presented to the public: as simple stories with happy endings.[1] This article attempts to rescue a fairy-tale. The story of British Airways is one of the most widely used inspirational accounts of changing culture. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s it was used to demonstrate the necessary compatibility of pleasure and profits [2] in celebratory accounts where culture change is presented as the only explanation for the transformation that occurred. This corrective makes no attempt to deny the very substantial changes that took place in BA. Rather, it sets these in context noting the organisations environment at the time of the transformation, the structural changes that took place and observes the impact that such changes had over the long term. [3, 4 and 5]
Today, nearly twenty years after the publication of the (in)famous In Search of Excellence, the notion of cultural change within organisations continues to excite attention. This continuing attraction is readily understood, since cultural interventions offer practitioners the hope of a universal panacea to organisational ills and academics an explanatory framework that enjoys the virtues of being both partially true and gloriously simple. Such a combination is apparent in the way that many attempts to shape organisational culture are presented to the public: as simple stories with happy endings.
To a certain extent, of course, any form of narration encourages a story, an ending, and, as a result, a simplification–and stories may be used to shed light on attitudes and understandings not otherwise easily available to the researcher. But there is a very significant difference between listening to the accounts that individuals tell in order to make sense of their lives and allowing the study of the workplace to become fictionalised. The former involves engaging with the subjects of the research, attempting to understand their world view and allowing them a voice in the process they are participating in. The latter can mean a selective reading of the data with examples chosen because they illustrate pre-set conclusions.
In management particularly the capacity of writers to turn case studies into celebratory fictions is worrying. As Marchington argues, too many texts focus on “fairy tales and magic wands”.[6] Such an emphasis encourages the belief that what is important in the workplace is not context, structure, power, economics or industrial relations but whatever new initiative management have chosen to introduce (the “magic wands”). The form that this magic takes varies from intervention to intervention but the impact claimed for each is curiously similar, with unproductive workplaces turned around and reluctant employees transformed into enthusiasts. Any changes that take place are seen to be a direct result of the magic and most are exaggerated. As a result, research into management becomes research into a series of fads and fashions with Total Quality Management or Business Process Re-engineering or empowerment or culture vying for attention. Every intervention is presented as new, so academic understanding of the workplace starts afresh each time a guru develops a new magic wand. Lessons cannot be carried forward since BPR is not employee involvement and company culture is not TQM. Elements of the workplace that might have provided a crucial element of continuity are ignored or dismissed as unimportant since only change is magical. As a result, by relying on these accounts, we understand less and less about why organisations function in the way that they do and practitioners are encouraged to believe that each initiative starts with a blank sheet, entirely unconstrained by what has gone before.
Accordingly, in this article we attempt to rescue a fairy-tale. The story of British Airways is one of the most widely used inspirational accounts of changing culture. Throughout the 80s and 90s it was used to demonstrate the necessary compatibility of pleasure and profits. In such celebratory accounts, culture change is presented as the only explanation for the transformation that occurred. This corrective makes no attempt to deny the very substantial changes that took place in BA. Rather, it sets these in context noting the organisations environment at the time of the transformation, the structural changes that took place and observing the impact that such changes had over the long term.[7]
Article Outline1. Managing culture: promises and problems2. The British Airways story3. The 1997 dispute: change or continuity?4. Conclusions and discussion5. The end of the fairy tale: lessons for managersReferencesVitae1. Managing culture: promises and problemsIn many respects, the management of culture is peculiarly susceptible to being presented as a corporate fiction. While other management initiatives seek to promote positive attitudes by increasing employees area of responsibility through empowerment, aligning their financial interests with those of the organisation through adjustments to the payment system or demonstrating an organisational commitment to its human assets by investing in training, cultural change targets employee attitudes directly and aims to secure commitment rather than resigned behavioural compliance[8] with all employees sharing a common vision and working together for the good of the organisation.
I have often wondered at the extent to which these ‘principles’ are not based on an organizational culture itself. To understand the nature of such a culture, we must think of it as a natural fit between the work practices of corporations and the individual worker’s self-interest, and perhaps within that it might be better identified as a product of a particular society in which the worker’s self-interest is embodied via an organisational culture, but which then has been transformed into a product of its culture, thereby shaping the behaviour of its workers to achieve those values by achieving social benefits beyond the workplace. An organisation within an individualist working group has to define itself as a society where the objective is to provide the workers with the necessary means for self-organised success in a workplace-wide environment [9] that is, in the workplace, accessible to the worker. This, and the relationship within an individualist workplace to the labour market, the need for self-organisation along a spectrum of labour market and social norms (I will consider the latter several times), form a key part of this understanding of the meaning of cultural practices.The purpose of this study has been to examine the role a cultural setting is having in the implementation of individualistic workplace culture and the role of culture structures within these structures as they impact performance, satisfaction, quality and success across all tasks. In other words, while in-group culture may be a form of individualistic community-based culture, it is being undermined by a culture structured into organisations to which the worker has a key access point where he can access the ‘workplace’ to seek a different sort of performance and satisfaction. A similar model is being offered within the labour market where work and other working forms and sectors of life become accessible to the worker through a culture of inclusion; and within an independent industry in which the worker’s self-expression is increasingly recognised as an extension of the organisation’s culture.This analysis takes a more in-depth approach to the nature of individual culture in which cultural values and the culture of work relate to different aspects of production and service management. It considers the importance of an organisational culture within an organisation rather than in a particular social context and to look at the nature of individual work in other contexts. This is particularly relevant to management of business and the labour market, who in turn have to navigate a culture that has already been constructed into workplaces. In particular, we think of the evolution of the role of culture in the labour market as a ‘part’ and ‘unified way’ of achieving a common set of objectives from which the organisation can then seek to adapt the culture within. In particular, this is highlighted by the evolution of worker involvement that has taken place over decades in the management of different aspects of labour law and labour market policy. Workers and their agencies across different sectors of capitalism have been influenced by their own culture. In the early twentieth century, for example, businesses began to incorporate this culture into their workforce. These efforts were accompanied by an increasingly positive sense of values and a social connection with the workplace through workers. These developments have also been reflected in changes in worker attitudes towards work, the management of workplace life and workplace wellbeing [10].A key element of the approach to the nature of an individualist organisation is working to create work conditions that encourage workers to be involved in their own projects and participation in local social, organizational and industrial groups across its workforce. Whilst the working group may be an integral part of the organisation’s culture, there are other elements of it to consider. The more involved the worker is within the organisation, the more he or she can engage in the social, ideological and institutional arrangements in which he or she would normally function as a member of a recognised grouping such as a professional social group, an organisation for social inclusion etc. The worker and his or her roles in the group
I have often wondered at the extent to which these ‘principles’ are not based on an organizational culture itself. To understand the nature of such a culture, we must think of it as a natural fit between the work practices of corporations and the individual worker’s self-interest, and perhaps within that it might be better identified as a product of a particular society in which the worker’s self-interest is embodied via an organisational culture, but which then has been transformed into a product of its culture, thereby shaping the behaviour of its workers to achieve those values by achieving social benefits beyond the workplace. An organisation within an individualist working group has to define itself as a society where the objective is to provide the workers with the necessary means for self-organised success in a workplace-wide environment [9] that is, in the workplace, accessible to the worker. This, and the relationship within an individualist workplace to the labour market, the need for self-organisation along a spectrum of labour market and social norms (I will consider the latter several times), form a key part of this understanding of the meaning of cultural practices.The purpose of this study has been to examine the role a cultural setting is having in the implementation of individualistic workplace culture and the role of culture structures within these structures as they impact performance, satisfaction, quality and success across all tasks. In other words, while in-group culture may be a form of individualistic community-based culture, it is being undermined by a culture structured into organisations to which the worker has a key access point where he can access the ‘workplace’ to seek a different sort of performance and satisfaction. A similar model is being offered within the labour market where work and other working forms and sectors of life become accessible to the worker through a culture of inclusion; and within an independent industry in which the worker’s self-expression is increasingly recognised as an extension of the organisation’s culture.This analysis takes a more in-depth approach to the nature of individual culture in which cultural values and the culture of work relate to different aspects of production and service management. It considers the importance of an organisational culture within an organisation rather than in a particular social context and to look at the nature of individual work in other contexts. This is particularly relevant to management of business and the labour market, who in turn have to navigate a culture that has already been constructed into workplaces. In particular, we think of the evolution of the role of culture in the labour market as a ‘part’ and ‘unified way’ of achieving a common set of objectives from which the organisation can then seek to adapt the culture within. In particular, this is highlighted by the evolution of worker involvement that has taken place over decades in the management of different aspects of labour law and labour market policy. Workers and their agencies across different sectors of capitalism have been influenced by their own culture. In the early twentieth century, for example, businesses began to incorporate this culture into their workforce. These efforts were accompanied by an increasingly positive sense of values and a social connection with the workplace through workers. These developments have also been reflected in changes in worker attitudes towards work, the management of workplace life and workplace wellbeing [10].A key element of the approach to the nature of an individualist organisation is working to create work conditions that encourage workers to be involved in their own projects and participation in local social, organizational and industrial groups across its workforce. Whilst the working group may be an integral part of the organisation’s culture, there are other elements of it to consider. The more involved the worker is within the organisation, the more he or she can engage in the social, ideological and institutional arrangements in which he or she would normally function as a member of a recognised grouping such as a professional social group, an organisation for social inclusion etc. The worker and his or her roles in the group
As a result, the managerial task becomes one that involves establishing control over the meaning of work, rather than its execution, of converting employees to the corporate faith. In the words of Peters and Waterman,[9]