Essay About Organisational Culture And Organizational Culture Of Quinlan

Organisational Culture and Management StrategyOrganisational Culture and Management StrategyINTRODUCTIONThis paper is prepared to analyse the organizational culture of Quinlan’s, and to discuss the reasons behind the low levels of staff morale and the problem of flexibility for Quinlan’s, based on the information in the case study and literature. In the first part, the organizational culture of Quinlan’s is analysed; the factors explaining this culture and the extent to which the culture is responsible for the company’s current difficulties are discussed. In the second part, causes of low workplace morale and possible solutions that can be applied by the Director of HRM at Quinlan’s, who has become aware that the underperformance of the company has affected workplace morale, are mentioned respectively. Lastly, the meaning of flexibility in practice for organizational and management strategy is explained; and the challenges that Quinlan’s faces in responding to its competitors who operate more flexibly are mentioned.

Organizational culture is a pattern of basic assumptions that are developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, and that has worked well enough to be considered valuable; therefore, it is taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to those problems (Schein, 1992, cited in Rollinson et al., 2002). There are different views in the literature as to whether culture is something that the organization has, or organization is a culture itself. However, at Quinlan’s, the prevailing idea seems to be that culture is devised by management and transmitted or imposed on the rest of the organization as part of the seductive process of achieving membership and gaining commitment, which is referred as corporate culture by Linstead and Grafton Small (1992).

The rationale of the cultural approach to membership of the NLA is that it provides members with opportunity to acquire “something new” as the organization is given the opportunity to experience the organization’s own culture and activities.

To provide this opportunity, a number of organizational processes are implemented. The organization has a plan for the future. The future is defined by the organization’s goal as establishing a culture that is the same as what is expected and accepted. The organization then proposes, based on that culture, what it plans to accomplish. If certain tasks are accomplished, such as teaching or consulting, the plan is based on that culture’s overall goal to achieve more goals and reach the top of the organization. The organizations plan will be the same as the goals the organization has chosen, but on a more dynamic and holistic level of structure. If the organization and its members develop differences in the culture within the organization and in the other members, this will change what organizations and groups are allowed to do. Moreover, a certain number of processes may be implemented which are not the same as the actual culture in which they were created. For instance, a culture might be defined in the “society” as a “culture of self-sufficient individualism” (Katharine 1995). In addition, the organization’s internal and external cultures are organized as if they were more like that group’s, with different standards.

If the organizations are not as similar as are the external cultures, the organization suffers from institutional or social issues such as disaffection between internal and external culture, the problem of inter-professional and inter-service relationships, disinherited values, and an unwillingness to adapt or incorporate new members.

However, the organization also has to develop relationships with other cultural partners. For example, the organization may make the commitment to develop cultural relationships with new members, develop non-disclosure agreements with other members, and incorporate members with which it no longer disagrees. But such behavior is a common problem in organizational organizations and has a negative impact on membership. The external culture might take the initiative to organize relationships with outside stakeholders, like new members, new organizations, and any other individuals who might be out of sync with that culture as well. Some of the problems of culture do not result in conflict. However, to avoid conflict, the organization would need cultural resources to engage with people who have different cultures and not to develop conflict.

In addition, a culture of commitment might be made so that other internal and external members find themselves involved in a cultural relationship. For example, the organization might be able to support members of larger organizations in developing and adapting their existing culture to meet their organizational needs. This kind of culture has positive social effects because it means that participants in the culture begin to identify and empathize with others who have different cultures. The person who develops the culture will not develop conflicts or social resentments or feelings of alienation. However, it does not mean that the culture is wrong. The reason for this is because culture cannot be understood outside the culture, which can include many components that might not be part of this cultural group. Moreover—especially for large, complex organizations such as CIC, NLA, and the NLA Organization, which include over half of all NLA members—there is no single ideal culture as it is structured. Nor can cultural relationships really

The rationale of the cultural approach to membership of the NLA is that it provides members with opportunity to acquire “something new” as the organization is given the opportunity to experience the organization’s own culture and activities.

To provide this opportunity, a number of organizational processes are implemented. The organization has a plan for the future. The future is defined by the organization’s goal as establishing a culture that is the same as what is expected and accepted. The organization then proposes, based on that culture, what it plans to accomplish. If certain tasks are accomplished, such as teaching or consulting, the plan is based on that culture’s overall goal to achieve more goals and reach the top of the organization. The organizations plan will be the same as the goals the organization has chosen, but on a more dynamic and holistic level of structure. If the organization and its members develop differences in the culture within the organization and in the other members, this will change what organizations and groups are allowed to do. Moreover, a certain number of processes may be implemented which are not the same as the actual culture in which they were created. For instance, a culture might be defined in the “society” as a “culture of self-sufficient individualism” (Katharine 1995). In addition, the organization’s internal and external cultures are organized as if they were more like that group’s, with different standards.

If the organizations are not as similar as are the external cultures, the organization suffers from institutional or social issues such as disaffection between internal and external culture, the problem of inter-professional and inter-service relationships, disinherited values, and an unwillingness to adapt or incorporate new members.

However, the organization also has to develop relationships with other cultural partners. For example, the organization may make the commitment to develop cultural relationships with new members, develop non-disclosure agreements with other members, and incorporate members with which it no longer disagrees. But such behavior is a common problem in organizational organizations and has a negative impact on membership. The external culture might take the initiative to organize relationships with outside stakeholders, like new members, new organizations, and any other individuals who might be out of sync with that culture as well. Some of the problems of culture do not result in conflict. However, to avoid conflict, the organization would need cultural resources to engage with people who have different cultures and not to develop conflict.

In addition, a culture of commitment might be made so that other internal and external members find themselves involved in a cultural relationship. For example, the organization might be able to support members of larger organizations in developing and adapting their existing culture to meet their organizational needs. This kind of culture has positive social effects because it means that participants in the culture begin to identify and empathize with others who have different cultures. The person who develops the culture will not develop conflicts or social resentments or feelings of alienation. However, it does not mean that the culture is wrong. The reason for this is because culture cannot be understood outside the culture, which can include many components that might not be part of this cultural group. Moreover—especially for large, complex organizations such as CIC, NLA, and the NLA Organization, which include over half of all NLA members—there is no single ideal culture as it is structured. Nor can cultural relationships really

According to Schein’s view (cited in Huczynski and Buchanan, 2001: pp. 626) “culture is the sharing of meanings and ‘basic’ assumptions among organizational employees”; and it consists of three levels, each distinguished by their visibility and accessibility to individuals. Schein’s first level is the surface manifestations of culture that are its most visible and accessible forms. Artefacts, courses and heroes are the most important surface manifestations for Quinlan’s. First one is evident in the priority given to store refurbishments to signal that Quinlan’s is changing and freshening up its image. Secondly, courses for induction, orientation and training, used to educate new members are so important for Quinlan’s that its recruitment process is found similar to that of the civil service. Thirdly, the importance given to hero, the individual who established and personifies the values and beliefs of the culture, and provides role models for emulation, is evident in the dominant presence of Thomas Quinlan, and the strong commitment of his followers to his values (Huczynski and Buchanan, 2001).

Schein’s second level concerns organization values and beliefs, which refer to those things that have personal or organizational meaning to the founders or senior management (Huczynski and Buchanan, 2001). An important source of values for Quinlan’s is the views of Thomas Quinlan, as modified by the company’s current senior management. Thomas Quinlan’s paternalistic agenda for his staff and people-centred policies within the company have shaped Quinlan’s values, and provided a common direction for all employees, making unions unnecessary. During his employment, employees knew that when they followed the specified practices, they would be rewarded by high level of benefits.

Finally, basic assumptions are located at Schein’s third level and they include the assumptions that individuals hold about the organization and how it functions. They are invisible, preconscious and relate to aspects of human behaviour, and the organization’s relationship to its environment (Huczynski and Buchanan, 2001). When evaluated according to the Schein’s list of basic cultural assumptions (cited in MPO Module Book, 2003: Section 13), Quinlan’s was considering itself as dominant due to the high-quality goods symbolised by its Britannia own label, which in turn led to high popularity and profitability. The company was product oriented, assuming that consumers are interested in quality (Brassington and Pettitt, 2003), so, it was confident that as long as the quality was high, it would be able to sell. This confidence resulted in ignorance of innovativeness and flexibility; and the company did not take the competitive threats into consideration until it faced with decreases in sales. Moreover, Quinlan was past oriented. Relying on its past success, it missed the radical changes in the environment. Finally, Quinlan’s had paternalistic authority system, and the environment seemed to be cooperative due to the generous reward system.

Nevertheless,