Culture and the CdI

1.1 Introduction

During the latter part of the previous century the concept of Organisational Culture started surfacing more clearly in literature. Although the study of organisational culture had only started scratching the surface, the word “culture” became one of the buzzwords of the 1990’s. This has continued till today.

1.2 Defining Culture

When reviewing the writings on culture, it becomes clear that the term is sometimes being used as a catchall phrase and sometimes even indicating opposing concepts.

Various authors have defined organisational culture from personal, specific, perspectives. One definition that is consistently found among all authors is that culture constitutes “the way we do things” [1]. This broad but brief definition is also included in the results of the CdI. Given the subtlety and influences of culture the title of a book “The Unwritten Rules of the Game” [2] seems to be relevant, particularly in relation to identifying the uniqueness of organisational cultures.

A more formal view indicates that culture is “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another derived from one’s social environment and distinguishable from human nature on one side, and personality on the other” [3]. Based on this definition it stands to reason that depending on the characteristic of a given culture, varieties of different modes of organisation can be identified. Considering the programming of the mind, comes to life in the archetypes or paradigms measured with the CdI.

1.3 Influences on Culture

Business and the society in which it operates coexist in a state of mutual dependence and mutual influence characterised by the relationship of its members to one another and the environment in which it functions. The time that members spend working together will however moderate the impact of diversity as they are confronted by, internalise and conform to emergent group norms. Extended exposure to such group norms could even provoke changes in individuals’ attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours [4] overriding individual preferences and even consciences. This is sometimes referred to as group-think [5].

Regarding the formation of group norms, individuals can, and do contribute to an organisation’s culture. Senior managers are however so influential that their actions and behaviour have substantial impact on the organisational culture [6]. A simplified view of this is that “culture comes down to a common way of thinking which drives a common way of acting on the job” [7]. As culture comprises group norms, assessment thereof can only be done through determining perceptions of leaders as cultural custodians.

1.4 Principles of Organisation Culture

When considering the identification of an organisational culture, certain core principles require attention. Key principles that should be kept in mind when interpreting the results obtained from an organisation are:

  • “People at all stages of their careers need to understand culture and how it works because it will likely have a powerful effect on their work lives” [8]. This links directly to workplace satisfaction
  • Most organisations are characterised by several cultural characteristics at once. These cultural characteristics can be found in different departments, sections or even levels in a hierarchy.
  • Cultural types can often be linked to stages of an organisation’s life.
  • There is no ideal culture — only an appropriate culture based on the industry, products and environment the organisation functions in.
  • Any culture, whether appropriate or not, can be functional or dysfunctional given specific needs / realities and circumstances.

1.5 Culture and Climate

An area that often causes confusion is the concept of organisational climate and its relationship to organisational culture.

Distinctly different to determining the underlying cultural constructs of an organisation, assessing organisational climate is concerned with “how employees feel [affective responses] about the organization’s expectations, reward practices and the like” [9].

It can thus be said that whilst culture is ‘the way we do things’, climate is ‘how we feel about the way we do things’. Together culture and climate “encompass all the structural forms … analogous to the personality of an individual” [10], as reflected in organisations.

1.6 The CdI

The CdI comprises 72 neutral statements rated in terms of their applicability to a company. The indicator is constructed to:

  • Identify the specific organisational characteristics which directly influence employee behaviour, resulting in a collective way of doing.
  • Function on three levels simultaneously, namely to:
    • identify 8 organisational types related to well-known and researched individual personality preferences (underlying business archetypes),
    • discriminate between organisations in terms of 5 organisational operating dimensions (cultural constructs or cultural factors), and
    • identify 7 styles operating as descriptors that can be broadly described as cultural narratives.

In the compilation of statements a conscious decision was made to exclude, where possible, statements that could require interpreting the cultural symbolism of organisational artefacts. This decision was taken on the basis that people with different societal cultures could interpret the artefacts differently.

The questionnaire has been applied in diverse settings and results have been statistically validated on three separate occasions. For the 72 statements constituting the CdI, the statistical reliability varies between 0.71 and 0.93 depending on the aspects under consideration.

1.7 Rating Scale

For assessment purposes it was decided to utilise a Likert five-point scale to allow flexibility in rating the statements to the organisation under review.

1.8 Scoring

Group results are determined in terms of a weighted average agreement or disagreement to a specific set of statements. Strength of agreement or disagreement with the response, and factor loadings, are used for weighting of responses. As a result, a 100% score is only theoretically possible. In practice however, due to the use of multiple responses per organisation, this will only be obtained in very rare cases.

This aspect is of key importance when assessing smaller organisations and where results are determined per section. Where small numbers (less than 15 respondents) are involved in completion of the CdI, it must be understood that the results obtained from one respondent, with clearly differing views, could have a significant effect on the overall results. Such results should thus be approached and interpreted with extreme caution.

1.9 Caution

Please note that the results set out in the reports are based on respondent perceptions of company functioning as pertaining to statements included in the CdI. The results must be seen in that light and the author and developer of the CdI cannot accept any responsibility for the outcome of actions taken by a company, based on the results or comments set out in the reports.

[1] Deal & Kennedy (2000; pp.4) • [2] Scott-Morgan (1994) • [3] Hofstede (1991; pp.5) • [4] Schein (1970; pp.109) • [5] Handy (1993; pp.163), Bowditch & Buono (1990; pp.133) • [6] Schein • [7] Goffee & Jones (2000; pp.15) • [8] Deal & Kennedy (2000; pp.16) • [9] Robbins (1998; pp.596) • [10] Dipboye, Smith & Howell (1994; pp.212)