If culture is like the DNA of an organisation, then you can argue that the culture of every organisation is unique. However, it is still possible to group certain styles or types of organisational culture. By doing, students are provided with an opportunity to compare and contrast - a vital exam skill!Let's look at an obvious basis for comparison - strong versus weak culture.
A strong culture is onewhich is deeply embedded into the ways a business or organisation does things.With a strong culture, employees and management understand what is required ofthem and they will try to act in accordance with the core values.
A key benefit of a strongculture is that there is less need for detailed policies and procedures becausethe "way things are done around here" is well understood andaccepted.
There are many greatexamples of organisations with strong cultures. Indeed, as we have argued inthis blog, organisations built on a clearly defined set of core values,consistently applied, use their strong culture as a source of competitiveadvantage.
Three of my favouriteexamples of strong culture are Southwest Airlines (founder Herb Kelleher'sstrategy of an employee-centric culture); Ikea (founder Ingvar Kamprad'sculture of thrift and teamwork) and Disney Theme Parks (where customers are"guests", a job is a "part" and a uniform is a"costume"). In each of these businesses the culture is an intrinsic,core part of the strategy. Actually you might argue that for organisations likeIkea and Southwest Airlines, the culture IS the strategy.
There are plenty of othergreat examples, including John Lewis Partnership, IBM, Marriott Hotels andZappos. You could add to those McDonalds, Starbucks, Goldman Sachs, HP andNordstrom - and a host of other successful businesses built on a strong,distinctive culture. You can even argue that an entire industry sector enjoysthe advantages of strong culture - namely the Mittelstand companies in Germany!
Compare the examples abovewith organisations whose culture is weak. A weak culture can arise whenthe core values are not clearly defined, communicated or widely accepted bythose working for the organisation. It can also occur if there is littlealignment between the way things are done and the espoused values. This canlead to inconsistent behaviour of people in the organisation which in turnresults in inconsistent customer experiences!
A key consequence of weakculture is that there is greater need for procedures, policies and bureaucracyin order to get things done in the desired way, with in turn can add substantiallyto organisational costs.
Can you think of someexamples of weak culture? A good place to look is in businesses ororganisations that are struggling to compete or perform. Think about your ownpersonal experiences of poor customer service or unacceptable quality - thereis likely to be some evidence of weak or dysfunctional culture.
For me, an organisationlike the HMRC is a prime example: poorly managed; highly inconsistent levels ofservice and a largely demotivated workforce. Also, do you agree with me thatthe terrible service you get at Burger King compared with McDonalds is anindicator of a weak culture? No-one working there really seems to care how longit takes to serve your order. What about Tesco? I stopped shopping there longago after becoming fed up with disinterested staff and longer queues. Tescomight enjoy the benefits of enormous scale, but is culture can't hold a candleto that of John Lewis Partnership.
Strong culture versus weakculture: a key comparison for students to make. But, is strong culture alwaysbetter than weak culture? It may depend!
Some research by Sorenson(2002) looked into the relationship between the strength of culture andbusiness performance. The research found that strong cultures were best able todeliver a successful strategy in fairly stable operating conditions. However,when the market or economy became more unstable or volatile, businesses withstrong cultures were less successful. Sorenson suggested this might be becausean organisation with a strong culture might be less likely to react to the needto change; i.e. they could be less adaptable in a rapidly-changing environment.
You might also argue thata culture can be strong but that a strong culture leads to business problems –even failure. There is little doubt that the corporate culture at Enron wastoxic – but it was also strong. Employees knew exactly what was expected ofthem – it’s just that what they were required to do was usually unethicaland/or illegal! Similarly, the original culture at Nokia and Sony was strong,but did the entrenched culture get in the way of those businesses responding torapid change in the external environment?
However, I suspect thatthe top-performing businesses, particularly those that have sustained highperformance over many years, much can be attributed to the strength of thecorporate culture.
