THE CULTURE CONUNDRUM

Kenneth Miller | November 16 2016 | Last updated October 2023

“We have met the enemy,
and he is us”

                                    —Pogo

Positive culture change is at once the greatest opportunity and most direct path to improved organizational performance for the overwhelming majority of enterprises—and it’s therapeutic even in small doses. There’s nothing—nothing—that can have a greater impact on your organization, whatever its mission. But as our favorite comic strip philosopher suggests, there are obstacles aplenty—and closer to home than we might like to think.

Culture is hands-down the least understood and most chronically under-managed attribute of a vast majority of organizations. And as MIT’s late Professor Emeritus, Edgar Schein—a genuine icon in the field of organizational culture—rightly puts it,

“Culture is the most difficult organizational attribute to change”.

Let’s face it, if it was easy, everyone would be doing it—and they decidedly are not. Indeed, most companies that try will fail in their initial culture improvement efforts through one or more of the following fundamental mistakes:

  1. Attempting to impose the desired culture as a top-down edict;
  2. trying to change the entire culture all at once;
  3. ignoring the culture that already exists in the organization;
  4. lacking the will to do what’s necessary to achieve the objective;
  5. (gasp) all of the above.

Otherwise put, they know it’s important and they want to improve it, but they simply don’t really understand organizational culture, where it comes from, what it consists of, what it looks and feels like, how it works, or how to fix it.

If you assume you can convene a meeting of your senior leadership group, decide on the culture you desire, and then effectively impose it on your organization, you’re both kidding yourself and wasting your time. Regardless of the volume of memoranda you write, manuals you create, town hall meetings you conduct or posters you hang on the wall, your efforts are almost certain to meet with dismal disappointment.

Likewise, failing to recognize that organizational cultures are complex multi-faceted organisms with a life of their own will render your attempts at change unimaginably difficult and almost surely ineffective. This is pretty arcane stuff, a good bit of which is non-obvious, living and breathing below the surface. Changing it requires an approach that is at once systematic, incremental, consistent, and perpetual. Not a one-off project for HR, this. 

Professor Schein wrote that “…unless you are an entrepreneur founding a new enterprise, you cannot ‘create’ a culture”. Launching a culture change initiative without recognizing and thoroughly understanding the cultural status quo is an all too common element of the ‘failure formula’ outlined above. 

As Einstein admonished,

“Everything should be made as simple as possible—but no more so.”

This is a key caveat to be ever mindful of in any attempt to positively transform organizational culture. After all, we are endeavoring to apply the simplest possible approach to an implicitly complex task—emphasis on possible. As mentioned above, even small doses of positive culture change can be beneficial, and most enterprises are probably well advised to start with ‘baby steps’—a stumble can be as much or more harmful than a giant stride helpful. But it’s critical to begin with the right steps—followed by a continuous progression of actions to maintain steady momentum toward the cultural Promised Land. 

We suggest this must begin with a clear articulation of exactly why we want to improve our organization’s culture.  This may not be as easy as it sounds. What specifically do we expect to achieve through positive culture change? And how do we measure whatever that is?

For example, we hear much these days about the pitiful state of workforce engagement prevailing in American business–most studies have put the engagement level in the low 30s%. This means that nearly 70% are disengaged, and research consistently shows about 20% are actively disengaged at work. Other studies document the favorable effects of increasing engagement levels–from reduced turnover and absenteeism, to improved safety records. increased revenue, higher levels of profitability and rising stock prices. And the numbers are impressive. A Gallup Q12 Meta Analysis revealed an engaged workforce yielded 21% and 22% annual increases in productivity and profitability respectively, and that companies with an engaged workforce outperform their less engaged competitors by as much as 202%, while another Gallup study put the number at 224%.

There’s simply no doubt that increased levels of workforce engagement–and all the goodies that go with it–are directly linked to positive culture change. The desired outcomes must be determined on an organization-by-organization basis according to its particular circumstances, interests and priorities.

There are plenty of specific goals that may be important to a given enterprise, eg, innovation, competition, efficiency, customer service, sustainability, social responsibility, etc. But workforce engagement is the common denominator that facilitates–perhaps enables–their individual and collective achievement. 

Whatever the specific objectives, we can be assured that their realization will occur only through the behavior of the organization’s various constituencies–particularly its leadership and workforce. Many experts have defined organizational culture as ‘the sum of the behaviors of all an organization’s stakeholders‘. While our own definition would include ‘attitudes and beliefs’ along with behaviors, we recognize that these are ultimately influences upon behavior. We would also point out that though behavior may well define the culture, the culture likewise influences behavior, which in turn affects the culture–a classic chicken-and-egg conundrum, one might say. And one that highlights the dynamic nature of culture. The fact is that the culture exists in a perpetual state of  evolutionary tension, constantly changing in perhaps subtle ways in response to the actions–behavior–of those involved in the day-to-day operation of the enterprise.

Having established goals and expectations, and understanding that culture is very much about behavior, we believe the next essential order of business to be the development of a fairly in-depth knowledge base regarding the broader nature and specific elements of organizational culture. This necessarily begins with the leadership team, and should most often involve the retention of an outside expert–this really is not a DIY project.

This is generally where we determine whether sufficient organizational will exists as to enable genuine enduring commitment to a process requiring honest introspection and consistent effort–a process guaranteed to be at once discomforting, arduous and perpetual. Recognize the reality that extant in every system is a palpable organizational inertia militating against fundamental culture change–the status quo is the default option absent the implementation of conscious and consistent culture change initiatives affecting every constituent of the organization. And it begins–but certainly does not end–at the top, with senior leadership. Just as engagement and behavior are linked to culture, so too is culture linked–inextricably–to leadership. Not to belabor Dr Schein, but he has also written that:

“The only thing of real importance that leaders do is create and manage culture”

Richard Barrett, of the UK-based Barrett Values Centre makes this observation:

“Simply put, the culture of an organization is a reflection of the values and beliefs of the leaders. Who you are as a leader determines the corporate culture. Therefore, if you want to change the culture, either you must change, or you must change the leader. Cultural transformation begins with the personal transformation of the leaders; organizations do not transform [unless] people do.”

To paraphrase Peter Drucker, ‘Rank confers neither power nor privilege—it imposes responsibility’. Workforce engagement requires workforce empowerment—an idea that can be difficult to accept for those accustomed to traditional authoritarian structures. We cannot suffer the delusion that those perched atop the hierarchical heap will enthusiastically cede power and perks. Those possessed of power, like it—a lot. The tipping point must be an embrace of the reality that all stakeholders are the beneficiaries of an organizational culture that recognizes and rewards leadership and initiative at all levels.

Herb Kelleher, co-founder and long-time CEO of Southwest Airlines, put it a bit more bluntly than either Drucker or Barrett:”

“I forgive all personal weaknesses except egomania and pretension…power should be reserved for weightlifting and [speed] boats; leadership is about responsibility…the only thing your competitors can’t eventually duplicate is your culture.”

And as international leadership expert Eduardo Braun has written,

“Culture is a source of competitive advantage”.

That seems well worth sacrificing a reserved parking slot for—n’ est-ce pas?

Dr Schein again reminds us that though organizations may overtly  espouse the virtues of teamwork, empowerment, communication, consensus, flat structures, etc, the harsh reality is that these practices don’t exist in most corporate cultures because such cultures are built upon solidly embedded assumptions of hierarchy, control, privilege and prerogative, limited communication and the presumption that management and employees exist in a constant state of tension and conflict. Thus the organizational will conundrum. Our willingness to embrace changes in long-held fundamental attitudes, beliefs and behaviors will determine what we are able to accomplish, and the degree of success we will achieve.

It’s that simple—and that difficult.

And, yes, it’s probably disruptive.

Let’s hope so.