Читать книгу Cultural Reflection in Management - Lukasz Sulkowski - Страница 18

The typology of weak and strong cultures is one of the most-often analysed issues of the cultural current in management. The subject literature is dominated by the belief that strong organisational culture prevails. Strong organisational culture is characterised by homogeneity, which means uniformity and common agreement among employees as to key assumptions, values and norms. Strong identification with organisational values is supposed to lead to the greater involvement of employees and, in consequence, to greater effectiveness⁸⁵. Internal cultural incoherence, the manifestation of which is the emergence of subcultures or even counter-cultures, could lead to a disintegration of the organisation (Tab. 5).

Tab. 5: Strong vs. weak cultures. Source: Own work.

Features	Strong culture	Weak culture
Degree of acceptance of organisational values and norms.	Agreement as to organisational values and norms.	Conflicts regarding organisational values and norms.
Sense of community among employees.	A strong sense of community among employees.	A sense of conflict of interests and striving for confrontation.
Degree of formalisation of norms.	Unwritten, commonly respected norms.	Formalised rules, which are often eluded.
Employees’ involvement in their organisation’s issues.	A high level of employees’ involvement.	A low level of employees’ involvement.
Degree of employee loyalty to the organisation.	A high level of employees’ loyalty to the organisation.	A low level of employees’ loyalty to the organisation.
Emotions related to being an organisation member – pride or shame.	Pride in being a part of the organisation.	Feeling ashamed of being a part of the organisation.
Emotions of the employees – a sense of being appreciated or humiliated.	Employees feel appreciated in the organisation.	Employees feel humiliated in the organisation.

Still, the homogeneity of organisational culture has its drawbacks. V. Sathe, accepting the superiority of strong organisational cultures, proposes to assess them in organisational terms, taking into consideration their distinctiveness ←49 | 50→and the extent to which they are spread and rooted⁸⁶. However, there are also numerous researchers pointing to the disadvantages of strong organisational cultures. I. Janis described the dangerous phenomenon of ‘group thinking’, which is a social mechanism of group integration, coercing conformity⁸⁷. A culture which is strong, or homogenous, distinct, spread-out and rooted in an organisation can limit the innovativeness and rationality of the decisions made, as well as hinder the process of introducing changes. The focus on the community of values obscures the views of non-conformists and provokes schematic thinking, which is shared by the majority. The unique, individual knowledge of some organisation members remains hidden, although it is often of key importance to the process of innovation. A different type of criticism is made by the researchers of the critical current (CMS), who believe that the issue of strong culture is a ←50 | 51→typical example of the instrumentalisation of organisational culture, which was called ‘organisational culturism’ by H. Willmot, and the ‘pigeonhole problem’ by L. Smircich⁸⁸. Strong organisational culture means striving for the creation of an oppressive mechanism for employees, the aim of which is to coerce even greater involvement and loyalty, which is supposed to increase effectiveness. In this sense, strengthening the organisational culture is a kind of social engineering and psychomanipulation, leading to higher indoctrination and in consequence, to exploitation of the employees.