Overwriting of an External Culture with Organisation Culture

Check out more papers on Organizational Culture


Throughout the revolution and development of organisations, cultural attributes have applied to the existence of many organisations. From various backgrounds to individual uniqueness, management has brought forward perspectives and ideals that present diverse techniques that contribute to modern organisations. Behind many of these techniques lies persuasive and contradictive control of employees, in order to benefit their organisation. In this essay, I argue that management of an organisation pursue individuals' perspectives and values for the beneficiation of their organisation, rather than preserving individuals' characteristics. The first part of this essay consists of organisational culture, where the core definition of "organisation culture" is explained, followed by the means to practice such management. The second part portrays the perspectives of management and the role they present to employees. The existence of hierarchy within the organisation implements individual views and values as an 'asset', which can be controlled by the 'reward system'. Part three of this essay illustrates the attempts to govern employees' perspectives and cultures with the intention to reshape the basis of individual culture, reforming to an organisation implemented society. In this part, the focus of managers to step further into individuals' social lives suggests a deeper meaning to administer not only within the organisation, but infiltrate outside the walls of an organisation. Although this essay emphasizes on the aspects towards management, acknowledgment of employees' views and values are in regards.

Part One: organisation culture

The first part of my essay is what "Organisation Culture" is. According to the textbook "Managing and Organizations", the definition of "Culture" is what "represents the totality of everyday knowledge that people use habitually to make sense of the world around them through patterns of shared meanings and understandings passed down through language, symbols, and artifacts" (Clegg, Kornberger, Pitsis 2008) . Organizational culture is defined as "the deep, basic assumptions and beliefs that are shared by organizational members" (Schein, 1997). Also according to Schein, culture can be divided into three levels, which are Artifacts(Level 1), Values(Level 2) and Basic Assumptions(Level 3). Nowadays, organisations developed their management through the knowledge to govern employees by psychological knowledge which means to understand what employees' desires are and "to shape work so that the workers see in work their self-fulfilment" (Rose 1990). Therefore, many organisations or companies try to create organisation culture and change culture, however, there are only a few companies changed successfully (Ackroyd 1990). And even though Ackroyd believes that "cultures are highly distinctive, resilient and resistant to change, he thought it is still possible to manage organisational culture. From my point of view, create and change organisational culture is feasible and it is necessary. A good corporate culture can make employees to work hard and efficiency. As hard work will produce both psychological and physical rewards for employees, those rewards make employees work harder and more efficiently. A good organisational culture will give workers a sense of belonging.

Part two: the perspective of management

Secondly, I argue that from the perspective of management, which is 'upper level', they want to manage the views and values of workers. An organisation is just like a human body, it constitutes of head, hands and feet. CEO and senior-managers are the head of the organisation and employees are the hands and feet. CEO and senior-managers are the core part of organisation, they give orders and instructions to lower level employeesA¼Å’and employees just follow their orders. Both managers and employees are important, as without senior managers to give the macro view of the company's short term and long term plans, as well as planningA¼Å’the company will operate disorderly. Moreover, employees are also very important, as"employees are the key to success" (Peters and Waterman, 1982). Managers and employees play different roles but both are essential. There is a position which is generally referred to as the 'leading hand'. 'Leading hand' means a position of manager which is lower than senior managers but it observes employees. There is such a position because most senior managers have more experience and ability than employees at the element of governing and developing companies, therefore senior managers have 'leading hands' so that employees can simply follow instructions and need not concern themselves over the bigger picture. There is the example of Vulcan. Vulcan was created in 1826, at that time; the company was very small and mainly manufactured pans and pots (Martin, 2000). Furthermore, during 1960 and 1980, Vulcan suffered from declining, business contracts. Consequently, they changed their Managing Director to John Whyte. He invested in reward system and incentives and created an organizational culture and belief, which was that the managers of Vulcan wanted the company to feel as a family for the employees and that it have a 'common language, traditions and a single shared identity' (Martin, 2000). The idea of the reward system was that with harder work you can get both physical and psychological rewards. His policy worked well, with the effect of employees working much harder, and consequently the business had a huge improvement. In 1985, the company expanded a lot, there were around 800 employees in the company, and their products became more plentiful such as cast iron cookers and fires (Martin, 2000). At that time, Vulcan was very powerful; the company occupied a lot of market shares in the manufactured cookware market. The products they produced were of high quality and standards. However, there are also a few possible drawbacks from managers administering the views and values of their workers. If an organisation only has one culture it will lead to limiting the organisation. First of all, it will result in the organisation having difficulty in adapting to external changes owing to a lack of a diversity of perspectives, principles and views in the organisation. Secondly, it will lead to a lack of variety which is essential for advance and adjustment - to contest constant commitment to inappropriate ideologies. Thirdly, there is a possibility of conformist thinking (Lecture). However, I believe it is still superior to have one culture in an organisation. As managers are an organisation's head, they will adapt external change and help the company to innovation.

Part three: the perspective of employees

Lastly, I argue that employees agree with managers trying to direct the perspective of employees. As an employee, work is a part of their life. Despite family, people spend most of their time working; it is not avoidable as everyone wants for a good life we have to work. If employees have the same perspective, views and values as managers it will make work much more enjoyable and satisfying. In the situation of an employee who works at a company, if he does not agree with the views and values of the managers, and thinks the managers' views are wrong, then it will be difficult for him to work with the whole group. As work is a part of life, people have to enjoy it, and the best way of doing this is to treat the organisation as 'family' and work mates as friends (Rosen, 1988). If we have the same point of view as managers, then it will be easier to work hard for the 'family' because the employees want it to progress. Nowadays, there are more organisations which want to create a corporate culture as it can make employees work more efficiently. Many senior managers have tried various ways to seek to manage the views of employees. In Rosen's reading, US adverting company Shoenman and Associates had a tradition with their employees which was a Christmas party. The company held such a party in order to make the relationship of managers and employees closer. Through the social event, "hierarchically arranged relationships of the office are to a degree stripped and levelled during and through play" (Rosen, 1988). Furthermore, through all of these kinds of customs, the company wants to express an idea to their employees that "work is your wife and work mates are your friends" (Rosen, 1988). In the party every thing is free; most of the employees enjoy leisure time with work mates from the company. During this kind of practice employees can relax, dance and chat with each other, even with those senior managers who are highly respected and hard to contact at working days, and in the party the employees do not have working pressure because it is just a company outing and it has nothing to do with working, they do not need to be concerned with what to talk about, how to behave, and all the things that are restricted in the corporation. According to Rosen's writing, some employees from Shoenman and Associates do enjoy the company social events while others do not due to them believing that the Christmas party is a business meeting, even though the unwritten rule is that this party is just a social event, and that the employees do not need be stressed and follow the rule of company, that everyone should just enjoy the party dance and chat with working mates, they still feel they have to be concerned about their actions as their senior managers and CEO are all attending the party. They may prefer to spend holiday time with their own family rather than with people who from company. But I believe that most of the employees do enjoy events with people from the business and they want to have more chance to be familiar with each other.


To conclude, I reason that administering the perception and ideals of employees to a single purpose benefits them as well as the organisation. I outlined this in three parts, in the first part starting by talking about the difficulty of shaping organisational culture, and the benefits of having a singular organisational culture. In the second part I went on to talk about while the organisation management are the head of the company employees are equally as important, and how a rewards and incentives system can greatly improve the output of the labour workforce while also improving the company itself. I also mentioned the possibilities of how having a single organisational culture can lead to limitations on company advancements. In the third section I talked about how organisational social events can reinforce the organisational view in the minds of the workers, and how they can improve the quality of employees' work life, but also how if they have differing views from the managerial class it is more difficult for them to adjust to working for a large corporation. Management is the skill to bringing together the tiniest details of a business into harmony, and how when, as in the case of the company Vulcan and its Managing Director, it is done well it can greatly advance an organisation as well as improving the satisfaction of the workers and quality of the workplace for the people who work in it.
Did you like this example?

Cite this page

Overwriting of an external culture with organisation culture. (2017, Jun 26). Retrieved May 20, 2024 , from

Save time with Studydriver!

Get in touch with our top writers for a non-plagiarized essays written to satisfy your needs

Get custom essay

Stuck on ideas? Struggling with a concept?

A professional writer will make a clear, mistake-free paper for you!

Get help with your assignment
Leave your email and we will send a sample to you.
Stop wasting your time searching for samples!
You can find a skilled professional who can write any paper for you.
Get unique paper

I'm Amy :)

I can help you save hours on your homework. Let's start by finding a writer.

Find Writer