2.6 A Discourse on Organisational Culture (OC)
2.6.2 The Competing Values Framework (CVF)
According to Simberova (2015), amongst the numerous models that espouse to capture the essence of OC, the CVF is the most widely used and most widely cited. The CVF is a framework that is broadly informed by Hofstede’s six- dimensional framework for OC. However, upon closer scrutiny, it is evident that the CVF is driven by the espoused values prevalent within an organisation and can be interpreted as a framework constructed on the basis of an overlap between Schein’s (1996) 2nd and 3rd levels of organisational culture framework. As is the case with the classification of OC that was made by Hofstede and Schein, the CVF is made up of individuals with competing values and these values define the culture of an organisation (Quinn & McGrath, 1985). The CVF is based on the 2 dimensions of ‘change versus stability’ and ‘internal versus external’ forces, both of which provide a basis for the explanation of organisational behaviour (Iivari &
Iivari, 2011; Simberova, 2015). These dimensions are reflected in the competing values of traditionalists and the advocates of innovation. They also form a subset of the 6 dimensional classification of OC proposed by Hofstede et al. (1990). The change/stability phenomenon emanates from Hofstede’s dimension of pragmatic versus normative behaviour and the internal/external phenomenon of the CVF
emanates from Hofstede’s open system versus closed system orientation. The full CVF is based on an amalgamation of theoretical constructs underpinning OC that were proposed by 2 of the leading authorities on OC, Edgar Schein and Gert Hofstede. From an ASDM perspective, the CVF has significant relevance and has been widely used in information systems research in general (Iivari & Iivari, 2011).
The original CVF was subjected to an adaptation by Denison and Spreitzer (1991) who performed a juxtaposition of the 2 dimensions of culture from the CVF that resulted in the emergence of four types of cultural orientations that define organisational behaviour. These are:
Rational Culture – achievement oriented, where the focus is on productivity, optimisation of processes, accountability; internally, the focus is on economic use of resources and the external focus is on goal achievement and the attainment of competitive advantage;
Hierarchical Culture – the focus is on stability and internal control with the underlying operational demeanour of ensuring security, control and stability by enforcing regulations prescribed by management structures;
Group Culture – the emphasis is on flexibility and internal control;
this aspect is strongly driven by the influence of staff members who use their individual and collective expertise and experience to determine the operational demeanour of an organisation; there is a strong focus on internal control, an aspect that profiles this type of culture as somewhat of a contrast to Developmental culture;
Developmental Culture – the emphasis is on flexibility, and external focus; a direct contrast to group and hierarchical culture.
Organisations that are anchored in this quadrant take risks, focus broadly about the big picture and big ideas, and are agile in their actions and the resources that they cultivate (De Graff, 2007); the initial investment in resources is mitigated by expectations of long terms benefits.
The Quadrant-Like Structure of the CVF
According to Denison and Spreitzer (1991), each of the culture types has its
‘polar opposites’, thus graphically manifesting as a 4 quadrant rectangular structure. On the basis of their study to investigate the relationship between ASDM and organisational culture, Iivari and Iivari (2011) extended this graphical manifestation of the CVF by identifying the main quadrant of applicability for ASDM as illustrated in Figure 2.14.
The quadrant based classification provided by the CVF (illustrated in Figure 2.14) is further conflated into a classification centered on change and stability as well as an internal and external focus. The quadrants in the upper half of Figure 2.14 represent an alignment with change, flexibility and spontaneity, whereas the lower half of Figure 2.14 represent an alignment with strong control, continuity and order. Internal focus is a reference to the maintenance and preservation of existing/traditional socio-technical systems and culture within the organisation and is represented by the left half of the CVF in Figure 2.14. External Figure 2.14: An Agile “Sweet-spot” in the CVF identified in Iivari and Iivari (2011)
focus emphasizes sensitivity to environmental issues where there is a focus on competition and interaction with the business domain elements that exist outside the organisation.
The Optimal Placement for ASDM in the CVF
According to Iivari and Iivari (2011), the optimal placement for ASDM is in the quadrant that represents a strong alignment with change and an external focus. As illustrated in Figure 2.14, the quadrant of optimal applicability for ASDM is situated in the upper right quadrant of the CVF model and has been named the Developmental Culture quadrant. According to Iivari and Iivari (2011), an organisational culture that espouses change and has a strong external focus is regarded as a ‘fertile environment’ wherein the principles of agility may be upheld, enabling the implementation of ASDM for the development of software systems.
While the CVF may be presented as a quantifiable, structured and theoretical model of organisational culture, Denison and Spreitzer (1991) warn that such a classification would rarely be found in reality. Although an organisation may be given an overall classification according to the CVF, by virtue of the presence of a single dominant type of culture, there is usually a presence of a mix of culture types that resonate between the various quadrants of the CVF.
Iivari and Iivari (2011) also defend their contribution regarding the quadrant of applicability for ASDM, by asserting that while a Developmental Culture would be ideal for the deployment of ASDM, the methods underpinning ASDM have elements of the other 3 cultural types as well. As an example, features such as time-boxing, effort estimation and productivity (prominently used as part of Scrum and also relevant to XP), reflect values of a Rational Culture. Also, the Agile Manifesto is centered on behaviourist elements such as trust, motivation and commitment, all of which are traits of Group Culture. However, an argument for the compatibility between ASDM and Hierarchical Culture is not easy to defend and as such, it may be regarded as the least appropriate for the deployment of ASDM.
As suggested by Simberova (2015), the CVF has become a well-recognised standard for the classification of the type of culture that exists within an
organisation. It is envisaged that the CVF will provide an ideal context for discourse on the influence of OC on the adoption and adaptation of ASDM. Also, Schein’s concept of ‘enculturation’ provides an avenue whereby ‘the way things are done around here’ may be adjusted on the basis of success stories regarding the use of agile methodology. The main outcome from the discourse on OC is that the CVF provides a conduit from which a researcher may be able to understand the prevalent culture in an organisation. This knowledge will be crucial in identifying a software development methodology that is strongly aligned to the culture prevalent in an organisation.