2.2 Research methodology
2.2.2 Self within a socio-cultural context
23
24
considered valid and therefore to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to these problems (p. 12).
Hofstede (1980) defines culture as “the collective mental programming of the people in an environment” (p. 43). Parekh (2000) defines it as the views or beliefs that human beings form regarding the meanings we attach to human life. According to Kidd (2002), culture plays an influential role in the behaviour of people, since it is the way of life for a group of people. Bate (2002) concurs with this view and emphasises that culture refers to a particular group of people.
He points out that from this perspective various multicultural countries can be viewed as having a number of cultural groups. In South Africa, for example, the concept of culture is often associated with the notion of ethnic origin. Chao, Wei, Good & Flores (2011) argue that a culture is a “configuration of learned behaviours and results of behaviour whose component elements are shared and transmitted by members of a particular society” (p. 3). This, according to him, is applicable to an organisation as the employees of an organisation are influenced by the organisational culture and are bound together by working towards the same organisational goals.
From these definitions one can deduce that culture is a socially learned way of living. It is the conventional behaviour of a society that encompasses beliefs, customs, knowledge and practices.
This learned behaviour embraces and influences human behaviour, all avenues of social life and thoughts. It can also be argued that every society has some underlying cultural profile that results in people behaving in an identifiable way because of exposure to a particular culture, and people organise their lives by conforming to cultural patterns, values, plans and goals. I believe that these assumptions have implications for leadership in that a leader’s culture can be explored and explained from various perspectives and levels in terms of socialisation, type of education, social environment and general life experiences. In addition, a leader’s understanding of culture will equip him or her to handle cultural tensions as they arise in the workplace. Culture in any organisation is an observable, powerful force. It is made up of its members’ shared values, beliefs, symbols and behaviours. Culture guides individual decisions and actions at the unconscious level and as a result can have a potent effect on the wellbeing of an organisation (Petersen, 2008). In its very broadest definition organisational culture can be viewed as purposeful thought, feeling, action and meaning that moulds and depicts life within an organisation (Parekh, 2000; Kidd, 2002). Brown (1998) emphasises that organisational culture refers to the pattern of beliefs, values and learned ways of coping with experience that have developed during the course of an organisation’s history, which get manifested in its material arrangements and in the behaviours of its members. It is the organisational culture that
25
distinguishes one organisation from another, and it is the organisational culture that gives an organisation its personality based on its value systems (Petersen, 2008).
These definitions and perspectives point out that in organisations there are cultures that affect the behaviour of people and these cultures are created by invisible concepts like values.
Organisational culture is therefore characterised as the framework of shared values, beliefs and assumptions. The organisation can be viewed as the outer shell within which the cultural values and beliefs contribute to the elements that motivate employees to achieve the goals of the organisation. However, there can be more than one culture prevalent in an organisation (Payne, 2008).
Payne (2008) shows that conflicting and converging cultures are present in many layers. She distinguishes between ethnic cultures, socio-economic cultures and the culture of bureaucracy.
Deblois, Corriveau, Guilbert et al. (2004) assert that political culture can also interact with all other cultures in ways that will affect the intellectual material and moral resources available to learners in any particular school at any given point in time. For example, whether or not children will learn about evolution will depend upon the political will in a country shaped along political, religious and cultural lines. Payne (2008) further argues that all these interacting cultures converge upon schools and how they are mediated will have consequences for the school as an organisation. Honey (2010) postulates that people have to surpass all these cultures to develop a set of values, beliefs and stories that will go beyond all other influences and tensions, and will focus everyone more closely on the common goal, which is the task of learning.
The notion of organisational culture is of particular relevance to my study. For leaders it becomes imperative to consider the non-material forces in organisations, such as cultures and values (Wheatley 1999, in Crowther, 2010, p. 5). I believe that the ways in which organisational culture is conceptualised by a leader are critical to the kind of leadership that will prevail.
Research indicates a correlation between strong organisational cultures and strong effective leadership (Sarros, Gray & Densten, 2002; Brenton & Driskill, 2005). Schein (1992) emphasises that while culture is a systemic phenomenon, the primary architects within an organisation are the leaders or people at the very top. An understanding of culture in the workplace becomes a significant factor of leadership, as confirmed by studies conducted by Sarros et al. (2002), who reveal that culture is more responsive to the leadership dimension than leadership is to culture.
Wilson (2007) suggests that there are two pervasive models of culture in schools that have an impact on leadership. He describes the functionalist model, in which culture is seen as the main
26
ingredient that binds an organisation through a sense of interdependency of shared values and agreed norms. These norms and values are drawn from wider societal values, but more importantly from the values rooted in the history and tradition of the organisation itself. Hence, the emphasis is on the organisation’s capacity for self-production through a closed system of relations in which the external environment is regarded as an extension of the organisation’s own sense of identity, interests and concerns. Within this model, leaders can audit their organisational culture and be proactive in strengthening cherished norms and traditions. The second model he describes is the dynamic-unbounded perspective. This model is different from the functionalist model in that it emphasises the ever changing nature of organisational culture. Organisational culture is understood in terms of heterogeneity and diversity, and organisations are characterised by loosely coupled systems. In this model the leader must be open to changes and alert to new ways of emphasising and strengthening the cultural values of an organisation.
A further explanation of how culture operates at different levels in an organisation is that of Schein (1992). He proposes a model of culture that is structured into three levels. Level one comprises of artefacts (observable action). This level includes observable features of the organisation, for example office layout. The second level comprises of basic assumptions (espoused values).On this level exists the organisation’s judgements about what is good and bad. The third level deals with basic assumptions (values in use). This level has the deepest and most comprehensive explanation of reality and our views of fundamental truths about people and the world. Schein (1992) proposes that it is this layer that actually drives an organisation’s behaviour.
He does, however, emphasise that these levels do not necessarily operate at a conscious level, but that an understanding of these levels can better equip a leader to deal with the cultural values within an organisation
One difficulty of examining and understanding these levels of culture is that except for the first level (artefacts — observable action), which is easily observable, levels two and three are not so easily discernible. These levels are usually inferred by patterns of behaviour. A criticism of this model is that a leader’s hidden values (which operate at the deepest level of basic assumptions – values in use) may sometimes conflict with or override the organisation’s basic assumptions — espoused values. The implication is that leaders may unwittingly undermine the espoused values of an organisation. Such behaviours may have a powerful impact on the effectiveness of an organisation (Argyris, 1994).
27
From my reflections as a school leader and my study of the literature, I have come to understand the concept of organisational culture as the identity of an institution. To me, the culture of an organisation plays a critical role in the organisation’s everyday operations. Organisational culture is complex, heterogeneous, diverse, fluid and changing. Furthermore, an organisational culture is socially constructed, and is affected by the history of the institution, its members’ shared meanings and basic assumptions, and the multiple contextual influences. It is a collective experience. The norms, values, beliefs and goals are constructed and reconstructed, produced and reproduced, learned and relearned and play out at different levels and in many rich layers.
I believe that a leader who understands the notion of organisational culture from this perspective is better prepared to work towards an organisational vision and an organisational identity that is open, dynamic and responsive to change.