The typology of information culture discussed here is informed by the Information Culture Conceptual Framework as discussed in Chapter 2. This section attempts to lay the foundation for the question of what types of information culture exist in the three selected parastatals by exploring the information culture typologies that have been used in the literature.
Organisations are differentiated by their information cultures. It is recognised that the information culture of an organisation is determined by a large number of variables such as its mission, history, leadership, employee traits, industry, national culture and so on. In addition, information culture can also be shaped by the cognitive and epistemic expectations embedded in how tasks are performed and decisions are made (Choo et al. 2008).
Information culture may also be a function of an organisation’s maturity or stage of development. For example, Ginman (1987) found a link between information culture and an organisation’s life cycle stage. There are few studies on information culture typology and those conducted by Choo et al. (2008) and Lauri, Heidmets and Virkus (2016) have elicited different perspectives. This may be due to the different methods employed to profile an organisation’s information culture. Choo et al. (2008) observed that an information culture typology is context
59 specific. Several factors such as leadership, communication flow, processes and procedures determine the kind of information culture that can exist in an organisation. In the context of Botswana, the information culture of the three parastatals is not known, hence the need to profile the information culture found in them.
It is evident from the above that information culture has several typologies. Based on the six components of information culture identified by Marchand, Kettinger and Rollins (2001), Lauri, Heidmets and Virkus (2016) identified three types of information culture characterised by their dominant components:
• Integrated information culture.
• Proactive information culture.
• Informal information culture.
Although Marchand, Kettinger and Rollins’ (2001) study identified six components of information culture, Lauri, Heidmets and Virkus (2016), using the same components, only identified three components to be relevant in identifying information culture types in higher education institutions in Estonia. Not all the components of Marchand, Kettinger and Rollins’ (2001) framework will apply in every study given the differing contexts.
Choo et al. (2008) adopted the six information culture types identified by Marchand, Kettinger and Rollins (2001) to profile the information culture of an organisation and these, as has previously been pointed out in Chapter 2, are information integrity, formality, control, sharing, transparency and proactiveness. The current study adopted this typology to profile information culture among the three parastatals in Botswana because its constructs are consistent with the Information Culture Conceptual Framework that was used.
The current review established that other types of information cultures do not relate to the Information Culture Conceptual Framework used in the study. However, they are discussed below to enrich the current review and show the diverse views that exist on information culture types.
Given that the limited number of available studies provide divergent views, it is not possible to characterise information culture as a specific and agreed-upon set of elements (Douglas 2010). This study, as has been pointed out, attempted to determine the characteristics of information culture within the context of records management.
Studies that investigated records and information culture focused on public institutions (Wright 2013; Svärd 2014) whereas Oliver (2008) focused on the education sector. The current study focused on parastatals and while some may argue that parastatals are public sector organisations, there are important differences in terms of their governance which may have a significant influence on their information cultures.
60 Authors have suggested diverse information culture typologies. It is crucial to understand the perspective of the authors on information culture as this might have influenced their conclusions about the typologies of information culture they identified.
In an attempt to profile information culture, Choo (2013) identified four information culture types:
• Result-oriented culture.
• Rule-following culture.
• Relationship-based culture.
• Risk-taking culture.
In a result-oriented culture, the goal of information management is to enable the organisation to compete and succeed in its market or sector. However, in a rule-following culture, information is managed to control internal operations and reinforce rules and policies. In a relationship-based culture, information is managed to encourage communication, participation, and a sense of identity. Lastly, in the risk-taking culture, information is managed to encourage innovation, creativity, and the exploration of new ideas. It can be expected that most organisations will display to varying degrees, norms and behaviours from all four types of information culture and that the information culture profile of an organisation would be related to its effectiveness.
Davenport and Prusak (1997:84) defined information culture as “patterns of behaviour and attitudes that express an organisation’s orientation towards information”. The authors posited that information cultures could be:
• Open or closed.
• Factually oriented or rumour.
• Intuition-based.
• Controlling or empowering.
• Internally or externally focused (Davenport and Prusak 1997:84).
Douglas (2010:388) defined information culture as “an emerging complex system of values, attitudes, and behaviours that influence how information is used in an organization” and identified four information culture types:
• Functional culture: managers use information as a means of exercising influence or power over others;
• Sharing culture: managers and employees trust each other to use information (especially about problems and failures) to improve their performance;
61
• Inquiring culture: managers and employees search for information to better understand the future and ways of changing what they do to align themselves with future trends/directions; and
• Discovery culture: managers and employees are open to new insights about crises and radical changes and seek ways to create competitive discontinuities (Douglas 2010:48).