informal coalitions

Organizational culture – thinking out of the box(es)

According to conventional wisdom, cultural change is a rational, programmable, management-driven activity. From this perspective, the challenge is to design, install and manage the ‘cultural aspects’ of organization so that these are aligned with the other presumed determinants of business performance (such as strategy, structure, processes, systems etc.). And this means measuring the culture ‘as is’, identifying and implementing the changes required, and then tracking progress towards this perceived ideal.

Cultural typologies

Most of the diagnostic tools on offer are based on models that set out to classify the culture of the organization in relation to particular dimensions of performance. One of the most well known of these is Deal and Kennedy’s model, which is based on the dimensions of feedback speed and degree of risk. A good description of this is given by Steve Roesler in his allthingsworkplace blog. Other models, such as those by Harrison and Stokes, and Goffee and Jones, offer different classifications. Again, though, these result in a number of distinctive cultural ‘types’ (typically four). Handy’s classification, which is the subject of a follow-up post by Roesler, similarly comprises four cultural types.

So how useful is it to view organizational culture in terms of four-box typologies and other such classifications?

The language of organizational change

I’ve recently been learning some basic German, by using Michel Thomas’s "natural" method of language learning. The "no writing and no revision" approach is particularly appealing (!) and appears to be working – at least to my satisfaction. But what relevance does this have to informal coalitions and organizational change?

Well, nothing directly. But stick with me!

Critical role of the local and current context on patterns of thought and action

An interesting piece in the 7 March issue of New Scientist challenges the "simplistic stereotypes" that are often used to define the difference between eastern and western cultures. 

Entitled "East meets West," Ed Yong's article questions the sharply polarized view of these cultures that is usually adopted. This well-established position typically counterposes the independent-individualized focus of western culture with the interdependent-collective focus which is ordinarily seen as being characteristic of eastern thought. The article challenges this established view and argues instead for what Yong calls "cognitive flexibility", which recognises the capacity of people from both cultures to adopt both of these modes of thought. 

Besides the article's implications for cross-cultural management, it seems to me that broader inferences can be drawn from it in relation to organizational dynamics in the round. And it's these that I want to turn to briefly here.

The essence of change leadership and organizational dynamics from an informal coalitions perspective

Since the publication of Informal Coalitions at the end of 2006, I’ve been using this blog to explore the ‘ins and outs’ of organizational dynamics from this standpoint.

The book presents a radical challenge to conventional thinking and practice on change leadership and organizational performance. So, a couple of years on, I thought it would be timely to summarize the main themes that define the essence of the informal coalitions approach.