The three cultures inside every organization are analogous to the story of the three blind mice and the elephant. The perspective of each mouse is framed by the part of the elephant it touches. It was almost a decade ago when Schein (1996) wrote about the three cultures of management. He asserts that there are three communities in organizational setting— executives, engineers, and operators—and they do not fully understand each other. In Shein’s view, when the three communities are not aligned, their actions limit organizational learning.

Schein defines the management culture as a set of basic tacit assumptions shared by a group of people. These assumptions color the way they perceive, think, feel, and behave. His tripartite conception of this culture is similar to Stephen Covey’s (1991) discussion of how individuals’ value judgments affect interpersonal relationships. The first way is when people interact at the deep value-based level that forms the core of the group. The second is when the group tries to convey a public image. The third involves the way the group actually operates on a day-to-day basis, which consists of making compromises about their values to achieve immediate goals.

We Can’t Judge a Book by its Cover

Shein states that observing a group or an individual’s overt behavior does not always help one understand a group’s culture. Underlying values and assumptions drive an individual’s behavior and the way the person perceives and thinks about the world. These values can be viewed as ideologies, which remind this author of the observation that a theory is driven by value, space, and time. Books on theories advise that a researcher can understand and replicate theories with the space and time assumptions, but it is very difficult or impossible to manipulate the value variable.

It is these values or ideologies that lead to the three groups within an organization. The executives’ values can be viewed as primarily political (i.e., focused on the bottom line or the return on investment to please the share holders). The executive culture consists of the chief executive officer and his/her subordinates, who use the global occupational community as their point of reference (Schein, 1996). Most of their decisions are colored by political objectives. The engineer culture consists of designers and technocrats who use their professional association as their point of reference. Their decisions are motivated primarily, by bureaucratic ideologies. They carry out the mandates of the executives, for example: improve the bottom line. This may involve the design and automation of the processes without any concern for the number of employees that may be displaced. The operator culture is driven by their rational ideologies and past successes. They collaborate to meet production schedules, yet in many instances, they cannot understand the actions of the engineers and the executives. It is imperative to understand the contributions of each of the three factors to decision making.

Those who lead organizations should reflect on Schein’s observation--whether society is missing the point by primarily focusing on how engineers and executives learn. He claims that such a view is counterintuitive, given that the most appropriate way for the three cultures to understand one another is by understanding each other’s values. These values determine their behaviors. Fulmer and Wagner (1999) support this view in their discussion on leadership lessons—learning from the best.

Where to go from here?

Organizational leaders in the US should realize that it is counterproductive to espouse teamwork and cooperation but reward only best-performing individuals. In this author’s view, this is a fundamental difference between the Japanese and American systems. The Japanese promote teamwork and reward the team.

Schein describes other paradoxes in organizations. For example, while information technology specialists see networking as a way of removing hierarchy, executives view hierarchy as a tool for enforcing control and coordination. Schein’s final suggestion is that organizational participants need to understand the inherent values upon which assumptions are based, understand one another, and address organizational problems from the same point of view for the sake of the organization’s survival. Recognizing that three cultural mind maps, mindsets, values, cultures and/or viewpoints exist within every organization is critical to resolving organizational issues and providing satisficing solutions. The ability of the three cultures to recognize and work with each other’s value-laden viewpoints can improve interpersonal communications, lift employee morale; improve productivity, and increase retention rate.

Covey, S. R. (1991). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Simon & Schuster, New York, NY. Fulmer, R. M., & Wagner, S. (1999). Leadership: Lessons from the best. Training and Development, 53(3), 28-34 Schein, E. H. (1996). Three cultures of management: The key to organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, 38(1), 9-20.

Dr. Odubiyi is the author of Blueprint for a Crooked House—a book that reflects on the factors that caused the collapse of a $10 billion global joint venture between AT&T and British Telecom. He is an associate professor of computer science at Bowie State University in Maryland. He was a Principal AI Researcher and R&D Manager at British Telecom North America/Concert Global Communications (USA). http://www.blueprintforacrookedhouse.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Jidé_Odubiyi