Figure
1Functionalist and Symbolist Perspectives on Culture
The word culture is often thrown around when speaking of organizations. However, not many people take time to think about what it really means when the buzz phrase organizational culture or corporate culture are mentioned. Culture is the shared meanings, stories, symbols and attitudes that humans have in common (Cheney, 2004, p. 76). More specifically, “there are simple and complex definitions of organizational culture. A simple one is: ‘the way we do things around here’- the rules and regulations. A more complex one is: the interpretive frameworks and core values that creates a unique sense of meaning in an organization” (Lewis, 1997).
While the definition gives a basic understanding of culture within an organization, a more in depth look better explains how organizations function in terms of their culture. There are two perspectives in organizational culture which offer two different views on culture within an organization. They are the functionalist perspective and the symbolist perspective (also known as interpretative or semiotic perspective). The difference between the two is the idea of “. . . culture being something that an organization‘has’ as compared with something an organization ‘is’” (Sackmann, 1992).
The functionalist perspective of culture takes the stance that culture is something that an organization has. Examples of companies with a functionalist perspective are Nokia, Vivendi, McDonalds, and most Universities. This perspective believes that the most successful organizations are characterized by shared meanings and social integration, motivation, and commitment. “While the pool of values and beliefs in the organization may have additional purposes, they primarily serve, according to this perspective, to help the organization integrate its members, adapt to its surroundings, and survive in a changing environment” (Cheney, 2004, p.88). The functionalist perspective assumes that culture consists of consistent practices, symbols and values shared by every member, that culture is used as a form of control and is unique to each organization. These beliefs and patterns of behavior are often taken for granted because they are not thought about (Pierce, 2004).
Organizations in the functionalist perspective can be compared to a machine. The main goal is to improve effectiveness of the organization. One way organizations improve effectiveness using this perspective is by the emphasis placed on strong leaders. The organization stresses the qualities that a good leader possesses. An example of this would be profitability and productivity (Lewis, 1997). “Organizational culture . . . is embedded in leaders and potentially strengthened by them. Good leaders create and shape their organizations’ cultures by embedding their assumptions in missions, goals, structures, and work procedures” (Cheney, 2004, p.87).
To go along with the idea that a strong leader shapes the organization is the broader belief that culture should be managed. Organizational culture is a top-down process as seen in figure 1 (Lewis, 1997). By controlling the culture of an organization, people in management positions would be able to control their employees.
The functionalist perspective has been successful in some organizations, but it still has its drawbacks. A problem with the functionalist perspective is that the values instilled by the culture to bring them together can prevent them from making new adjustments in a time of change. For example, Disneyland instilled the values of drama and family in its organization to bring them together. However, the very same values were used against Disneyland when the employees were dissatisfied in 1984 (Cheney, 2004, p.88).
The second perspective in organizational culture is the symbolist perspective. The organization in this perspective is the culture. It states that, “organizational behavior exists as a pattern of symbolic relationships that have been given meaning by organizational members through a consensual process, which gives the appearance of an independent ‘rule-like existence’” (Pierce, 2004). One of the goals of the symbolist perspective is to explain how organization communication makes sense to the workers (Lewis, 1997).
Organizational culture is seen as a series of integrated subcultures instead of a set of values that members are encouraged to adhere to. “Proponents of a symbolist perspective argue that organizations consist of many different and sometimes competing value systems that constitute what organizational theorist Gareth Morgan calls ‘a mosaic of organizational realities rather than a uniform corporate culture’” (Cheney, 2004, 89) All this is saying is that organizations are characterized as sub-cultures which can be seen if figure 2. Because the organization is the culture, it is complex and can adapt in times of change. At the same time people involved realize that change is a slow process (Lewis, 1997). While the functionalist perspective relies on consistency, the symbolist perspective takes a different approach and does not view inconsistency as a problem. This is because consistency does not allow an organization the flexibility to adapt to change (Cheney, 2004, p.89).
The issue of management is also addressed in a symbolist perspective. This way of approaching culture believes that culture should not be used a management tool because the culture usually forms through a number of social interactions, not one person telling everyone else what to do (Cheney, 2004, p.93). On that note, the leaders in the organization work to facilitate teamwork and motivation (Lewis, 1997).
Figure
1
Figure
2
Cheney, G.,& Christensen, L.,& Zorn,T., &Ganesn, S. (2004). Organizational Communication
In An Age of Globalization. Long Grove: Waveland Press Inc.
Lewis, G. (1997). Organizational Communication-An introduction. Retrieved February 1, 2005,
from
Pierce, J. (2004). Organizational Culture and Professionalism: An Assessment of the Professional Culture of the US Army Senior Level Officer Corps. Retrieved February 1, 2005, from
http://etda.libraries.psu.edu/theses/approved/worldwidefiles/etd-675/disertation_final_version_-_James_Pierce.pdf
Sackmann, S. (1992). Cultures and Subcultures: An Analysis of Organizational Knowledge. Administrative Science Quarterly, retrieved February 1, 2005, from www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4035/is_n1_v37/ai_12392169