Observaciones Finales

In studies on contingencies for culture management in organisations, theorists have identified organisational life cycle, leadership turnovers, mergers and acquisitions, and emergence of crisis as some opportunities to influence culture management in organisations (Lundberg 1985; Ogbonna and Harris 1998; Schein 2010; Siehl 1985; Spicer 2011). On organisational life cycle, Siehl (1985) and Schein (2010) studies indicate that transitional changes in the organisation may provide opportunities to influence culture. This is premised on the notion that as the organisation evolves from its founding stage to midlife and maturity phases, organisational members can reshape its culture to align to the needs of each phase. As Schein (2010) argues, leaders’ understanding of the different phases would facilitate the process of steering existing culture towards the desired organisational culture particularly if the evolving change is perceived to be "slow or going in the wrong direction" (p. 273). The opportune condition for culture management in this context, Siehl (1985) argues, is the period of "transition from the entrepreneurial stage to formalisation and growth stage" (p. 128). This condition is further supported in Ehrhart et al. (2014) analysis, as they contend that continuing growth and development of organisations within these periods would require different leadership skills that would influence culture change.

In the eventuality of a change in leadership, empirical research indicates that organisational members use this opportunity to influence desired culture management (Siehl 1985; Schein 2010). For instance, Schein (2010) argues that the most potent version of culture change in this context is the infusion of outsiders as Chief Executive Officers (CEO) to manage organisations. The contingency for culture control becomes apparent with the CEO’s attempt to incorporate personal assumptions and values amongst members. In addition, the CEO’s inclusion of new managerial personnel or change of existing managerial staff has the tendency to facilitate the culture management process. Schein (2010) argues that culture management becomes feasible

43

with the ousting of members "perceived to represent the old and increasingly ineffective" culture (p. 287). On occasions where the newly appointed or promoted CEO is an insider, the feasibility of culture management is likely to be outweighed by the existing cultural values this insider CEO upholds. For instance, Ogbonna and Harris's (2001) study on two medium-size retail stores in the UK, illustrate this aspect of culture perpetuation with the appointment of insiders (family relatives) as CEOs in the firms. These insiders, with influence from their predecessors, were able to promote dominant cultural values and strategies that lingered in the case organisations. However, this might not always be the case as insiders’ distinctive personality could promote cultural change initiative rather than stability (see Schein 2010). The rationale within this analysis is that changes in leadership, either internal as an insider, or external as an outsider, provides opportunities for organisational members to influence culture management.

Analogous to the opportunities changes in leadership creates for culture management are occasions created during mergers and acquisitions. For instance, in the case of acquisitions5 , Shearer et al. (2001) argues that a post-acquisition process offers CEOs an almost immediate opportunity to reshape organisational culture. Analysing from a functionalist perspective, Shearer et al. (2001) study revealed how the culture of an acquired chemical firm in the US, could be transformed by successive CEOs following the acquisition of the firm. Similarly, in a merger situation, Spicer (2011) argues that mergers provides likely, obvious and potential high situations for culture change. Based on Spicer (2011) study on the merger of two medium-size training organisations in the UK, he contends that issues and challenges in the acculturation of both organisations with different backgrounds, histories and work practices would "inevitably

5 _{Spicer's (2011) study on two medium-sized training organisations in the UK elucidates the difference between}

a merger and acquisition. Based on this study, a merger situation requires the integrating of cultures from two organisations with different backgrounds histories and work practices; while an acquisition requires the dominance of one company (buyer/ acquiring firm) culture that is distinct, over the acquired (seller/ target firm) culture.

44

lead to culture change" (p. 246). Several contemporary studies on mergers and acquisitions have also indicated that organisational members could consciously influence culture management of organisations, during such situations, in order to align clashes that may emanate from such joint ventures (see Schein 2010; Marks and Mirvis 2011; Froese et al. 2008; Kavanagh and Ashkanasy 2006).

In analysing the contingency of real or perceived crisis context, issues such as environmental uncertainties; complexities and calamities; environmental opportunities and demands; internal and external organisational revolutions; and managerial crisis are presented as opportune periods for culture management (see Lundberg 1985; Hatch and Cunliffe 2013; Ehrhart et al. 2014; Deal and Kennedy 1982; Frost et al. 1985)6. Lundberg (1985) argues that such precipitating pressures from a crisis context creates opportunities for culture management; either towards culture change or preserving cultural norms. Ehrhart et al. (2014) further noted that in such situations, organisational members would most likely attune to any culture management initiative aimed at alleviating the crisis or ambiguity. For instance, Moynihan's (2012) study, with the case of Hurricane Katrina, indicates the viability of managerial control of organisational culture, substituting a dominant cultural trait with an inconspicuous form. This indicates the viability of culture management under such external crisis.

In line with research on contingencies as opportunities to influence culture management is the notion that any alteration in organisational culture should be initiated when deemed necessary (Deal and Kennedy 1982; Schein 2010). For instance, Deal and Kennedy (1982) argued that

6 _{These early studies (Siehl 1985; Lundberg 1985; Frost et al. 1985) on organisational culture presents details of}

real or perceived crisis context that creates opportunities to influence culture management in organisations. As explained, environmental uncertainties includes resource deprivations or excesses; and competitor or consumer options; and environmental complexities and calamities includes all types of natural disasters or recessions. Environmental opportunities include technological breakthroughs, newly available market venture capital or market niche; and environmental demands includes performance demand from the public or market place, and stakeholders pressures. External revolution comprise of acquisitions; internal revolution emanates from the installation of new managerial personnel; and managerial crisis involves occasions of inappropriate strategic decisions. See also Ehrhart et al. (2014) on conditions for culture change.

45

culture management in organisations is required when the organisation is at the verge of becoming a large corporation; in the event of rapid growth; poor performance in the organisation; changes in its environment; and high competitive demands in its industry. They contend that the basis for culture management must be credible to convince members to adapt to desired cultural change. This indicates the significance of members’ acceptance of any culture management initiative. Siehl (1985) argument supports this notion stating that the feasibility to manage organisational culture depends largely on members’ perceived need for it. She argues that it becomes more difficult, even during these contingencies, to manage organisational culture if such culture control is not desired by organisational members.

Interestingly, the buy-in of organisational members into the process of culture management in organisations is not the only difficulty encountered. Theorists have identified several challenges in attempts to manage culture in the same situations these contingencies provide to facilitate culture control in organisations (Ogbonna and Wilkinson 2003; Dauber 2012). For instance, issues of resistance was noted in Siehl's (1985) analysis on culture management during a transition period. She argued that while it is feasible to initiate culture management initiatives during transition periods in organisations’ life cycle, there are aspects of members’ resistance in the same period, to cling unto the stability of the past to maintain degrees of certainty. Similarly, Marks and Mirvis (2011) analysis indicated that cultural differences amongst firms in mergers and acquisitions could hinder the process of influencing the integration of cultures. Other contemporary studies have identified complexities in the process of managing organisational culture during mergers and acquisitions to include the mismanagement of cultural differences (Dauber 2012); issues with inappropriate pace of culture management (Kavanagh and Ashkanasy 2006); and cultural imposition from the acquiring firm (Larsson and Lubatkin 2001) amongst others (see Hurt and Hurt 2005; Stahl and Voigt 2008; Teerikangas and Very 2006).

46

On the contingency of real or perceived crisis context, Harris and Ogbonna's (2002) study on grocery retail outlets in the UK, indicated difficulties in managing organisational culture within a grocery retail outlet that was instigated by environmental uncertainties (competitive pressures) to initiate changes in its organisational culture. Difficulties to influence culture change emanated from senior managerial personnel (board family members) inattention to symbolic issues and inconsistency in communicating culture change. On the effects of leadership on organisational culture, Ehrhart et al. (2014) review of Tsui et al. (2006) and Berson et al. (2008) studies indicated that "CEOs can influence culture, but consistent with the contingency perspective, the extent of their effect may be limited by a number of factors" to include the level of autonomy granted to leaders; and the age and size of the organisation (p. 191).

In view of these contingencies towards culture management in organisations, the preceding studies indicated that the feasibility to influence culture management is not utterly unthinkable or outrightly easy. The literature suggests the process indeed involves the input of managerial personnel as well as other organisational members; and requires certain conditions for any culture management initiative. These studies also indicate that there are difficulties in attempts to influence culture management in organisations regardless of these contingencies (section 3.6 presents further details on complexities on organisational culture management). Interestingly, these complexities have not deterred the interests of practitioners or managerial oriented academics in studies on organisational culture management. Rather, it has instigated the analyses and recommendation of several models, techniques and processes as attempts towards culture management in organisations. The next section presents a brief analysis of theoretical propositions in related literature on how to manage organisational culture. The review of these propositions indicate systematic approaches towards culture management in organisations. In

47

addition, it also highlights the limitations of these models to deemphasise on other aspects such as issues of conflicts, power and resistance; and external influences amongst others.

3.5 ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE MANAGEMENT: THEORETICAL