Organizational Culture: Can It Be Managed?

Organizational Culture Can It Be Managedsome Organizational Theori

Organizational culture has long been a subject of interest for scholars and practitioners alike, sparking debate over whether it can be actively managed or simply observed and influenced indirectly. Campbell (2000) emphasizes that organizations are continuously constructed through individual interactions, rendering their culture fluid, dynamic, and ever-changing. This perspective challenges traditional notions that organizational culture can be tightly controlled or managed in a mechanistic way, similar to processes or activities within the organization. Instead, culture appears more abstract and fragmentary, shaped by countless informal and formal interactions both internally among members and externally with stakeholders.

To understand whether culture can be managed, it is essential to first clarify what constitutes organizational culture. Edgar Schein's seminal work defines culture as a pattern of shared basic assumptions learned by a group as it solves its problems of external adaptation and internal integration (Schein, 2010). These assumptions form the invisible fabric of organizational life, influencing behavior, perceptions, and decision-making. Unlike tangible processes, culture is deeply embedded in the collective psyche of an organization’s members. It is reflected in symbols, rituals, stories, and norms that continually evolve through ongoing interactions.

Given this complex, fluid nature of culture, many theorists argue that it resists direct manipulation. They contend that culture is emergent—arising from the collective behaviors and shared assumptions of individuals rather than as a static, controllable entity. For instance, Martin (2002) asserts that attempts to "manage" culture often amount to influencing it through leadership practices, rituals, and symbolic actions that shape organizational stories and perceptions. Such approaches can guide and reinforce certain cultural traits but are unlikely to dictate culture decisively or permanently. In this view, culture is more a phenomenon that can be influenced—or shaped—rather than managed outright.

On the other hand, some scholars posit that elements of organizational culture can be intentionally influenced through strategic initiatives. Leaders can articulate values, introduce new rituals, or design symbols that align with desired cultural traits, thus guiding the collective mindset over time (Kotter & Heskett, 1992). These deliberate interventions may not completely control culture but can create conditions conducive to cultural change or reinforcement. Still, the process remains complex and context-dependent, with emergent cultural patterns often resisting top-down control.

The question of whether culture can be managed has significant implications for strategic control. If culture is seen as relatively unmanageable and fluid, then organizations must focus on shaping the conditions and contexts within which culture emerges and evolves. This entails fostering leadership behaviors, communication practices, and organizational symbols that subtly influence shared assumptions over time (Denison, 1996). Conversely, if culture were highly controllable, organizations could implement rigid cultural policies and expect consistent outcomes. The evidence suggests, however, that culture’s emergent, socially constructed nature makes such control both impractical and potentially counterproductive.

From a strategic perspective, understanding that culture is more about influence than control allows organizations to adopt a more adaptive and participative approach. Leaders can serve as cultural catalysts, modeling desired behaviors, and cultivating an environment that promotes shared values without attempting to impose them rigidly. This aligns with the view that culture should be leveraged as a strategic resource, guiding organizational identity, motivation, and cohesion in a manner that is organic and aligned with members’ shared experiences (Schein, 2010; Trice & Beyer, 1993).

In conclusion, organizational culture is inherently complex, fluid, and socially constructed, challenging the notion that it can be managed in a traditional sense. While influence and strategic shaping are possible through leadership and symbolism, outright management of culture remains elusive due to its emergent properties. Recognizing the nuanced relationship between influence and control enables organizations to better harness culture as a strategic resource—one that supports adaptability, coherence, and long-term success in a constantly changing environment.

References

• Campbell, D. (2000). The socially constructed organization. London: Karnac Books.
• Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Martin, J. (2002). Organizational culture: Mapping the terrain. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Kotter, J. P., & Heskett, J. L. (1992). Corporate culture and performance. New York: Free Press.
• Denison, D. R. (1996). What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native's point of view. The research quarterly, 67(1), 84-93.
• Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J. M. (1993). The cultures of work organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Alvesson, M. (2013). Understanding organizational culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Hatch, M. J. (1993). The dynamics of organizational culture. Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 657–693.
• Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2011). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework. John Wiley & Sons.
• Schwartz, H. (2006). Organizational culture and effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 1-21.