DiagnosingCultureofPublicOrganization…..pdf

Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences

2018, Vol. 12 (1), 398-418

Pak J Commer Soc Sci

Diagnosing Culture of Public Organization

Utilizing Competing Values Framework:
A Mixed Methods Approach

Email: [email protected]

Faisal Qadeer

Lahore Business School, The University of Lahore, Pakistan

Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Diagnosis of culture is extremely important and in great demand in literature particularly

when it comes to public organizations which operate in complex and compelling social,

political and economic environment. Scholars and practitioners also affirm that examining

the culture of public organizations is a very complex and challenging task. It is well-known

that any organizational development initiatives through a change of culture failed

dramatically because the culture diagnosis is either ignored or not understood. Incidentally,

in the public sector, empirical findings of the cultural diagnosis are either non-existent or

sketchy. Therefore, we comprehensively diagnose the culture of a public organization by

utilizing the most widely used competing values framework through sequential explanatory

mixed method approach (a survey, observations and in-depth interviews). This ambitious

research approach is undoubtedly very rare in diagnosing public sector organizational

culture. This study accepts this challenge to make a meaningful contribution and analyses

the culture concerning the competing values of flexibility/stability and internal/external

relationship. Results indicated that a reliance on the hierarchy culture did exist, while

managers want to depart from this bureaucratic culture and adopt the characteristics of the

clan culture.

Keywords: diagnosis of culture, types of culture, competing values framework, public

organization.

1. Introduction

Many authors and practitioners argue that diagnosis of culture is essential to achieve

organizational change and the long-term effectiveness successfully. Denison (1990) claims

that organizational culture is an important factor in achieving high organizational

performance. The study of organizational culture began in the 1980s, and understanding

organizational culture has become an essential approach to implement strategic

management and achieve high performance in the organization (Sasaki et al., 2017).

Diagnosing and changing existing organizational culture is a challenging and problematic

area of research.

Hina Rukh (Corresponding author)

National College of Business Administration & Economics, Lahore, Pakistan

Rukh & Qadeer

399

In literature, the transformation of the bureaucratic inertia, high formalization, rigid

departmentalization and centralization of government requires a thorough examination of

the culture of public organizations. The culture of public sector organizations is complex,

especially where corruption, red tape, poor governance, political and individual influences,

resources scarcity, discrimination, favoritism, low protection of public rights are prevailing

causes.

Researchers, commentators on the global upheaval also agree that to survive and thrive in

today’s highly volatile, competitive and dynamic business environment; organizations

need to be sensitive to the need of diagnosing of its culture. Organizations must have clear

and deep understandings of their present and future requirements to respond to them on a

priority basis (Cummings & Worley, 2009).

Cultural diagnosis is an un-ignorable factor before implementation of any organization

development and change initiatives. Moreover, where ignored, the result comes in the

failure of change programs (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Hisrich and Al-Dabbagh (2013)

also enforced that planned efforts will only be implemented successfully in the public

organization like private sector when the diagnosis of culture is right. Rousseau (1990)

suggested that it is imperative for the individuals to study or understand the organizational

culture so that they become able to measure key dimensions of culture, develop a strategy

for changing it, and begin an implementation process.

Therefore, there is an acute need for diagnosis of culture in the public organizations to

bring in change and transform them rapidly. A variety of private organizations have been

practicing examining culture since long before implementing organization development

(OD) and change initiatives (Cummings & Worley, 2015). Incidentally, in the public

sector, cultural diagnosis before organization development is regarded as very limited that

demands the establishment of literature on specific public organization development

(POD).

OD scholars and practitioners also believe that through focusing on the social and human

aspects of organizations, the ability of public organizations for adapting and solving

problems must be improved. “OD is not a step-by-step procedure to solve a specific

problem but a planned process of fundamental change in an organization’s culture through

utilization of behavioral science knowledge and techniques” (Burke, 1982). Traditionally,

however, the existing literature on OD has focused more on the private sector, and further

research on OD initiatives relevant to the public sector is the urgent need to make them

efficient, entrepreneurial and effective. Mostly, OD interventions failed to implement

successfully in organizations because of the reason to ignore the importance of diagnosis

of the culture. Therefore, without a diagnosis of culture initially, the success of any attempt

to change public organization’s culture is not possible.

Museus (2007) described that quantitative tools are insufficient for uncovering an in-depth

understanding of how or why organizational culture properties shape group actions and

experiences. The use of the quantitative techniques for cultural diagnosis is extensive in

private sector, and its empirical findings are limited in public sector. Employing the

quantitative as well as qualitative methods for diagnosis is very rare in literature. By using

Diagnosing Culture of Public Organization Utilizing Competing Values Framework

400

mixed methods, the validity of the results not only strengthens but also produce more robust

results than could be accomplished by using a single method. The purpose of the study is

to investigate the culture in public sector context through mixed-method techniques by

utilizing competing values framework. This way it attempts to address the complicity and

peculiar nature of culture effectively. It offers the opportunity to go more in depth of an

essential aspect of organizational culture and to authenticate the quantitative results of the

diagnosis of culture. Sequential explanatory mixed method technique combines the

specificity and accuracy of the quantitative data with the complex perceptions and

interpretation of idiosyncrasies provided by qualitative data. An underlying value

framework is used to determine the most important key cultural dimensions. Of course, no

framework is comprehensive enough to be treated as either right or wrong. According to

Cameron and Quinn, (2011), the most appropriate frameworks should base on empirical

evidence, should capture accurately the reality it describes and should be able to integrate

and organize most of the dimensions it proposes. That is the purpose of using the competing

values framework that provides a means for an organization to understand and analyze key

aspects that generate strategies to change the culture and improve performance.

No doubt, along with advancing the organization development and change literature, this

study will help scholars and practitioners to scrutinize the intensified need of public

organizations from the viewpoint of transforming them into, to a great extent, private sector

entities. Also to necessitate overhauling of public sector organizations at their root level to

reshape their culture to facilitate a successful transformation. Further, it aims to

comprehensively examine the existing and preferred cultural requirements of the public

managers that will give direction to transform the public organizations successfully.

Moreover, it will observe the extent to which the results showed similarities and differences

in the prevailing and preferred culture diagnosis from the previous research. Based on

Bradley and Parker (2006), Camron and Quinn (2011) and Harrison and Baird (2015), the

existing culture of the public organization is hierarchical, and employees have prevailing

values of internal focus and stability and control orientation. This study will expect the

same about the existing culture, but there has been a paucity of the literature to investigate

the preferences of the employees for different types of the culture.

2. Literature Review

The literature on OD applications focusses more on the private sector than the public sector

(Hood, 1991). Public organizations are operating in the same highly volatile political and

economic environment as of the private sector. They are facing the same pressures of

increasing competition, globalization, technological developments, and managerial growth

(Lovell, 1995; Stewart & Kimber, 1996).

Since the 1970s, public organizations are often criticized as they are getting more corrupt,

inefficient, rigid, corrupt, unaccountable, non-friendly and unsuitable for the public that

requires more dynamic approaches to make them more citizens focused and business-like

organizations (Hughes, 1998). This criticism paved the way for surfacing of different,

appropriate and new techniques and interventions under the field of public organization

development (POD). The evolution of POD will help to define new concepts and tools to

Rukh & Qadeer

401

tackle even tougher problems of organizational dynamics and change facing to the

government in an increasingly global and diverse world.

Unfortunately, most attempts at change public sector presume that the challenge is to

manage better rather than to govern differently. Attempts to transform public sector without

examining the causes of the crises and how external factors are changing. The role of

government ends up treating symptoms rather than the causes of the crises (Osborne &

Gaebler, 1992).

Because of which the magnitude of the failure of the most planned organizational initiatives

to change has been colossal. For example, organizations have experimented their re-

engineering, pursued total quality management (TQM) and strategic planning besides some

extraordinary steps like downsizing without achievement of any tangible results. Rather

such initiatives created problems and even threatened the survival of the organizations

(Cameron & Quinn, 2011). In various studies done to trace factors responsible for such

failures, the organizational negligence to critically look at culture from re-organization and

management’s perspective was the fundamental factor. Such negligence, besides being a

sole cause for the failure, even dampened other initiatives of organizational changes (Kotter

& Heskett, 1992). This established that unless addressing culture with an in-depth

diagnosis, any meaningful and productive change in organizations through any other

initiatives could not be attained. Empirical research also provides support for this fact that

organizational culture influences individual’s behavior and its importance as a stimulant

for organization performance cannot be ignored (Naranjo-Valencia et al., 2016).

This void has provided an opportunity to the organizational leaders, managers, and

academic researchers to understand and examine the criticality and significance of

organizational culture that could be used as an effective tool to transform rather less

effective organizations to cost-effective and efficient ones. This increased interest is

justifiably visible. While specific reasons for this professional tilt may be considered as

quite different, but the primary reason for the growing interest is embedded in recognition

of an organizational culture that is an important factor in organizational effectiveness

(Denison, 1990). As organizations are continuously evolving and reinventing their

structure, the understanding and implications of culture become more important and

essential (Sinha & Sheorey, 2016). Its diagnosis, therefore, has become more important to

see through an organization’s history of cultural evolution and the key aspects that helped

in shaping its identity (Trice & Beyer, 1993). Focusing on the importance of the public

sector and its culture, existing literature on public organizational development and change

is very limited.

An in-depth vision of culture within an organization can surely provide the requisite

wisdom to leaders, managers, and researchers about its fundamental prevailing

characteristics (Schein, 1990) and then to propose strategic reformatory measures.

Understanding of organizational culture will, in turn, help both the private as well as public

organizations in managing or changing the culture to their sole advantage, i.e., enhanced

efficiency, effectiveness, productivity, harmony, congeniality and so forth, which factors

play a crucial role in the survival and growth of such organizations.

Diagnosing Culture of Public Organization Utilizing Competing Values Framework

402

In recent years, the public sector has required changes dramatically, with an emphasis on

accountability, transparency, and efficiency that can only be achieved by changing the

culture of public sector organizations (Boyne & Meier, 2009). Before changing the culture,

its diagnosis is crucial to find out existing and preferred culture. The use of the

Organizational culture assessment instrument (OCAI) is extensive in private sector, and its

empirical findings are limited in public sector.

Figure 1 illustrates the Cameron and Quinn (2011) competing values framework labeling

each quadrant to encapsulate best the most notable characteristics of the values that the

cluster represents. The four labels are Clan (upper left quadrant), Adhocracy (upper right

quadrant), Hierarchy (lower left quadrant), and Market (lower right quadrant). These labels

help illustrate how the organizational values of the clusters also closely align with the

organizational form most often implemented by organizations that feature the values of a

particular quadrant. Cameron and Quinn (2011) argue that the dimensions, and the

quadrants they shape, are robust and rich enough to be considered a cultural type.

Figure 1: The Competing Values Framework

The four culture types of the competing values framework – Hierarchy, Market, Clan, and

Adhocracy – are each rooted in a model of organizational theory research. Each theoretical

foundation provides the organizational environment for the values and characteristics of

each culture to take root and become prominently expressed. The six sub-dimensions –

dominant characteristics, organizational leadership, management of employees,

organization glue, strategic emphasis, and criteria for success – serve to describe the

fundamental manifestations of culture within an organization. While not completely

comprehensive, the six sub-dimensions do cover the major components of the culture. The

dominant characteristics and organizational glue sub-dimensions address the basic

assumptions within the organization. Next, the organizational leadership and management

of employees’ sub-dimensions address interaction patterns within the organization. Finally,

the strategic emphases and criteria of success sub-dimensions address organizational

direction. Each sub-dimension serves as a lens to view a slice of the culture within the

Rukh & Qadeer

403

organization. When compiled together, they create a comprehensive culture profile of the

whole organization as intended by the OCAI assessment.

The Hierarchy culture, characterized by stability and an internal focus,

is made up of a formally structured chain of command and control that emphasizes

constancy, predictability, and efficiency. The Hierarchy culture type is one of the earliest

and most widely adopted organizational culture types, particularly in government entities.

The Market culture, characterized by stability and an external focus, produces a

competitive organization that emphasizes results and achieving goals. The organization

functions similar to a market focused on outward transactions with external communities

that interact with the organization, such as “suppliers, customers, licensees, unions, and

regulators” (Cameron & Quinn, 2011).

The Clan culture, characterized by a flexible and internal focus, is a collaborative culture

having values of an extended family with a strong commitment of people for human

resource development and organizational success. Employees often work in

semiautonomous teams and are rewarded based on production and goals achieved as a

team, not as individuals. Employees are encouraged to actively participate in the

development of the organization by providing their thoughts and input on how to improve

production. Managers focus on empowering employees and help them develop their skills.

Facilitating this employee cultivation is designed to build commitment and loyalty from

employees to have a more effective overall organization.

Finally, the Adhocracy culture, characterized by a flexible and internal focus, makes up a

creative culture that promotes entrepreneurship, innovation, and unique ways to meet

challenges and stay on the leading edge. This culture occurs from the open-system theory

that focuses on an organization’s interaction and interdependence with its external

environment.

3. Methods and Analysis

A mixed method research design consisting of two distinct phases was selected to achieve

the challenging aim of diagnosis of public organizational culture. In the first phase,

quantitative data was collected using Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument

(OCAI) to diagnose the existing and preferred culture in the public organization. In the

second phase, qualitative data was collected through an ethnography comprising in-depth

interviews, participant observation, analysis of archival data and official documentation to

authenticate the diagnosis of the culture further. The research site was the large size public

organizations responsible for metropolitan planning and development in the major cities of

Pakistan.

3.1 Quantitative Phase-OCAI

To identify the characteristics of organizational culture, the latest version of OCAI

(Cameron & Quinn, 2011), based on competing values framework was used as this

theoretical framework is one of the most influential and extensively used models in the

area of organizational culture research (Yu,2009). Easy English language self-administered

instrument/questionnaire was comprised of seven sections, mentioning the aims of the

Diagnosing Culture of Public Organization Utilizing Competing Values Framework

404

study, instructions to fill the questionnaire and giving the assurance of confidentiality to

the respondents. First six sections were arranged to cover the six dimensions consisting of

four descriptive items each addressing the four culture types of the competing values

framework, namely Clan, Adhocracy, Hierarchy, and Market. The six dimensions include:

“1) The dominant characteristics of the organization, or what the overall organization is

like; 2) The leadership style and approach that permeate the organization; 3) The

management of employees or the style that characterizes how employees are treated and

what the working environment is like; 4) The organizational glue or bonding mechanisms

that hold the organization together; 5) The strategic emphases that define what areas of

emphasis drive the organizations strategy; and 6) The criteria of success that determine

how victory is defined and what gets rewarded and celebrated” (Cameron & Quinn, 2011).

The seventh section was to collect demographics/personal information of respondents

about their gender, marital status, age, education level, job designation, department, nature

of the job, job experience in the current organization and total job experience.

The OCAI is the most frequently used instrument for assessing organizational culture in

the world today. It is a framework that was empirically derived, has been found to have

both face and empirical validity, and helps integrate many of the dimensions various

authors have proposed. In the past twenty years, it has been used extensively in scholarly

research and thousands of organizations. OCAI has been found not only to give an accurate

assessment of organizational culture, but significant relationships have also been found

between culture and a variety of indicators of organizational effectiveness. Cameron and

Quinn (2011) revealed that the review of scholarly publications in just the past ten years,

for example, investigated that mostly doctoral dissertations have explored the relationship

between organizational culture and a variety of outcomes using the OCAI. This instrument

has been used in a variety of industry sectors representing both developed and developing

countries in these studies. That is the purpose of using the Competing Values Framework

that provides a means for an organization to understand and analyze key aspects that

generate strategies to change the culture and improve performance.

3.1.1 Target Population

Considering the complexity of the OCAI, its language, and also benchmarking most of the

other studies, it was the best to survey managers only. Managers having at least six months

of work experience in public organization were the target population. Managers were 325

(Male 273 and 52 Female) working in different departments. The studied organization has

total 2274 (Male 1973 and 301 female) permanent employees working under basic pay

scale 01-20. The questionnaire was sent to all managers having work experience of at least

six months in the studied organization so that they are much familiar with the beliefs and

values of the organization. Of the 325 managers, only 160 managers filled in the survey

that shows the response rate of 49 %.

3.1.2 Measurements

The four types of organizational culture are measured under six culture dimensions, i.e.,

dominant characteristics, leadership style, management of employees, organizational glue,

strategic emphases and criteria of success. The 24 items in the instrument were arranged

Rukh & Qadeer

405

in a group of 4. Each set of four items had a common introductory piece and then each of

the four items that followed corresponded to one of the four culture types.

Sample items for clan culture in the two-dimension dominant characteristics and

management of employees are, “the organization is a very personal place. It is like an

extended family. People seem to share a lot of themselves”, “the management style in the

organization is characterized by teamwork, consensus, and participation.” In the same two

dimensions, the sample items for adhocracy culture includes, “the organization is a

dynamic and entrepreneurial. People are willing to take risks while doing innovative and

creative work”, “the management style in the organization is characterized by individual

risk-taking, innovation, freedom, and uniqueness.” Similarly, the sample items for market

culture includes, “the organization is very result oriented. A major concern is with getting

the job done. People are not very personally involved”, “the management style in the

organization is characterized by intense competitiveness, high demands, and achievement.”

Finally, for hierarchy culture includes, “the organization is a very formalized and

structured. Formal procedures generally govern what people do”, “the management style

in the organization is characterized by security of employment, predictability, and stability

in relationships” (Cameron & Quinn, 2011).

To find out the respondents’ response for “Now” and “Preferred” culture, four items under

each dimension were asked to select a single item. “Now” refers to the culture, as it existed

currently in the organization. “Preferred” refers to the culture, as it would like to look in

next five years. The selected items were coded by using nominal scale 0 for No and 1 for

Yes. The responses were counted to determine the scores for each culture type. Items that

are the most similar and the most preferred to the organization would receive higher scores

and items that are the least similar and the least preferred received fewer scores.

The scores regarding percentages were plotted on a radar-style graph for each dimension,

which provided a visual representation of the organization’s culture profile. The mapping

depicted the current and preferred culture. High percentage represented the dominant

existed and preferred culture type and low percentage represent the less existed and desired

culture type. Current and preferred organizational culture types have shown in solid lines

and dotted lines in each quadrant respectively.

Responses to personal information were coded by using nominal scale 1 to 2 for gender,

marital status and workplace and ordinal scale of 1 to 3 for age, education level, managerial

level, nature of the job, job tenure and total experience.

3.2 Quantitative Cultural Assessment

The survey fetched 160 useable questionnaires from the managers of a large public

organization. The response rate was 49 % for the target populations of 325 managers. Of

the 160 managers, 78% were male; 59% were unmarried; 91% fall in the age bracket of 18

to 35 years. They represent all managerial level, 66%, 24%, and 10% from lower, middle

and upper level respectively.

The managers are highly qualified with 97% of them are at least master degree holders.

These respondents have sufficient job tenure in the current organization, 42% have four

Diagnosing Culture of Public Organization Utilizing Competing Values Framework

406

years and above, and 58% have a tenure of 1-3 years. The overall experience of 59%

managers is four years and above while 41% is between 1-3 years. More than three-fourths

are working in core (line) departments. From the descriptive statistics, it is shown that there

were no major differences in response rate for different respondents’ characteristics (age,

gender, marital status, education, department, etc.) The means of the four types of dominant

& preferred cultures were compared based on various demographic and job-related

variables (gender, marital status, educations, managerial level, job nature) using t-test and

ANOVA. There was no significant difference, and systematic bias found among all these

groups. Therefore, interpretation of the various culture in aggregate was same as that of

any of the subgroups in the sample.

Rukh & Qadeer

407

Table 1: Cultural Profile of the Site Organization

Cultural

Dimensions/Types

Existing Culture Preferred Culture Difference

Score Rank % Score Rank % Score %

Dominant Characteristics

Clan 34 3 21 36 2 22 +02 +01

Adhocracy 9 4 6 75 1 47 +66 +41

Market 53 2 33 30 3 19 -23 -14

Hierarchy 64 1 40 19 4 12 -45 -28

Organizational Leadership

Clan 16 3 10 65 1 41 +49 +31

Adhocracy 11 4 7 53 2 33 +42 +26

Market 22 2 14 34 3 21 +12 +07

Hierarchy 111 1 69 8 4 5 -103 -64

Management of Employees

Clan 35 3 22 81 1 51 +46 +29

Adhocracy 23 4 14 48 2 30 +25 +16

Market 42 2 26 17 3 10 -25 -16

Hierarchy 60 1 38 14 4 9 -46 -29

Organizational Glue

Clan 15 3 9 53 1 33 +38 +24

Adhocracy 11 4 7 51 2 32 +40 +25

Market 56 2 35 30 3 19 -26 -16

Hierarchy 78 1 49 26 4 16 -52 -33

Strategic Emphasis

Clan 22 4 14 66 1 41 +44 +27

Adhocracy 35 3 22 60 2 38 +25 +16

Market 42 2 26 19 3 12 -23 -14

Hierarchy 61 1 38 15 4 9 -46 -29

Criteria of Success

Clan 35 3 22 93 1 58 +58 +36

Adhocracy 12 4 7 34 2 21 +22 +14

Market 43 2 27 22 3 14 -21 -13

Hierarchy 70 1 44 11 4 7 -59 -37

Overall Culture Profile

Clan 157 3 16 394 1 41 + 237 + 25

Adhocracy 101 4 11 321 2 33 + 220 + 23

Market 258 2 27 152 3 16 -106 -11

Hierarchy 444 1 46 93 4 10 -351 -37

The OCAI examined both the organization’s current and preferred “basic assumptions

(dominant characteristics, organizational glue), interaction patterns (leadership,

management of employees), and organizational direction (strategic emphases, criteria of

Diagnosing Culture of Public Organization Utilizing Competing Values Framework

408

success). Each group contains four items corresponding to one of the four culture types

(i.e., Clan, Market, Adhocracy, and Hierarchy) (Cameron & Quinn, …