This time last year “culture” was announced as ‘Word of the Year’. But despite having the biggest spike in dictionary lookups, describing office culture can be more difficult than giving up coffee. For most people that sit at their desk for 8 hours a day, discussing culture is just something that chews-up time in meetings. It’s no surprise that the word is akin to a hypnotist's clicking fingers, with over 90% of companies failing to build it successfully. The question is: what is a ‘winning culture’ and how do the 10% of companies achieve it successfully?

“Culture eats strategy for breakfast.”

~ Peter Drucker

WHAT IS CULTURE?

By definition, organisational culture refers to: a system of shared meaning that is held by its people. It's a definition that is more elusive than the Colonel's "secret blend of herbs and spices". The fact is ‘culture’ is an intangible that escapes common understanding. Without a basic definition, ‘culture’ becomes a phenomenon in most organisations. But for the 10% of companies that succeed in building a winning culture, there are some particular characteristics that clearly define its meaning. Two comparable examples below exhibit the characteristics that define organisational culture. With this in-mind, business leaders are able to appraise their own organisation on these characteristics to form a picture of what their culture looks like.

Example 1:

Example 2:

DIFFERING CULTURES

It might seem obvious to suggest that the 10% of companies with a ‘winning culture’ are those that rate highly in the characteristics detailed above. But the truth is that comparable companies can be competitive in their respective industries with very different cultures.

There are several influences that have an impact on the kind of culture that a company exhibits. Giving some credence to this notion are the ‘Tech’ companies that often make the annual list of the ‘Top Ten Places to Work’, while the comparable pharmaceutical companies are yet to pop the champagne. Both ‘Tech’ and ‘Pharma’ companies operate similarly in manufacturing products for the benefit of the general consumer, but both perform in dissimilar environments. The table below gives an example of two opposite cultures. Both companies produce goods for their customers, only they operate in vastly different industries.

It is often the type of industry that predicates the need for this cultural difference. Usually, the industries that are strictly governed by state or federal departments are those that seldom earn the title, ‘Best Place to Work’. The fundamental reason is risk. Organisations that operate in high-risk industries are frequently under third-party scrutiny and bound by the stability of government regulations. In a word, it is ‘formality’ that is required to be demonstrated in order for companies to be successful, while performing under government supervision.

FORMALITY VS CULTURE

Typically, formality is something that is associated with government organisations. Moreover, formality is often seen as the pair of handcuffs restricting companies that routinely undergo official inspections. While particular industries may be subjected to more frequent attention than others, the ultimate purpose of this governance is to maintain stability and order.

The military is an organisation that epitomises formality. Everyday, soldiers, sailors and airmen, wake-up to a written list of ‘Daily Orders’ that outline a specific set of directions. They carryout these orders with reference to written guidelines, known as ‘Standard Operating Procedures’. If somebody doesn’t know how to perform a task, they are immediately pointed to written documents that explicitly explain the process. The product of this environment is consistency, predictability and orderliness; all of which are at the heart of the military’s core values and what it stands for. The military is unique in its approach, but as an organisation, its purpose is to influence people to become unanimous and undivided in performing tasks – it’s their distinctive capability.

In most countries, the general public respects the military, together with its formalised and regimental methods. But perhaps more accurately, the public respects the qualities that emerge from a military environment, being: loyalty, cohesiveness and organisational commitment. While these qualities are a by-product of strong formalisation, the same qualities can be observed as a by-product of a strong culture.

Both a strong culture and formalisation arrive at a common destination, but the two have very different roads leading the way. The stronger an organisation’s culture, the less concerned managers need to be with formalising written guidelines to influence employee behaviour. Instead, employees quickly internalise guidelines upon accepting an organisation’s culture. For example, a Google employee knows it is culturally acceptable to arrive at work somewhere between the hours 8-9am, whereas a soldier gives his signature on written orders acknowledging that he must arrive no later than 0740 hours. Formalisation and a strong culture are at opposite ends of the spectrum. One approach is not necessarily better than the other, but a continuum exists between the two approaches, and all organisations sit somewhere along this scale.

STRONG VS WEAK CULTURES

Unlike the military, most organisations rely on a strong culture to set its guidelines. Rather than outlining written instructions for every routine task, workplaces will let employees know if something is considered unacceptable. But without an explicit policy to establish guidelines, companies operate with the risk of developing a weak culture. What’s the difference between a strong and weak culture? Simply put, a strong culture is one where people share the same opinions about an organisation’s mission and values. A weak culture is completely the opposite, where opinions vary, resulting in a lack of loyalty, cohesiveness and commitment.

A company’s founding motto is usually established to set the tone for a strong orgnanisational culture. For example, ‘Apple’ famously pioneered tech innovation with their company slogan: “Think different.” Similarly, ‘St Jude Medical Inc.’ leads industry performance, only with a different motto: “More control, less risk.” Both Apple and St Jude perform successfully within their respective industries, but with completely opposite values that result in very different, yet strong cultures.

RECRUITING FOR CULTURE

It’s the classic “short & sweet” feedback that is familiar worldwide: “we didn’t find you to be a cultural fit …” Usually this response is considered an excuse for not revealing a more tangible reason for missing out on a job. Why is it interpreted this way? Because, for most people, being a ‘cultural fit’ is something that is rarely understood. It’s not only job applicants, but hiring managers often struggle to recognise the cultural risks of choosing unsuitable candidates. Recruitment and selection is an important aspect of the hiring process, it can either help keep culture alive or disrupt the customs and beliefs held by long-term employees.

Despite how rigorous a company’s recruiting and selection process may be, new employees do not naturally accept an organisation’s culture. There is a socialisation process for successful candidates, which sees newcomers being indoctrinated into an unfamiliar culture. The process itself involves three particular stages: Stage 1 – Pre-arrival; Stage 2 – Encounter; and Stage 3 – Transformation.

STAGE 1 – PRE-ARRIVAL
This stage recognises that people enter an organisation with their own values, work expectations, and attitudes. Newcomers will make their own assumptions of what it is like to work at a particular organisation. For example, new staff will likely expect a job at Disneyland to be exciting, a busy restaurant kitchen to be high-pressured, and a children’s hospital to require compassion. The knowledge that newcomers hold about an organisation will often predict the how well they will adjust to the culture. Those candidates that are well informed about the company during interviews are usually better equipped with the right knowledge to anticipate the work environment and expectations.

STAGE 2 – ENCOUNTER
This is where an employee enters an organisation and learns the reality of the environment, the job itself, the co-workers and boss. During this stage newcomers experience one of two things: (1) it is exactly what they had in-mind; or (2) the reality is different from their expectations. There are two obvious effects from the respective occurrences. In the first instance, if the newcomer was accurate in what to expect, then their exposure to the workplace simply cements previous perceptions. But more often than not, perceptions rarely match the reality, and newcomers may feel compelled to hand in an early resignation. Organisations that are successful in preventing newcomers from resigning often dedicate attention to (1) a reliable recruiting and selection process; and (2) encouraging friends and co-workers to help newcomers ‘learn the ropes’. Companies that encourage existing employees to refer others, not only do they see benefits in cost savings, but when friends help others become acquainted with the workplace and job practices, a higher level of commitment is usually observed.

STAGE 3 – TRANSFORMATION
The final stage of the socialisation process sees newcomers adjusting to their new job and work environment. Organisations will usually have desired changes that new employees are expected to adopt. To encourage change, organisations elect different approaches for welcoming newcomers to the workplace, it's a process that is commonly referred to as 'onboarding'. The table below reveals different options that companies utilise to accommodate new employees. Generally, organisations will tailor their own approach for ‘onboarding’ new recruits. These approaches often fall into two categories: (1) the institutional approach; and (2) the individual approach.

Typically, the ‘institutional approach’ is found in organsations that value a high degree of formality. Government departments and emergency services will often follow the ‘institutional approach’ to support new employees in their work environment. However, most creative industries, like tech and advertising, will rely on the ‘individual approach’ to support their new staff. The respective approaches result in two different outcomes. The ‘institutional approach’ encourages change that sees the person fit to the organisation and possess a high level of commitment to it. While the ‘individual approach’ encourages the type of change that produces more innovative results and sees newcomers take their own creativity into a role.

Acknowledging this process for socialisation or ‘onboarding’ is particularly important for managers. Successful managers are able to recognise when this process is complete through observations and interviews with newcomers. Once new employees have become comfortable with their job and organisation, the ‘onboarding’ process is complete. However, the process can often be mistaken for a tangible set of activities, where administrative documents and system processing takes a precedence over a newcomer’s comfort-level in the organisation. Rather than completing the necessary paperwork and learning where the coffee machine is, the ultimate goals of any ‘onboarding’ process is to encourage employees to: (1) feel confident in their competence; (2) feel trusted and valued by peers; and (3) internalise and accept the informal practices and rules of the workplace.

Overall, the socialisation process can ultimately determine the success of a newcomer in an organisation. A company’s investment in this process will speak to its performance in three particular areas: (1) productivity; (2) commitment; and (3) turnover. The table below shows the influence that the process has in the workplace.

THE TAKEAWAY

Culture is ultimately a descriptive word. It captures employees’ perceptions on a set of characteristics, which help to define their workplace culture. Being aware of these characteristics is usually more of a benefit to those who are considering a career change, or are simply changing company within the same industry. It’s important for both hiring managers and job applicants to recognise the importance of culture, particularly an organisation’s investment in maintaining a strong one.

As a job applicant, asking about a company’s ‘onboarding’ process during an interview is a great way to gauge whether a workplace values their culture, or if it considers ‘onboarding’ to be limited to administrative paperwork. As a manager, knowing the two socialisation or ‘onboarding’ approaches will help determine which option is more suitable for the workplace, and will contribute to positive results in productivity, commitment and turnover.

If you’re a manager at any level in an organisation, I encourage you to share this article with your network to lay a better understanding of the word 'culture'. If you're job hunting or know somebody who is, share this article with them to help gauge expectations for company onboarding processes.

Culture: Why 90% fail to build it