Culture is not a people problem
Apparently, culture matters … some say it eats strategy for breakfast (well, Peter Drucker did, and then everyone else said it lots).
If it is important – more important than strategy - then why does the culture of an organisation remain unmoved, unphased, unchanged when smart people attempt to enhance or shift it?
For instance, they might:
Refresh + align the values of the organisation to suit the evolving organisation. New words, new definitions, maybe even through an inclusive process that seals everyone’s engagement. Then reinforce the new values with some refreshed signs around the joint
Encourage their diverse workforce to better understand their differences and similarities, and to celebrate these. Design and introduce some group events, maybe some regular diversity and inclusion activities that ‘bring people together’
Develop new working conditions that you can live with, and people can appreciate. Introduce paternal leave to match the length of maternal leave, or assured employment for a certain number of years beyond each baby’s birth
Why don’t these people-related approaches to culture get us the culture we want?
Because culture is not a people problem.
😳
These people-based efforts are typically genuine in intent, and they can be valuable in isolation or to specific demographic groups within the organisation. But any effort to shift culture that solely focuses on people will fail.
Because culture is not a people problem.
If that’s what it’s not, then, What is it?
Culture is, instead, at the centre of things. It’s the sum of the interactions of all the parts, albeit not a direct or simple addition (‘The magic in the middle’). It is the hazy, hard-to-nail-down, jelly-like thing that results from an array of complex, sometimes unpredictable interactions between many intersecting elements of an organisation. Picture an algebraic equation you just don’t know how to solve, or even where to start. It’s the cross over between the Frog + the Bicycle (but that’s another story for later). It’s pervasive yet difficult to see, especially when you’re part of it (like love, I guess. From the inside, love is blind. Culture is hard to see when you’re inside of it, too.) Equally, it can be mind-bending to get clear on exactly what you need it to be. (Fortunately, there are specialists who can help 😉.)
Organisational values, diversity and inclusion approaches, and working conditions (the examples we examined) are components of organisational design, and they certainly contribute to culture. But these are only the start of a long list. There are many other things, and possibly, more influential things in that ill-defined culture equation. Like delegations of authority, organisational communication systems, leadership approaches, metrics used to measure performance (individual, team + organisational), organisational structure, to name a few. All organisational components that impact culture fall within the 3 broad buckets of ‘Direction’, ‘Ecosystem’ and ‘People’.
OK, so it’s not a people problem. It’s at the centre of things.
How do we shape it and shift it? (And why would we bother?)
Your organisational culture is the bedrock for the success of your strategy. It can either help or hinder execution. Why? Because it determines things like[1]:
Individual accountability. Do people need hounding or do they just get on with it? Do they blame others for things that go wrong (and spend a lot of time doing this), or do they correct errors and learn from them?
Connection to and utility of organisational purpose. Do people channel this connection into their work, using it in day-day decision-making? Or are they disconnected from the purpose and act according to their own need, desire or objective?
Trust in relationships. Do people start with high levels of trust to accelerate relationships across the business for personal benefit and better work outcomes? Or do they distrust particular departments and people in them, and form individual ‘outlier’ relationships to facilitate getting their ‘stuff’ done in more transactional ways?
Organisational learning and adaptation to the internal and external environment. Are people effective in identifying what systems and processes need to change based on what they’ve learned, and then work with the right people to make those changes? Or are they deflated by the human system they work within that seems deaf to complaints, problems, and ideas, and takes too long to adjust, losing customers along the way?
Important stuff, right? All riding on culture.
If you genuinely want to shift your culture so your strategy actually gets done, here’s a plan:
Define the culture you have[2]
Decide the culture you want[3]
Design a shift that addresses all 3 buckets at play: your organisation’s ecosystem, all elements supporting the direction you’re headed in, and your people. (And if you were hoping it is simple and quick … it is neither of these. Because of all those interactions, known and unknown.)
The shift will involve: examining everything through a cultural lens (asking questions like “if we want this kinda culture, what sort of delegations do we need?”); moving the levers; identifying and understanding interactions as you go; and adjusting to suit your desired outcome. (Something unpredictable or not yet well understood will go ‘bang’. Change one thing and the whole system shifts – that’s how systems work. So, adjustment is necessary and ongoing.)
If you’re hearing things like “we need people to be more accountable”, “why do people keep double booking my time?!”, or “our customer complaints are increasing – what’s going on?”, it’s your culture you need to sort – the bedrock, not the veneer. Go on, call us.
--------------------
[1] There’ll be some individual differences but if we can say it generally about the way people in the organisation work, it’s likely a cultural trait
[2] We said this is difficult. We’re good at it. We can help you
[3] See 2