Building a high performing culture

In the 20th century, "culture" emerged as a central concept in anthropology, encompassing the range of human phenomena that cannot be directly attributed to genetic inheritance. Specifically, the term "culture" in American anthropology had two meanings:

• the evolved human capacity to classify and represent experiences with symbols, and to act imaginatively and creatively; and

• the distinct ways that people, who live differently, classified and represented their experiences, and acted creatively.

Hoebel describes culture as an integrated system of learned behavior patterns which are characteristic of the members of a society and which are not a result of biological inheritance.

Distinctions are currently made between the physical artifacts created by a society, its so-called material culture, and everything else, the intangibles such as language, customs, etc. that are the main referent of the term "culture". Culture, Wikipedia, accessed 18th and 20th October 2014.

Society, culture and the individual

The general theory of psychology in The Origin of Consciousness presents ideas as a prime causal factor in determining human mood and conduct. Further, the postulate is that the fundamental of humanity, the prime biological inheritance of all people, derived from evolution, is the ability to create and apply ideas in survival (refer the essay Do our genes determine who we are). I define this fundamental capacity that defines humanity as ‘human nature’.

Culture is generated by people, therefore a general theory of psychology must account for culture. The above definition of culture offers the insight that it is ‘the intangibles such as language, customs, etc. that are the main referent of the term "culture".’ I now postulate that all ‘intangibles’ at least underlying all intangibles, are ideas. Further, that the aggregation of people in groups enables sharing of ideas, which in turn leads to survival of those adopting the ideas without them having to derive the idea for themselves. That is it is culture that enables sharing of ideas and so those who have not experienced the circumstance to which the idea applies know and are able to apply the idea if/when they do encounter the circumstance.

I summarize this view of culture as the reservoir of ideas of the group from which the individual draws their personal ideas they will apply to guide and direct their mood and conduct. It is this theory that today makes human evolution through culture. Evolution where ideas ‘live and die’, and not evolution through the life and death of individuals.

Knowledge is the primary intangible of culture and dominates human existence. It shapes the learning of the child or new comer and the integration of both into the group. It dominates the conduct of the group relative to its environment.

Organizational culture and the individual

How does this general theory of culture match our understanding of organizational culture?

Organizational culture is the behavior of humans within an organization and the meaning that people attach to those behaviors. Culture includes the organization's vision, values, norms, systems, symbols, language, assumptions, beliefs, and habits. It is also the pattern of such collective behaviors and assumptions that are taught to new organizational members as a way of perceiving, and even thinking and feeling. Organizational culture, Wikipedia, accessed 18th and 20th October 2014.

In short, organizational culture is the reservoir of ideas on how the business operates and from which new organizational members draw the ideas to apply to shape their mood and conduct within the organization.

All culture serves the same purpose

An organization culture is a subset of general culture, serving exactly the same role relative to the new comers into the organization. There is not much new there...but at least we are very clear about what culture ‘is’.

Culture is the set of ideas that dominate the actions and feeling in a group of people, whether it a very large group, such as Western society, or a small group such as the family operating the local convenience store. Obviously the ideas in the small groups must be derived from the ideas within the larger group. These ‘sub cultural’ units within a larger whole can be thought of in the same manner we regard individuals in relation to their culture. We can ‘see’ the larger whole (all the ideas) then subsets of it (specific sets of ideas), until we arrive at the smallest possible unit, a person with their personal ideas they apply in their life. Further discussion takes us beyond the confines of this essay, which is focused on organizational culture as a subset of ideas derived from a broader culture.

The two fundamentals of human existence

First fundamental of is our human nature, the inherited, evolved, natural ability to create ideas and apply them.

Immediately arising from our nature is that there is always more than one idea in relation to any situation. Therefore immediately a consequence of our nature we are always faced with choice ...what ideas are best adopted and applied in this situation?

We will explore the consequences of choice shortly. But first I turn to two questions crucial in fully understanding the nature of our choice at work.

1. What drives organization success?
2. What is the exact relationship between organization success and social wellbeing?

I explored these questions greater detail in essays, Work, flow and job satisfaction, supported by Understanding and managing financial reports, Achieving the perfect game plan to double profits.

What drives organization success?

OPD theory is very clear, namely that underlying every strategy there is a set of ideal actions referred to as the behavioral structure that must be identified and acted out if the strategy is to be achieved (Okay, strategy is agreed. Now what?)

The organization structure is defined by deriving from strategy the KPIs to be achieved and grouping like KPI with like. Then identifying divisions, teams and roles in each team.

For every goal there are actions called ideal actions that must be acted out for the goal to be achieved. It follows, the specification of a role is the KPI result expected from the role with the ideal actions that are agreed as offering the greatest chance of greatest success with the KPI. The role specification is referred to as the game plan for the role, and defines the actions required by the person assigned the role such as they have greatest chance of greatest success with the expected outputs in the role.

The theory leads to the requirement of the executive, namely that to drive strategic success then they must guide identification and delivery of the appropriate game plans (refer The Mind of the CEO).

Corporate success defined by the extent the leadership succeed in perfect game plans perfectly delivered.

What is the exact relationship between organization success and social wellbeing?

In Work, flow and job satisfaction I used Ashby intellectual tools to show the following equations.

OPD-SHRM→ organization results (1)

This defines the link between OPD strategic human resource management and the impact on corporate results. The greater clarity and aptness of game plans, and the more they are acted out, the better the result.

The next three equations then follow logically.

Organization results → economic results (2)

Economic success → community wealth (3)

Community wealth → community health (4)

These equations define how the flow of personal effectiveness in a job ripples through the economy and impacts community health. This effect is captured in equation (5), which states that personal work effectiveness has an ultimate effect on community health.

OPD-SHRM → community health (5)

In short, every one doing their job as effectively as they can is their direct contribution to the greater social good.

The circumstances are rather more complicated, in that the link between work effort and community wealth is moderated by the governance and ownership of organizations and hence is not always as direct effect as implied in equation (5).

OPD-SHRM → (owners and governance) →community health (6)

Equation (6) expresses the circumstance, stating that effort at work flows to the community but moderated and influenced by directors and owners of the organizations that make up the economy of the community (for a more detailed discussion see the book Building Community Wealth and Health).

The nature of our choice

With this background understanding on what drives organization success, and insight into the link between personal work effort and community wellbeing, we can now examine the exact nature of our personal choices in regard to work. There are two immediate questions.

1. How does the broader social circumstance impact effort at work?
2. How do we go about doing a good job at work?

Understanding how broader social circumstance impacts work effectiveness

We now understand that the organizational success directly influences social wellbeing, even given moderation by governance and directors. Understanding this we can now adopt one of two positons.

• We can choose not to work and hence not contribute to community success.
• We can chose to work and contribute to community success.

Let’s assume we do not like how directors in some company govern the business. Should that mean we no longer make an effort?

To change the authorities of directors requires significant political change, we can still fight to do this, but that is seen as a separate issue and not necessarily interfering with our effort at doing a good job at work. Since if we do not do a good job, then we are failing in delivering our contribution to the greater social good.

We can adopt the attitudes as covered in the essay Work, flow and job satisfaction.

• We know there are issues in social ‘ownership and governance’, and ‘working for the man’...We can take action politically to encourage review of this economic structure of our society recognising the entrepreneur is the important creative economic driver of society but depends on the education and effort of the people to make their ideas commercial reality. Both are equally important.
• We can accept the salaries, conditions, etc., as the hygiene factors of the job. If they become unacceptable, then we could seek another job.
• We also know that people doing their job has an eventual impact on the health of the community. Therefore doing one’s bit at work is doing one’s bit for the greater good of the community.

The argument leads to the proposition that work is an essential aspect of community wellbeing. Further, that political labels such as ‘right and left’ merely deflects resource in one direction rather than another... but eventually we all share the same community, and face the same demand of having it wealthier and healthier.

We understand the role of work in modern society is exactly as it was it was in a small village 8000 years ago. Our personal relationship to the greater social good is exactly the same today as it was in a village 8000 years ago (for more detail refer Work, flow and job satisfaction).

Understanding how our attitude to personal satisfaction determines work effectiveness

To what extent are we responsible for our own satisfaction?

We and we alone have access to our mind. Our satisfaction arises in our mind, it follows we have significant responsibility for our satisfaction and can do much to enable it.

We can decide that our satisfaction needs to embrace the reality of modern community life and not be at odds with it. We can look to enjoy the effort, taking satisfaction from the work while ensuring work has an appropriate place (balance) in mind in relation to family, friends and leisure activities.

As an aside, the greater depth and breadth of cooperation in modern communities means that the people in those communities have the opportunity for leisure much greater that that available to people in the small village 8000 years ago. That does not mean work is any less important, it means that there are more people and greater technology enabling more economic output per person, which means more time to do things totally of our choosing we call leisure. The converse also applies, if the economy shrinks per person, then available leisure time will be curtailed.

We may debate the definition of GDP, but the final number/definition does not matter. What matters is the GDP/capita, and regardless of how GDP is defined if GDP growth does not match population growth, then there will be social tension and possibly violence. It is all specified in the consequences of the equations above.

Work is an essential aspect of modern life. I am the only person with access to my mind, therefore I can work to manage my mind so my life is as satisfying as I can make it for me.

What if the team leader is not very supportive, should we allow that to undermine daily personal satisfaction? We can decide that daily satisfaction will be driven most by self, and not by how others may act toward self. This ethic toward self is one of those broader ideas in our thoughts we need bring to account, since it will directly influence on how we feel and likely act at work.

I do not look to anyone else to build my personal daily satisfaction. I do not look to anyone else to ‘motivate me’. I assume full responsibility for my mind (refer Work, flow and job satisfaction).

Understanding how to do a good job at work

We know that apt and clear game plans acted out to standard are the drivers of organizational success. Perfect game plans perfectly delivered. It follows:

• Our personal success in the job begins with an apt/accurate game plan.
• We can support building the game plan if not offered to us.
• We can memorise that game plan and ensure we understand/know what exactly we need do to do a good job.
• We can make the effort to act out the game plan.
• We can make the effort to find flow in our daily actions, lose ourselves in the effort even if for only brief periods, and so seek to manage our daily satisfaction.

In full understanding of what we are doing, we can adopt attitudes that both match the reality of social circumstance, and simultaneously enable improved daily personal satisfaction.

The emergent details underlying organizational culture

The two core factors that determine performance within an organizational culture are summarized below.

1. The background general social attitudes.
• Understanding the social/community structure. People joining the organization accept the role of the organization in determining community wellbeing. Further, while they may disapprove with the extent of governance authority they also realize that such political action needs to be made independent of the need to continue with organization success as the main underpinning of community wellbeing.
• Acceptance of self-responsibility. People understand that their personal daily satisfaction is in their mind, and they and they alone have access to their mind. The organization supports and encourages people to find personal life satisfaction by enabling emotional intelligence and other self-management skills.
2. Factors determining performance on the job.
• Management as improving and memorizing game plans. People work with the team leaders to sharpen game plans.
• Adopt game plans in mind. People understand how they work as a species, namely that the ideas they hold on frames in mind act as internal glasses determining what they see and how they react. They understand that the beginning of satisfactory performance is to memorize what needs done, when. That is memorize the agreed game plans of the role so they know, and they know they know.
• Self-motivation. Effort in acting out the ideas on a frame in mind depends on the emotions associated with the ideas. Therefore the game plan needs imbued with positive emotion. Each person actively aims to apply their own positive emotions to the game plan.
• Leadership. Every team leader supports people by enabling them to have fun while delivering the game plans, assisting people to imbue their game plan with positive emotions, guiding them enjoy work every day.

Factors 1 and 2 summarize the core of a high performing organizational culture. These factors are implemented with an underlying respect for all people, this associated with the expectation that everyone is part of the team and doing their part in team performance.

These factors are not an opinion, but a deduced consequence of the analysis of organizational culture beginning with a general theory of psychology.

There are other factors, but they tend to be rather superficial factors of style such as dress codes, titles, formality of authority, and secondary relative to the two core factors.

Conclusion

We can find an analogy in sports, where in the game there is disciplined focus on the game plan. There is much evidence exhibited by sports people as they wrestle with their emotions to deliver that which they know they need do to achieve.

It is no different in organizations, except in the organization the effort is much more than a burst for a short period, but is quiet, steady, focus and concentration perhaps for at least eight hours a day five days a week.

There is no avoiding this analysis. Excluding the superficial differences that may exist between organizational cultures, the core of all organizational cultures is exactly the same: The striving for perfect game plans perfectly delivered

A high performing organizational culture is every person striving to identify and deliver the perfect game plan in roles assigned to them. Actively ensuring nothing gets in the way of them doing what they need do, and actively supporting all the team enjoy doing it.