These dimensions provide a framework for analysing national culture and for considering effects of this on management and organisation (Pheng and Yuquan, 2002).
This ‘unpackaging’ of national culture has been described as a ‘paradigm shift’ in cross-cultural research. (Minkov and Hofstede, 2011) Hofstede’s and other similar studies (Globe etc.) findings and indices are of huge benefit in terms of project organisation and project management. From a construction project point of view, to be successful, companies managing projects across borders need, to understand the culture of the countries in which they operate, or at least the differences. “Differences in national cultures call for differences in management practices” (Bredillet et al, 2009).
“Ignoring or mishandling differences can mean an inability to retain and motivate employees, misreading the potential of cross-border alliances, marketing and advertising blunders, and failure to build sustainable sources of competitive advantage. Mishandling cultural differences can render otherwise successful managers and organizations ineffective and frustrated when working across cultures.” (Low & Shi, 2002)
Organisational Culture
Culture is defined as corporate or organisational within organisations. It has been described as “how we do things around here to succeed (Schneider, 2000, cited in Ankrah et al, 2006). It is real and has tangible impacts, knowledge of this phenomenon is vital to understanding what is happening in organisations, how to run them and how to improve them (Schein, 1992). Organisational culture is shaped by technology, markets and the cultural preferences of leaders and employees (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, 2006)
Being a part of an organisation modifies the thinking, ideas, and values of an individual (Andersen et al, 2009). Organisational culture defines appropriate behaviour, governs processes, motivates individuals and asserts solutions (Hampden-Turner, 1994, cited in Ankrah et al, 2006).Organisations are groupings of people with a purpose, they have their own distinct core identity, nature, character and culture. (Ankrah and Proverbs, 2004). Organisational culture can be used to increase productivity, economic performance, profitability, turnover (Gupta, 2011) Organisational culture is important when trying to implement initiatives such as supply chain management solutions (Hampden-Turner, 1994, cited in Ankrah et al, 2006) and total quality management, requiring a complete overhaul of corporate culture and management approach (Quazi and Padibjo, 1997). It is invisible and an organisation’s culture, influenced by its native culture will struggle internationally without appreciation of the local culture in which it is operating, “many multinational companies apply formulas in overseas areas that are derived from, and are successful in their own culture. International management consulting firms of Anglo-Saxon origin are still using similar methods to the neglect of cultural differences.” (Trompenaars, Hampden-Turner, 2006) Such approaches can undermine operations “In practice, beneath the surface, the silent forces of culture operate a destructive process, biting at the roots of centrally developed methods which do not fit locally.”(ibid)
Within organisations there may be sub-cultures based around departments. An organisation could have a shared mission and strategic intent. The sub-cultures, developed within the ‘overall’ culture of the organisation, could organise themselves differently in their efforts to achieve it (Schein, 1999). If the organisations beliefs, attitudes and values are suited to the particular environment it faces it will mature successfully. Initially there will be an emergence of sub-cultures based on geography, markets, function or products. These will be in congruence yet different to the core values, attitudes and beliefs of the main organisation. These are called silos, their members may build invisible boundaries, this makes it harder to communicate and integrate efforts (Industry Culture: A Need for Change Report 2001-008-C). Despite efforts to break down these in-house cultures or silos, different disciplines still retain their cultural identity. If organisations are heavily project based then varying project cultures can emerge. “The culture that exists in a new product development project run by the marketing division may differ significantly from the culture typically found in projects run by a support function such as IT or engineering”. (Cooke-Davies et al, 2000)
Taxonomies of Organizational Culture
Hofstede showed within one multinational the marked differences in cultures based on national norms. All organizations can thus be marked on the basis of these dimensions (see appendix 1 for two sets, Trompenaars and Hampden- Turner, and Hofstede). To deal with a multitude of dimensions, typologies can be employed, they attempt to simplify the means of assessing culture, describing a number of types. One notable contributor is Charles Handy. Handy identified the club, role, task and person typology, he based these on dimensions of “the degree of centralization, degree of formalization, selection and succession, sources of power and influence, control and coordination, task organization and rewards and sanctions.”(Ankarah and Langford, 2005)
Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (2006) highlight three aspects of organisational structure important in defining organisational culture:
- The relationship between employees and their organisation.
- The vertical or hierarchical system of authority defining superiors and subordinates.
- The general views of employees about the organisation’s destiny, purpose and goals and their place in this.
Organisations are undergoing change, traditional hierarchical organizations, laden with rules, burdened with communication protocols prescribed by their position in the hierarchy are too inflexible and slow for organizations to react to new demands. This leads to communication gridlocks, the organization clogs up through an inability to communicate information between relevant personnel efficiently, structure is restrictive and cumbersome. (1995,Hastings)
Project Management Culture
Large organisations are increasingly using project teams to implement change. (Firth and Krut, 1991) Hierarchical cultures are deemed more appropriate in stable markets, their structure suited to a particular environment. This model is appropriate in established markets, where there is repetition of tasks, products etc. and continuity, there is little or slow change. In contrast, project management cultures are more adaptive, they are suited to dynamic environments. Project management organisations are matrix structures, specialists tend to use more initiative and contribute at all levels they are set up for one off tasks. In these organisations, tasks are unique; the environment is one of volatility and change. In hierarchical organisations ultimate power is at the top of the structure. The leader is at the top, the middle section is the weak part, amongst the workers. Project organisations are different, like webs, the strongest part is a centre. The culture is interdependent, based on teamwork, task focused, not individuals. A line manager would struggle to adapt to the structure of project management, he would have to learn to manage in a different way (ibid).
Line management and project management cultures have similarities but some dimensions are opposite. (See appendix 2 for table indicating the dimensions of line and project management.)
Project management has evolved as a discipline in response to increasing project type work, it is supported by a growing body of research academic literature. There has developed industry standards, codes of conducts, these act to reinforce the emerging project management culture.
Project Organisation Culture
The project organisation is a temporary coalition and can include an array actors from a myriad of organizations with varying cultural attributes and orientations (Ankrah and Langford, 2005). These actors have differing perspectives and as mentioned may be active on other contracts. It is the responsibility of the project manager to coordinate these actors. They have to bridge the gap between disciplines and organisations and co-ordinate efforts on behalf of the client. Since no two organisations are the same and particularly considering the diversity of the actors involved in the process, project management is complex and requires tact, leadership skills and an ability to manage constructive teamwork.
Project organisations are affected by the culture of the base organisation which sets up projects “Projects are organizations within an organization. They cannot be unaffected by the culture of the rest of the organization…Many projects are based on the matrix organisation principle, which means that people from the base organization work part-time on projects (Andersen et al,2009).
From a construction perspective the list of members include clients, various consultants, architects, contractors, project managers. In the past the culture has been described as being plagued by adversary and self-interest.
Industry Culture
In the construction industry project organisations have failed to exceed and generally been unable to fulfil client expectations (Ankrah and Langford, 2005). Construction reports have long since berated the construction industry. It has been described as adversarial and antagonistic. Construction is a very competitive and risky business, participants have conflicting objectives. Clients have become reliant on penalty clauses in the formulation of contract documentation. It has traditionally been labelled male orientated and macho driven. Egan in Rethinking Construction emphasised the need to rethink industry culture as central to creating a modern, successful industry. Management needs to be improved to implement and accomplish this change in culture. The traditional focus has been on the contract, the project. He describes it as dog eat dog, about lowest price. These are cultural perspectives that have become entrenched, the norm. Egan and Latham before him say the key to improvement is to become client-focussed. Adversary needs to be replaced by co-operation. These are pertinent issues in improving the image of the industry and attracting the right personnel.
To alter this culture, Egan and Latham advocated the adoption of partnering as a way of improving industry culture. Partnering has been described as:
‘‘A long-term commitment by two or more organisations for the purpose of achieving specific business objectives by maximising the effectiveness of each participant’s resources. This requires changing traditional relationships to a shared culture without regard to organization boundaries. The relationship is based upon trust, dedication to common goals ,and an understanding of each other’s individual expectations and values. Expected benefits include improved efficiency and cost-effectiveness, increased opportunity for innovation, and the continuous improvement of quality products and services.’’(CII, 1991, p.4) (Cited in Bygballe et al, 2010)
For the project manager and the project organisation the successful integration of partnering would seem to offer great benefits in terms of reducing conflict, improving productivity and client satisfaction and certainly easing the task of the project manager through the natural collaborative culture it suggests. It does seem to be an idyllic scenario that disregards the complexities of embedded cultural patterns of behaviour and though it could be implemented it would certainly take time for such a cultural transformation to permeate the industry. The biggest problem could be the fragmented nature of the industry.
There have been improvements in other industries through the use of partnering, however, as yet in construction, despite great interest, there has been limited progress. Progress has been made between clients and main contractors but the partnerships haven’t focussed sufficiently on involving sub-contractors and suppliers. (Bygballe et al, 2010).
Conclusion
Projects can be set in a multitude of environments, home and abroad. They can contain a diverse range of nationalities, actors with different backgrounds, from different organisations and different professions in a dynamic workplace. Project managers need to gather this mix, develop a team and deliver the project to the client’s requirements. Culture and a good appreciation of the dynamics is very important and project managers need to appreciate this. To get the best out of the actors, the project manager needs to develop a project culture based on co-operation and respect, potential culture based issues need to be identified. The project manager is at the centre of the matrix, this comes with responsibility.
Within the construction industry the project manager may have a daunting task on certain projects because of adversarial tendencies. Procurement needs to be looked at to try and reduce this. The industry needs to move away from lowest price, try and encourage effective partnering that is holistic in that all players are integrated and empowered. This may break down cultural barriers and improve best value, quality and client satisfaction. This would improve the image of the industry and encourage more talented people to enter the industry.
This report could have maybe looked at total quality management and lean construction as ways of enhancing industry culture. It could also have included a look at Cameron and Quinn and their competing values framework. The subject of culture is researched vastly from many different angles, the challenge of this report has been in identifying the key issues and hopefully these have been covered.
Bibliography
Andersen, E. S. Dysvik, A. and Vaagaasar (2009) “ Organizational rationality and project management”. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 2, No.4, pp. 479-498.
Ankrah, N.A. and Langford, D. A. (2005) “Architects and contractors: a comparative study of organizational cultures”, Construction Management and Economics Vol. 23, 595-607.
Ankrah, N. A. Proverbs, D. Antwi, A. and Debrah, Y. (2006) “Towards a new approach for assessing organizational culture in construction projects organizations: overcoming methodological challenges” pp743-756
Bredillet, C. Yatim, F. and Ruiz, P. (2009) “Project management deployment: The role of cultural factors”. International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 28, 183-193.
Cooke-Davies, T. Hough, G. and Rees, D. (2000) “How culture impacts projects”. The Antidote from CSBS, Issue 27.
Deal, T. and Kennedy, A. (1982), Corporate Culture, Addison, Wesley, Readings, MA.
Firth, G. (1991), “Introducing a project management culture”, European Management Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4.
Gupta, B. (2011), “A comparative study of organizational strategy and culture across industry”. Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol.18, No. 4, pp. 510-528.
Hastings, C. (1995), “Building the culture of organizational networking: Managing projects in the new organization” International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 13(4) pp.259-263.
Hofstede, G.(1983), “The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories”, Journal of International Business Studies, Fall, pp76-88.
Hofstede, G. (1991), Culture and Organizations, McGraw-Hill, London.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Industry Culture: A Need for Change Report 2001-008-C-05 Research Program C: Delivery and Management of Built Assets. Project Team Integration: Communication, Coordination and Decision Support.
Minkov, M. and Hofstede, G (2011) “The evolution of Hofsede’s doctrine” Cross-Cultural Management, An International Journal, Vol. 18, No.1, pp 10-20.
Low, S.P. and Shi, Y. (2001) “Cultural influences on organizational processes in international projects: two case studies”, Work study, Vol. 50, No. 7 pp. 276-285
Oney- Yazici, E. Giritli, H, Topcu-Oraz, G and Acar, E. (2007), “Organizational culture: the case of Turkish construction industry”. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. Vol. 14, No. 6 pp. 519-531
Oudenhoven, J.P.V. (2001), “Do organizations reflect national cultures? A 10-nation study” . , pp. 89-107.
Pheng, L.S. and Yuquan, S. (2002) “An exploratory study of Hofstede’s cross-cultural dimensions in construction projects”, Management Decision, 40/1, 7-16
Project Management Institute (2000). “ A guide to the project management body of knowledge” (PMBOK® guide). Newtown Square, PA: Author. Cited in “Project Management: A cultural literary review”. (2005) Project management Institute, Vol. 36, No.1, 5-14.
Quazi, H. A. and Padibjo, S. R. (1997) “A journey toward total quality management through ISO 9000 certification- A Singapore experience”. The TQM Magazine 9(5), 364-371. Cited in Pheng, L.S. and Teo. J.A. (2004), ”Implementing TQM in construction firms”, Journal of Management in Engineering 20:1 (8).
Trompenaars, F. & Hampden-Turner, C. (1997), Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Cultural Diversity in Business (Second Edition) London: Nicholas Brealey
Schein. E.H. (1992) Organizational Culture and Leadership. 2nd edition, Jossey-Bass
Bygballe, L. Jahre,A.M. Sward, A. (2010) “Partnering relationships in construction: A literature review”, Journal of Purchasing and Supply ManagementVol. 16, Issue 4, Pages 239-253.
Appendices
Appendix 1: Hofstede (first4)Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner dimensions of culture
Appendix 2 : A comparison of hierarchical and project management dimensions