Management Theories And Organizational Culture

High vs Low Context Culture

Some major differences in High context and low context cultures are:

High Context	Low Context
Close relations with people	Not so close relations with people Save Time On Research and Writing Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper. Get My Paper
Very long relations and strong too	Not so long term relations
E.g. Family	E.g. Corporate relations
Less Visibility and less formality	Clear Visibility but more formality
Knowledge is mostly not transferred.	Knowledge is most of the times transferred to other (Nguyen & Heeler, 2007).
Internalized understanding between people is more	There is not such internalized understating with in people.
The decisions and the relations mostly depend on the face to face relationships with people.	The decision and the relations are mostly dependent on the activities which are to be done in the specific time.
Some examples: Party with Friends, Family Gatherings, Campus Friends, Hosting a friend overnight etc.	Some Examples: A supermarket Chain, Any convenience store, A hotel Meeting etc.

Technology has definitely changes the look of the whole world. The progressions in the computers and the technology which now days is used in rising up the efficiency of the business. The structure of the organization always adapts to the changes done by the restructuring departments, position needs modification and adding or removing of jobs. The staff of the firms mostly needs the training on the new programs of software or equipment or tools as per the requirement of the job if it becomes the standard of the industry (Farhangh & Abbaspour, 2013). The new businesses which are web based mostly add new departments or new jobs for specializing the newest areas of technology. There are multiple occasions when implementing the new technology might hinder a few jobs or positions making them removed from the organizations (Raymond, 1993). For example: There are some places where work is still done manually yet with the help of the technology, the people who did work manually were out of jobs because of the technology.

The three types of decision making approaches of the managers are as follows:

1. Rationality: This approach is very systematic and also step by step procedure which helps in making decisions. This approach believes that the firm is monetarily based and managed by the manager’s decision which has goals and also have the complete knowledge(Uzonwanne, 2016).
2. Bounded Rationality: This approach is all about making proposes which people usually do not utilize ideal decision making approaches as the outcome of the cognitive limitations in the capability in understanding critical knowledge(Yanoff, 2007). This also helps on the issues linked with the obstacles that come in accessing of the information. In fact, this idea suggests that the people like the approaches which are not natural and which depend on the heuristics for making this procedure aptly manageable.
3. Intuition: When people talk about the intuition, they describe something which is understood and taken or claimed by personal instincts and emotions that come from within. This means that that emotions or information that is coming from within has no evidence instead it is just a conscious thought or a rational procedure(Tat & Abdullah, 2011).

The force Field analysis is actually a tool used for systematically analyzing the elements which are found in the problems which are complex. This tool frames the issues with respect to the factors or the pressures which supports the status quo or the retraining forces (Swanson & Creed, 2014). In addition to that it aligns with the factors that support changes in the wished direction or the driving forces. The element can be individuals, resources, behaviors, cultures, policies, beliefs, requirements and the desires etc. Force field analysis being a tool for managing the change, it supports in identifying the elements which should be addressed and monitored if the changes are to be successful (Shrivastava, 2017). 

There are some steps in the procedure of the force field analysis:

1. Definition of the Problem: The problems can be defined by analyzing the nature of the present situation which is not acceptable and also the requirements and the modifications if there are any. This is necessary for disintegrating the particular issues from the things which are working quite well already.
2. Identifying the Change Goal: The defining of the desired scenario which is worth working for is to be done in this step. This definition of the goal should be as specific as it can be.
3. Identifying the Driving Forces: The identification of the factors or pressures which helps in the changing the desired directions are to be done. Then the strengths which are relatable with the forces are to be identified. Then the placing of the driving forces on the chart is done.
4. Identification of the Restraining Forces: The factors or the pressures that resist the proposed change and helps in the maintenance of the status quo are to be identified.
5. Development of the Change Strategy: The diagram which at this step would be drawn is called as state of quasi stationary equilibrium. However t his is relatively static state, the movement could be achieved by changing the factors which presently contributed to the equilibrium. The change can easily occur as the result of the combination of the flowing elements. They are: strengthening of the driving forces, addition of the new driving forces via transforming a prior restraining force and removing the restraining forces.
6. This step must involve some considerations of the possible outcomes when the equilibrium forces are distorted.

The best example of the force field analysis is that it can be used by the corporation to discover how the creative climate could be enhanced within the organisation.

IBM’s organizational culture is actually based on Thomas J. Watson’s hard work for amalgamating the firm that was in reality known as the Computing Tabulating Recoding Company and it was formed on the integration of the four firms (Naikal & Chandra, 2013). Watson’s objective was to actually unite the complete firm and making sure of the long term success that it faces in future. The efforts that he made in creating and changing the firm made the foundation for IBM’s present corporate culture of think. The characteristics of the culture is been again redefined in a new way which is based on the beliefs of the values. This was the firm’s method for establishing the main values via the participation of the employees. Presently, there are some following elements in the culture of IBM which defines its corporate culture very specifically. They are:  

1. Radical Thinking: It is a primary and defining element of the firm’s organizational culture. This culture characteristic continues as a main influence in the development of the firm since 100 years now in operations of the technology industry. The managers of IBM motivates the employees for engaging in thinking which has the probable possible for disrupting the status quo and diverge from the conventional ways in the business.
2. Dedication to success of clients: IBM’s goal is to manage the high quality of customer service for addressing the requirements of the information technology business. This type of culture characterizes the vitality of the customer relationships in the identification of the success of the business(Barbosa, 2014).
3. Innovation: The focus of this feature is to address t he market demands via development of the products. This is one of the firm’s rigorous strategies for growth and the competitive advantage. 

Dr. Kotter says that firms can become successful by doing some changes in the firm by following the 8 step model for leading change. The eight steps are:

• Create logic of urgency.
• Set up a influential guiding coalition
• Build up a change idea.
• Communicate the vision for buy-in(Paul, 2015).
• Empower broad-based action and remove obstacles to the vision;
• Plan for and create short-term wins;
• Never let up—drive new behaviors and practices and avoid regression;
• Incorporate changes into the corporate culture.

While IBM was going through a struggling time, it came to the conclusion after the whole diagnosis t hat it has to take some measures like cutting and employees being laid off.

• The first step to implement the Kotter process was to create the sense of urgency. The people in IBM were motivated to assist with the change. The CIO laid the ground work for the transformation by announcing that people should not fear of the worst to come rather they should focus on other things.
• The next step was to create the coalition of the correct people for leading the change. IBM used its massive executive level for conveying the message of cohesiveness and compatibility with in the associates gaining the momentum for the need to change.
• Next was the 3^rdand 4^th stage where a clear vision was to be established for building the effective communication and leading the change. Louis developed the vision for the firm which first detailed about the breaking of the firm. Nevertheless, after he spoke with the stakeholders and evaluating the feasibility to rebuild the firm, he decided to make a new vision for IBM. That vision was that the firm will move towards the sustainability and competitive advantage.
• Then came getting rid of the problems that comes in the way of achieving the vision. For this the internal issues and barriers were removed. The realigning the incentives and the pay scales of the people was the first step to achieve the vision. This gave the employees a good productivity for achieving their goal.
• Then the short term wins were generated. People were being rewarded for their work and were also appreciated in front of the whole teams which gave the employees an extra nudge for achieving the vision.
• Then the last two steps helped in the firm to manage the success that the change brought the firm. According to the last step when the company achieved its vision, it has to then be ready for implementing the new changes whenever required.

This is how IBM followed the Kotter’s eight steps and managed with the changes that made the firm successful and it still comes in the list of the successful companies of the world. 

References 

Barbosa, E., 2014. Organizational culture oriented for innovation: Influencing variables. The Ma?opolska School of Economics in Tarnów Research Papers Collection, 25(2).

Farhangh, A. A. & Abbaspour, A., 2013. The Effect of Information Technology on Organizational Structure and Firm Performance: An Analysis of Consultant Engineers Firms (CEF) in Iran. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 81, pp. 644-649.

Naikal, p. & Chandra, S., 2013. Organisational Culture: A Case Stud. International Journal of Knowledge Mangement and Practice, 1(2).

Nguyen, A. & Heeler, R. M., 2007. igh-low context cultures and price-ending practices. Journal of Product & Brand Managemen, 16(3).

Paul, M. L., 2015. The Future of Organizational Change Management. [Online]
Available at: https://essay.utwente.nl/67268/1/Paul_BA_BMS.pdf
[Accessed 19 October 2018].

Raymond, L., 1993. Information technology and organizational structure revisited: implications for performance. [Online]
Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/39b5/b4bbbb0555b43934528479e7e8d6e2e32087.pdf
[Accessed 19 October 2018].

Shrivastava, S. R., 2017. Force field analysis: An effective tool in qualitative research. Journal of Current Research in Scientific Medicine, 3(2), pp. 139-140.

Swanson, D. J. & Creed, A., 2014. Sharpening the Focus of Force Field Analysis. Journal of Change Management, 14(1).

Tat, H. H. & Abdullah, M. M. B., 2011. Situational Factors and Intuitive Decision Style among Academicians. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(7).

Uzonwanne, F., 2016. Rational Model of Decision Making. Springer International Publishing, pp. 1-6.

Yanoff, T. G., 2007. Bounded Rationality. Philosophy Compass, 2(3), pp. 534-563.