Corporate Culture and Strategy Progress

Question: Discuss about the Corporate Culture and Strategy Progress. Answer: Corporate culture and strategy Corporate culture and strategy are interlinks and Balmer (2012) states that corporate culture is a factor for company's long-term success. The strategy must be rational and logical, clear and simple and easy to comprehend b the employees; while, on the other hand, culture is emotional, ever changing, and complex. Bolton et al. (2013) depicts that cultures are the human force working in the organization and the customer to whom the company is dealing with. Retailing industry can be considered as one of the famous fields where these factors can structures. The strategy of a company comprises of its goals, objectives and activities to accomplish it; however, culture represents the value, practices and behaviour of the working personnel. In the retail industry, it is important for the employee to behave good with the customers and the managers have to behave in a friendly way with the employee. Eccles et al. (2012) believes that happy employee serves the best to the customer to make them happy and thus it shows Clan culture of the organization. At the same time, innovation and entrepreneurial focus makes this industry successful enough by introducing digital technology for making the working procedure easy, which highlights the Adhocracy culture of the organization. Market leaders consider three value disciplines of the organization- customer intimacy, product leadership and operational excellence. Every organization must have to assess the problem and finding the cause and then solve the problem by building the organisational ecosystem and culture to support this discipline. Schneider et al. (2013) defines that every company including retail industry, thinks twice to adhere new accounting procedures to its Finance department; however, these organizations needs a business strategy that drives the success of the organization by linking the units and functions together. Different people have a single motive to do business that is to earn maximum profit however in a different way thus possess different perception regarding organization culture. Some leader thinks that organization business approach is culture while some managers believe that monetary rewards and non-monetary rewards drive the organizational culture. Balmer (2012) portrays that sense-making ability in organizations defines the culture, where creating shared awareness and understanding of individuals perspectives is interlinked. However, to the extent, it is important to assume the organizational culture as the immunity system for the business as good culture prevents "wrong thinking" and "wrong people." Some leading organization emphasizes more on the way to achieve the goals by valuing the employee's intelligence and motivate them to present new and innovative ideas so that better results can be obtained. In this context, Zappos, hire people from the cultural background is that they can understand the customer's requirement and serve their best on behalf of the company. This not only makes their employee happy but they boost their talent to come up with new strategies. Thus, retail indyctry also follow the same structure along with following a Clan culture so that if someone having a bad day, they can go to other and share the adversity and then find a solution collaboratively. Murray and Fortinberry (2015) also depicts that this company bribes their low performer employee a worth of $1000 to leave the org anization. Moreover, this organization implements strategy not necessarily a corporate strategy to make their customers happy and that makes them a successful company in modern times. Moreover, Toyota follows the culture for assessing the cause of the problem and then solving it for supporting their product and process design and this help them to transform from a not-so-famous company to a successful organization. Seven dimension of culture comprises of universalism and particularism, individualism and communitarianism, specific and diffuse; neutral and affective, achievement and ascription, past, present and future, internal and external and effectively maintained by a retail industry (Shahzad et al. 2012). Toyota implements particularism as it provides autonomy and flexibility to people for making their decisions. Moreover, communitarianism can be represented by appraisal and reward of group performance and avoid showing favoritism. Retail industries also follow diffused culture where they emphasize on building on good relation before focussing on business objectives. These companies provides every required material to customer and must emphasize on transparenc y regarding plantation of their new factory and a new model to their internal stakeholders, which signify the ascription culture of the organization by showing respect to people in authority and encourages the employee to perform well in their role (Guiso et al. 2015). Alvesson and Sveningsson (2015) depict that company cultures are like country cultures and traditionally individual have to work with these cultures by their existing resources while not changing the culture. Moreover, in contemporary organization leadership ability is required for bringing appropriate change in the culture of the organization for better productivity and profitability. In this blog, there are two approaches for depicting organizational culture- Typology or geometric shape a model and a textual descriptionof the elements of the culture. However, the author here is correct that textual description model is more effective as an employee cannot understand the detail behind the pictorial representation of the typology; whereas, they know about the minute details of the changed system though a descriptive model. The benefits of Typology model is that employee tends to remember the picture and labels of typology and can interpret the meaning of these strategies in their own term. Moreover, changes can be drives at any stage or for each element or combination of elements of the model and it is easy to formulate by the managing authorities. Structure and Strategy It is true that structure follows strategy as strategy planning defines the organizations purpose and goals to identify opportunities and constraints regarding the strategy. Fullan (2014) defines that strategy emphasizes on what to achieve and structure defines what to achieve. Thus, it can be concluded that structure can include anything that supports the strategy. Holacracy focuses on innovation and experimentation for making the business approach effective for attaining more profit. Flexibility and adaptability are a necessity in a world where technology is changing day by day. Holacracy is used towards a manager-less decision-making statements (Denning 2014). Unlike traditional way of doing business under a particular boss, Zappos now function as groups, or circles, of people rather than miniature hierarchies. The primary advantage of adopting this strategy is that it had opened up lines of communication between teams and ensures employee engagement. On the other hand, bureaucracy does not emphasize in employees and objectives, but it focuses on the approach to which employee achieves these goals. The administration does not define the way whether traditional of modern technology but to achieve productivity and profitability. Innovations are crucial for organization like retail industry also, which reacts successfully to the emergence of new competitors, technological advancements and better productivity and assures the popularity among community. This can be clearly represented by the contingency factors that are followed in Zappos. Dager (2014) portrays that there are five contingency factors - strategy, environment, organizations size, organizations age and technology. In Zappos, the constitution in holacracy works like fledgling democracies and everyone can work like managing authorities and hence everyone is liable for dictatorship or self-governance. Reference List Alvesson, M. and Sveningsson, S., 2015.Changing organizational culture: Cultural change work in progress. Routledge. Balmer, J.M., 2012. Strategic corporate brand alignment: Perspectives from identity based views of corporate brands.European Journal of Marketing,46(7/8), pp.1064-1092. Bolton, P., Brunnermeier, M.K. and Veldkamp, L., 2013. Leadership, coordination, and corporate culture.The Review of Economic Studies,80(2), pp.512-537. Dager, J., 2014. Holacracy, Zappos and Standard Work. Denning, S., 2014. Making Sense of Zappos and Holacracy.Forbes blog, Jan,15. Eccles, R.G., Ioannou, I. and Serafeim, G., 2012.The impact of a corporate culture of sustainability on corporate behavior and performance(No. W17950). National Bureau of Economic Research. Fullan, M., 2014.Leading in a culture of change personal action guide and workbook. John Wiley Sons. Guiso, L., Sapienza, P. and Zingales, L., 2015. The value of corporate culture.Journal of Financial Economics,117(1), pp.60-76. Murray, B. and Fortinberry, A., 2015. The Science of Creating the Right Culture for Your Organization.Effective Executive,18(2), p.45. Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M.G. and Macey, W.H., 2013. Organizational climate and culture.Annual review of psychology,64, pp.361-388. Shahzad, F., Luqman, R.A., Khan, A.R. and Shabbir, L., 2012. Impact of organizational culture on organizational performance: an overview.Interdisciplinary journal of contemporary research in business,3(9), p.975.