CULTURE CHANGE AS LEVERAGE FOR STRATEGY
IMPLEMENTATION
Master thesis, MscBA, specialization Change Management
University of Groningen, Faculty of Management and Organization
December 8, 2008
Abstract
Philips Lighting Winschoten is currently implementing a new strategy. However, the implementation of strategy is complex and not always successful due to a variety of reasons. Failure in most change processes can be traced back to the organisation’s culture. The main aim of this study is to investigate how culture can leverage the process of PLW’s strategy implementation. The within this thesis investigated key elements of culture are leadership, communication, and training and education.
Twelve executive employees were interviewed in order to measure their perspective on organisational culture and strategy implementation. Main topics of these interviews were leadership, communication, and training and education. The current culture has been measured by Cameron and Quinn’s Organization Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI). Next to strategy implementation and organisational culture, questionnaires are used to measure the perception of PLW’s employees towards communication.
Preface
After having learned a lot about organisational change during the classes I have attended, Philips Lighting Winschoten offered me the opportunity to experience organisational change in practice. This master’s thesis is based on these experiences. Therefore, I would like to mention that I am very grateful for the chance that is given to me.
Throughout the whole period of research I have experienced a lot of freedom to conduct my research. As well, I had the privileges to attend MT meetings, to co-operate with an external consultant, and actively participate within the change process. I would not have had these privileges without the mandate of my supervisor, John Preston. Therefore, I would like to thank John Preston. In addition, I would like to thank Cor Jongeling for his enthusiasm and the conversations we had. Furthermore, I would like to show gratitude to Anke Brouwer who offered me worth full feedback.
As well, I would like to thank my supervisor at the faculty of economics and business Leen de Waal for his feedback and suggestions.
Last but certainly not least, I would like to mention my girlfriend, my parents, my brother, my sister, and my friends for their support during the writing of this master’s thesis.
Jan Erik Huininga
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 4
2. Theory 7
2.1 Strategy 7
Deliberate approach to strategy 7
Emergent approach to strategy 8
Equifinality 8 2.2 Strategy implementation 9 Change management 9 2.3 Organisational Culture 12 2.4 Cultural change 15 Leadership 17 Communication 19
Education and training 20
2.5 Conceptual model and sub-questions 22
3. Methodology 24 3.1 Interviews 24 3.2 OCAI 25 3.3 Questionnaire 25 4 Results 27 4.1 Strategy 27 4.2 Strategy Implementation 27 4.3 Organisational culture 29 4.4 Leadership 31
4.5 Training and education 33
4.6 Communication 35
4.7 Communication questionnaire 37
5. Discussion and conclusion 39
5.1 General conclusion 46
5.2 Recommendations 47
5.3 Limitations and strengths 51
5.4 Scientific implications 51
5.5 Further research 52
References 53
1. Introduction
Strategy implementation is not particularly popular among many managers because the fact that implementation of even the most excellently prepared strategies are burdened with problems (Noble, 1999; Hrebiniak, 2006). According to Hrebiniak (2006) the utmost problem that impedes strategy implementation is related to the inability to manage change. Hrebiniak adds that many change related problems are related with organisational culture. This is underlined by Noble (1999) while the latter considers politics, communication problems, and struggles for power and leadership as main obstacles to strategy implementation. However, the same managers see strategic planning or, the development of strategic plans as the way to a thriving future. This view on strategy and strategy implementation is straightforward, since most strategic plans will not come to complete fruition. Too often, the translation of strategic plans into adequate actions fail due to the inability to react to unexpected events whereby expected results fail to materialise (Mintzberg, 1994; Noble, 1999). The translation of strategic plans into action is seen as critical to successful strategy implementation, and is currently a main issue that Philips Lighting Winschoten is dealing with.
Last year, Philips Lighting Winschoten (hereafter PLW) initiated a strategic change program with the objective to realign the business line Special Glass and Quartz with its environment. Philips is facing an environment with an emerging competition coming from Asia, and especially China. Competition located in China is able to produce at lower cost prices, since the costs of labour are less in China compared to Europe. Therefore PLW is striving for improvements in quality, reliability and innovation, aiming at maintaining the lead in technical advancement. On the other hand, PLW needs to offer fair prices to customers, which means that cost reduction is the other focal point of the change program. These two focus points are translated into two Ships1 which are explained hereafter.
- Ship: Zero-Defect is initiated to reduce the cost of non-quality and to meet clients’ quality demand. To do so, control, process and product quality should be improved rigorously by means of carrying out (backlog) maintenance, improving equipment and work instructions (Philips, 2008).
- Ship: 20 % cost reductions. The aim of this ship is to drastically reduce costs by means of improvement of operation efficiency. To reach significant cost reductions PLW decides to outsource the finishing department to Poland. Furthermore, a reduction in indirect personnel should bring about further cost reductions (Philips, 2008).
Abovementioned Ships are top down initiatives and both focussed on changing systems and structures. In academic literature, change initiatives that focus on structures, systems, and are instigated from the top are regarded as planned change (Bamford and Forrester, 2003; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Burnes, 2004). Besides the two Ships mentioned above, PLW is implementing another Ship with a different focus, which is discussed below.
- Ship: 1 + 1 = 3 has the purpose to change the culture at PLW in congruence with the other two ships. The focus of this ship is the development of soft skills such as, leadership, teamwork, feedback, communication and engagement of the employees toward the strategy (Philips, 2008). Improvement in both skills and engagement ought to be the catalyst of cultural change and should be of assistance in the deployment of the ship objectives (ship zero defect and ship 20% cost reduction).
In contrast with the other two Ships, Ship 1+1=3 focuses on changing the organisational culture and on developing the organisation’s human capability to implement strategy. As well, this Ship is less planned. In the literature this type of organisational change is characterized as emergent change (Bamford and Forrester, 2003; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Burnes, 2004)
The two portrayed change initiatives that are present at PLW are in academic literature identified as two dramatically different perspectives to strategy implementation i.e. planned and emergent (Bamford and Forrester, 2003; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Burnes, 2004; Dunphy and Stace, 1988, 1991).
To note, the instigated change initiative at PLW is two pronged, with on the one hand a planned aspect and on the other hand an emergent aspect. In this light, academic researchers argue that efficient and effective operations of an organisation are highly dependent on the congruence of its structure and culture (Allaire and Firsirotu, 1984). In addition, sustained organisational change cannot yield improvements in performance when only structures and systems are subject to change (Hirschhorn, 2000). Thus, to perform fundamental and sustained organisational change managers should concentrate on structure, systems, and culture (Hirschhorn, 2000, Cameron and Quinn, 1999)
process of strategy formulation and strategy implementation should be taken into account in order to reach a fundamental organisational change. As a result, the research objective is:
To create insights and recommending the management team of Philips Lighting Winschoten about how culture and cultural change can leverage strategy
2. Theory
The concepts included in the research objective will be illuminated in this section. Academic sources and internal documentation of PLW are consulted for relevant data. Different views on strategy, strategy implementation, organisational cultures, and culture change are presented first. Thereafter, elements that influence organisational culture are presented in order to give a clear picture of the research field.
2.1 Strategy
This section is concerned with how organisations formulate strategy. Two main approaches to how organisations determining and charting strategic direction are postulated. The concept strategy is continuously the subject of widely differing interpretations and definitions, which are based on diverse assumptions. Consequently none of the existing definitions are universally accepted (Burnes, 2004). However, existing definitions of strategy can be classified along commensurate features. Based on these features, two general views on strategy can be discovered. The first perspective is described as the classical or prescriptive approach to strategy formulation. The alternative and second view on strategy is named as the analytical or emergent approach to strategy formulation (Burnes, 2004a, 2004b; Mintzberg & Waters, 1985; Snow & Hambrick, 1980).
Deliberate approach to strategy. In the prescriptive context strategy is concerned as a specific
inflexible characteristics and a mathematical reliability. According to Peters and Waterman (1982) strategies constructed by using a classical approach are detrimental, while this approach suffers from paralysis through analysis and irrational rationality. With the former Peters and Waterman (1982) try to illustrate the danger of using rationality to such an extent that it becomes counterproductive and stops action. With the latter they underline the threat that rational models can be irrational, as rational techniques do not always match the circumstances at hand.
Emergent approach to strategy. The other view on strategy is a view that does not rely on
rational models and mathematics. The emphasis is not on the construction of long-term and detailed plans but on organisational and social aspect of strategy formulation (Burnes, 2004). The ultimate reason in this is that organisational capabilities will determine the variety of strategic options. Organisational capabilities are expressed as, management style, technology, resource allocation and structure and systems (Burnes, 2004). In addition, Osborn (1998) argues that emergent strategies arise from the daily activities; they often represent bottom-up ideas. Osborn maintains that the agility and adaptability of an organisation to emergent strategies is part of the organisational capability. The emergent approach doubts the usefulness of a corporate of vision (Burnes, 2004). Although, adjacent to this, the development of organisation capabilities is, or at least can be, a consciously planned process that is pursued by an organisation (Kay, 1993). This conscious process determines an organisation’s strategic direction instead of a clear vision. In effect, emergent strategy is the outcome of a process that is both guided and restricted by the organisational capabilities (Stalk, Shulman and Lawrence, 1992)
Equifinality. Hrebiniak and Joyce’s (1985:338) concept of equifinality is, “(…) equifinality,
strategies may be perfectly compatible with contextual and environmental states. The exact combination of these different strategies is left to organisational choice. However, Mintzberg (1994:263) does recognise that this organisational choice can be steered, and states, “when the leadership is able to direct, we move towards the realm of the planned strategies (…); when it can hardly nudge, we move toward the realm of the more emergent strategies (…)”. In turn, positive results are not necessarily dependent on the selected approach to strategy formulation. However, to create outperforming results out of positive results, a combination of planned and emergent strategies may be appropriate.
2.2 Strategy implementation
Strategy and strategy implementation are interlinked concepts, since strategies only produce superior results when they are successfully implemented (Noble, 1999b). Thus, the implementation process is vitally important for strategic success (Hussey, 1995; Noble, 1999b). Burnes (2004) mentions that change management is vitally important, whether it be for the implementation of a predetermined strategy, or development of organisational capabilities. Additionally, Leppit (2006) suggests that change management is seen as the vehicle that drives strategy implementation. Yet, among abundant approaches to change management, Leppit (2006) argues that theory E and theory O are the most common approaches to change management that are adopted by the contemporary business world today (Leppitt, 2006). Below an elaboration of different perspectives on change management is given.
Change management is a discipline wherein different views and fundamentals are at the
foundation of a wide spectrum of approaches to manage change (Beer and Nohria, 2000; Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). As mentioned in the introduction section, theory E and theory O are the two most common approaches to change management in contemporary business world (Leppitt, 2006).
due to their position, positional power to drive change, and top leaders have acknowledgment and stature. In short, theory E is regarded as a change approach which is top down driven, focused on structures and systems, and carefully phased with a goal as end point.
Theory O, or emergent change is the opposite of theory E, as it has the purpose to develop organisational capabilities to implement strategy (Burnes, 2004). Organisational capability is equal to the human capability to implement strategy, therefore, there is a focus on learning from the past to increase today’s effectiveness (Weick, 2000). Accordingly, as today’s effectiveness changes, this change approach consists of an ongoing process of adaptation (Weick, 2000). However, Hirschhorn (2000) argues that employees give moral meaning to structures. At the moment structures are subject of change, belief systems, norms, and values must give this structure legitimacy. So, according to theory E, the actual subject of change is changing organisational culture. Allaire and Firsirotu (1984) take a similar view, arguing that change efforts need to focus on the development of an organisational culture that fits the organisational context. In turn, theory O focusses on development of organisational capabilities, and culture. This tends to be a multi-level, cross-organisation process that is considered as iterative and disorganized (Burnes, 2004). Therefore, this change process is less planned and programmatic (Beer and Nohria, 2000), and due to the change of today’s effectiveness this type of change is regarded to be continuous (Burnes, 2004).
After having explained change management in a dichotomy of theory E and theory O, the concept of change management will be elaborated by means of the model developed by Dunphy and Stace (1988, 1991). First, to refer to organisational choice of strategy formulation, change management of organisational choice is present. As Dunphy and Stace (1991:263) pose the following thought “ The argument of this paper is that contingent rather than universalistic approaches are required. 'Soft' and 'hard' approaches are not irreconcilable but are rather parts of a broad set of contingent choices available to decision makers”. In addition, Beer and Nohria (2000) argue that theory E and theory O are two extremes and based on ideology. However, they believe that neither theory E nor theory O is perfect. Consequently, they argue that a synthesis of both may be a solution wherein the exact mode is not specified. It can be argued that the mode of organisational change is left to organisational choice (Hrebiniak and Joyce, 1985) and situational factors (Dunphy and Stace, 1988, 1991; Mintzberg, 1994).
represent situations where the primary focus is on achieving changes to the technical side of the organisation, i.e. structures, processes, and tasks. This type of changes tends to be top-down driven and less participative. Theory O and the collaborative approaches of Dunphy and Stace are both corresponding to situations of change where the human side of change is paramount (Burnes, 2004:324). However, besides the dichotomy collaborative versus the directive approach to change, which represents the mode of change, Dunphy and Stace add the variable magnitude of change. When taking the position of organisational choice (Hrebiniak and Joyce, 1985), an organisation could decide on the magnitude of change as well. Yet, theory E and theory O do not explicitly elaborate on this topic, while the theory of Dunphy and Stace conveys a continuum in which incremental and transformative modes (magnitude) of change are two extremes. In the light of the thesis’ problem statement, the model of Dunphy and Stace is able to map contingencies that are present at PLW, by using the same dichotomy as theory E, and theory O and thereby adding the variable of magnitude. The use of this model enables this research to map the current change situation at PLW more deliberately. The model is presented below.
Participative evolution. Dunphy and Stace (1988, 1991) define this type of change as a
process with incremental corrective characteristics. Another specific characteristic is the high Figure 1
Organisational change and leadership Collaborative mode
Participative Charismatic change
Evolution
Support, fine tuning, Support, radical change,
time available, bottom-up organisation out of fit, no time available
participative / consultative
Incremental Transformative
Change Change
Forced evolution Dictatorial
Transformation No support, minor adjustments, No support, radical change,
time available, top-down organisation out of fit, no time available top-down
degree of employee involvement at all levels within the organisation. Due to this high degree of employee involvement, a systemized and comprehensive approach to human resource practice and policy is exercised to guarantee involvement at all levels. This approach has two essential underlying assumptions. First, the organisation fits the environment and, therefore, needs minor adjustments. Or second the organisation is out of fit, but enough time is available to change in an incremental mode (Dunphy and Stace, 1991).
Charismatic change is a transformative change approach, which can be characterized as fast
paced and having major impact (Dunphy and Stace, 1988, 1991). This approach is used when the organisation is out of fit, and little time is available for extensive participation, and incremental change. However, organisation-wide support for change is present and, therefore, a high degree of collaboration is feasible and practised. Changes within this approach are concerned with major strategic, structural, and systems change, without much resistance from inside the organisation.
Forced evolution. This change approach is used in situations when organisations are in fit
with the environment, but need minor adjustment, or when the organisation is out of fit but time is available. The main difference compared to the participative evolution is that this approach of change is used in situations in which key interest groups oppose change. Consequently, relationships between workforce and management have a directive, or even coercive orientation, rather than collaborative one (Dunphy and Stace, 1988, 1991).
Dictatorial transformations are large-scale changes that are used when an organisation is out
of fit and with time as a critical factor. Due to lack of time, participation has no priority, and is reduced to the minimum. Moreover, there is no support within the organisation for radical change. However, since the organisation is out of fit, radical change is crucial for organisation’s survival. To accomplish radical change in a situation of no support, the organisation can be directed in the right way by means of a coercive and or directive approach of change (Dunphy and Stace, 1988, 1991).
2.3 Organisational Culture
organisational culture is “the unique configuration of norms, values, beliefs, ways of behaving and so on, that characterise the manner in which groups and individuals combine to get things done”. Both definitions perceive organisational culture as a force (norms, values etc) that define behaviour of those in the organisation, legitimizes certain forms of actions, and proscribes other forms. In addition, Cameron and Quinn assert that organisational culture has a severe influence on organisations and is increasingly important during organisational change. Moreover, Cameron and Quinn found out in their studies that a culture has several functions: “(…) culture can reduce collective uncertainties, create social order, create continuity, create a collective identity and commitment, and elucidate a vision of the future” (1999:4). Since culture has severe influence on behaviour and actions within organisations, one can deduce that organisational culture is seen as a key determinant of organisational performance, and can hamper or drive a strategy implementation process.
A successful organisational culture is one that is based on assumptions, which are appropriate to the environment in which an organisation operates (van Wely, 2002). Allaire & Firsirotu (1984) take a perspective that focuses on the inside environment of an organisation, and argue that effective and efficient operations of an organisation need a culture that is aligned with its structure and practices. Cameron and Quinn (1999) are more comprehensive and found out that successful organisations have a culture that is strong, and unique. As a result, it abides to reduce collective uncertainty. It creates social order, continuity, a collective identity, and commitment, and illuminates a vision of the future.
However, culture is more difficult to grasp and measure compared to for example financial results. Therefore, Cameron and Quinn (1999) developed a measurement tool, named OCAI (Organisational Culture Assessment Instrument), based on the Competing Value Framework. The OCAI has the ability to discern different cultures by interpreting organisational phenomena. The values that this measurement tool employs are based on empirical evidence and help to integrate many of the dimensions proposed by various authors. The purpose of this model is to assist managers to diagnose and interpret a wide variety of organisational phenomena and facilitate change in organisational culture.
dominant culture types, which serve as the foundation for the OCAI. The four dominant cultures are typified as, clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market. The OCAI is visualised and elaborated below.
Hierarchy culture. This approach to organizing organisational dynamics is based on the work
of Max Weber, who introduced scientific management to the business world at the beginning of the industrial revolution (Cameron & Quinn, 1999). Scientific management is based on certain foundations such as, the thought that organisations are rational entities, and must be administered in a rational way. In addition, employees are seen as economic beings without any motivation and, therefore in need of direction and control (Burnes, 2004). Cameron and Quinn offer prototypical examples of traits that are common for organisations with a hierarchical culture. These traits are standardized processes, formal procedures and policies, multiple hierarchical levels, emphasis on rule enforcement. The main aim of this culture is the endeavour to reach economies of scale where stability, predictability, and efficiency are main parameters (Cameron and Quinn, 1999).
Clan culture. Fundamental thoughts of the clan culture are deduced from the Japanese
approach to management (Burnes, 2004). This organisational culture is characterized as one that is build on traditions and loyalty. Internal climate and concern for people are highly important within this culture, and are seen as decisive factors for organisational success.
Figure 2
Organisational culture and leadership Flexibility
Clan Culture Adhocracy Culture
Informal, loyalty, traditions, Entrepreneurial, innovating, teamwork, consensus, bottom-up, initiative (individual), anticipative, long-term focus creativity, information
Internal focus External
And integration focus and
differentiation Hierarchy Culture Market Culture
Formal, control, top-down, Goal & result oriented, rules & policies, efficiency prestige, demanding,
reputation, competition
Consequently, in line with the aforementioned, teamwork, participation, and consensus are seen as paramount (Cameron & Quinn, 1999).
Market culture. The market culture is narrowly related with organisational effectiveness
wherein the theory of transaction costs is seen as fundamental. Organisations with a market culture are distinguished as tough, demanding, competitive, and result-oriented (Cameron & Quinn, 1999). The forces of (internal) market mechanisms profoundly influence internal climate, more specifically, market type organisations are continually focus on carrying out transactions (contracts, changes, sales) to create competitive advantages. Firm results such as, profitability are prime objectives to the organisation. Hence, core values within this culture are productivity and competitiveness that are triggered by materialistic or monetary incentives.
Adhocracy culture. Adhocracy stems from ad hoc, which refers to a “temporary, specialized,
and dynamic unit (…) which disbands as soon as its task is completed. Adhocracies are similarly temporary” (Cameron and Quinn, 1999:38). Accordingly, the concepts of adaptability, creativity, and flexibility are fundamental to this culture. An important challenge of these organisations is being able to adapt to its environment as fast as possible. In this context adhocracy organisations ought to be able to transform fast and, therefore, are in need of flat and flexible structures. Furthermore, an adhocracy is regarded as open and learning minded where clients’ demand is central. To facilitate learning, the adhocracy culture is tolerant towards risk taking and has emphasis on individuality (Cameron and Quinn, 1999). 2.4 Cultural change
Changing the organisational culture generally starts with a diagnosis of the organisation’s existing culture to assess its alignment with current or proposed business strategies (Cummings and Worley, 2005). To do so, the OCAI assessment tool is seen as appropriate to set diagnosis of organisational cultures (Cummings and Worley, 2005; Cameron and Quinn, 1999). The deviation in alignment between (proposed) business strategies and organisation’s existing culture can, and most likely will, instigate culture change.
a similar perspective, since they argue that a successful organisational change is highly dependent on an organisational culture and, these should change together. One reason that explains this significant role is that culture is very broad and inclusive in its scope and, therefore, exerts an encompassing influence throughout organisations. The perspective of change management that is employed in this thesis is akin to Hirschhorn’s (2000) view, which states that belief systems, norms and values must give legitimacy to structural change.
Organisational cultures embrace a complex, interrelated, comprehensive set of elements, since it is concerned with behaviour, belief systems, and norms and values (Eldridge and Crombie, 1974; Deal and Kennedy, 1983). Consequently, it is impossible to include every element in diagnosing and assessing organisational cultures (Cameron and Quinn, 1999:29). However, in order for cultural change to be effective, elements that exert influence on a culture should be employed. These elements must exert influence on the organisational culture, or in other words, on the unique configuration of norms, values, beliefs, and ways of behaving (Eldridge and Crombie, 1974:78). In this perspective Cameron and Quinn (1999) assert that leadership styles, ways of thinking, and paradigms and approaches to problem solving are fundamentals that should be altered in order to achieve changes in organisation’s culture. Below, the elements that exert influence on the fundamentals mentioned by Cameron and Quinn (1999) are described.
Burnes (2004) argues that leadership is a thriving factor within the process of cultural change since (appropriate) leadership provides support and motivation towards change and provides direction by establishing goals as well. This thought is underlined by other academics, for example Cameron and Quinn phrase that “an organisation’s culture is reflected by what is valued the dominant leadership style (…)” (1999:15). In addition, Gagliardi (1986:129) states that “in any case, the first condition of cultural change is the existence of a leadership (...), which can bring the organisation into unexplored territory where its competence can be reconstructed and its identity redefined”. Both statements imply the importance of leadership in culture change and underline the influence leadership has on the organisation’s culture. Therefore, to instigate culture change, leadership should be actively employed.
organisation by means of influencing the shared perceptions, values, and beliefs (Rapert et al, 2000).
At the moment employees’ behaviour and mindset are influenced and altered by leadership and communication, reinforcement in the sense of training and education could be necessary (van Wely, 1996). As Cameron and Quinn (1999) assert that paradigms and approaches to problem solving should be altered in order to achieve changes in organisation’s culture, training and education is seen as a key component for achieving this. This is illustrated by Bennet, Lehman and Forst, (1999:190) who phrase that “(…) training has increasingly become a key component of a larger effort to change the organizational paradigm or way of doing business (Bennet, Lehman and Forst, 1999).
The three discussed elements, leadership, communication, and training and education, are seen as vital methods to alter an organisation’s culture. In further readings I will elaborate on these elements:
- leadership - communication - training and education
Leadership, in this section the concept of leadership in context of organizational, and culture
change is put forward. Many definitions of leadership can be found in academic literature, one of them is stated by Burnes (2004:601) who defines leadership as “the process of establishing goals and motivating others to pursue and achieve these goals”. However, a more comprehensive view is employed by many academics who place leadership on a continuum, in which transformational and transactional leadership are two extremes (Bass & Ovolio, 1993; O’Regan & Ghobadian, 2004; Yukl, 1989).
will not accept any deviation from the existing culture. Moreover, he will operate within existing rules such as, operating procedures, and norms (Bass & Ovolio, 1993; Bass, 1990). To ensure comprehensibility between transformational leadership and transactional leadership, a table is presented with the various characteristics based on the theories developed by Bass (1990) and Kotter (1990).
Table 1
Transactional and transformative leadership by Bass (1990) and Kotter (1990)
According to Vroom & Jago (2007) managers and leaders can, and will, combine transactional and transformational leadership skills. They argue that the use of these skills should vary depending on the situation. Burnes (2004) adds that the compatibility between leadership and organisational state is perceived as essential for successful leadership. In a situation where the organisation is required to change, a more transformative style of leadership is appropriate (Burnes, 2004). To induce these thoughts, it can be suggested that in situations where change occurs, or needs to occur, a transformational style of leadership is required and vice versa. This suggestion is underlined by various academics such as; Kotter (1990:104) who asserts that more change always demands more leadership2, since leadership
is about coping with change, and producing change. Bass (1990:23) put it in an other way “the transformational leader develops and changes the organisational culture (…) rather than work within the organizational culture, they challenge and change that culture”. Hence, to
2 Kotter’s perception of leadership is akin to transformational leadership (Kotter, 1990)
Transactional leadership Transformational leadership
Creating the agenda
Planning and budgeting, developing a detailed plan of how
to achieve results
Establishing direction, developing and providing a vision and sense of mission
along with a strategy for getting there.
People Contracts exchange of rewards for effort, promise rewards for good performance, and finding best fit between individual and
job.
Aligning people: communicates high expectations, expresses important
purposes in simple ways and promoting intelligence and
responsibilities
Execution Controlling and problem-solving, watching and searching for
deviations from rules and standards and take corrective
actions.
Motivation and inspiring: gives personal attention, coaches, advises, and satisfying basic human needs for
achievement.
Outcomes Produces predictability and order,
maintaining status quo
Produces changes in organisation and organisational culture - often to a
paraphrase abovementioned, in situations where change is needed transformational leadership is more appropriate since this type of leadership produces change.
Communication is seen as essential to effective implementation of organisational change (van
Wely, 2002; Elving, 2005; Elving & Bennebroek Gravenhorst, 2005). In accordance, Lewis (1999) designates that organisational change implementation and communication processes are “inextricably linked processes” (Lewis, 1999:44). Poorly managed change communication may result in a disrupted change process wherein rumors and reluctance to change exaggerate the negative aspects of change (Elving & Bennebroek Gravenhorst, 2005).
A main function of communication is the creation of a convergent and shared understanding of the strategic intent and priorities (Rapert et al, 2000). However, not less important, communication is dealing with resistance to change as well. Both functions of communication could be explained in a bilateral sense, first communication is used as a means to provide information about tasks, policies and other issues of the organisation and, second communication is used as a means to create a common held spirit or belonging to the organisation (Postmes, Tanis & de Wit, 2001).
One antecedent of successful change is the presence of agreement and acceptance of all employees to the necessity of change. To bring about such a common ground, recent studies demonstrate that high quality of information is needed (Allen, Jimiesson, Bordia & Irmer, 2007). In literature a correlation between the quality of communication and the success of change is suggested (Elving & Bennebroek Gravenhorst, 2005). The better the quality of information is, the more effective communication will be. Yet, the quality of information influences employees’ appraisal of change, since effective communication considerably reduces people’s uncertainty. Notably, uncertainty is one of the main obstacles employees consider and, thus determines the acceptance and degree of involvement of the employees within change processes (Burnes, 2004; Elving & Bennebroek Gravenhorst, 2005). Hence, communication should be practiced to reduces employees’ uncertainty and create a positive attitude towards change. Positive results or successful projects that are seen as models of how to undertake change should be publicized while helping to validate the new strategy and culture (van Wely, 2002).
two-way communication can be asymmetrical as well as symmetrical. Communication, in which participants are able to exert influence by bargaining and negotiating, puts forward symbiotic changes of both organisation and its actors. This form is perceived as symmetrical (van Ruler, 2004). Two-way communication, in which not every participant is able to exert equal influence on the communication process, is seen as asymmetrical. However, these different modes of communication are used as a foundation for a communication framework. Van Ruler (2004) discerns four communication strategies: information, persuasion, dialogue, and consensus building. The framework is presented in figure 3.
Figure 3
Communication strategies by van Ruler (2004)
Grunig (1989) phrase, that a symmetrical and two-way communication strategy is most likely to affect organisational culture. Thus, to align the organisational culture with the organisational strategy, the use of communication strategies that include two-way and symmetrical characteristics, such as bargaining, negotiating, feedback, discussion, and tolerate diversity of ideas, is proclaimed (Grunig, 1989; van Ruler, 2004). In context of the thesis’ problem statement, a symmetrical and two-way communication mode (consensus-building and dialogue) is seen as a suitable communication strategy for culture change.
Education and training is a key part in any process of change, and can take different forms
(Burnes, 2004). These different forms are determined by the environment and internal elements such as structure, culture, and strategy of an organisation. Mintzberg (1980) claims that an effective organisation is in harmony with its environment, deduced from this, to be an effective organisation the internal environment must be in harmony with the external environment. Yet, education and training is utilized to adapt necessary skills and behaviors to be successful in new roles that are created due to the change of internal elements (van Wely, 1996; Mintzberg, 1980). Frissen and van der Putten (1990) assert that training and education is an instrument that can influence internal elements of an organisation. They argue that the use of training and education is able to align the mindsets and behaviours of employees that are needed to reinforce a new culture. Additionally, Beer (2000) suggests that training is also important to develop skills to lead change. As well, training and education give expression to an organisation’s awareness of the need to invest in organisational change (Frissen and van der Putten, 1990). In sum, training and education can assist in aligning the mindset, behaviours, and skills of employees, and can increase the organisation’s awareness that is needed to reinforce a pursued culture.
Van Wely (1996) distinguishes two different perspectives on training interventions; the technical perspective and the cultural / structural perspective. First, the technical perspective is purely directed at technical aspects that are requisite to perform effectively and efficiently in a function. Thus, the aim of the technical perspective of training and education is basically to equip employees with (new) skills that are indispensable to perform well vis-à-vis a changing environment. This perspective can be related with Argyris’ (1993) single-loop learning, which is typified as adaptive learning, and involves detecting and rectifying errors within organisation’s practices and policies. Thus, this type of learning is concerned with altering, adapting the current skills, into skills that suit the new or pursued situation better. However, this type of training does not change the organization's core, but re-aligning practices and policies (Morley & Garavan, 1995).
occupied (van Wely, 1996). In relations to Argyris’ (1993) perspectives on learning, cultural / structural training and education is very comparable with double-loop learning. This type of learning goes beyond correcting variance, instead it challenges the appropriateness of organisation’s basic norms, values and policies. In other words, training and education influences the culture of the organisation, and is seen as a facilitator of organisational transformation (Morley & Gravan, 1995).
To conclude, with regard to the problem statement, training and education is extremely valuable to institutionalize organisational change, and especially the cultural / structural perspective. This perspective has a fundamental role in aiding managers and employees to learn, change, and develop (Morley & Garavan, 1995). In addition, it has the ability to influence an organizational culture, and this can be helpful to institutionalize an organisational strategy.
2.5 Conceptual model and sub-questions
As the conceptual model illustrates, a relation between strategy, organisational culture, and strategy implementation exists. Before a strategy can be successful, and be practiced it must be implemented. However, successful strategy implementation is dependent on organisation culture (Allaire & Firsirotu, 1984). The culture should be in congruence with the strategy, hence, organisational culture is seen as an enabler of strategy implementation (Cummings and Worley, 2005; van Wely, 2002). Organisational culture is very broad and elusive therefore, only leadership, communication, and training and education are brought within the scope of this thesis.
Figure 4: Conceptual model
Strategy
Organisational Culture
Strategy Implementation
Communication Leadership
Based on the conceptual model the following sub-questions are formulated.
1. Which approach to strategy and strategy implementation does PLW apply? 2. What are the characteristics of the current organisational culture of PLW?
The two abovementioned sub-questions aim to define the current strategy, the strategy implementation approach, and the organisational culture of PLW. After having defined these concepts, a comparison can be made between strategy, strategy implementation, and culture in order to assess the fit. The sub-questions, which are stated below, are based on the core concepts that have fierce influence on organisational culture. Since the concepts described in these sub-questions have severe influence on the organisational culture, interventions in these concepts can be used to adapt the organisation culture to the strategy (Cameron and Quinn, 1999).
3. To what extent is the current culture aligned with the strategy and strategy implementation process?
4. To what degree is the current role and style of leadership appropriate to implement its strategy?
5. To what degree does PLW make use of training and education to support strategy implementation?
3. Methodology
This methodology presents an outlook of how this thesis gathered relevant information that gave rise to analysis and recommendations on how culture can lever strategy implementation within PLW. Both qualitative and quantitative research is conducted in which different methods are used. Below, a further elaboration on the research methodology is given.
3.1 Interviews
Within this research I administered a qualitative research wherein selected persons were interrogated to answer questions that were formulated in advance. However, possible answers were not known in advance, which paved the way to use interviews. According to Emans (2002) are interviews suited and notably used in situations in which possible answers are not known in advance. Moreover, qualitative research is seen as appropriate to assess rather ordinary situations, locations, groups, or persons with complex problems (Baarda, De Goede en Teunissen, 2005). Hence, qualitative research is a preferred instrument to employ in this research, since complex concepts as leadership, communication, and training and education are at the outset of this thesis’ problem statement.
The interview questions were conducted by means of topics as discussed by Baarda et al (2005). These topics gave direction to what must be discussed during the interviews and were derived from the literature discussed in the theory section.
In relation with this thesis’ problem statement: “how culture can leverage strategy implementation in order to achieve organisational change” and the related sub-questions, the most important stakeholders, employees with a management function, were identified first. These employees are important since they have the main responsibility for the actual execution of a new strategy and have the most influence on topics as leadership, communication, and training and education. The participants of the interviews were thus exclusively employees with management positions. Based on availability and importance twelve participants were selected and interviewed.
the labels; due to a small population (n=12) a solid validity determination is difficult and therefore a test is not conducted. (5) Define central labels; after having defined the labels I assigned those to the central labels as described in the theory section: strategy, strategy implementation, leadership, communication, and education & training. (6) Determine the inter subjectivity; this phase I passed over. However, dependent on the availability of time the results of the interviews were discussed with the participants afterwards. This created a mutual understanding on which perspective the outcomes should be placed. (7) Answer the research question; the last step concerns answering the research questions. This can be found in the conclusion.
3.2 OCAI
To find out the current organisational culture of PLW, I used the OCAI. The OCAI measures the organizational culture and the underlying aspects of this organizational culture (Cameron & Quinn, 1998). This measurement tool consists of six questions and each question includes four options. Participants were asked to divide one hundred points among these four options depending on the extent each option is similar to the organisation of PLW. The amount of points given, by the participants to the alternatives, indicates the organisational culture as perceived by the participants. In order to create a realistic picture of the organisational culture employees throughout the whole organisation were asked to fill out the OCAI.
3.3 Questionnaire
The questionnaire employed in this research is partly based on the OCD (Organisational Communication Development Audit System) developed by Goldhaber, Dennis, Richetto & Wiio (1979). The OCD is an audit system that is widely known as a solid approach to evaluate organisational communication. As well, the inquiry contained questions that I had formulated myself in order to deepen the subject of research.
The questionnaire contains 55 questions of which 51 questions were built upon a 5-points Likert scale. The range of these questions consisted of options of total agreement up to total disagreement. Questions that considered the current supply of information and the desired
supply of information were derived from the OCD questionnaire of Goldhaber et al (1979).
The other variables symmetry by supervisor, bottom-up communication by supervisor,
top-down communication by supervisor, symmetry by management, bottom-up communication by management, and top-down communication by management had to be developed uniquely for
this research. The construction of these variables was necessary because there were no suitable questionnaires to be found in academic literature. Therefore, the content of various scientific articles stood at the foundation of these questions, writers of these articles were i.e. van Ruler (2004) and Bennebroek et al (2006).
To ensure the construct validity of the questionnaire, this questionnaire comprises indirect and direct questions. The indirect questions aim to measure the eight variables, whilst the direct questions were inserted to test the validity of these indirect questions. The answers on the direct and indirect questions must be correlated in order to gain an indication of the construct validity (Baarda et al, 2001:1996). The correlations between direct and indirect questions were all above the α=0,65. This indicates that the validity of the questionnaire is sufficient, and thus, measures what was ought to be measured (Baarda et al, 2001; Rubin and Babbie, 1993:178).
The internal reliability of these variables were all above the α=0,6 (Cronbach’s Alfa), which is necessary to consider a variable as internal valid (Baarda, de Goede & van Dijkum, 2003:73). Respectively the variables’ internal reliabilities were: (1) current supply of information
4. Results
This chapter presents the results of the interviews, the OCAI and the inquiry. First, the results in relation to the current approach to strategy formulation will be presented, which will be succeeded by the results that are concerned with the actual strategy implementation. After that, the results of the OCAI (organizational culture) will be presented and explained. Subsequently, the results of the interviews concerning leadership, communication, and training & education are illustrated. At last, statistical results derived from the communication inquiry are presented.
4.1 Strategy
The first topic that was assessed by means of a qualitative research comprised strategy. In the theory section two different approaches to strategy formulation were described i.e. the deliberate approach and the analytical approach to strategy formulation. In addition, however, in the theory section I mentioned that a combination of both may be most appropriate. In the table presented below, elements of the approaches to strategy formulation that are present at PLW are offered.
4.2 Strategy Implementation
By using the model of Dunphy and Stace (1988, 1991), the change initiative of PLW can be characterized along two continuums. The first continuum is concerned with the mode of change while the second continuum typifies the magnitude of change. Below, the results that are related with these two continuums are described.
3 Added Value Analysis, a structure change with the aim to increase organisation’s effectiveness. 4 Winschoten Finishing, a project with the purpose to outsource the finishing department to Poland.
Deliberate elements
Use of rational models and analysis --- Time span of 730 days (planning) --- Overall strategy has a long-term focus; it is made in advance of major decisions to which it applies (AVA3, WIFI4) --- Focus on costs and quality.
Analytical elements
Focus on development of organisational capabilities (1+1=3) --- interpreting strategy not as static but as a plan that is altered along the way.
Mode of change. The mode of the change initiative that is used by PLW is two pronged. The
start of this change process has a directive or even coercive disposition. The following phrase is illustrating this properly: “The first priority was to get the right MT, followed by the
creation of a right structure and then create the change in corporation with the middle layers of PLW”. The first priority within the strategy implementation process was the formation of a
management team that is capable to implement the change process. After having established an appropriate management team, the implementation process was ought to be triggered by the creation of a new structure. Both initiatives are top down, directive and rather large scale, especially the change of organisational structure. Whilst the new structure came to surface, the middle management of PLW became involved in the change process in order to increase the sphere of influence, and to bring the change deeper in the organisation. This directive mode is seen as required in order to create thriving conditions and align the structure with the strategy. As well, it was ought to create a sense of urgency, this is illustrated by the following quotation: “With respect to the creation of new business everybody thinks, well bring in the
new products and everybody is doing great and everybody has to do nothing but just flip the switch and tomorrow we create new products. So same behaviour, some poor quality, same high costing, same inward looking view persists and then it isn’t going to happen. Therefore a sense of urgency is important to move everybody to new behaviour. Generate the awareness, something has to be done” However, this phase is supposed to gravitate into a more
collaborative mode, since this change initiative must be persistent and self-propelling. “The
change is not one person but should be driven by ultimately the whole organisation in order to create a viable future”. Hence, initiatives are undertaken to involve the whole organization
in the change process in order to gain support and understanding towards the change process. To achieve this not only the management layers should drive the change, but ultimately the whole organization.
Magnitude of change. The initiated change process at PLW has the characteristics of a
and ultimately redundancy. Besides the major changes as described above, PLW also executes three other projects (Ships) that are directly related to the organizational change. These ships are assigned to create a better fit with the environment, while the main purposes are cost reduction, quality improvement, and a cultural change to enable organizational change. This is exemplified by the following phrase: “If this organisation doesn’t change, in a very black and
white language, people within this organisation don’t have a future. This is based upon the aspects were PLW is in right now such as, the environment, competition, market, objectives. Therefore, the three ships need to be executed. In the short term things needs to happen to gain altitude before we can sustain altitude”.
4.3 Organisational culture
The scores of the culture inquiry (OCAI) have been collected and presented in four different tables. In appendix A the original scores of the OCAI can be found. The four tables represent the three different employee groups special glass, quartz, indirect employees, and the last table represents the accumulation of these three tables.
Figure 6 Special Glass 0 2 4 6 8 Clan Adhocracy Market Hierarchy
Special Glass, figure 6 presents the existing culture within the department Special Glass. As
hierarchy and market is to some extent paradoxical whilst a hierarchy culture is focussed on internal operations and a market culture is focussing on external positioning.
Figure 7 Quartz 0 2 4 6 8 Clan Adhocracy Market Hierarchy
Quartz, figure 7 shows that the organisational culture within the department quartz has the
Indirect, employees who are not directly involved within the production process are indirect
participants. As figure 8 illustrates, these participants reveal that the dominant culture has the most resemblance to a hierarchical culture. Thus, indirect participants perceive the culture at PLW as one that facilitates internal control and stability by using formal rules and policies.
Figure 9 Total 0 5 10 15 20 Clan Adhocracy Market Hierarchy
Total Sample, figure 9 illustrates the outcomes of the overall OCAI. The current culture at
PLW shows the most resemblances to a culture with characteristics of a hierarchical culture. In addition, some influence of both a market culture, and a clan culture can be discerned. The culture of PLW shows no characteristics of an adhocracy culture.
4.4 Leadership
Table 3
Interview results related with leadership
Transformational leadership, half of the participants that were interviewed see coaching,
being supportive and helpful as major issues for good leadership within PLW. Participants gave different vantage points of how they feel about coaching and being supportive and helpful. For instance one participant phrased “I see leadership as giving assistance to the
people that I administer” yet, another participant cited “Leadership, as I see it, is a continuous process of being occupied with coaching people in order to improve people’s capabilities” another view “I always give behaviour related feedback to my direct subordinates, which can be positive or negative”. Strikingly, another observation in relation
to coaching, being supportive and helpful surfaced. This is described in the two following phrases: “formally I will perform the GWO’s and individual conversations to put the coaching
aspect into effect. Yet, up to now these formal conversations did not take place due to the deficiency of time” and “the problem is that I perform coaching too scarcely”. Thus, being
Leadership # Common perspectives on leadership
Transformational Leadership Transactional Leadership Remarks 5 8 5 7 8 3 7 5 3
- Being helpful and supportive towards employees so that they can perform their tasks
- Provide direction toward employees
- Coaching improves results
- Leadership is concerned with giving trust and responsibility to employees
- Provide scope wherein employees are allowed to execute their tasks
- Make optimal use of tools, capacity and the employees in order to realize objectives
- Monitoring and control is important
- The actual execution of coaching is done too scarcely(time)
helpful and coaching are on the agenda of most of the PLW managers. Conversely, the performance suffers due to a lack of available time or priority.
The interviews clearly show that managers at PLW perceive giving trust and responsibility to employees as important leadership tasks. Seven participants acknowledge that they actually give trust and responsibility to employees. One manager mentioned: “I give my people
freedom so that they can do what they have to do” at the same time another participant
phrased “I try as much as possible leave decisions at my employees as they know precisely
what has to be done”.
Transactional leadership, as table 3 shows, elements of transactional leadership are present at
PLW as well. Most strikingly, managers at PLW perceive leadership as providing scope wherein employees are allowed to operate in. Closely related, monitoring and controlling are, according to the participants, important assignments of an executive within PLW: “(…)
currently, structures and procedures are important since the creation of a strong foundation is important” and “at the moment I am directing and steering my employees due to the pressure of time. Even so, controlling is important to find out how and if the plans are accomplished”.
Remarks that were made during the interviews are, on the one hand, related to the shift
coordinators (lowest management level). Three participants believe that the shift coordinators have difficulties with administering leadership tasks for instance: “The shift coordinators do
not have any evaluation or coaching conversations with their subordinates, this situation is not desirable” and “the leadership skills of the shift coordinators are not sufficient”. On the
other hand, few participants feel that management layers above them are not listen enough to them, and they state the following “we do not have much influence (…) consequences are that
assignments are enforced to us, whilst participation may be a better way of working” and “often new ideas suddenly appear on the shop floor without any consultation of operators, who have to work with these new ideas, this evokes resistance among the operators”.
Accordingly, the perception exist that at all management layers within PLW need improvement.
4.5 Training and education
Table 4
Interview results related to training and education
Technical perspective, As table 4 show skill training (technical perspective) is available to
most of the employees working at PLW. Examples of skill training available at PLW are the WGO’s5, VAPRO6 and Greenbelt (six sigma). Skill training is usually combined with learning on the job. Remarkable, however, three participants perceive that these training programs are not performed properly due to a lack of time: “Go-To-Win is a project which
should be executed as soon as possible since it improves the multi functionality of the operators. Yet, we didn’t start with the execution since time is lacking” another view “A lot of training possibilities are available however, most of the training programs are in need of guidance that should be provided by ourselves. In conclusion, we can perform training
5 WGO, Werkplek Gerichte Opleiding. 6 VAPRO, Vakopleidingen Procesindustrie.
Training & Education
# Common perspectives on training and education
Technical Perspective Cultural / structural Perspective Remark 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 3
- Skills training is available for practically everyone
- Project Go-To-Win is coupled to the strategy (multi functional production personnel)
- Failure to perform training and education is due to a shortage of time (functional training of operators, go-to-win)
- Within PLW, the assignment of training with a cultural / structural perspective is possible
- POP is at the foundation of assigning training and education to employees
- The Performance Appraisal is at the basis to assign training
- I use coaching and or feedback to assist others in their learning process
- Training and education are not directly linked with strategy (OCDP)
programs but we do not have the time to supervise”. So participants are critical to the
availability of time to execute training programs properly.
Cultural / structural perspective, as table 4 show, a feeling exists that training on cultural /
structural perspective is not accurately linked to the strategy: “(…) what sort of profiles do we
need to reach certain goals and how will this be translated into training programs, however, this process is not developed yet. Consequently the OCDP7 gives no direction to training and education at the moment”. Besides the coupling between training and strategy, participants
were questioned about what is at the foundation of the assignment of training and education programs to subordinates. Different answers were given, since three participants apply the POP for the assignment of training and four use a Performance Appraisal. Thus, different methods are used to assign training programs.
4.6 Communication
Table 5 presents the most remarkable results concerning communication. The perspectives that are used in the communication table are derived from the theory section. The results from the interviews are placed in the table after being mentioned by at least three different participants.
Table 5
Interview results related to communication
7 OCDP, Organisational Capability Development Plan
1. Communication # Common perspectives on Communication
One-way /Two-way Communications Symmetry / Asymmetry 6 5 3 4 3 7 4 4
- I expect a certain input from my subordinates
- Communication between the different layers is not optimal - It’s difficult to extract valuable information from the shop
floor
- I do not deliberately sell the strategy and vision of PLW to my subordinates
- Communication is used to raise the consciousness of the vision and strategy of PLW among employees
- Input from my subordinates influence decisions - In the end I take the decisions
One-way / two-way communications, input from subordinates is, according to seven
participants, influencing the decision-making process: “I expect a certain input from my
subordinates, I see this as an essential element for being a professional organisation (…) all the employees working at my department can, and actually do, influence decisions that I take (…)”. In contrast, participants mentioned that communication between the different layers is
not optimal. One participant phrased: “Communication between the management team and
the rest of PLW is not satisfying” and another participant phrased: “it is difficult to invoke and digest good stories or information from the shop floor” both describe in general the current
situation at PLW very realistically. So, input from subordinates is seen as an important element within PLW, however, invoking this input is seen as a main bottleneck. Another remarkable result is the notion that four participants have concerning the communicating of PLW’s vision and strategy. Three participants mentioned that they do use communications to raise the consciousness of the vision and strategy among employees. However, quite paradoxically, four participants mentioned that do not sell the strategy and vision throughout the organisation, as one participant phrased: “by means of communication I can increase the
consciousness of the contribution that my subordinates have on the strategy (…) however, I have not addressed actions to this up till now” another participant noted “we hardly communicate with each other about issues that are happening around here (…) I do not communicate the strategy to the operators and shift coordinators”. It appears that strategic
matters are not communicated properly throughout the whole organisation. A possible negative effect is perceived by a manager who made a remark about the low sense of urgency, which he perceived throughout the organisation “sometimes I observe a lack of urgency and
commitment that people have to create a right for existence of PLW in the future”.
Asymmetry / symmetry. As mentioned above, input from subordinates is seen as an important
influencer of decisions. Though, four participants acknowledged that in certain situations participation of subordinates is not appropriate: “sometimes, when a fast decision is needed, I
make the judgement without consensus. At that moment I am the boss”. The other way
around, communication at PLW is believed to be open for personal interpretation and connotation. Four participants explicitly mentioned that they feel that personal interpretation of assignments is desirable most of the time: “dependent on the person, situation, and
4.7 Communication questionnaire
Because of the importance of communications within a change process and the possibility of measuring the characteristics of communication, an inquiry has been conducted. The inquiry divides three different measurement variables namely symmetry, bottom-up communication, and top-down communication. Symmetry is discussed in the theory and mirrors the degree to which sender and receiver are equal in the communication process. Bottom-up and top-down communication reflects the degree to which two-way communication is practiced within PLW.
These three variables were questioned to the participants from two different perspectives. The first perspective measures these variables between employees and direct supervisors and the second perspective measures these variables between employees and the management. The results of this inquiry are presented below in table 6.
Table 6
Perception of current situation with regard to symmetry, bottom-up, and top-down communication on a 5-points Likert scale
Symmetry Supervisor Bottom-up Communication supervisor Top-down Communication supervisor Symmetry Management Bottom-up Communication Management Top-down Communication Management Mean 3,17 3,14 3,25 2,64 3,11 2,94 Special Glass Std. Dev ,64 ,63 ,64 ,63 ,60 ,52 Mean 3,34 3,57 3,34 2,40 2,71 2,64 Quartz Std. Dev ,51 ,46 ,38 ,56 ,56 ,60 Mean 3,28 3,91 3,34 2,77 3,21 3,00 Indirect Std. Dev ,64 ,44 ,66 ,64 ,49 ,52 Mean 3,26 3,55 3,32 2,58 2,98 2,86 Total Std. Dev ,58 ,61 ,54 ,62 ,62 ,57
