The Secret Weapon for Building Teams: Culture

Can you define your organizational culture? Do you know how you “show up” when it’s crunch time and projects must be completed? I explore the origins and methodology of cultural archetypes in this week’s post.

I have observed organizations and leaders that, on the surface, seem dynamic and successful actually dysfunctional and barely able to cope. On the outside, the leader has all the skills necessary to lead an orgainzation, business, or department but has lapses in judgment, putting their career on the line or bringing difficulty to the organization.

Where does this dichotomy come from? To better understand these types of things, we need to understand the leadership dynamics of the organization and the organizational culture.

Organizational culture, which has become integral to studying management and business practices, refers to the shared values, beliefs, norms, and behaviors that shape an organization’s collective identity and functioning. The roots of this multifaceted concept can be traced back to pioneering thinkers in anthropology, sociology, and management. Organizational culture originates in anthropology, where studying societal norms, rituals, and shared values is pivotal. However, the management field actively adopted and applied these anthropological insights to organizations.

One of the earliest thinkers to explore organizational culture was Edgar Schein, a renowned organizational psychologist. In his seminal work “Organizational Culture and Leadership,” published in 1985, Schein laid the foundation for understanding organizational culture. He defined it as “a pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems.”

Schein’s definition marked a turning point in the conceptualization of organizational culture. He emphasized the role of shared assumptions and the learning process within organizations, contributing to a deeper understanding of how culture emerges and evolves within a specific context.

Measuring Organizational Culture: Methodological Evolution

Measuring organizational culture is complex due to its intangible and multifaceted nature. Over time, various methods and tools have been developed to capture its essence. One notable approach is the “Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument” (OCAI) introduced by Cameron and Quinn in the 1980s. This method categorizes organizational cultures into four archetypes: Clan, Adhocracy, Market, and Hierarchy. The OCAI employs a survey-based assessment where participants rank their organization’s current and preferred cultural characteristics.

Another method, the “Competing Values Framework” (CVF), also developed by Cameron and Quinn, considers four cultural orientations: Clan, Adhocracy, Market, and Hierarchy, similar to the OCAI. However, the CVF takes a more holistic approach, presenting cultural dimensions as two sets of opposing values (e.g., flexibility vs. stability) that can coexist within an organization.

In addition to these methods, ethnographic research, observations, interviews, and content analysis have been used to study and measure organizational culture. These qualitative approaches allow researchers to immerse themselves in the organizational environment, gaining a deeper understanding of the culture’s nuances and complexities.

The origins of organizational culture can be traced back to Edgar Schein’s definition laid the groundwork for subsequent research and exploration of this concept. Through the evolution of methodologies, researchers have strived to capture the elusive essence of organizational culture. The OCAI and the CVF are examples of quantitative approaches. At the same time, qualitative methods like ethnography provide a deeper understanding of the cultural dynamics at play.

As organizations continue to evolve and adapt to changing environments, studying organizational culture remains vital, enhancing our understanding of how shared values and beliefs shape the functioning of diverse entities.

In addition to the methods previously mentioned, the integration of Carl Jung’s archetypes and Dr. Carol Pearson’s work offers a novel approach to exploring the dimensions of organizational culture.

Jungian Archetypes in Organizational Culture Measurement

Carl Jung’s archetypes, originating from his depth psychology theories, provide a unique lens through which to view organizational culture. Archetypes represent universal, recurring symbols or themes that reside in the collective unconscious. By integrating archetypes into the measurement of organizational culture, we can tap into deep-seated patterns of human behavior that influence an organization’s identity and functioning.

Dr. Carol Pearson, a scholar in psychology and leadership, built upon Jung’s archetypes to develop the Pearson-Marr Archetype Indicator (PMAI). This instrument identifies dominant archetypes within individuals, shedding light on their motivations, values, and behavioral tendencies. By extending this concept to organizations, we can use archetypal analysis to identify the prevailing themes and patterns within organizational culture.

For example, a tech company might seek to understand its organizational culture more deeply. The company’s leaders decide to apply archetypal analysis to gain insights into the underlying dynamics shaping their culture. Through a combination of individual assessments, surveys, interviews, and content analysis, they identified several dominant archetypes:

• The Magician — Magician organizations tend to be curious and adaptable, open to reframing beliefs and changing procedures and policies. They model the change they want to see in the world to the delight of employees, stakeholders, and customers. Magician companies seek out win-win situations where they can.
• The Sage — Sage organizations emphasize continuous learning, research, and intellectual growth. They employ the use of mentors to foster knowledge among younger team members. Sage organizations are adept at gathering knowledge conducting research, and applying what they learn to solve problems.
• The Explorer — Explorer organizations look for what’s new on the horizon. They celebrate risk-taking and embarking on bold ventures. Employees were encouraged to overcome obstacles and push boundaries, reflecting the heroic archetype’s spirit of adventure.

Dr. Carol Pearson’s work further enriches our understanding of organizational culture by connecting archetypes to leadership and dynamics. In our fictitious company, Pearson’s insights help leaders recognize how the interplay of these archetypes influences communication, decision-making, and employee engagement.

For instance, the Magician organization is willing to take leaps of faith, but the sage archetype requires proof to act. While the Magician organization wants to believe everything will “just work out,” the Sage organization will need all the facts. Together this company is likely contemplative, introspective, and fueled by sudden insights.

In addition, an orgainzation that shows up strongly as a Magician works well with the Explorer archetype. The Magician likes to follow a vision, and the Explorer is open to changing directions as they become aware of them. Both are focused on the future and rely heavily on improvisation.

This company can be successful knowing it can be free to develop big ideas (Magician) that are focused on the future, change and pivot when required (Explorer) and have the data and knowledge to support what they want to do due to the data and expertise they have gathered (Sage). They are free to succeed and rely on improvisation within limits.

Integrating Carl Jung’s archetypes and Dr. Carol Pearson’s insights into measuring organizational culture adds a new layer of depth to our understanding. The archetypal analysis enables organizations to identify and align with universal themes that shape behaviors and values. The tech company case example illustrates how this approach can offer valuable insights into an organization’s culture, enhancing communication, leadership, and employee engagement.

As organizations continue to seek comprehensive methods to measure and understand their cultures, the integration of Jungian archetypes and Pearson’s work provides a promising avenue for exploration.

References:

• Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass.
• Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2006). Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework. Jossey-Bass.
• Pearson, C. S., & Marr, H. (2002). The Hero and the Outlaw: Building Extraordinary Brands Through the Power of Archetypes. McGraw-Hill Education.

Learn more about how I can help you define and change your organizational culture by contacting me.