Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of HIDDEN MEANINGS
ORGANIZATIONAL DISCOVERY THROUGH SENSEMAKING, DIVERSITY, AND CULTURAL ANALYSIS
DIVERSITY - A DEEP ISSUE
Brought to You by Team 3
interacting for the goal of group
acting/thinking intuitively patterning, translation, and placing items into various frameworks - Weick, 1995
The sensemaking process differs dramatically based on
who is making sense of information
,(of one’s own organization,or of an organization which one is external from) - Wagner & Gooding, 1997
SUPPORTED BY OUR OBSERVATIONS AND INTERVIEWS:
Sensemaking shapes employee and corporate identity as well as citizenship behavior - Grant, Dutton,and Rosso, 2008
Cycle of Organizational Learning and Identity Formation:
Sensemaking <--> Behavior <--> Culture <--> Sensemaking
Balogun, J., & Johnson, G. (2004). Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. The Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 523-549.
Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. The Academy of Management Review 33(1), 122-136.
Choo, C.W. (1996). The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge and make decisions. International Journal of Information Management, 16(5), 329-340.
Drazen, R., Glynn, M.A., & Kazanjian, R.K. (1999). Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations: A sensemaking perspective. Academy of Management Review 24(2), 286-307.
Grant, A.M., Dutton, J.E., & Rosso, B.D. (2008). Giving commitment: Employee support programs and the prosocial sensemaking process. The Academy of Management Journal, 51(5), 898-918.
Griffith, T.L. (1999). Technology features as triggers for sensemaking. Academy of Management Review 24(3), 472-488.
Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2013). Organizational theory: Modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Härtel & Ashkanasy (2011). Healthy Human Cultures as Positive Work Environments. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. P. Wilderom, & M. F. Peterson (Eds.), The Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate (2nd ed.) (pp. 85-100). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Kezar, A., & Eckel, P. (2002). Examining the institutional transformation process: The importance of sensemaking, interrelated strategies, and balance. Research in Higher Education 43(3), 295-328.
Maitlis, S. (2005). The social processes of organizational sensemaking. The Academy of Management Journal 48(1), 21-49.
Morrison, E.W., & Milliken, F.J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review 25, 706-731.
Schwandt, D.R. (2005). When managers become philosophers: Integrating learning with sensemaking. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 176-192.
Sonenshein, S. (2007). The role of construction, intuition, and justification in responding to ethical issues at work: The sensemaking-intuition model. The Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1022-1040.
Thiel, C.E., Bagdasrov, Z., Harkrider, L., Johnson, J.F., & Mumford, M.D. (2012). Leader ethical decision-making in organizations: Strategies for sensemaking. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 49-64.
Thomas, J.B., Sussman, S.W., & Henderson, J.C. (2001). Understanding “strategic learning”: Linking organizational learning, knowledge management, and sensemaking. Organization Science, 12(3), 331-345.
Tsui, A. S, Egan, T. D., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1992). Being Different: Relational Demography and Organizational Attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), 549-579.
Wagner III, J.A., & Gooding, R.Z. (1997). Equivocal information and attribution: An investigation of patterns of managerial sensemaking. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 275-286.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3). Sage.
Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 628-652.
Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409-421.
SYMBOLS, EVENTS, FIRST PERCEPTIONS
Examples in Organization A:
Examples in Organization C:
Examples in Organization B:
Public Sector City Government Interviews: New Hire, Senior
Symbol (shared): City logo represents excellence
Memorable event (differ): Emergency work; Change in Director
Expressed perceptions (shared): Limitations in growth/movement
Private Sector Academic Institution Interviews: New Hire, Mid-level
Symbol (shared): Building
Memorable event (differ): Denied schedule change; Company picnic
Expressed perceptions (shared): History gives authority
Private Sector Aerospace Firm Interviews: Mid-level, Senior
Symbol (differ): Display cases in building; old logo
Memorable event (differ): Luncheon; Declassification of work
Expressed perceptions (shared): Mandates without empathy
Organization A - Public Sector Government Culture
Stable, good place to work
Untapped employee potential
Get placed on a track and stuck
Work often not appreciated by external customer
Organization B - Private Sector Academic Institution
Stable place to work
Undervalued at lower levels
Heard if have history and tenure
Work often not appreciated by external customer
Organization C - Private Sector Aerospace Firm
Stable place to work
Profit motive means somewhat undervalued at many levels
Mandates with little to no socialization
Work often not appreciated by leaders, ideas discounted
observations of culture at 3 different organizations
WHAT IS ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE?
what is organizational culture?
Schein (2010) stated "a pattern of shared basic assumptions learned by a group as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, which 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." (p. 18)
Espoused values and beliefs (ideals, goals,
Underlying assumptions (taken for granted,
THE ORGANIZATIONAL ICEBERG
Formal Sensemaking Experiences
ORGANIZATION A - Yes; Lessons Learned done after events
ORGANIZATION B - No; Not enough time after events
ORGANIZATION C - Some; No thinking through impacts on people
Based on interviews and observations, we noted visible actions that
be congruent with espoused beliefs and underlying assumptions...or may not
Positive Shared Culture
ORGANIZATION A - Yes; Good place to work; shared alliances which are good and bad
ORGANIZATION B - No; Not valued; Lots of work AFTER work
ORGANIZATION C - No; Highly dysfunctional environment; Up to You
Thanks for joining Team 3 on our culture journey!
A Full Summary Table of our interview results is to the right. It is optional. Also, here is an optional but cool diversity in action video for those inclined to watch as we fade out!
Agenda - Our Cultural Exploration
Multi-level Analysis based on interviews and observations at 3 Organizations
1.What is Organizational Culture?
2.What is Sensemaking?
3.Level 1 Analysis - Surface Understandings
Symbols, Events, Vocalized Perceptions
4.Visible versus Unseen:
Behavior <-> Sensemaking <-> Culture
5.Level 2 Analysis - Culture
6.Comparison of 3 Organizational Cultures
Overlap and Differences
7.What is Diversity?
Level 3 Analysis - Diversity, a deep issue
OVERRIDING OBSERVATIONS - Each organization functions differently depending on context and need, but each organization was somewhat bureaucratic and stable at the high internal level, and somewhat clannish at the deeper internal levels.
Ashley Cole - The Theorist
Regina Dobson Cousar - The Designer
Roman Fry - The Analyst
what is diversity?
Organizational diversity refers to increasing "
", i.e. "more and more individuals are likely to work with people who are demographically different from them in terms of age, gender, race, and ethnicity". (Tsui, Egan, & O'Reilly, 1992, p. 549).
Social inclusion is associated with
valuing and embracing
diversity of perspectives, knowledge, and mental and physical abilities (Härtel & Ashkanasy, 2011, p. 88).
Diversity increases adaptive capacity. (Schein, 2010, p. 284)
The more turbulent the environment, the more likely it is that the organization with the more diverse cultural resources will be better able to cope with unpredicted events.(Schein, 2010, p. 370)
ORGANIZATION A - Somewhat; Initially included but permanently limited; peers are good but glass ceiling is real
ORGANIZATION B - Somewhat; Peers include you but you are opportunity limited; glass ceiling
ORGANIZATION C - Somewhat; Limited interaction by management level
Observation: Little commentary on race and gender; most focused on diversity in function and placement; interviewees did not directly address; MORE STUDY NEEDED
What did we learn on the journey?
Organizational culture is composed of many, many levels. We found similarities across our organizations but also differences.
The staff members interviewed just as frequently agreed as they disagreed when quizzed on their perspectives concerning culture, sensemaking, and diversity.
Sensemaking is desirable at all three organizations. Employees seem to want time to discuss the meaning of events and decisions.
Organizational culture - dynamic cycle based on behavior, sensemaking, inclusion, exclusion, level achieved, and general rewards.
We were not able to fully tease apart the issue of diversity. MORE STUDY NEEDED.
These team findings are based on our observations and interviews of 2 staff members each. The total sample population includes 6 individuals purposively selected (based on our interview protocol design) at 3 organizations. We each conducted a third interview for our individual presentations' findings.
Therefore, findings are limited by the small sample size.
(please use arrow keys to advance)