Page 350 - Cultures and Organizations

Pyramids, Machines, Markets, and Families: Organizing Across Nations 315

for a very similar configuration in the Aston Studies, referenced earlier in
this chapter.
The adhocracy corresponds with the “village market” implicit orga-
nization model; the professional bureaucracy corresponds with the “well-
oiled machine” model; the full (machine) bureaucracy corresponds with the
“pyramid” model; and the simple structure corresponds with the “family”
model, while the divisionalized form takes a middle position on both cul-
ture dimensions, containing elements of all four models. A typical country
near the center of the diagram in Figure 9.2 is the United States, where
the divisionalized form has been developed and enjoys much popularity.
Figure 9.2 explains a number of national characteristics known
from the professional and anecdotal literature about organizations; these
are especially clear in the preferred coordination mechanisms. Mutual

adjustment fits the market model of organizations and the stress on ad
hoc negotiation in the Anglo countries. Standardization of skills explains
the traditional emphasis in countries such as Germany and Switzerland
on the professional qualification of workers and the high status in these

countries of apprentice systems. Standardization of work processes fi ts the
20
French concept of bureaucracy. Direct supervision corresponds to Chinese
organizations, including those outside mainland China, which emphasize
coordination through personal intervention of the owner and his relatives.
Standardization of outputs is very much the preferred philosophy in the

United States, even in cases in which outputs are difficult to assess.

Planning, Control, and Accounting

Planning and control processes in organizations are strongly infl uenced by
culture. Planning and control go together: planning tries to reduce uncer-
tainty, and control is a form of power. So, planning and control processes

in a country are likely to vary according to the prevailing uncertainty-
avoidance and power- distance norms. Planning and control systems are
often considered rational tools, but in fact they are partly ritual. It is

extremely difficult to know how effective planning and control really are.
The ritual elements make an objective evaluation impossible: there will
always be believers and nonbelievers.

Therefore, it is difficult to identify effective and ineffective planning
and control systems in other cultures. Let us take the case of strategic plan-
ning and control by top management. In Chapter 6 we referred to a study
(published in 1980 by the Frenchman Jacques Horovitz) of top manage-