Page 396 - Cultures and Organizations

The Elephant and the Stork: Organizational Cultures 361

They were presented with written questionnaires, followed up by personal
interviews.

Out of a large number of quantifiable characteristics tried, about forty
provided usable data. For these forty character istics, the scores for each
of the twenty units were correlated with the unit scores on the six prac-
21
tices dimensions. In the following paragraphs, for each of the six practice
dimensions the most important relationships found are described.
There was a strong correlation between the scores on practice dimen-
sion 1, process orientation versus results orientation, and the balance of
labor cost versus material cost in the operating budget (the money neces-
sary for daily functioning). An operation can be characterized as labor-
intensive, material-intensive, or capital-intensive, depending on which of
the three categories of cost takes the largest share of its operating budget.
Labor-intensive units (holding number of employees constant) scored more
results oriented, while material-intensive units (again holding number of
employees constant) scored more process oriented. If an operation is labor-

intensive, the effort of people by definition plays an important role in its
results. This situation appears more likely to breed a results-oriented cul-
ture. The yield of material-intensive and capital-intensive units tends to
depend on technical processes, which fact seems to stimulate a process-
oriented culture. It is therefore not surprising that one finds research and

development units and service units on the results-oriented side; manufac-
turing and offi ce units, subject to more automation, are more often found
on the process-oriented side.
The second-highest correlation of results orientation was with lower
absenteeism. This is a nice validation of the fact that, as one of the key
questions formulated it, “people put in a maximal effort.” Next there were
three significant correlations between results orientation and the struc-

ture of the organizations. Flatter organizations (larger span of control for

the unit top manager) scored more results oriented. This confi rms one of
Peters and Waterman’s maxims: “simple form, lean staff.” Three simpli-
fied scales were used based on the Aston Studies of organizational struc-

22
ture referred to in Chapter 9, measuring centralization, specialization,
and formalization. Both specialization and formalization were negatively
correlated with results orientation: more specialized and more formalized
units tend to be more process oriented. Centralization was not correlated
with this dimension. Results orientation was also correlated with having a
top-management team with a lower education level and promoted from the