Levels and types of corporate culture. The main components of corporate culture

Since the late 90s, the concept of "corporate culture" has firmly entered the lexicon domestic business. The works of M. Porter, R. Kaplan, D. Norton and others, which have already become classics, prompted many Russian companies to hold sessions on formulating the Strategy and elements of corporate philosophy. Somewhere this happened consciously: analysis, formulation and translation were carried out, supporting projects. And somewhere it ended with setting a task for the marketing department or hr. And the location in a conspicuous place in the office or corporate website.

In this article we will talk about our view on the phenomenon of "corporate culture":

• What is corporate culture?
• The difference between the concepts of "corporate culture" and "corporate philosophy"
• Communication Strategy and corporate philosophy.
• Levels and main elements of corporate philosophy.
• The role of corporate culture and its impact on company performance.

Corporate culture of the company

The corporate culture of the company is an expression of the values, attitudes and behavior patterns of all its members (shareholders, management and employees), formed in the process of adaptation to the external environment and internal integration.

It was not for nothing that we chose as an illustration a picture with a monkey looking in a mirror. Thus, we wanted to show: everything that makes up the behavior of people in an organization or is a manifestation of their view of the world and themselves, and is a corporate culture. The corporate culture of a company is a reflection of the culture of those who work in it.

Strategy and corporate culture

The main goal of any organization is longevity and/or financial efficiency. But each company determines the ways of its existence and behavior in the market. This is the Strategy - the goal and ways of existence.

Goals and ways to achieve them are determined by shareholders and top management. And it is in the Strategy that the values ​​and competences of the company's top officials are reflected. And this, as we understand it, is a large (but not the main) share of the corporate culture.

For example, a company chooses a growth strategy in the market through the intensification of sales and active behavior in relation to competitors and customers. This requires all employees to have a high focus on results, competitiveness in the internal environment. Without the company's leadership understanding that such internal competition can be beneficial, such a strategy will be impossible to implement: attempts to remove inefficient employees will meet with resistance ("it is not customary for us to part or demote employees").

Thus, the corporate philosophy and culture are part of the company's strategy. Or interpenetrating and interdependent elements of a single whole. Like Yin and Yang.

Elements of corporate culture

Corporate culture includes a lot of elements. In fact, this is everything that makes up the company and how it lives:

• the structure of the company itself and the methods of communication associated with its peculiarity;
• welcome communication style (formal-informal);
• consistency and regularity of management;
• system of remuneration and incentives;
• declared values;
• myths, legends;
• regulatory documents;
• availability and ways of implementing corporate events, etc.

Corporate Philosophy and Corporate Culture

In our opinion, these concepts are not identical. As can be seen from the definition above, corporate culture is a broad and comprehensive concept.

Corporate Philosophy- this is an exposition business rules and moral and ethical principles that guide the company in its activities - more formalized. Most often, this is what is declared and “brought to the surface”, which can be seen on the company’s website and materials: Vision, Mission, Values, policies, etc.

Levels of corporate culture

The concept of corporate culture levels was introduced by Edgar Schein in 1981. This model quite fully describes the genesis and manifestation of CC. There are 3 levels:

• superficial (external facts)— patterns of behavior, emotional atmosphere and style of communication, technologies, style of clothing and solutions in the graphic representation of the brand, organization of workplaces and areas of interaction with customers, symbols, rituals, etc.;
• interior(value orientations and prescriptions) - moral beliefs and ethical rules, code of conduct, values, corporate philosophy;
• deep(basic personal assumptions - what forms a person's personality) - beliefs and attitudes, national mentality, attitude to the world, man and activity.

The deep level, for certain reasons, can be called decisive. Because it is "core" for everyone who is part of the organization. This is especially important in relation to the founders and shareholders of any company. After all, it is they who, expressing their life values, form the company, select employees, determine the style of management.

"The fish rots from the head" - this expression can often be heard from employees of companies where there are problems at the level of communications, management, business efficiency. And often the employees are right. After all, it is the owners and the management hired by them that bring a seemingly successful and well-known company to collapse. Isn't this an example of how the personality of the founders affects the atmosphere of the company and even its fate?

Factors affecting corporate culture

The main factors that influence corporate culture are the following:

• the personalities of the people who organized the company (which is why we pay great attention to working with the owners of the businesses we advise);
• personalities of top managers and key employees;
• employees;
• external environment (market and customers, government regulation and authorities.

Each of these factors can be of decisive importance for the formation or development of the corporate culture of a particular organization.

The role of corporate culture

The role of corporate culture in the success of any company is determined by the functions that it is assigned - broadcasting welcome behaviors, maintaining balance in the internal environment, creating motivation for action. Sort of "spiritual bonds".

metaphor example

Let's take a single-celled organism. It lives in the external environment (in which there may be other unicellular organisms similar to it), has internal structures (all sorts of ribosomes, mitochondria and other vacuoles). If the internal structures do not maintain homeostasis - a stable state aimed at the optimal functioning of all body systems in its presence in the external environment - our unicellular will die. Even if it has a hyperfunction of capturing and converting energy (production) or a super efficient cell membrane that attracts the right particles or repels unnecessary particles (sales department).

This unicellular organism interacts in its own ways with the environment and other unicellular organisms. Depending on the effectiveness of all actions is the duration and realizability of the potential of this organism.

Main the role of corporate culture- reproduction of itself (at all levels and components of the company), broadcasting, "education" of newly arrived employees. Everyone noticed on themselves, plunging into a new team, that some ways of interacting or business techniques may seem alien. But over time we change. And, with a good combination of circumstances, after a while we perceive them as our own. If the corporate culture of the company is not replicated in employees (changing slightly over time under the influence of the external environment or the employees themselves), then the organization will not be unified and effective.

At the same time, if there is no “absorption” of effective ways of behavior from new employees, the company may lose its “mobility”, and the corporate culture will gradually stiffen and lose its relevance. In this case, we can observe the ritualization of corporate culture. A lot of religion arises in it - a large number of beautiful, but useless (from the point of view of communication with God). And in gradual change without losing the original meaning is the second function of corporate culture.

From this perspective, it is interesting to follow the dynamics of changes in corporate culture in the process of changing the composition of the company. We have accompanied companies more than once, in which the estimate of the management team took place. If this process proceeded smoothly and in an organized manner, then even old employees changed. If the process happened quickly (for example, the change of the entire “top”) or unsystematic, then a collapse occurred to some extent.

For example, the appearance in the management structure of a security agency of a person in a key position with a “Western” management culture led to a certain clash of values ​​and approaches: the focus on efficiency and administration caused confrontation in a system focused on hierarchy and ritualism.

Taking into account the above, we can say that the role of corporate culture in the formation of an order to the HR departments of the company responsible for the selection and adaptation of employees.

The third function is to maintain motivation for activity. In any strong corporate culture, there are always myths and legends that illustrate examples of employee success, rewards for welcome behavior. It can be material incentives or promotion to the rank of heroes.

Not the least important function of corporate culture is the creation of a sense of community and the possibility of identification. Professional slang, rituals, legends and myths of the company play an important role here. For example, about the moment of creation of the company. Or joint singing of the anthem at corporate events (it happens).

Textbook example-joke about the origin of the company nameMicrosoft. We don't know how reliable this is. But such myths allow employees to have a little more in common. Going beyond functional communication.

Another task of corporate culture (and here the role of elements of corporate philosophy, as well as visible artifacts of corporate culture) is to translate a certain image of the company outside. Positioning in the external environment for customers and partners is one of the foundations of business success. Without a holistic brand (meaning not only the logo and color solutions, but the impression that the company creates) it is hardly possible to speak about the possibility of effectively achieving goals. In some cases, this broadcast of corporate ideology is changing the world.

A prime example is the companyZappos. Moreover, Tony Shay describing the corporate cultureZappos solved several problems: systematization and description of experience, translation of corporate culture and brand promotion.

A very classic example isApple, which has formed several markets with its products and changed the culture (loudly said, but true) of modern man. We are not adherents of the "apple", but it cannot be denied that without productsApple man's world would be different.

Summarizing this part, let us return to the thesis about the role of corporate culture, depending on the place that is assigned to it. If the corporate culture is something unconscious and unmanageable, then its impact on the business can be minimal or negative.

The influence of corporate culture on the effectiveness of the organization. Example

In business, there are many examples of a strong corporate culture (penetrating all levels of the company) aimed at achieving goals and helping to achieve these goals. Moreover, it is noticeable that the corporate culture in such companies is purposefully formed. Sometimes long and hard. Carrying out point changes depending on the realities of the surrounding world.

A Russian example is the Izbenka/Vkusvill company (our consultants have participated in some of the corporate culture translation projects). The corporate culture of "Izbenka" at one time was aimed at increasing the main indicator of business - the loyalty and satisfaction of the visitor to the outlet "Izbenka". The task for which the corporate culture worked in this case— formation of a stable number of consumers and promotion of the brand in a competitive environment (customers were asked whether they were ready to recommend Izbenka shops to their relatives and friends). So the company practically did not spend money on advertising, but actively expanded.

At the same time, a culture of food consumption was being formed - an audience of customers who were ready to buy Izbenka products was brought up. This made it possible to soon move out of the "small store near the metro" format, offering customers larger spaces and a wider product range.

All this would not have been possible without purposeful and systematic work with all levels of the organization. From heads of directions to sellers of outlets. Understanding and acting in accordance with corporate values ​​has allowed the company to shape the market and succeed.

There are also negative examples influence of corporate culture on the effectiveness of the organization. We often parse them into.

Development or formation of corporate culture

In conclusion, we will briefly outline (in detail - in a separate article) the possibilities for the formation and transmission of corporate culture.

• First, you need to take into account that the corporate culture is always there. It, like the mental life of a person, permeates the whole existence. And therefore our main message to managers and owners is awareness and management. Awareness at the level of one's own values ​​and how one wants to see the company.
• Secondly, strict adherence to the chosen principles. promotion of these principles. At the employee level. At the level of clients and partners. It will be easier for all people and groups interested in you to choose among people like you. The right people will stick to you.
• Thirdly, maintaining the corporate culture in the internal environment of the company. Through storytelling, adaptation and training of employees, periodic organizational sessions with managers.

It is not necessary to spend big budgets on corporate culture management. It is important that this work be regular and purposeful. only in this case can results be expected.

At the end - advice. At the next corporate holiday, tell your employees how the company started or what you had to go through before the first success. It would be even better in this story to mention one of the employees present.

St. Petersburg Academy of Management and Economics

Faculty of Management

Test

Corporate culture

in the discipline "Management"

Completed by: student of group No. 1333 Zakharov D.V.

Checked: _________________________________

St. Petersburg

2006

	CONTENT
	Introduction
	The concept of corporate culture
I. I	Concepts of corporate and organizational culture
I. II	Corporate culture as a collective unconscious
	Corporate culture limits
	Corporate culture in Russia
	Types and indicators of culture
	Types of corporate culture
	Structure of corporate culture
	Corporate culture indicators
	Positive and negative corporate culture	3 0
	Change and formation of corporate culture
	Change in corporate culture
	Formation of corporate culture
	Conclusion
	Bibliography

INTRODUCTION

Culture does not exist by itself, it cannot be unfastened and shown as an independent phenomenon or object. The culture of a person is manifested in his behavior, appearance and statements.

The culture of an organization also manifests itself in all activities and relationships both inside and outside the organization. It cannot be dealt with separately, it simply does not exist separately. You can sit down and draw up internal codes, rules of conduct, standards of relationships. This is a necessary and useful thing. But unfortunately, a high-level corporate culture cannot be created on this basis.

Recently, more and more publications appear in the press, in which the authors reflect on what corporate culture is. Actually, it would probably be wrong to call this concept new, since any organization from the day it is created has its own special internal atmosphere. Another thing is that only recently domestic managers have realized the fact that skillful management of corporate culture can become a serious competitive advantage of the company.

The topic of corporate culture is becoming more and more relevant, it can be found on the pages of newspapers and magazines, in discussions at forums, conferences, meetings of HR clubs. Many companies decide to approach this topic thoroughly and use the full potential of corporate culture for the benefit of the company's development.

In modern literature, there are quite a few definitions of the concept of "corporate culture". Like many other terms of organizational and legal disciplines, this one does not have the only correct interpretation. Most authors agree that the culture of an organization is a complex composition of important assumptions accepted without evidence by members of a group or organization as a whole.

Corporate culture:

Corporate culture is a system of principles, customs and values ​​that allows everyone in the company to move in the same direction as a whole.

One of the important components of the company's success is the corporate culture. Of course, it is necessary to treat it as an effective tool that allows you to mobilize all departments to achieve a common goal, stimulate initiative, and ensure loyalty and mutual understanding between company employees.

1. The concept of corporate culture

1.1. Concepts of corporate and organizational culture.

In numerous sources devoted to the consideration of this topic, two concepts are usually used: corporate and organizational culture. Moreover, in some of these terms, completely different meanings are given, in others they are almost identical. Before considering these concepts, it is necessary to clarify what exactly is meant by each of them. Thus, becoming a stumbling block, organizational culture remains little studied. In the literature devoted to the problem of organizational culture, we find attempts to construct a scheme for analyzing this phenomenon. In modern literature, we find quite a lot of definitions of the concepts of organizational culture and corporate culture. Like many other concepts of organizational and managerial disciplines, the concept of organizational or corporate culture does not have a single "correct" interpretation. Each of the authors seeks to give his own definition of this concept. There are both very narrow and very broad interpretations of what an organization's culture is.

It can be stated that until now, in most works devoted to this topic, such concepts as corporate culture and organizational culture have not been clearly separated, although the very existence of these definitions suggests a distinction between the phenomenology behind each of them.

One of the attempts is made by a well-known domestic consultant T.Yu. Bazarov. He qualifies corporate culture as a value-normative space in which a corporation exists in interaction with other organizational structures, but organizational culture is "an integral characteristic of an organization (its values, behavior patterns, ways of evaluating performance results), given in the language of a certain typology" .

However, the definition of corporate culture given by T.Yu. Bazarov, does not clearly indicate the source of the corporate culture. “Corporate culture is a complex set of assumptions accepted without evidence by all members of a particular organization and setting a general framework for behavior accepted for the most part organizations. Corporate culture is manifested in the philosophy and ideology of management, value orientations, beliefs, expectations, norms of behavior. Corporate culture regulates human behavior and makes it possible to predict his reactions in critical situations.

A further attempt to decipher the concept of corporate culture leads to a confusion of these concepts.

According to other experts, if the time criterion is decisive, then organizational culture is the past of the company, and corporate culture is its future.

Any organization has its own history, which affects its way of life, traditions, norms and rules of interaction. Once formed, such a culture greatly affects both the people in the organization and the organization as a whole. Most often, organizational culture is aimed at managing a given organization, and its influence can hinder the development and expansion of the enterprise. So, for example, the existing relations between the founders and employees do not allow to build effective system management. To some extent, this is an image of the world built on the basis of basic principles unconditionally accepted by all employees.

Organizational culture is a set of the most important assumptions accepted by the members of the organization and expressed in the organization's declared values ​​that give people guidelines for their behavior and actions. These value orientations are transmitted to the members of the organization through the symbolic means of the spiritual and material environment of the organization.

Corporate culture lives in a single symbolism, through which value orientations, unspoken rules of behavior, ideas about accepted and unacceptable ways of interaction that underlie the construction of interactions inside and outside the organization are transmitted.

Corporate culture is the values, attitudes, and behavioral norms specific to a given organization. Corporate culture defines the typical approach to problem solving for a given organization.

The basis of corporate and organizational culture are those ideas, views, fundamental values ​​that are shared by the members of the organization. They can be completely different, including depending on what is the basis: the interests of the organization as a whole or the interests of its individual members. It is the core that determines everything else. From the values ​​follows the style of behavior, communication. External attributes without them have no independent value. That is why we have such a negative attitude towards external symbols after the pioneer organization, Komsomol, five-year plans, etc. It’s just that in recent decades, nothing stood behind the outer layer in depth. The same can happen with companies that mistake a set of external features for corporate culture.

Corporate culture is one of the most effective means of attracting and motivating employees. As soon as a person satisfies the needs of the first level (relatively speaking, purely material), he has a need for another: position in the team, common values, non-material motivation. This is where corporate culture comes into play.

Among the components of both organizational and corporate culture, one can single out such concepts as value orientations, ideas, attitudes. But if within the corporate culture this means the socio-psychological climate, then in the organizational culture it is the structure, the model of the organization.

Organizational culture is of fundamental importance for studying the history and development of the company, the transformation of the system of relations. The basis of the organizational culture of the company is laid by its founders, determining the future key points of development and change.

Despite the obvious variety of definitions and interpretations of organizational culture, they have common points. Thus, in most definitions, the authors identify patterns of basic assumptions that members of the organization adhere to in their behavior and actions. These assumptions are often associated with the vision of the individual's environment (group, organization, society, world) and the variables that regulate it (nature, space, time, work, relationships, etc.). It is often difficult to formulate this vision in relation to an organization.

1.2. Corporate culture as a collective unconscious.

Edgar Schein defines the concept as: "a deep level of underlying assumptions and beliefs shared by members of an organization that act unconsciously and define a largely 'accepted' habitual way of perceiving and evaluating oneself and the environment." At the same time, E. Schein connects the emergence of these “taken for granted” assumptions and beliefs that do not require proof with the previous experience of the organization, in which she could make sure that all these assumptions and beliefs were confirmed, helping to survive and develop in the environment and solve internal problems of integration. . It is essential for the author that one cannot look for direct analogies between organizational culture and the centuries-old culture of nations and peoples, or, conversely, confuse it with artifacts that lie on the surface and are conscious ideas about values ​​and norms.

The mechanism of culture formation in this approach is associated with the first successes of the organization. In an effort to survive in the environment, not to disintegrate under the influence of internal factors, the employees of the organization make certain decisions, carry out certain actions, and if this activity is successful, then it is further reproduced at an unconscious level in relationships with outside world and in solving internal problems. Behind the first successful actions are some unconscious value priorities. And it is these deep and unconscious values ​​that become the core of organizational culture.

They appear in some unwritten rules. E.Shine suggested looking for them primarily in the field of structuring time and space.

In addition to manifestations in the unwritten rules of structuring, organizational culture can be revealed through the analysis of beliefs and beliefs, that is, those myths that are common in the organization and are transmitted as truths, without justification and evidence. Such myths exist in any organization and indeed largely describe the chosen attitude to external and internal realities.

The following very common myths can be cited as examples:

Relations in the organization should not be friendly, but comradely;

Relations should be intelligent, without squabbles;

Relations in the organization must be fair, without favorites;

The organization should be small, without bureaucracy;

Our government cannot be trusted, therefore, it is impossible to show real incomes and financial flows, etc.

This list goes on and on. And what existing myths, indeed, are very tenacious and allow us to determine at what point in our modern history the organization arose, what previous experience its members had.

1.3. The limits of corporate culture.

For practitioners, all these scientific approaches, in fact, come down to the well-known old alternative of management: either to squeeze people into certain limits, or “to pave the paths already trodden by pedestrians”. As always, there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches. And the working solution lies somewhere in the middle and is, as always, managed through several integrations, that is, it is not achieved in one step.

If the requirements of the environment are not taken into account, if the values ​​and rules of the organization are 100% contrary to those accepted in the environment, then the organization simply will not survive for a long time. In this sense, the environment acts as a limiter of organizational culture.

In modern management, there are and develop many standards and general requirements, generally accepted evaluation criteria are used to evaluate organizations, and all management IT technologies are created on their basis, to ignore the framework set by globalization means to lose external funding, partnership, doom yourself to life on a "desert island".

Most of the existing standards are formal and do not affect the real interaction of people; finally, there is the possibility of choosing the standards themselves.

The need for standards is undeniable. The trouble is that these standards are developed in some countries and cultures, and the requirement for their observance extends to the whole world. The standards developed in the USA and Western Europe do not always coincide, not to mention Russia, Asian and African countries, where some of them are simply inadequate to reality.

Therefore, in Russian organizations, as a rule, only a certain part of the standards is used, the one that works, gives a competitive advantage.

2. Corporate culture in Russia

In recent years, more and more literature has appeared that analyzes the features of Russian culture, the desire to realize one's specialty in the era of globalization is natural and constructive, the difficulty is that it is extremely rare to look at one's culture from the outside and without prejudice. Despite these difficulties and risks, such self-awareness is necessary, it allows you to find real resources and assess the risks that arise in the emerging Russian management.

Let's try to describe a number of features of Russian culture that has evolved over more than a millennium, but which are manifested in modern organizations and management.

I. The environment is perceived not just as dangerous, but as hostile to the organization. Any manager perceives both the state and even partners in the social atom not only with distrust, but is also forced to expect a constant unexpected worsening of the situation, a sharp and unprofitable change in the rules of the game. Such an attitude to the environment, of course, requires the development of protection mechanisms. There are quite a lot of them, but resistance to transparency, classification of any real indicators, double-entry bookkeeping, registration of several legal entities and the development of complex chains of movement of money and other assets can be considered typical. In recent years, a mandatory, forced movement to government structures has become typical for large businesses in order to secure their business, if not through influence on decisions, then at least at the expense of the information received. All of these protective actions are expensive, imposed as a mandatory cost on the budgets of organizations, and are possible only at very high rates of return. At times when profit margins in the market are falling, costly environmental protection systems leave Russian organizations vulnerable. But a far more restrictive consequence of anticipating negative and unpredictable environmental behavior is planning for worst-case scenarios. If the environment is perceived as unpredictable and hostile, then planning is generally difficult, but without planning there is no management. Then you have to use scenario planning, but for scenario planning you also need to somehow predict, predict the actions of the environment. If we assume that the behavior of the environment is unpredictable, you just have to plan for the worst, have in your head a situation where “everything falls, and falls unexpectedly, can fall at any moment.” Such logic is possible, but unpleasant, with such an approach it is difficult to talk about development, it is too pessimistic. You have to defend yourself against unpleasant rational logic. The most primitive form of defense is simply to give up planning, and therefore also management. More difficult option planning from what has been achieved, approximation of the results of the past into the future. An even more sophisticated option with duality: plan for the best scenario, but expect the worst for yourself. The worst option is generally to abandon the objective version of the perception of the environment, as if not to see it.

II. Another feature is connected with the concept of morality traditional for Russian culture.

In a situation where there are no or constantly changing, the laws governing business do not work. When absolutely all subjects of the business process are not protected by law: owners, managers, performers, and customers. There is no real business risk insurance. It is necessary to find at least some mechanisms to guarantee and reduce risks. And first of all, they begin to look for such guarantees in morality. They remember the "merchant's word", they are looking for "decent" managers and employees, they give the task to recruiting firms to find people who can be trusted. If in the Western world business ethics is understood as compliance with laws and the terms of contracts, then in Russia even the existence of laws and contracts is not enough, which guarantees. The most surprising thing is that this cultural resource is still working in Russian business. Conversations about moral obligations are quite common. Moreover, sometimes decisions are made not based on the logic of business, but on the basis of moral obligations. But the fact is that in the absence of regulatory laws and existing sanctions, business interaction is generally impossible. You should pay attention not to cases of deceit, but to the fact that although there is no law, there are no sanctions for breaking the rules, businessmen and managers accept and comply with certain obligations, even in cases where it is not beneficial for them. Of course, in recent years, certain mechanisms of guarantees have been developed: this is an appeal to criminal circles as arbitrators, and the collection of mutual compromising evidence, and appeal to the courts, and attracting the attention of the media - and yet the culturally accepted belief in morality and justice in Russia is up to still works and largely determines the interaction in business.

III. Any polls in Russia show the high value of the family. True, the very concept of “family” is not standard in our country; as the respondents point out, it is often used in a broad sense and includes not only the wife (husband) and children, but also other close people. In management, this leads not only to the "nepotism" that was regularly fought in the Soviet years, but also to the fact that almost any organization in Russia begins with a group of friends and acquaintances. There are business firms founded by classmates, members of the Student Song Club, a climbing team, a whole section of martial arts, etc. As organizations evolve, this “family principle” begins to conflict with the demands of the business. In any business, at some stage, professionals are required. Some of the acquaintances who started building the organization were able to become such a professional, learn a little, but some could not. Then the difficult stage of the crisis begins for the organization, and many successful organizations fall apart at this stage.

IV. Another feature of contemporary Russian culture that affects Russian management is the value of education, intelligence, and creativity (or creativity, to use Western terms). Despite all the accusations of incompetence and lack of special knowledge of our managers, especially in journalistic works, the real facts show that these accusations are common, but not fair. The educational level of managers in representative offices and branches of Western companies in Russia is often higher than that of their counterparts abroad. Our managers often receive several higher educations. The cost of studying for MBA (Master of Business Administration) courses reaches $ 5,000 per year, and the number of students who want to study there does not decrease, but constantly increases. In recent years, we have seen a real boom in business training in our country, the number of training companies present on the market and the price of their services are constantly increasing. Finally, in recent years, business literature addressed to managers, both translated and domestic, has been in constant demand. Such an educational boom, of course, creates a potential resource for domestic management. But nowadays we often have to deal with its reverse side. Reading special literature and learning develop and are the result of an all-powerful faith in science, that everything can be calculated, in any case, develop an algorithm. But management is not only a science, like any practice, it involves working in a multifactorial world, where there are many uncountable tasks, where intuition and “feel” are required, many decisions are forced to be made based simply on the opinion of an expert who is trusted.

The second cultural consequence of faith in science is in Russia a constant desire for creativity and originality. Constant and abrupt changes in the environment and at the level of weather fluctuations and the unpredictability of political decisions make a habitual picture of a world in which something is constantly “falling”. In such a world, it becomes pointless to improve technology. A solution that was effective yesterday may not be effective today. It is necessary to constantly invent something fundamentally new.

The same is happening in Russian business. Instead of improving, adapting Western developments, their own methods and methods of work are invented, or Western technologies are used in a completely different context and for completely different purposes. The status of routine work in Russian business culture is extremely low. It is not good technologists that are valued, but strategists who can offer original ideas. Instead of following the rules, which is boring, non-standard solutions are being sought. But people who are capable of producing creative ideas tend to be unorthodox, unpredictable, and emotionally unstable themselves. They are bored and uncomfortable in a situation of consistent, unhurried development, they are prone to a revolutionary path of leaps, behavior on the principle of “all or nothing”. Therefore, one can admire the pace of development of our modern business, its creativity and energy, but not be surprised at the huge risks that our entrepreneurs easily take on.

Description of the influence of Russian culture on Russian business and management can be continued indefinitely. At the same time, it is essential that all organizations are and are subject to the influence of the culture of the environment. Moreover, in order to develop an organizational culture that is absolutely different from the environmental one, it is necessary to erect a “wall”, to strive for complete closeness, which is not only expensive, but also inefficient. At the moment, there is a cultural chaos in Russian society, one can meet a variety of evaluation criteria, an orientation towards a variety of value priorities. Popular at the same time are both the myth that “it is a shame to be poor” and the belief in equality and social justice.

Chaos in Russian culture, which always implies the possibility of change, affects organizational cultures as well.

There are business organizations in which social justice fell into the first value priorities. But now there are already many companies where, in the Western manner, health as a value falls into the first priorities. In one of the Russian firms, the enthusiasm for Western values ​​was so strong that all employees spoke English among themselves, and knowledge of the language was a prerequisite for employment. Interestingly, the real place of money as a value in decision-making was absolutely independent of the myths declared in the organization. In some of them, the priority of selfish interests was emphasized, in others they were not even mentioned. But real valuable priorities are manifested not in declarations, but in realizable grounds, decision-making criteria.

3. Types and indicators of culture

3.1. Types of culture in the organization.

The corporate culture in the company is formed on the basis of such factors as the personality of the leader, the business area and the stage of development of the company. The American sociologist C. Handy, based on the analysis of a number of major American companies, proposed a typology based on the distribution of power and the associated value orientations of the individual, which determine the specific nature of the relationship between the individual and the organization, the structure of the organization and the nature of its activities on various stages her evolution.

According to this criterion, C. Handy distinguishes four types of organizational culture (in the form of a metaphorical expression). Moreover, the author emphasizes that culture is not static, but goes through all these stages in the process of its formation.

1. Power culture ("culture of Zeus").

Power culture is formed mainly when the director is not just a leader, but also a master. This person must have personal strength, be a constant leader. Most often, such a leader has a number of especially close employees nearby. The leitmotif of relations in the team is power and tight control.

Many companies at the formation stage have just such a structure. A distinctive feature of such a culture is that the company is very mobile and easily adapts to any changes in the market. True, there is one "but" - the entire mobility of the company is directly proportional to the mobility of the leader himself.

The problem with this structure is that there is a limit to the growth of the company. The fact is that the person in charge often does not want to delegate his authority. If it is more or less possible to control the activities of 30-60 people, then with more employees, this becomes unrealistic. Thus, the desire to keep power in the same hands produces to curb the growth of the organization.

In such a situation, there is often a high turnover among middle managers. With regard to these employees, there is no correspondence between their duties and powers. Many employees can participate in the formation of a decision on a particular issue, but the decision is still made by one person. The only way out for such a company is to create a holding company. At the same time, each formed link will also be headed by a leader, a strong personality.

2. Role (bureaucratic) culture (“Apollo culture”).

Most characteristic of big companies operating in a fairly stable market and occupying a strong position in it. A distinctive feature of such a structure is that all the rights and obligations of absolutely all employees are clearly defined and scheduled. People seem to fit into cells.

Such a culture severely restricts a person. When selecting employees, it is not so much their professional abilities that are taken into account, but the likelihood of how well they fit into specific job descriptions. Such a structure guarantees gradual career growth, however, the realization of the ambitions of employees will be impossible, and the manifestation of excessive initiative will be inappropriate. Moreover, an employee who does not fit into this strictly regulated structure is rejected.

The problem is that in a situation of drastic changes in the market where the company operates, it will be difficult for it to adapt to new conditions. People who are selected for such companies are most often simply not able to cope with unforeseen circumstances and cannot tune in to perform some other duties that are not familiar to them and are accustomed to following specific job descriptions.

3. Personal culture ("culture of Dionysus").

This species is quite rare. Its difference lies in the fact that the entire team consists of highly professional people. In general, they can work both without a leader and without each other. Just for some reason this moment they feel more comfortable being together.

Most often, law firms, consulting firms, and architectural bureaus have such a structure. Such a corporate culture is designed to satisfy personal ambitions and personal interests. Sometimes it is formed not in the organization itself, but in some of its departments or divisions. Such a culture cannot last long. Most often, a leader stands out in it, and it turns into a power one.

4. Target culture (“culture of Athena”).

The target culture is formed in companies whose activities are aimed at solving specific tasks. They are adapted to work in a dynamically developing market (the Internet market, for example). The structure of such organizations is often quite blurry. To avoid the transformation of the work team into a "get-together", there is usually a strict form of accountability and control.

The main focus in such companies is on the professionalism of employees. The target culture requires teamwork.

The largest American specialist in the field of management, W. Ouchi, proposed his own version of the typology of the organization, which is based on differences in the regulation of interactions and relationships. According to Ouchi, there are three most common types of culture: market, bureaucratic, clan.

Market culture is based on the dominance of value relations. The management and personnel of this type of organization are mainly focused on profitability.

The bureaucratic culture is based mainly on the system of power that regulates all the activities of the enterprise in the form of rules, instructions and procedures.

Clan culture is an element of informal organizations and is an addition to the two above. People in such an organization are united by some system of values ​​shared by all.

3.2. Structure of corporate culture.

The culture of an organization cannot be understood as a monolithic block. Within each fairly large organization, there are groups (formal and informal) that are carriers of their local "subcultures". Thus, the administration and divisions, as a rule, have different subcultures that can coexist both peacefully and hostilely "under the roof" of the general culture of the company. In this case, subcultures repeat the structure of the enterprise itself.

One or more subcultures can either exist in the same dimension as the culture that dominates the organization, or create within it, as it were, a "second dimension". In the first case, it will be a kind of "vanguard" in which adherence to the key values ​​of the dominant culture is more pronounced than in other parts of the organization. Usually such is the subculture of the central administrative apparatus (which, in fact, sets the dominant culture). In the second case, the core values ​​of the dominant culture in the organization are accepted by the members of the group along with a set of other values ​​that do not conflict with the dominant ones. This can be observed on the periphery of the organization or in the territorial authorities. This is how adaptation to the specifics of activity (functional services) or local conditions (territorial departments) takes place.

In organizations, there may be a third type of subculture - stubbornly rejecting what the organization as a whole wants to achieve (organizational leadership). Among these organizational "countercultures" the following types can be distinguished:

a) direct opposition to the values ​​of the dominant organizational culture;

b) opposition to the power structure within the dominant culture of the organization;

c) opposition to patterns of relationships and interactions supported by organizational culture.

In the process of their development and interaction, subcultures “line up” in a certain way relative to each other: they are isolated, begin to establish connections, are forced out, lined up in a certain hierarchy.

One of the leading experts in the field of organizational psychology, American psychologist Edgar Shane, on the basis of the concept of culturologists F.R. Klukhona and F.L. Strodbek, identifies different levels of organizational culture.

According to E. Shein, it is based on some basic ideas about the nature of the surrounding world, reality, time, space, human nature, human activity, human relationships. These hidden and taken for granted assumptions guide people's behavior, helping them to perceive the attributes that characterize organizational culture. They are in the sphere of the subconscious and, accordingly, are not sufficiently realized even by their carriers - members of the organization. They are revealed only in the course of a special analysis and, basically, are only hypothetical.

The second level represents the values ​​and beliefs shared by the members of the organization, in accordance with the extent to which these values ​​are reflected in symbols and language. The perception of values ​​and beliefs is conscious and depends on the desire of people. They are realized to a greater extent than the basic ideas and are often directly formulated in the program documents of the organization, being the main guidelines in its activities. As a rule, they are formed by its management and brought to the attention of all employees. Given values, which may be explicit or implicit, in turn determine social norms governing the behavior of members of the organization. Declared values ​​do not always correspond to the true values ​​of the organization.

The third level is the external manifestations of organizational culture. These include the technology and architecture used, the use of space and time, specific observable human activities (rituals, ceremonies, etc.), and the layout and design of the organization's premises. It is like a visible part of the organizational culture. However, the meaning of these external manifestations remains incomprehensible if the basic ideas that stand behind these external manifestations are unknown. At this level, things and phenomena are easy to detect, but they can not always be deciphered and interpreted in terms of organizational culture.

3.3. Culture indicators.

External features (oddities)

For an external observer, a person who has found himself in an organization for the first time, the first impression is indicative, when much in the organization seems strange and incomprehensible. It is these oddities and peculiarities that are the first indicators of organizational culture, signs of its presence in the organization. After all, it is these unusual manifestations that distinguish this organization from others, and do not at all seem strange to its employees.

First of all, you can pay attention to the behavior of people in the organization. There are organizations where people always move along the corridors during working hours, and there are organizations in which the corridors are almost empty, all employees are constantly in their working premises. It can already be assumed that, in the first place, direct communication is encouraged, and secondly, on the contrary, it is either not required or not encouraged. In some organizations, it is customary to dress sexually and flirt with members of the opposite sex; in others, employees dress and communicate sexlessly, flirtatious smiles and jokes are not accepted. However, there is an even stranger combination: a sea of ​​coquetry and flirting with strict sexless clothes, and, conversely, erotic clothes with cold sexlessness.

The reaction of employees to the presence of an outside visitor is very indicative. In some organizations, such a visitor will smile, greet him, may even come up and ask if he needs help. In other organizations, the outsider is not noticed, they look through him.

Very clearly characterizes the organization of its design. The color of the walls can be gray, or dull white, or aggressively bright, or pastel. Pictures on the walls can be absent, standard, or unusual and different in different offices. There may be chairs and armchairs in the halls and corridors, or there will be no furniture outside the offices at all.

Finally, language. In some organizations they like to use professional slang, in others it is customary to speak in short chopped phrases, somewhere they speak with the use of old Russian phrases, in many organizations the language is equipped foreign words.

All these signs allow us to formulate hypotheses about the culture of the organization, but most importantly, they form an integral impression, a feeling: there are boring and depressive organizations, there are aggressive, open and closed, dynamic and slow ones.

Structuring time and space

In every organization, time and space are structured differently. In order to be convinced of this, it is enough to pay attention to a number of key points.

First, the spatial and temporal boundaries of the organization. Some organizations exist from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., some irregularly, until the last visitor, while there is work, some at night, and, finally, some always. In terms of culture, this would mean that some organizations allow their employees to structure their own time outside the boundaries of the organization, and time boundaries are predetermined. Others set the uncertainty of time boundaries and, finally, others extend the time boundaries of the organization to the entire time of employees, thus structuring and controlling them always, totally.

But one can easily be convinced of the existence of organizations whose leaders consciously or unconsciously set time limits based on completely different non-technological requirements. Then the uncertainty of time limits will indicate the increased anxiety of the manager, the desire to control his employees totally, to have the ability to manipulate them. But the uncertainty of time limits, like any uncertainty in the organization, is a conflict factor. In such an organization, one can assume increased conflict, the possibility of emotional breakdowns of employees. This means that the organization must have some mechanisms for resolving conflicts, or at least working with them.

The boundaries of time in the organization are also clearly visible when monitoring the correspondence between the appointed time and the real one. For example, if the meeting is scheduled at 10, then when does it actually start - at 10, at 10.30, at 11. Does everyone come to the meeting at the same time, or is someone regularly late, and how does the manager react to being late? and other employees. This is very revealing. And the main thing here is not at all

Labor discipline. Time is one of the few factors that connects an organization with the environment, it is the same for everyone. And very often the time in the organization sets the first person. It is late and everyone is waiting. After some time, those managers who feel confident in the organization, knowing that the boss is late for at least half an hour, begin to pull themselves up 20-25 minutes later than the appointed one. Then the time of being late becomes an indicator of confidence, status and power in the organization. If they are regularly late for a meeting, observing time limits for other events, then this is also an indicator of attitude towards this event: it is consciously or unconsciously perceived as empty, non-constructive. Upon analysis, it may turn out that such meetings simply do not make serious decisions.

Structuring space in the organization is no less significant. Space in an organization is always expensive, costs money, and is in short supply. From this point of view, the structuring of space indicates that the organization is evaluated as the main thing. That is, simply by analyzing which division, or which functions have more and better space, it is possible to determine the priorities of the organization. If the sales floor in the organization is small, and the IT department occupies a large room, then we can conclude that the leader is passionate about programming and modern technologies to a greater extent than their own direct business.

If the space for employees to work is cramped, but the offices of managers are spacious, then in such an organization status issues are more important than business. However, one can meet organizations where even this regularity does not work and the space is distributed outside of any regularities, just by chance. In such cases, it can be assumed that, in the organization, there is no value of rational calculation and money at all. This occurs in our country in budgetary, but sometimes, oddly enough, in commercial organizations.

The configuration of space can also tell a lot. In one of the companies you can find a very original structuring of space. AT great hall there were tables of employees, and in the middle there was a glass aquarium in which the head was. The leader of the organization was proud of the solution he found, he believed that in this way he constantly controls employees. That is, in terms of organizational culture, in this organization there was a myth about the possibility and effectiveness of constant visual control.

Norms and rules

Every organization has some written and unwritten rules. Some of them are fulfilled, some are not. Non-compliance with the rules may or may not be monitored. For non-compliance with the rules, certain sanctions may be determined or not. This is a very telling indicator.

First, without norms and rules, management is basically impossible. And therefore, in which area of ​​activity of organizations there are more rules, whether these rules differ, whether they contradict each other, one can judge whether management is systemic.

Secondly, it is indicative that the staff is aware of these rules.

Thirdly, it is essential for culture, but actually proceeding from what, from what logic were these rules derived? What are the value priorities and myths behind them? Do these rules, norms and requirements set from outside, technological standards, safety precautions contradict?

Often in organizations you will encounter different ideas about rules at different levels of the hierarchy. And then they talk about different subcultures of management and performers. In such a situation, one can assume difficulties, both in management and in ordinary mutual understanding.

Fourthly, are the rules essentially imposed from above, or are they developed jointly, and behind them is a certain contract, obligations of the parties, and there is a mechanism for changing them.

It is essential that in an organization where there are no rules at all, which are still followed by everyone, there is no single organizational culture, no management, no group.

myths

It's usually easy to hear unsubstantiated claims and beliefs in an organization once you start asking questions about the motives behind the decisions made.

For example, in a company that sells information products and has an information portal, it is logical to ask whether they advertise their products on the Internet, whether they sell them through their portal. If you receive an answer that information products are not sold over the Internet. You can clarify whether employees have tried to make such sales, and find out what they have never tried.

So, literally, by asking simple questions to understand the history and criteria for making decisions in a company, you are bound to run into myths. Another thing is that members of the organization perceive them not as myths, but as reality.

Myths play a very important role in an organization. Psychological research perceptions have long experimentally revealed the selectivity of this process. People always divide incoming information into shape and background, signal and noise, and categorize it. Such perceptual filters allow you to quickly isolate the main thing among the sea of ​​information and signals. Moreover, this process occurs unconsciously.

Organizational myths allow you to set common or, in any case, similar filters, members of the organization perceive themselves and the environment through the prism of the same filters and therefore understand each other well.

Every phenomenon has a downside, if for some reason the system-forming functions of the organization change, environmental conditions change dramatically, for example, myths can become inadequate, stop working.

In general, the dismissive attitude towards myths developed by the scientific approach is not fair. Suffice it to recall that even 200 years after the discovery of the Copernican picture of the world, sailors used the Ptolemaic system. Just because it allowed you to successfully navigate, was familiar and worked.

The system of rewards and sanctions in the organization

One of the most important components of management is the motivation system, which also has a cultural character. Moreover, the words can be called the same, but the content is implied differently depending on experience, on precedents in the organization.

To a seemingly simple question: “What can you get fired for?” - members of the organization give very different answers, or cannot answer at all. These answers are in a wide range: for being late, showing initiative, not fulfilling specific official duties, disclosure of organizational secrets, for anything, if you do not like the leadership. These answers well characterize both the degree of uncertainty set in the organization and the predominance of emotional attitudes and values ​​over rational ones, or, conversely, the priority of business values.

In some organizations, as a rule, built on a family basis, it is not customary to fire anyone at all, they fine or ostracize them as punishment, lower their status.

The same diversity is observed in rewards. In some organizations, the award is given to everyone so as not to offend anyone. In others, the remuneration is calculated, as in a student detachment, in fairness through the coefficient of labor participation. There are organizations where they try to tie the remuneration of everyone to the profits of the company. In some companies, you just need to explain to the authorities that they really need money for an apartment, for the treatment of children, for recreation.

Intrinsic motivation is also very diverse: from promotion and expansion of the social package, to admission to the unofficial social circle of bosses.

The study of such systems of reward and punishment reveals the confusion of cultural norms. For example, in an organization, rewards and penalties can be considered an intimate matter - money is given out individually in closed envelopes, while at the same time everyone in the organization can know about each other's income and actively discuss them. At the same time, the management of such an organization can be sure that "in our country, as in Western companies, people do not know and are not interested in other people's money, they do not look into someone else's pocket." Such an analysis allows us to identify and distinguish between working and only declared norms and myths.

In general, the study of the system of rewards and punishments makes it possible to identify the presence of common or different criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of people and the organization as a whole at different levels of the hierarchy.

Legends, heroes and anti-heroes in organizations

In every organization there are some legends, stories, gossip about what happened in the past and is happening at the present time. The extent to which these stories correspond to the truth varies, but all these stories are a manifestation of culture and not only demonstrate, but also shape the attitude of employees towards their organization and environment. The most revealing in these stories are the main characters, heroes and anti-heroes. The hero is always the bearer of the main values ​​and norms of the organization, the anti-hero commits acts that are condemned in the organization. With a serious stratification of the organization, the formation of subcultures and legends, gossip turns out to be different. Either the same event is interpreted in different ways, or the attention of employees is attracted by different events, that is, the selection of a figure and a background, the criteria for highlighting the main thing in subcultures are different.

Rituals and symbols

Every developed culture has its own rituals. Rituals mean repetitive actions, procedures that have a symbolic meaning. In order to understand the meaning of any ritual, it is necessary to turn to the history of its occurrence, which is not always known to all its participants. History makes it possible to understand why it is the way it is, what each action that makes it up means. But the applied meaning of the ritual is that it provides emotional impact on the participants, affects their unconscious, sets a sense of belonging and unity.

In modern Russian organizations, as a rule, little attention is paid to rituals. Often even the first persons of the organization do not understand their significance and try to evade participation in them. And yet there are rituals in organizations. Meetings, “calls to the carpet”, confidential conversations with the first person, the procedure for hiring a new employee acquire a ritual character.

The meaning of rituals and organizational symbols is in the translation of traditions, values ​​and approved conditions, which is necessary for both old-timers and neophytes.

In organizations whose leaders consciously use rituals and symbols in management, procedures are specially developed and improved. The roles of participants can be consciously distinguished, a way of interpreting individual symbols and the sequence of elements of rituals is spreading in organizations.

Much attention is paid to rituals in many large foreign corporations.

The fact that in our organizations, especially in recent years, the ritual is not consciously used in management, leads to the fact that certain mandatory procedures are perceived and interpreted by employees spontaneously and arbitrarily, which leads to uncertainty, mutual misunderstanding and increased anxiety.

It is essential for rituals and symbols that, acting on an unconscious level, they set the psychological state of both individual participants and the entire organization as a whole. Analyzing what states are caused by the rituals and symbols adopted in the organization, one can understand the desired, culturally approved psychological attitude. There are cultures built on the fear and discomfort of employees. It is through this fear and the desire to reduce discomfort that they are stimulated into action.

In other cultures, on the contrary, rituals bring employees into a state of unity based on pride in their organization. Often the same sense of unity and cohesion is achieved through opposition and hatred towards "enemies".

Separately, it is necessary to note the ritual of initiation, the introduction of new employees into the organization. It occupies a special place, because it simply cannot be absent. At the same time, the function of this ritual is very important, because it not only demonstrates the attitude of the organization towards its employees, it immediately introduces neophytes into the organizational culture and is imprinted. This is a kind of pattern that newcomers follow, and which sets their response to the organization.

Very often, in rapidly growing organizations, employees are hired without having time to equip their workplaces. And there is no time to meet the leader with them for a long time. Newcomers wander around the premises, distracting other employees, get involved in some kind of work and relationship, receiving random information about the organization and its managers and clients. In some organizations, it is assumed that such an introduction of a new employee is a test: will the one thrown into the water float or not float. Of course, if it “doesn’t come out”, then the organization’s losses come down to the money that was paid to him for the entire period until he himself or his bosses came to the conclusion that he had no place in the organization, and to the negative information that this employee after leaving.

A significantly greater risk for the organization is posed by those who “surfaced”, because it is completely unpredictable where they will emerge, that is, growth becomes unplanned, and therefore unmanageable, and this is very expensive. Such expenses could be afforded by some privileged Soviet organizations with unlimited financial resources. For modern commercial organizations, these costs are exorbitant.

Taboo

Many organizations have taboo topics. You can’t talk about feelings, about the size of salaries, you can’t demonstrate and show sexuality, etc. The presence of such a taboo leads to the fact that it is often possible to meet asexual organizations.

And, finally, in some organizations they will easily tell you about trade secrets, but when asked about the size of the salary, they will indignantly answer that this topic is not subject to discussion. However, later you will find out that a familiar programmer, of course, has long told everyone about official salaries and bonuses.

But knowing what is forbidden to manifest in the organizational culture, it is always logical to look for where and in what form this forbidden part of reality manifests itself.

Values ​​and internal performance criteria

A comprehensive analysis of the indicators described above, as well as the observation of real interaction in the organization and the identification of repeated choices made when making managerial decisions, allows us to fairly reliably speak about the real values ​​that underlie the culture existing in the organization.

At the same time, it is possible to assess the degree of discrepancy between declared and actually “working” values. Identify value priorities. Knowledge of such value priorities in the organization allows not only to understand the logic of decisions already made, but also to predict what choices the organization will be inclined to make in the future, as long as these priorities do not change.

For example, if the value of creativity in an organization is higher than the value of money and the importance of the very existence of the organization, one can expect difficult, most risky and, as a rule, delayed decisions.

If in an organization the first value priorities do not include at all the material values ​​associated with the physical existence: life (as the physical existence of a person), money, health, etc., then the organization, as a rule, will be totalitarian in nature, aggressive towards the environment , be in a state of struggle or preparation to repel an attack.

Value priorities also set internal criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of the organization and its employees, the hierarchy of these criteria.

Internal performance criteria allow us to understand the most illogical and seemingly stupid decisions and actions to an external observer.

In a number of organizations, not the one who brings in the most profit is encouraged with a salary and bonus, but the one who seems more creative, smarter. In others, the main criterion in deciding the issue of remuneration is the needs of the person, as in communism: the employee must be given more money, because he has three children, because he just got married, because he asked for more. In some organizations, the amount of an employee's remuneration depends on his loyalty to a particular manager, which equates to loyalty to the organization. There are organizations where the main criterion is fairness, they either try to calculate the coefficient of labor participation, or pay everyone equally, equally.

Interestingly, according to the observations of M.A. Ivanov and D.M. Shusterman, in Russian organizations, the remuneration of employees rarely depends only on the money they bring to the organization in the form of income or cost reduction, in most organizations such indicators are not considered at all. And again, these decisions are based on not always conscious internal criteria.

You can even trace possible options consequences for the organization of the introduction various criteria. As soon as an organization accepts rapid growth as the main criterion, expenses begin to sharply outstrip income and eat up profits. It is enough to make safety the leading criterion and the rejection of all businesses connected, as it seems, with crime, begins. If the leaders of an organization want creativity, novelty and exclusivity, then they do not appreciate, and sometimes simply do not notice, lying on the surface, “stupid” and easily replicated goods and services that allow them to bring money at little cost.

In fact, the entire analysis and reconstruction of organizational culture makes sense if they allow one to formulate and realize internal values ​​and criteria for evaluating effectiveness. Only this awareness allows us to assess the existing human limitations and opportunities in the organization, to develop an adequate mission and strategy.

3.4. Positive and negative corporate culture.

The nature of the corporate culture is described by a system of features defined on three grounds.

1) The degree of mutual adequacy of the dominant hierarchy of values ​​and the prevailing ways of their implementation. On this basis, cultures can be divided into "stable" (high degree of adequacy) and "unstable" (low degree of adequacy). Stable is characterized by clearly defined norms of behavior and traditions. Irregular due to the lack of clear ideas about the optimal, acceptable and unacceptable behavior, as well as "fluctuations" socio-psychological status of workers.

2) The degree of compliance with the hierarchy of personal values ​​of each of the employees and the hierarchical system of intra-group values. On this basis, "integrative" (high degree of compliance) and "disintegrative" (low degree of compliance) are distinguished. Integrative is characterized by the unity of public opinion and intra-group cohesion. Disintegrative - the lack of a unified public opinion, disunity and conflict.

3) The content of the values ​​dominant in the organization On this basis, the corporate culture of the organization can be divided into "personality-oriented" and "functionally-oriented". Person-oriented - fixes the values ​​of self-realization and self-development of the employee's personality in the process and through the implementation of his professional labor activity. Functionally oriented - the value of the implementation of functionally specified algorithms for the implementation of professional and labor activities and status-defined behavior patterns.

Depending on the nature of the impact of corporate culture on the overall performance of the enterprise, we can distinguish "positive" and "negative" corporate culture. Positive - stimulates the performance of the enterprise (its features: personality-oriented: integrative, stable) or its development (personality-oriented: integrative, unstable).

Negative - impedes the effective functioning of the enterprise and its development (its signs: functionally oriented; disintegrative; stable or unstable).

The nature of corporate culture is manifested through a system of relations: a) the attitude of employees to their professional and labor activities; b) their attitude to the enterprise as an objective condition for the implementation of professional labor activity and the implementation of their attitude towards it; c) functional and interpersonal relations of employees as a subjective condition for the implementation of their attitude towards both activity and the enterprise. The specificity of corporate culture as a form of existence lies in the fact that, reflecting the real situation, it particularly emphasizes the trends of its change. The mechanisms of influence of corporate culture on the activities of the enterprise lie in the fact that employees predict the development of the situation, against which they evaluate and build models of their behavior. Realizing them in activity, they strengthen certain tendencies and thus create situations adequate to them.

Personally significant is the activity through which the employee: a) realizes and develops his actual and potential abilities that are personally important for him, based on the general context of his individual life: b) realizes a subjective (i.e. reflective and practically transforming) attitude towards reality, reflecting a specifically human way of life.

A positive corporate culture captures the value of professional labor activity as a way to realize the value of self-development and subjectivity, as well as the value of an enterprise as a condition for the implementation of this kind of method.

Negative - reflects the situation when activities at a particular enterprise are beneficial to varying degrees, however, not valuable for an employee in terms of his self-development and self-realization.

A positive culture is characterized by:

1. An employee's perception of himself as a subject whose professional and labor activity affects the overall performance of the enterprise and determines the strategy for its development.

2. Conscious acceptance of personal responsibility for a common product joint activities organizations. Together, this gives rise to a conscientious attitude to one's production duties as a norm of employee behavior, regulated by public opinion, which is negatively disposed towards manifestations of fictitious labor activity;

3. Orientation of the employee to the search, development, selection and implementation of the most optimal ways to carry out their activities. The implementation of this kind of orientation creates a sense of responsibility among employees for the quality of the product of their own activities and generates an interest in improving the result. Professional labor activity acquires a creative character, even if objectively it does not possess such a character, which creates general atmosphere passion for their work;

4. A positive assessment of the impact of professional and labor activity on personal development;

5. Feeling of mutual adequacy of personal and collective criteria of one's own value. The success of an employee as a result becomes the basis for both self-respect and respect from colleagues. The efficiency of business interaction is increasing, which is an objective condition for establishing friendly interpersonal relations in a team.

A positive corporate culture assimilates positive myths that are not based on manipulative-psychological propaganda, the "exposing" of which significantly worsens the relationship of employees to the organization, but reflects the real state of affairs. The myths of a positive corporate culture, reflecting the trends in the development of the sphere of values ​​of the organization, orient employees to the construction of behavioral models corresponding to them, the implementation of which in their activities stimulates the efficiency of the enterprise.

4. Change and formation of corporate culture

4.1. Changes in corporate culture.

Corporate culture is always linked to the previous experience of the organization. It is the experience of making decisions and actions inside and outside the organization that is fixed both in value priorities and in norms and rituals.

Currently in Russia there is a very rapid growth of organizations both in terms of the number of employees and in terms of turnover. Such growth requires restructuring. Holdings and holding-like structures are being created, and they need to be managed. A task that has been recognized by large foreign corporations for quite a long time is becoming an urgent task.

After all, the management is no longer one, but several organizations that have their own system-forming factors, scattered in space, sometimes for thousands of kilometers, including numerous and heterogeneous personnel.

In order to successfully manage all this, we need uniform standards, which are either agreed upon, or set from the management company, or, partially set, partially agreed upon.

The environment and its requirements change, the goals of the employees of the organization change, changes are made to the technological process, and the organizational culture changes along with them. Another thing is that it is an unconscious and most conservative component of the organization. Therefore, its changes may be delayed, proceed more slowly than someone would like. These changes may be completely unconscious, invisible to members of the organization, or carried out consciously and systematically.

In practice, changes in organizational culture are linked to organizational survival. If change is slower than required, then the organization will die.

It is essential that in this process of development of the organization, leading to its changes or death, the organizational culture plays the role of a kind of “system integrator”. By virtue of its totality, it sets the ethics and aesthetics of the organization, the limitations and opportunities that unite its employees, on the one hand, and the possibility of implementing the system-forming functions of the organization, its technological preferences and rules, on the other, and, finally, the perception and attitude to the requirements of the environment.

Knowing this, we can confidently say that any systemic change in an organization involves a change in its culture. Any systemic change in the organizational culture will ultimately lead to a change in the value priorities of its employees.

If the change in organizational culture occurs spontaneously, not controlled, then it inevitably involves a stage of chaos in the organization. Someone is already using the new rules, laughing at outdated rituals, using a new language. Someone, on the contrary, adheres to traditions, expresses dissatisfaction with innovations. In some areas and divisions, a change has occurred, while others have become inadequate to new trends.

There are many examples of such slow and chaotic changes.

Trade firms in our country have repeatedly changed priorities depending on the requirements of the environment. Until 1996, business here was completely dependent on the availability of any, but cheap goods - everyone fought for stable relations with commodity producers, commodity loans, and obtaining goods on consignment. Later, the search for a client, a buyer ready to pay money, became central.

In recent years, this situation has changed several times. As a result, much more attention is now paid to pragmatic considerations in the interaction between the buyer and the seller: the economy has begun to prevail over interpersonal relationships. In those sales organizations where the transition from a product-centered approach to a customer-centered approach was unmanageable, each time there was chaos, they were always late, suffered losses, and many went bankrupt. But such a change is impossible without fundamental changes in organizational culture. Indeed, in organizations every time there should have been changes in the internal criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of activities.

Technological innovations have dealt a huge blow to organizational cultures. The purchase of Western production lines has destroyed more than one organization.

Changes in organizational culture are even more difficult to manage. First of all, for such management it is necessary to realize the peculiarities of one's culture. It is very difficult to do this on your own, and sometimes impossible. After all, being a bearer of culture, a person always treats it with prejudice, emotionally - either loves or hates. A paradoxical situation arises: no one feels and knows culture better than its bearer. But it is practically impossible to carry out a holistic vision and an objective assessment of the possibilities of culture.

That is why in management most often the change in organizational culture is understood as the construction of a new culture. Which with immutability implies the destruction of the old. Such changes lead to the loss of a large number of old employees, carriers of the old culture.

But the problem is not limited to the change of personnel. The leaders of the organization themselves turn out to be carriers of the old culture; in order to change it, it is necessary to replace them as well. In reality, such changes in organizational cultures turned out to be effective only in those cases when new leaders came to the organization, with authority and real opportunities to change most of the staff.

Meanwhile, any organizational culture has quite a lot of degrees of freedom. After all, as a rule, all employees of the organization had experience in other organizations and, due to this, are carriers of several organizational cultures. Any organizational culture has certain necessary limitations, but also opportunities, resources for change. You just need to see and understand them. Usually for such changes, strangers are invited to organize people. It is their heterogeneity that allows them to ask stupid questions, demand arguments and explanations of what is obvious and accepted without any justification for all bearers of organizational culture. In order to answer such questions, it is necessary to realize the absence of arguments and explanations, to look for them in history, to find the mechanism for their formation, to look at one's culture from the outside.

When there is strong anxiety and dissatisfaction with the corporate and organizational culture that has developed in the organization, its members and especially leaders have a desire to change everything quickly, at once. But changing organizational culture, unlike changing it, is always a long process. It is necessary to preserve the essential features, what made the organization effective. Start change with minimal impact, start the process, plan it in time, set the pace of change. This way of controlled change of organizational culture is obviously preferable in effective organizations, as well as in those numerous cases when a cardinal change of personnel is impossible.

But the problem is not only in setting certain standards, it is necessary that they are actually observed and maintained. And here you can not do without rules, norms and values. That is, the question of a single culture arises. But after all, each of these organizations, along with the general ones, also has its own system-forming ones: sometimes different technologies, different requirements of the environment and personnel. Then we should not talk about a single culture, but about the common intersection of cultures, the cultural core that unites them, allows us to understand each other and work together. That is, there is a need to have some necessary for interaction and understanding general rules, about some basic uniform criteria for effectiveness, about common language and requirements for personnel, technology, product quality, management culture.

In order to create such a corporate culture based on the organizational culture of the parent company, it is necessary, firstly, to realize your own culture and describe it. Secondly, to highlight in it the necessary and sufficient that needs to be formed in other companies. Thirdly, to organize a system for teaching this corporate culture and monitoring compliance with its requirements.

But even this is often not enough. A system of mutual internships for managers and employees and the creation of some kind of organizational mechanism for monitoring and developing corporate culture are also necessary.

Experience shows that forcing the organizational culture of the parent company into all new organizations is not effective. It's not that it's difficult and demanding high costs but in the fact that new organizations work in different conditions and this foreign culture is simply not adequate to the reality with which they are dealing, it makes them ineffective.

Therefore, the formation of an effective corporate culture is also always a process that must be planned and organized, must be controlled and motivated. It is essential that this process should not be one-sided, employees of all organizations included in the corporation should be involved in it.

4.2. Formation of corporate culture.

Building a corporate culture is a long and complex process. Let's take a look at its main steps:

1. definition of the mission of the organization;

2. definition of core core values;

3. formulation of standards of conduct for members of the organization based on basic values;

4. description of traditions and symbols reflecting all of the above.

All these steps and their results are described in the corporate manual. This document is especially useful in situations of hiring and onboarding new employees and allows you to immediately understand how much a potential employee shares the values ​​of the organization. When constructing a company’s cultural building program, three areas of the company’s activity can be distinguished:

1. Personnel management (at the level of manager-subordinate).

2. Communication management (at the level of interaction between employees).

3. Service management (at the level of interaction between the company's employees, customers and suppliers).

It is in these areas that the culture of the company is most evident.

Since activity and communication are manifested through the actions of people, and actions are determined by the stereotypes, knowledge and skills of these people, we single out the stereotypes, knowledge and skills of employees and managers of the company as objects of management. Culture or lack of culture is manifested in them. To change the culture means to change the stereotypes, knowledge and skills of employees and managers of the firm.

At the intersection of three identified areas of activity and three objects of change for the purpose of cultural transformation of the company, the tasks of this very cultural construction are formed.

If all managers and employees of the company were freed from inefficient and interfering stereotypes of thinking and behavior that greatly darken the cultural landscape of the company, if they possessed all the indicated knowledge and skills, then legends could be made about the culture of the company.

In general, the formation of a corporate culture, as a process of strategic change (according to Kurt Lewin), goes through several stages in succession:

- "defrosting" of the existing corporate culture - diagnostics, research;

- "liquidation" - planning and implementation of the necessary changes;

- "freezing" - fixing the result.

With a detailed study of the internal environment of the company, several indicators can be determined at once: flexibility or stability, dynamism or order and control, unity or rivalry, integration and unification or differentiation and division.

As in the character of a person, where the basis is a combination of several types of temperament, so in the corporate culture of a company, several basic types of culture are manifested.

The next important addition to the definition of corporate culture is to identify the core values ​​of the company, that is, what lies in the field of basic ideas and attitudes: the attitude of employees to the company, motivation for work, customer focus, management style and relationships.

The final step of this phase is to develop an implementation plan, complete with time tables, that will begin the process of culture change.

There is no doubt that the efforts made to change the corporate culture will be effective only if such important principles of organizational change as:

Creating a positive emotional background for the ongoing changes - start small and celebrate the victory;

Building public support for change – involve authoritative and constructive staff;

Building a system for monitoring and recording results - to maintain people's confidence: the goals are achievable;

The sources of formation of corporate culture are:

1) a system of personal values ​​and individual-peculiar ways of their implementation;

2) methods, forms and structure of the organization of activities that objectively embody some values, including the personal values ​​of the leaders of the enterprise;

3) an idea of ​​the optimal and acceptable model of behavior of an employee in a team, which reflect the system of spontaneously formed intra-group values.

The mechanism of formation of corporate culture lies in the mutual influence of its sources. Intersecting, they limit the area of ​​really possible ways of realizing personal values ​​at a given enterprise and thereby determine their content and hierarchy that dominate in the team. The hierarchical system of values ​​singled out in this way generates the most adequate set of ways of their realization, which, being embodied in the ways of activity, form intra-group norms and models of behavior.

CONCLUSION.

Corporate culture is a set of behavioral characteristics that are mandatory for organizations that are part of the corporate structure. Corporate culture directly affects the performance of organizations. Until recently, it was argued that in our conditions it is impossible to approach entrepreneurship not only from the standpoint of true morality, but also from the criteria of Western ethics, corporate ethics. But today there are several domestic ethical codes adopted by both business professional associations and corporate structures.

Based on the materials studied, we can conclude that organizational (corporate) culture is:

Implicit, invisible and informal "consciousness" of the organization - the way of thinking, management culture (management ideology, leadership styles and problem solving by managers, their behavior in general), which determines the organization's policy towards employees, partners and customers;

A set of the most important ideas, views, fundamental values ​​and standards, beliefs, ethical norms, beliefs and expectations supported by the organization, which are accepted without evidence by the majority of employees, give people guidelines for their activities and determine the way of uniting and coordinating the management, structural units and individual employees;

The external expression of these attitudes is the methods of solving problems and achieving the goals of the organization; a system of prohibitions and "rules of the game" that must be observed in order to succeed in the organization; a way of doing business in a given "locality", which newcomers must learn and at least partially accept in order to become "their own" in the team;

Defined by these norms and rules, constantly recurring, habitual forms of behavior, communication, relationships and interactions both within the organization and outside it; morals, customs, traditions, rituals, ways of showing respect, special language, myths, legends, heroes of the organization, stories about it and its leaders, slogans, organizational rites and rituals, taboos, etc. Special "imprinted" skills that employees demonstrate when performing certain tasks and which are not necessarily recorded in writing;

Integrative symbols that an organization creates to characterize itself (layout of premises, office furnishings, etc.);

The psychological climate generated by all of the above factors is the "style" of this organization, a feeling that is transmitted through the arrangement of the physical space and the way the members of the organization interact with each other, with customers or other people external to the organization.

Corporate culture exists in any organization, regardless of its size and scope. This is explained by the fact that in any community there are principles, norms, rules, procedures and rituals that guide the members of the group. In other words, organizational culture can be understood as a set of principles, values ​​and rules of the organization, which are shared by the majority of its members and are passed down from generation to generation. In addition to the general rules, in each team there are also subcultures that are formed within the framework of separate groups (divisions, departments, like-minded people).

Like any system, corporate culture consists of certain components that differ from each other in the level of visibility and complexity.

One of the components of organizational culture is its visibility. That is, what can be seen, heard or felt when observing a group with an unfamiliar culture: office environment and interior, technologies used, products and services, communication style, myths and stories, philosophy, corporate holidays and ceremonies. However, it is impossible to draw conclusions about the quality of corporate culture by observing only its visible part. For a deeper understanding, it is necessary to consider its next element - shared values. It contains the values ​​and norms declared and professed by the company's team. These include the philosophy and principles of work, corporate values, which are shared by the majority of employees and contribute to maintaining the working atmosphere in the company.

Correctly chosen priorities are an important component in the formation of corporate culture. So, for example, one of the priorities may be the Russian proverb: "do not put off until tomorrow what you can do today." If every employee follows this principle, it will have a positive impact not only on the financial results of the company, but also on its perception by customers. Another priority might be the phrase: "Give the buyer more than he expected to receive." As a result, customers will come to you again and again.

And, finally, the final component of the corporate culture is the basic principles. These include judgments, beliefs of the installation, which are perceived by the group at a subconscious level and are not subject to doubt. For example, the corporate culture of one of the largest companies in America "Intel" contains the following basic principles: respect for a person, his rights and dignity; providing consumers with services that meet the highest requirements; production of high quality products; fulfillment of obligations to shareholders; constant interaction with suppliers of products and services.

Leaders of the organization, top managers, owners have the strongest influence on the formation of the organizational climate. Without their participation, it is impossible to carry out any changes in the corporate culture.

The external environment of the company also leaves its mark on the organizational culture. Consumers, competitors, the economic and political situation, the state - all these factors interact with each other. For example, a company operating in a highly competitive market is certainly more sensitive to change and consumer needs than any government monopoly. Another example would be a retail store that works directly with consumers and is interested in learning about their requests and needs. His opponent is the virtual trading floor, the operation of which is dominated by automation and software solutions, and there is no personal contact with the buyer.

Features of the business sphere also cannot but affect the organizational culture. Safety is paramount in the chemical and energy industries. In the high-tech sector - innovation and speed, in the luxury clothing trade - all to meet the needs of customers.

National traditions have a huge impact on the formation of corporate culture and business in general. Japanese companies widely practice group decision making and teamwork. Americans, on the other hand, encourage individuality in every possible way, promote the development of creative initiative among employees and welcome sole decision-making.

Summing up the most significant factors influencing the formation of corporate culture, we can single out the criteria, compliance with which indicates a strong corporate culture:

1. Common interests - most of the company's employees and managers share common values ​​and business practices. For example, at monthly meetings there is a unity of views, everyone quickly comes to an agreement. To achieve such a result, you need to constantly work with employees, conduct regular surveys, being interested in wages, work organization in the workplace, management style and the internal climate in the organization. To obtain reliable data, it is necessary to remain anonymous. You can also use ballot boxes to collect ideas and suggestions from employees;

2. The adequacy of the chosen strategy - the company's goals do not contradict the corporate culture, for example, the culture of the Swedish company IKEA, which produces and sells inexpensive furniture, is adequate to the chosen strategy. It is based on values ​​such as simplicity, modesty and cost control. Company managers, including senior management, never fly first class or stay in expensive hotels;

3. Adaptability of culture - the ability to be a catalyst for change. The susceptibility of the organization to changes in the external environment and the ability to work effectively in the long term depend on this characteristic. The values ​​that characterize the adaptability of a culture are trust, risk-taking, entrepreneurship, creativity, innovation, etc.

It should also be noted here that there is no one common recipe for changing corporate culture. Some techniques can lead to great results in one company and lead to disastrous results in another. Before you make changes in organizational culture, you need to clearly understand why and what exactly you want to change. People won't change or learn new things unless there's a good reason to do so, so culture changes shouldn't be made unless they help solve some of the big problems facing the organization.

It is known that firms with a pronounced corporate culture use human resources much more efficiently. Corporate culture is one of the most effective means of attracting and motivating employees. As soon as a person satisfies the needs of the first level (relatively speaking, purely material), he has a need for another: position in the team, common values, non-material motivation. This is where corporate culture comes into play.

Since organizational culture is formed under the influence of many factors and processes, its change requires numerous transformations in various areas of the company - strategy, personnel, organizational structure, management style, compensation system, etc. And, finally, you need to be patient, since changing the corporate culture is a long and painful process. Leadership must have the determination and will to see the change process through.

List of used literature:

1. Bazarov T.Yu. Human resources management in a developing organization. - M.: IPK State Service., 1996.

2. Emelyanov E.N., Povarnitsyna E.E. Business psychology. – M.: ARMADA, 1998.

3. Ivanov M.A., Shusterman D.M. Organization as your tool. Russian mentality and business practice. – M.: Alpina Publisher, 2003.

5. Personnel management: modern Russian practice. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2003.

6. Hunt Deyon Management of people in the company / per. from English. – M.: Olimp-Business, 1999.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Types of corporate culture

Corporate culture arises in any structured group of people. Moreover, it becomes more powerful, the longer this structure exists.

Typically, corporate culture arises spontaneously, “from below”, and is transmitted “by word of mouth”, with the help of personal example and oral instructions from old-timers. The most charismatic individuals contribute the most. It is their habits and rules of behavior that begin, albeit unconsciously, to be copied by other employees.

Naturally, if a strong charismatic leader is at the head of the organization, then it is he who will have the main influence on the formation of corporate culture. And the corporate culture will start working for its creator.

However, without a clear "scientific" management of this process, without the creation of "anchors" of the corporate code, without the conscious use of elements of corporate culture in advertising and PR materials, the main goal cannot be achieved, namely, self-maintenance and self-development of the organization.

Some leaders view their corporate culture as a powerful strategic tool to orient all departments and individuals towards common goals, mobilize employee initiative, build loyalty, and facilitate communication.

The specific cultural values ​​of an organization may relate to:

The purpose of the organization and its "face" (the highest quality, leadership in its industry, the spirit of innovation);

Seniority and power (powers inherent in a position or person, respect for seniority and authority);

Importance of various leadership positions and functions (powers of the human resources department, the importance of the positions of various vice presidents, the roles of different departments);

Treatment of people (caring for people and their needs, respect for individual rights, training and opportunities for professional development, fairness in pay, motivation of people);

The role of women in management and other positions;

Selection criteria for managerial and supervisory positions;

Organization of work and discipline;

Decision-making processes (who makes decisions, who is consulted);

Dissemination and exchange of information (employees are well or poorly informed);

The nature of contacts (preference for personal or written contacts, the possibility of contacts with senior management);

The nature of socialization (who communicates with whom during and after work, special conditions, such as a separate dining room, etc.);

Ways to resolve conflicts (desire to avoid conflict or compromise, participation of top management);

Evaluation of performance (secret or open, by whom, how the results are used);

Identification with the organization (loyalty and integrity, spirit of unity, enjoyment of working in the organization);

Types of corporate cultures

"Culture of power" - in this culture of the organization, a leader plays a special role, his personal qualities and abilities. As a source of power, a prominent place belongs to the resources at the disposal of a leader. Organizations with this kind of culture tend to have a rigid hierarchical structure. Recruitment and promotion through the hierarchical ladder are carried out quite often according to the criteria of personal loyalty. An example of power cultures can often be found in small business organizations, in companies involved in property, trade, and finance. Such a structure is best represented as a web. It depends on the central source of power, the power comes from the center, and spreads in the form of central waves. Control is carried out centrally through persons selected for this purpose, subject to certain rules and techniques, and a small amount of bureaucracy. Problems are solved, for the most part, on the basis of a balance of influences, and not on a procedural or partially logical basis. Organizations with this type of culture can react quickly to events, but are highly dependent on decision-making by people from the center. They will seek to attract people who are politically inclined, power-oriented, risk-averse, and who do not place a high value on security. The power of resources is the basis of power in this culture, with some elements of personal power in the center. Size is a problem for power cultures: it's hard to put too many activities together and still maintain control. Such organizations succeed in creating organizations with a greater degree of independence while maintaining control over finances.

To get along well with a culture of power, an employee must be oriented towards power (strength), be interested in politics, and not be afraid to take risks in unsafe situations. He must be confident in himself, and not in other team members, focused on results, be thick-skinned enough to withstand tough competition.

"Role culture" - is characterized by a strict functional distribution of roles and specialization of sites. This type of organization operates on the basis of a system of rules, procedures and standards of activity, the observance of which should guarantee its effectiveness. The main source of power is not personal qualities, but the position occupied in the hierarchical structure. Such an organization is able to operate successfully in a stable environment. The epitome of role culture is the classic, tightly planned organization (better known as the bureaucracy), which can be thought of as a temple. This type of organization is characterized by strict functional and specialized areas, such as the finance department and the sales department (its columns), which are coordinated by a narrow link of management from above. The degree of formalization and standardization is high; the activities of functional areas and their interaction are regulated by certain rules and procedures that determine the division of work and power, methods of communication and conflict resolution between functional areas. In a role culture, the main source of power is the power of position. Individuals are chosen to fill a role, personal strength is frowned upon, and specialist strength is valued only in its proper place. Influence is governed by rules and procedures. The effectiveness of this culture depends on the rational distribution of work and responsibility, and not on individuals. This type of organization is most likely to thrive in a stable environment, with a stable market that is predictable and controllable, and where the life of the product is long. Conversely, a role-playing culture does not adapt well to change, is poorly “aware” of the need for change, and is slow to respond to it. The role organization is found where the stability of production is more important than flexibility, or where technical competence and depth of specialization are more important than the introduction of new products or the cost of maintenance.

A role culture gives an individual employee security and the opportunity to become a competent specialist; performance within certain limits is rewarded by an appropriate pay scale and possibly promotion within the functional area. But this culture is destructive for ambitious, power-oriented individuals who seek to manage their work, for those who are more interested in the result than the methods. Such persons will be satisfied only by being in the group of senior managers. A role-playing culture would seem to suit managers who love safety and predictability, who want to get things done by playing a role rather than making an outstanding personal contribution, and for those who are interested in being able to expertly apply an accepted methodology rather than the final result.

"Culture of the task" -- this species culture is oriented, first of all, to solving problems, to implementing projects. The effectiveness of organizations with such a culture is largely determined by the high professionalism of employees and the cooperative group effect. The most powerful people in such organizations are those who are currently experts in the leading field of activity and who have the maximum amount of information. This culture is effective in cases where the situational demands of the market are decisive in the activities of the organization. This culture is project or work oriented, its structure is best represented as a grid, some threads are thicker and stronger than others, with power and influence located at the intersections of this grid, at the nodes. An organization with a "matrix structure" is one example of a task culture. The focus of this culture is on getting work done soon. An organization with such a culture tries to bring together the right resources and the right people at the right level and enable them to do a good job. Task culture depends on the ability of the team to increase work efficiency and combine the employee's personal goals with the goals of the organization. This is a team culture where team performance is more important than individual goals, position, and style differences. Influence is based more on the strength of the expert, specialist, and not on the strength or position of the individual. Influence is more widespread here than in other types of corporate cultures.

The task culture is highly adaptable. Groups, project teams or special commissions are created for specific purposes and can be re-formed, disbanded or left. The organization can respond quickly because each group ideally contains all the necessary elements to make decisions. Individuals find this culture to be characterized by a high degree of autonomy, performance-based evaluation, and easy working relationships within the group, with mutual respect based on ability rather than age or position. Therefore, the culture of the task is suitable where the life of the product is transient, and where the speed of reaction is important. These advantages are countered by the difficulties of managing a large mobile organization, the difficulties associated with creating a rational structure, the difficulties of achieving professionalism. Management in these organizations is difficult. Primary control remains with top management, who allocates projects, people, and resources, and retains little day-to-day control over work without violating cultural norms. This works well in favorable conditions and when resources are available to all who need them. However, if they are less available, senior management will begin to feel the need to control work and results, and team leaders may begin to compete for these resources using political influence. The morale of the group falls, the work brings less satisfaction, and employees begin to act in their own interests. This makes it necessary to establish certain rules and work procedures. The manager is forced to use the execution of work. Thus, a task culture tends to shift to a role culture or a power culture when resources are limited or the enterprise is performing poorly.

Most managers, of course, at the middle or lower levels, would prefer to work in an organization with a task culture that emphasizes teams, specialist (expert) capabilities, performance-based rewards, and the integration of individual and group goals. This fits well with current trends towards change and adaptation, individual freedom and low status differences, but this culture will not suit all situations. A manager in such a culture must be flexible and confident when dealing with unstable and possibly short-term jobs. He or she must be prepared to be judged by results and must feel at their best coordinating the work of colleagues, each of whom may be more competent than the manager, in particular aspects of the task. Everyone in the group can expect control over their activities. It is assumed that this type of culture is preferred by most middle managers.

"Culture of personality" - an organization with this type of culture brings people together not to solve some problems, but so that they can achieve their own goals. Power is based on proximity to resources, professionalism and the ability to negotiate. Power and control are coordinating. This type of culture is unusual. It is not found everywhere, however, many individuals adhere to some of its principles. In this culture, the individual is at the center; if there is some structure and organization, it exists only to serve and help individuals in this organization, to promote the fulfillment of their own interests without any purpose. This culture is best thought of as a swarm of bees or a "galaxy of stars". Obviously, few organizations can exist with this kind of culture, because organizations tend to have some corporate goals that rise above the personal goals of the members of the organization. Moreover, for this culture, control or even a hierarchy of control is impossible except by mutual consent. The organization is subordinate to the individual and owes its existence to this individual. The individual can leave the organization, but the organization rarely has the power to "evict" the individual. Influence is distributed equally, and the basis of power, if necessary, is usually the power of a specialist: a person does what he is good at doing, so they listen to him.

Law firms, architects' unions, and small consulting firms are often "individual" oriented. A cooperative may strive for a culture of personality in an organizational form, but as it develops it, at best, comes to a culture of task, but much more often to a role culture or a culture of power. While personality culture organizations are rare, it is common to encounter self-interested individuals who fit this type of culture but work in more typical organizations (hospital consultants, local council architects). They have little commitment to their organization and see it as a place to do their own business with some benefit to the employer. Such individuals are not easy to manage. Being a specialist, it is easy for them to find another job; the power of position, not backed by the power of resources, does not work. These individuals do not recognize the power of experts and do not submit to the power of coercion. Only the strength of the individual remains, but such people are generally difficult to influence. In addition, they are usually not influenced by group norms and relationships with colleagues, which could moderate their personal ambitions.

Perhaps no manager would be happy working in an organization with a culture of personality. These "personalities" would seem to be literally uncontrollable, but even in a culture of personality, people need the means to achieve their goals, and the person who controls access to these means may exert some pressure and insist on tutelage for the use of these resources.

But it must be emphasized once again that two or more of these cultures can exist in the same organization along with subcultures, all of which complicate the life of the organization, are sources of anxieties, joys, frustrations and opportunities for those who work there.

We live in an age of ever-increasing pressure from outside - the pressure of a global socio-economic, political and economic crisis, and from within - the pressure of a spiritual crisis. Both have an impact on the life of the organization. In those where life has entered a period of crisis, culture is fragmented and largely discredited, it can no longer serve as a reliable link between people who need to think and act together.

A survey of employees of various commercial banks, trading and consulting firms showed that the top management of these organizations sees the corporate spirit as a source of the company's wealth.

Among other things, organizations can be divided into dominant cultures and subcultures.

The dominant culture expresses the core (central) values ​​that are accepted by the majority of the members of the organization. It is a macro approach to culture that expresses a distinctive characteristic of an organization.

Subcultures develop in large organizations and reflect common problems, situations faced by employees, or experience in resolving them. They develop geographically or by separate divisions, vertically or horizontally. When one production department of a conglomerate has a unique culture that differs from other departments of the organization, then there is a vertical subculture. When a specific department of functional specialists (such as accounting or sales) has a set of generally accepted concepts, then a horizontal subculture is formed. Any group in an organization can create a subculture, but most subcultures are defined by a departmental (individual) structural scheme or geographical division. It will include the core values ​​of the dominant culture plus additional values ​​unique to members of that department.

Fig.1 Division of QC into subcultures

Obviously, different subcultures will influence each other and the overall corporate culture as a whole, causing its features.

Successful organizations have their own culture that leads them to achieve positive results. Corporate culture allows you to distinguish one organization from another, creates an atmosphere of identification for members of the organization, generates commitment to the goals of the organization; strengthens social stability; serves as a controlling mechanism that directs and shapes the attitudes and behavior of workers.

Fig.2 Influence of subcultures on enterprise QC

Strong and weak culture. It is necessary to distinguish between strong and weak culture. A strong culture is characterized by the core (core) values ​​of the organization, which are strongly supported, clearly defined and widely disseminated. The more members of an organization who share these core values, recognize their importance, and are committed to them, the stronger the culture. Young organizations or organizations characterized by a constant rotation of opinions (concepts) among their members have a weak culture. Members of such organizations do not have sufficient joint experience to form generally accepted values. However, not all mature organizations with a stable workforce are characterized by a strong culture: the core values ​​of the organization must be constantly maintained.

"HR department of a commercial organization", 2014, N 3

CORPORATE CULTURE

Our country is a multinational state. Each nation has its own traditions and customs - an important component of national culture. So it is with organizations: each has its own system of values, its own rules and norms, formed over the years, determined by accumulated experience. They make up the corporate (organizational) culture of the company, making it unique.

Definition, purpose and typology

The concept of "culture" in itself is ambiguous. This term comes from the Latin verb "colere" - cultivation, education. However, both of these meanings can be applied to the culture of an organization. Let's imagine the formation of a corporate culture as the sowing of views, beliefs (including management philosophy) in a newly created team and education in the process of further activities.

This phenomenon was observed back in the 19th century, initially among the military. It is believed that in Russia they began to deal with corporate culture recently, but this is not entirely true. A certain cultural work was going on at every major enterprise of the Soviet era. Remember at least the stands with photographs of distinguished workers, the universal party affiliation ...

Corporate culture is a system of interaction between people in an organization according to the initially laid down principles, established procedures and historically developed rules. At the stage of its inception, the culture of the organization is able to determine its future: structure, commercial activity, development, motivation system. The meaning of corporate culture is the coincidence of the beliefs of employees and the "rules of the game". Its goal is the management of human resources, which are the main value of any organization. In an era of intense market activity and fierce competition, it is no longer enough to control people's behavior, it is important to understand the mood and opinion of society and be able to respond in time.

Corporate culture (according to K. Cameron and R. Quinn) is represented by the following types:

1. Clan culture, or family type culture. This type is characteristic of organizations in which friendly, almost family relationships based on loyalty to tradition and mutual devotion. Leaders for their employees become educators, teachers, parents. The leaders of such companies are of the "colleague" or mentor type. The former manage by involving workers in the process of solving problems, seeking mutual consent. The latter take care of their "kids" and actively help some of them. In the clan culture, an important role is played by the psychological attitude, the unity of workers, and their participation in business.

2. Adhocracy culture. Companies with this type of culture are characterized by risk, flexibility, quick response and creative approach to doing business. Their leaders are progressive and desperate people. This type of culture exists in companies engaged in projects, technological developments, and innovative activities. Their rule is to be ready for anything and dedicated to experimentation and innovation.

3. Hierarchical (bureaucratic) culture. This is the culture of organizations where all processes are formal and structured. Their leaders are organizers and rational coordinators, people of instructions and rules. Such companies are characterized by internal support in relation to personnel, orderliness, a high level of control, stability, and the diligence of employees is important. Basically, the hierarchical type is represented by state structures and cultural institutions, which are focused on internal comfort, maintaining a smooth course of activity.

4. Market culture. In organizations with a market corporate culture, the priorities are the fulfillment of the task, the desire to win, to achieve success. Leaders are firm, stern and demanding leaders. Companies with a market corporate culture are aimed at the external environment: to penetrate the market, to be leaders, to have access to new technologies.

Governance and Significance

Norms and values ​​change and evolve over time. They are influenced by events occurring both in the country and within the organization. Organizational culture depends on the goals, models of actions to achieve them, the economic condition of the company and helps it to solve certain problems.

Management of corporate culture means its development and dissemination in the team. The management structure consists of:

Corporate culture is a set of beliefs, norms of behavior and attitudes common to all employees, an unwritten "code of honor". The importance of corporate culture for the team is indicated by the following:

	it unites the team, strengthens the spirit of cooperation and helps to achieve the goal together, to complete the task;
	if an employee accepts the culture of the organization and corresponds to it, his personal responsibility for the result increases, self-awareness is stimulated;
	corporate culture helps the employee to quickly adapt to the new team, to become his own, instills a sense of security and trust in the company;
	employees understand the importance of the activities carried out in the organization;
	corporate culture increases the labor potential of employees;
	the corporate culture of the organization also influences public opinion about it, raising its authority;
	with a good corporate culture, the employee is proud to be part of the company.

If the core values ​​are supported and shared by the majority of employees, the corporate culture has a strong influence on them. Its effectiveness can be determined by the coherence of the work and the success of the interaction of employees, their job satisfaction and pride in its results, dedication to the company, readiness for change, despite existing or possible obstacles and difficulties, compliance with the stated standards and high demands on the quality of work.

Functions of corporate culture

The culture of the organization serves to form a general idea of ​​employees about the organization and performs a number of other functions:

	cognitive - when getting acquainted with the culture of the organization, the beginner accepts the "conditions of the game", that is, the established norms, traditions of the local team;
	regulating - indicates and fixes the rules of conduct, requirements for the organization of the workplace;
	cumulative - forms and stores in the "memory" of the company certain beliefs, ethical ideals, significant dates, events;
	intracommunicative - employees communicate better with each other thanks to generally accepted methods and forms of communication;
	external communication - provides a system of relations with the public, business partners, forms a positive reputation, a special image of the organization;
	motivational - helps to reveal the potential of the employee (intellectual property items are created, own developments and research are carried out);
	security - a fixed and valid system of values ​​can prevent adverse events;
	educational - culture involves the improvement of corporate norms, which means the constant development of its carriers and the fruitfulness of their activities.

Corporate culture not only regulates and consolidates relationships within the company. Part of the culture is visual design, stories that are passed on in the team by word of mouth. What elements and objects can be distinguished?

Symbols and slogans - memorable images, logos, mottos, slogans. Sentences that succinctly articulate the core values ​​of a corporate culture and design elements for buildings, offices, or branded clothing can convey a company's philosophy to people, indicate its material capabilities, and ultimately stimulate teamwork. So, a symbol of well-being is corporate transport, vouchers for employees.

Ceremonies, rituals, ceremonies. Most often, these are planned actions for public awarding those who have distinguished themselves - with a solemn speech, awarding an award ... You can often hear about the rite of "initiation" - a small performance or a comic test, after which a newcomer is accepted into the team.

Corporate events. They are necessary for establishing relations between employees, getting closer to colleagues from non-resident branches of the company, getting to know management, etc. As a rule, these are field trips or feasts with an entertainment program. The day of foundation of the company, New Year, etc. can be celebrated. In a word, corporate parties familiar to everyone.

Narratives and stories are narratives based on real-life precedents. Various developments may reinforce existing norms or lead to their revision. Conclusions from such situations, as a rule, are formulated as mandatory actions.

Myths and legends. Their heroes are employees who have accomplished feats in the course of their work or achieved incredible results. Stories about the heroes of the company set an example for other employees (in such a story, events can be partially fictional, embellished).

Dress code (from the English dress code - "clothing code"). These are the requirements for appearance and clothing both for working in the company's office and for attending certain events. This term originated in the UK, but is accepted and valid throughout the world. For organizations where employees are "in plain sight", a dress code is often indicated as a prerequisite in employment contract, internal regulations or other regulatory document. There are companies that provide relief, for example, on Fridays. And for firms, let's say, hidden from society, such a condition is not at all necessary.

The language of communication. Communication through professional terms, abbreviations. As a rule, it occurs within departments, thereby uniting employees and emphasizing their belonging to a single whole.

There are several criteria for determining the presence of internal culture, proposed by S. P. Robbins:

	personal initiative - the degree to which employees are empowered with freedom, independence and responsibility;
	degree of risk - willingness of employees to take risks;
	direction of action - the establishment of clear goals by the organization and the expectation of their achievement;
	coordination of actions of employees;
	managerial support - assistance of management to subordinates;
	control - a list of rules for monitoring the behavior of personnel;
	identity - the degree of identification of each employee with the organization;
	reward system - incentives based on the work performed;
	conflict - the willingness of an employee to openly express his opinion if it does not coincide with the opinion of the majority;
	degree of interaction within the organization.

Finally

So, corporate culture is the result of the organization's path, the history of the problems solved and the guide to the future. A well-organized, efficient company culture prevents negative changes in the company and promotes the preservation of positive aspects. And of course, the head of the company should pay great attention to this issue.

Corporate culture- a set of behavior patterns that are acquired by the organization in the process of adaptation to the external environment and internal integration, which have shown their effectiveness and are shared by the majority of members of the organization. The components of corporate culture are:

• adopted leadership system;
• conflict resolution styles;
• functioning communication system;
• the position of the individual in the organization;
• accepted symbols: slogans, organizational taboos, rituals.

The term "corporate culture" appeared in the 19th century. It was formulated and applied by the German Field Marshal Moltke, who used it to characterize the relationship in the officer environment. At that time, relationships were regulated not only by charters, courts of honor, but also by duels: a saber scar was an obligatory attribute of belonging to an officer's "corporation". Rules of conduct, both written and unwritten, developed within professional communities as early as medieval guilds, and violations of these rules could lead to the exclusion of their members from the communities.

Typically found in organizations corporate culture- a complex set of assumptions accepted without evidence by all members of the team and setting a general framework for behavior.

Today's leaders and managers view their organization's culture as a powerful strategic tool, allowing to orient all departments and individuals towards common goals, mobilize the initiative of employees and facilitate productive communication between them. They strive to create their own culture for each organization so that all employees understand and adhere to it. Modern organizations, as a rule, are multicultural formations.

Fundamentals of corporate culture

Chapter from the book "Corporate Management"

5.1. Essence and main elements of corporate culture

The efficiency of the company's activity is determined by the following factors: the technical and organizational level of production, the qualifications of the staff, the level of motivation and remuneration, the presence of a development strategy. These mechanisms are usually regulated in various regulatory documents (technical data sheets, plans, programs, tariff system, etc.). At the same time, in the team of any corporation there is such a sphere of relations that is not amenable to formal regulation. These relations develop over a number of years according to unwritten rules under the influence of historical experience, the mentality of people, local customs and traditions, spiritual values ​​and tastes.

In the management of enterprises, these relationships are manifested in the informal division of labor, the presence of informal leaders, established habits and traditions, as well as a special microclimate in the team. All of this area is united by the concept of "corporate (or organizational) culture".

The corporate (organizational) culture is based on the fundamental values ​​shared by the members of the company. These values ​​in different corporations can be different, including depending on whose interests underlie the activities of the company: the company itself as a whole or its individual members. The styles of leadership, behavior, communication, and activity follow from the above values.

A high level of corporate culture is an important strategic factor that mobilizes all structural units of the corporation and its individual workers to achieve the goals set within the declared mission of the company.

The most significant characteristics of corporate culture include:

• awareness by the employee of his place in the company (group);
• type of joint activity;
• code of Conduct;
• type of control;
• culture of communication;
• communication system;
• Business Etiquette;
• company traditions;
• features of the interpretation of powers and responsibilities;
• work ethic.

The decisive factor in the formation of corporate culture is philosophy of the company or in other words, the principles followed by the management of the company. These principles are formed in advertising materials, in the speeches of the founders of the company, information documents. The formation of such principles aims to create a certain image of the corporation in the eyes of its employees and in the external environment.

Corporate Image - this is a kind of medal, one side of which represents the internal image of the company, that is, walking in the minds of the members of the corporation, and the second - its external image, intended for partners, competitors, financial and credit organizations of the tax service, etc.

The main concern of the company's management is appearance organization, since the success of its activities in a competitive environment largely depends on this. This image is formed in the minds of individuals and organizations under the influence of contacts with the company, both directly with the employees of the company, and in the course of acquaintance with advertising, visits to exhibitions, presentations.

The image of the company can be formed spontaneously and purposefully. Often executives don't get around to keeping track of the emerging image of their company. All forces are given to the formation, mainly, of the production potential of the enterprise. In such cases, a spontaneous image is formed, which usually has both positive and negative features, which is why you can hear directly opposite opinions about the same company. Naturally, it is more correct to start work on the formation of the company's image simultaneously with the creation of the enterprise.

Thus, work on the image is subtle and complex, covering many processes and many people, but absolutely necessary if the corporation wants to gain a foothold in the market and have good prospects for further development.

The main elements of corporate culture Type of joint activity - the nature of the interaction of employees within collective labor, a way of organizing such work.

There are several types of joint activities (Table 5.1.1).

Table 5.1.1
Characteristics of individual types of joint activities

Type of joint activity	Main features
Individual	Minimal interaction between labor participants. Each performer has his own scope of work in accordance with the professional position. Personal communication is carried out mainly in an indirect form: through computer networks, telephone, teletype, etc. The only thing that is common is the object of labor, to the processing of which everyone contributes. High initiative, focus on individual achievements
Consistent	Sequential inclusion in the work of performers one after another in accordance with the specifics of the technological process and the qualifications of each. Interpersonal communication is expressed to a greater extent than with an individual type of joint activity. High technological discipline. Strict adherence to regulations
interacting	The participation of each employee in solving a common problem. The nature of the work of individual employees is determined by the head. The effectiveness of the overall work activity equally depends on the contribution of each member of the team. High orientation to the authority of the leader, collective goals, group morality
Creative	A special type of activity is joint creativity; each participant is equally the creator of something new, unique. The special activity of the participants, the flexibility of the group, the variability of its composition. Orientation to professional development. This type is especially typical for the fields of science and art.

Control type

The type of management characterizes how management decisions are made and implemented in the company. The type of management should correspond to the organizational (corporate) culture of the company and, first of all, to the peculiarities of the mentality of the staff. That is, it is impossible, for example, to manage a scientific team by the methods adopted in the army, just as it is impossible to manage a production enterprise by the methods of a theater director.

The main types of control are presented in Table. 5.1.2.

Table 5.1.2
Characteristics of the main types of control

Management Type Bureaucratic	Characteristic Decisions are made by the top manager. The main lever of influence on subordinates is orders, punishments (ie force). This type implies the presence of technologically and organizationally disciplined employees who unquestioningly carry out the orders of their superiors. Here the initiative is minimal.
Democratic	The main lever of governance is the law, democratic in its content, ensuring the interests of both the majority and the law-abiding minority.
Market	Decisions are made in accordance with the laws of the market, which is the measure of the effectiveness of these decisions. The main lever of influence on performers is money
collectivist	The main control lever is knowledge and competence. Active and equal participation of all highly professional performers in decision-making

The relationship between types of joint activities, types and control levers is shown below (Table 5.1.3).

Table 5.1.3
The relationship of types of joint activities, types and levers

management

Corporate standards

Corporate standards are part of the corporate culture and are rules that are accepted to be followed. In different companies, these rules may be different, but their average list is as follows:

• relations with colleagues (relations between managers and subordinates, behavior in conflict situations, rules of interchangeability, communication with the customer, the procedure for advanced training and training of a new employee);
• relations with clients (greeting, negotiating, talking on the phone, settlements, behavior in a conflict situation, farewell);
• workplace (decoration, maintenance of order, behavior in the workplace, its transfer to another performer);
• relations with the external environment (protection of the interests of the company, preservation of trade secrets, ways of representing the company).

5.2. corporate behavior

The concept of corporate culture includes a very important aspect called corporate behavior and includes a variety of activities related to the management of business entities. The main principles of corporate behavior began to be formulated in the early 1990s. in the "codes of corporate conduct" adopted in countries with the most developed capital markets: England, the USA and Canada. These codes regulated the practice of corporate conduct, in particular, the issues of ensuring the interests of shareholders, the accountability of directors and the management of the company. Since then, many countries have issued codes of corporate conduct with relevant methodological recommendations.

A number of these codes contain rules that repeat the provisions of the legislation on companies and securities. At the same time, they contain principles and rules that are not legally binding. The legal status of these codes varies from country to country. Somewhere they are part of the mandatory conditions that a company must meet in order for its securities to be listed on the stock exchange. In other countries, the code is a document that is only advisory in nature and is not associated with any mandatory requirements.

Russia has developed a draft code of corporate conduct. This code does not replace the legislative and regulatory acts on joint-stock companies, but regulates those issues that lie outside the legislative sphere. These are questions of morality, ethical standards of behavior, rules of business communication, etc. The main provisions of the code are aimed at maintaining and developing normal, civilized relations between the company, its partners, shareholders and government authorities.

The norms of corporate conduct apply to business entities of all kinds, but they are most important for corporations. This is due to the fact that it is in corporations that the separation of ownership from management takes place, in connection with which conflicts between shareholders and the management of the company are possible.

The main purpose of corporate conduct standards is to protect the interests of shareholders, including minority ones. At the same time, the higher the degree of protection of shareholders' interests, the more significant investments the company can count on.

The draft code of corporate conduct developed in Russia includes the following principles:

1. Trust between participants in corporate relations is the basis for building intra-corporate relations

Relations between shareholders, members of the board of directors and executive bodies of the company must be based on mutual trust and respect. Mutual trust and respect between participants in corporate relations is possible provided that each of them conscientiously and without abuse exercises their rights, performs duties and is guided by the interests of the company and its shareholders.

A necessary condition for the trust of shareholders in the board of directors and executive bodies of the company is the establishment in the company of such a procedure for corporate behavior that ensures equal treatment of all shareholders of the company, openness in making corporate decisions and implies personal responsibility and accountability of members of the board of directors and executive bodies to the company and its shareholders, and in the case of members of the executive bodies, their responsibility and accountability to the board of directors of the company.

2. Ethical standards of corporate conduct
Ethical standards of doing business are the basis for the formation of corporate behavior policy.

In addition to following the current legislation and the rules of corporate conduct, Russian joint-stock companies must adhere to certain standards of business ethics in their daily business activities.

Integrity is not only a moral imperative, but also serves to protect society from risks, support long-term economic growth, and contribute to successful entrepreneurial activity.

Ethical standards, along with legislation and the best practice of corporate behavior, form the company's corporate behavior policy based on the interests of shareholders and management, which helps to strengthen the company's position and increase its profits.

Company officers must carry out their activities in good faith and reasonably with due care and diligence, avoiding conflicts with other officers and shareholders.

Members of the boards of directors of the executive bodies of the company, as well as employees of the company, must perform their professional functions in good faith and reasonably, with due care and diligence in the interests of the company and its shareholders, avoiding conflicts of interest. They must ensure that their activities are in full compliance not only with the requirements of current legislation, but with the goals and spirit of laws, ethical standards and generally accepted norms of behavior.

Decision-making by shareholders, members of the boards of directors and executive bodies of the company should be based on the principle of transparency and adequacy, since the market economy implies that business participants provide each other with reliable information in a timely manner and with respect for confidentiality standards. In the event of corporate conflicts, members of the boards of directors and executive bodies, as well as other employees of the companies, must find ways to resolve them through negotiations in order to ensure effective protection of both the rights of shareholders and the business reputation of the company.

3. Equal treatment of shareholders

Corporate conduct is based on equal treatment of shareholders, including minority and foreign shareholders. All shareholders should be able to obtain effective protection in case of violation of their rights.

Members of the board of directors and executive bodies are obliged to manage the company in the interests of all its shareholders. Among the most serious abuses of Russian joint-stock companies in the field of corporate behavior today, we should note the management of companies in the interests of large shareholders of the company while deliberately ignoring the rights and interests of minority shareholders.

4. Rights of shareholders

Shareholders must be provided with:

• reliable and efficient methods of registering ownership of shares, as well as the possibility of free and quick alienation of their shares;
• the right to participate in the management of the joint-stock company by making decisions on the most important issues of the company's activities;
• the right to participate in the company's profits;
• the right to regular and timely receipt of complete and reliable information about the company.

Important corporate decisions include those decisions that, in accordance with the Law "On Joint Stock Companies", require the approval of their shareholders, as well as any other decisions that lead to a significant change in the activities or financial position of the company.

One of the recent abuses is the attempt by some Russian joint-stock companies to break up transactions into a series of interconnected but smaller transactions in order to justify a narrow and formal interpretation of the requirement for shareholders to approve transactions of a certain size.

Abuses in the field of accrual and payment of dividends by Russian joint-stock companies are widespread. The situation needs to be changed in order to ensure the basic right of shareholders to participate in the company's profits.

5. Management bodies of the company

The practice of corporate conduct should ensure that the members of the boards of directors and executive bodies of the company carry out conscientious activities with due responsibility and discretion, in compliance with the requirements of the law and invariably in the interests of the company and all its shareholders.

Members of the executive bodies, when managing the company, must follow the decisions of the board of directors and

its policies, avoiding conflicts of interest, and be accountable to members of the board of directors and shareholders of the company.

The remuneration of members of the executive bodies and the board of directors of the company should depend on the results of the company's activities.

Members of the board of directors and executive bodies of the company must be liable to the company for improper performance of their duties.

6. Company transactions

All transactions of the company must be carried out in good faith, in the interests of the company, take into account the interests of all its shareholders and aim at making a profit by the company, as well as increasing the value of the company's assets.

The procedure for making by the company transactions in which there is an interest must ensure the interests of all shareholders.

Interested party transactions must be made on commercial terms, corresponding to transactions between persons not related to each other, and approved by non-interested shareholders, members of the board of directors of the company on the basis of full information on such interest provided prior to the conclusion of the transaction.

The procedure for reorganization and takeover of the company must ensure the interests of shareholders and the possibility for shareholders to exercise control over the actions of the company's management bodies in the process of reorganization and takeover.

7. Disclosure

The board of directors, executive bodies and officials of the company must provide shareholders and each other with complete and accurate information in a timely manner about the activities and financial position of the company, about the practice of corporate behavior that has developed in it, about the capital structure and major shareholders of the company, about issues submitted for approval by shareholders . They do not have the right to use confidential or other inequitable information about the company for their personal interests or in the interests of third parties and must take adequate measures to protect such information.

Joint stock companies must ensure that the level of information disclosure to shareholders and investors of the company is such that it will allow them to make informed decisions regarding the acquisition or disposal of shares and other securities of the company. Proper openness of joint-stock companies to the investment community helps to attract investment and increases the capitalization of the company. At the same time, the management bodies of the company must determine the boundaries of information disclosure, since the disclosure of certain information that is not subject to mandatory disclosure in accordance with the current legislation and internal documents of the company may not be in the interests of the company and shareholders.

A necessary condition for shareholders' confidence in the company, members of its executive bodies and the board of directors is an equal opportunity for all shareholders to receive reliable and complete information about the company's activities and its real financial position in a timely and efficient manner. When covering its activities, a company should not shy away from disclosing negative information about itself, as it is necessary for shareholders and potential investors to make an investment decision.

Information about the capital structure and major shareholders of the company is necessary for making informed decisions by shareholders and potential investors, as well as for identifying related party transactions. This information should include information about known to the public agreements between major shareholders regarding the exercise of voting rights on their shares.

8. Continuous improvement of corporate behavior standards is the duty of every joint stock company

Russian joint-stock companies should develop and improve standards of corporate conduct that ensure compliance with current legislation, adherence to the rules of corporate conduct, as well as ethical standards for doing business.

In particular, companies must acquaint members of the board of directors, members of executive bodies, other officials and employees of the company with the rules of corporate conduct, as well as introduce an internal control system that ensures compliance of the company's activities with existing legislation. This creates the prerequisites for the implementation of the best practices of corporate behavior and corporate ethics.

5.3. Stages of corporate culture formation

Corporate culture, like any system, has its own life cycle, that is, it goes through all stages from inception to liquidation (disappearance, replacement).

The birth of a corporate culture usually occurs with the emergence of a new economic organization, and in a certain sense, individual elements of this culture can challenge the ideas and moods that have been established in society. At this stage, either a passively condescending or a negative attitude towards the emerging culture prevails. Even universal condemnation and sanctions are possible. However, it is the new culture that is the basis for the formation of the prerequisites for the further development of society in general and economic relations in particular. Naturally, we are talking about such cultural innovations that lie in line with the laws of historical development.

Stabilization of corporate culture can be stated when this culture is followed by the vast majority, when it becomes an organic environment for the existence and development of society. Moreover, we are talking about both the everyday manifestation of this culture (clothes, leisure, etc.), and the spiritual component (worldview, preferences, motives, etc.).

History of corporate culture at the transition to the level of the classics. The main elements of culture are generalized, overgrown with myths and legends. This level becomes a springboard for the further development of society and culture in a broad sense. That is, the culture goes beyond the actual corporate culture and becomes an inter-corporate culture, and then the culture of business as a whole.

In conditions when the resources of one company are often not enough to implement projects, and management has to move to the level of inter-corporate culture, that is, promptly adjust the system of values, norms, forms of communication, etc. All this contributes to the development of the trend of transition from competition to partnership.

The next, higher stage in the development of corporate culture is, as already noted, the culture of business as a whole. The emergence of large integrated structures (in particular, holdings) entails the need to seek resources beyond the capabilities of even a few companies, and therefore the development of project management, the awareness of the need to form not just contractual relations, but also the integration of values ​​and ideology. Business culture can be characterized as a tool for transforming management technologies into technologies for the systemic organization of a corporation's activities. Those companies that reach the level of business culture have the best conditions for their development, since:

• contribute to the formation of new opportunities for business development;
• form a new cultural environment that ensures the emergence of new needs of society in the development of additional types of business.

Naturally, companies at different levels of corporate culture development have different perspectives (Table 5.3.1).

Table 5.3.1
Perspectives of companies with different levels of corporate culture

	Company profile	Company outlook
Corporate culture	Developed attributes of corporate culture; focus on making a profit, gaining and maintaining positions in the market; patriotism, team spirit	In the absence of the ability to take into account the rapidly changing conditions of the macro environment, the company may become inefficient
Intercompany culture	Openness, willingness to change. The corporate culture of the company is tolerant of other cultures, their values, norms and attributes	Additional business opportunities, expansion of information resources, staff development, stable functioning of the company
Business culture	Readiness for social partnership; mutual enrichment of the company's corporate culture and social values	Developed values ​​and needs form the prerequisites for the emergence of new areas of activity