Linda Gardner

MSOD 613 Individual Paper on Open Systems and Cultural

Assessments
As the Talent Acquisition Manager of a technology startup company, I was
very aware and involved in all three levels of the organization from an open
systems outlook based on Worleys Figure 5.2 in Organizational
Development and Change. I gained a strong understanding of the different
levels from my involvement in the reporting structure, systems, goals, and
strategy of the company from a staffing needs perspective. Through my
exposure to the day to day work environment in different departments and
the viewpoints of so many different individuals I became very familiar with
the company morale. Unfortunately the subsystems or departments within
the organization were not always in alignment which effected the companys
overall effectiveness and drive. How so? And which level of organization
would you take? I not only learned things from hiring managers while
assisting them in building their teams but also from the feedback from those
that I helped hire into the organization. Through my initial intake meetings
with hiring managers as they open a new position, we discussed their needs,
pain points, and potential gaps in talent on their existing teams which shed
some light on the differences from department to department. Also with my
follow up check in conversations with new hires, they tended to start sharing
information about the effectiveness and attitude of their team in a very
honest manner. I think was due to their level of comfort with me since I was
their first point of contact when interviewing with the organization.

Therefore, I learned very valuable information about the true and raw
company culture and attitude through these conversations. It was always
very interesting the way things and people were perceived and the differing
reality within different departments and groups. As Schein has pointed out to
us, certain groups opinions differed quite drastically from the next,
depending on who they reported to and who else they were exposed to
within the organization. If someone may have shared stories or opinions that
skewed a persons perception they became a part of that group based on
their surroundings and wanting acceptance. People became a product of the
geographical group from which they were located in the company or the
department they were in. With that being said, through employee
satisfaction surveys it was assumed that the vast majority of employees
were happy with the company, the work they were doing, and with the
leadership in place based on the feedback scores. As we also learned from
Scheins reading, assessments are not always the best way to determine a
companys culture and the underlying business issues at hand. The truth that
was heard around the office was quite different from the initial survey results
and the common underlying theme was that certain groups felt the company
was led by fear from the executive team. This was also part of the reason
people were not willing to be forthcoming on the assessment in fear that
there might be retaliation against them if it was found out that they were the
one that said it.

With what was called an amazing company culture and work environment
that was modeled off of the hippest startup technology companies in Silicon
Valley, it was a very appealing, different, and attractive work environment for
a company in Ssan Ddiego. The corporate office came with all the perks or
artifacts which included a fully stocked kitchen, relaxation room, dogs in
the office, bar in the office, and casual attire work environment. Also, part of
the attraction was the fact that there were very smart and passionate people
there that were such visionaries that you were constantly learning new ideas
from them. The company was said to truly live and breathe their core values
and mission every day but that started to appear to be more of an
assumption than truth. At some point, people seemed to have lost sight of
those things even though it was part of the daily morning meeting ritual to
recognize others for exhibiting our core values. What were the espoused
values?
After reassurance to employees that the employee satisfaction surveys
were anonymous, some brave individuals started sharing feedback at the
end in the comments section that they felt that VP's were micro-managers
that pressured that wanted to instill fear in others as a management tactic.
While this started in some departments it started to trickle into the whole
organization and rub off on other areas within the office, creating a very
negative space. Sales goals were supposedly impossible to hit, as clients left
the program due to the product not delivering on promises. The staff felt that
the executive team was more concerned with their image and spent the

companys money on the wrong things rather than spending the time,
money and energy to develop the right product. With the new awareness
that there were some leaders that were using bullying tactics as a way to
accomplish initiatives and drive company performance it was obvious that
change was necessary. The image that the CEO and leadership team had
originally wanted to portray was now clearly far from what they had always
hoped for and preached.
After further investigation, the CEO and board deemed it necessary to
take some pretty drastic measures and part ways with certain individuals
that were part of the toxicity that had started to impact the culture so
heavily in a negative way. The CEO was well aware that the company could
not reach its full potential without repairing the culture first and that
required serious change and course of action to create a fresh start. While
the company didnt use an outside consultant or follow Scheins method to
decipher the culture they did eventually come to some conclusion the long
and hard way through turnover of employees and dissatisfied employees that
in turn were underperforming. Based on this experience and my time spent
within the organization, I understand that a companys culture is much more
complex than just how a company wants to be seen in the eyes of others and
that the saying is really true that you have to practice what you preach. As
Schein says in The Corporate Culture Survival Guide, the connection of
assumptions versus realities when assessing a company culture is much is

much deeper than what is on the surface. So what were some of the
assumptions that seemed to be operating?

Linda, you mention the readings, but then I wanted you to fill in with what
you knew about the components. (for example, what is the general
environment, industry structure as the inputs; strategy, technology,
measurement, HR systems as design elements). In these kinds of
assignments, the faculty want to make sure you understand the models by
applying them to your systems. I would ask you to look at these elements
and send me an update. Thanks.
Ann