You are on page 1of 1

Exam Question 14

Is culture management a more effective form of control because it is an


‘influence upon behaviour which is not recognised as an overt management’
(Hales, 1993)? What are the dangers of this approach?

Culture management is much more ambitious in its desire to shape people’s beliefs
than ‘traditional’ human relations. It is to adjust employees in its workplace, but it
also sought to design work and what were assumed to be a relatively stable and
enduring set of human needs. Culture management aspires to intervene and regulate
being, so there is no distance between individual’s purposes and those of the
organisation for which they work.

Culture management is only an effective form of control when the organisation is able
to fully instil its corporate and organisational values and beliefs into their employees.
For eg, the differences that are perceived between Japanese and US culture have
highlighted culture as a factor in managerial success. That is because Japanese
cultivates harmonious relations at all levels in the organisation, merge individuals
with common goals and they rely heavily on worker’s responsibility. Whereas in the
US, obsession with bureaucratic system betrays a tendency to break down processes
in mechanical fashion and to seek ‘efficiencies in the elements of management’.
Under the US ethic of competitive individualism, the key metaphor is the game and
the need to distinguish winners from losers.

The whole purpose of culture management is to re-constitute beliefs. The 2 cases I’ve
mentioned above are the cultural differences between Japan and the US. I would say
that culture management is an effective form of control for Japan.
However for the US, people are more individualistic. Culture management might be
seen as unethical and naïve. For this case, culture management will not be seen as an
effective form of control.

You might also like