Photo Credit (Pixabay)
We will be discussing cultural concepts, particularly those pertaining to the hypothetical blending of civilizations. In addition to “stuff” like offices, phones, contracts, systems, and procedures, organizations that connect with or acquire other entities also bring with them culture and related social systems, which are able to be “moved” as the formal system changes around them but are not “owned” and cannot be “sold” or traded.
This straightforward graphic explores the issues of what happens when two cultures collide, including what defines the past, what we hope to achieve in the future, and where the gaps, fissures, and deficiencies lie.
Since culture is understood to be the interaction (thoughts, deeds, intent) between people, we usually look for it in the “people” side of the equation. However, culture can also have an association with “spaces,” which in turn have an association with formal authority.
Relationships built on social currencies—such as pride, fear, intent, trust, and so forth—are a major component of culture. We might discover a sense of belonging via and within these currencies. And goal, in fact. Rituals and artifacts are often associated with culture; participants in the ‘Landscape of Community’ study project discussed the significance of these aspects of culture. In this way, culture is socially co-created (at the level of behavior, consequence, and the implicit creation of socially acceptable “norms”) as well as socially constructed (at the individual level of perception).
Thus, we must take into account what will endure, what will be destroyed, and what will only alter when civilizations “come together.” And how: who gets to decide, how do we honor the history, and how do we, within the Organization’s framework, discover something meaningful to work toward in the future?
That may be the incorrect phrase in and of itself: a culture has the capacity to be purposeful but is not inherently purposeful. However, the issue is that organizations are not neutral spaces; rather, they serve a purpose, thus when people discuss culture, they are discussing efficacy or purpose and effect.
Formal transformation is usually presented as a painted vision of an idealized future civilization. We make plans for this. Additionally, occasionally we might receive it (or a subscription-only version of it), but we also occasionally receive the “emergent.”
More than just perseverance, emergent characteristics include new behaviors, habits, attitudes, and customs that develop over time and are not fully preplanned nor pure inheritable features.
If we picture a conflict between the “planned” and the “emergent,” there can be tension. Maybe we need or have both at all times. Although the emergence and persistence of the old may be messy or undesirable, we must consider the power we possess and whether “tidiness” is really a characteristic of culture—which is more of a space and tradition than a “thing.”
Another dilemma is, should we focus on solving problems from yesterday or from tomorrow?
Cultures have a way of casting long shadows; according to my research, over half of a team maintained a primary cultural identification that was associated with the identity of the legacy organization for up to 11 years after formal organizations merged. Since our sense of “belonging” is both a subjective emotion and a tribal force. I cannot “make” you fit in, nor can I make you leave a tribe or switch allegiances; tribes are trust-based organizations.
But you can link the dots and make room for fresh involvement, in part by establishing new areas, possibilities, and narrative and storytelling channels.
People write themselves into and out of culture in a very genuine way.
Furthermore, there will very certainly be tension between the planned and the emergent in a “new” culture.
There are some things you are able to own. Certain things you can own but not manage. You may affect others, but you do not own them. Naturally, some things also just seem to happen.
All of these are related to culture: formal modifications can establish the conditions necessary for the emergence of a culture. You will be able to experience the “lived” experience and express your goals and intentions. It will occasionally feel disjointed and perplexed.
Since yesterday has passed, solving for it is not too difficult. It is more difficult to solve problems for the future when there is no internal knowledge or power structure. That’s why it’s so challenging.
A mechanical-technical understanding of culture is not going to be very helpful. Additionally, a broadcast-certainty viewpoint won’t be helpful. It could be better to have a space and story approach, with shared areas that are connected and have different levels of ownership. basically everything that influences our actions and reactions, including how we feel, what we are taught, what we see, and what we think.
Culture is important to us and nothing at the same time. It cannot be disregarded, but it also won’t show up when needed. We can, at most, earn the privilege of taking part.