the quest for organizational cultural competence

THE QUEST FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURAL COMPETENCE Dana Bălaș-Timar, Aurel Vlaicu University of Arad, [email protected]

1. Conceptualizing culturally competent organizations

Current international business environment is characterized by a great cultural diversity. International companies are promoting a certain organizational culture, particular to each of them, which has a certain mindset and a specific way of intercultural understanding. Not every organization beneficiates of a strong cultural competence and hence the natural question arises: What does cultural competence stands for, especially for an organization that operates in a multicultural society? Is this a company's survival condition? To analyze the concrete situation of a company, it is recommended to answer three questions: What are the cultural values of the organization? What is my opinion about this culture? How can I convince employees to share this culture? The theoretical basis for the organizational culture concept is represented by the development and organizational transformation. Organizational transformation is considering changes in the overall structure, organizational culture and organizational strategy, based on new perceptions, ways of thinking and attitudes. In contemporary society, the concept of culture (organizational, national, etc.) exceeded the study of the differences between companies, nations or countries. When examining one or more organizations operating in the same country, one can see that members share both principles of national culture and organizational culture promoted by management. The rapid changes occurring in the global economy automatically involve a series of reactions and responses regarding the technological and communicational strategies as well. Nowadays communication technology allows us to quickly and efficiently communicate and transmit desired messages to our target groups. Also, distances and boundaries between countries have become unimportant with technological advances in transport and travel. In this way, communities and cultures transcend geographical distances, overcoming any barriers.

1

Thus, organizational culture supports organization in adapting to the external environment. For changes that occur in an organization to be successful, it is necessary to resort to an optimal cultural shift. In organizations, implementing change becomes a managerial task. Managers have leadership qualities and a range of specific skills such as cultural competence or the ability to promote a strong organizational culture. Changing organizational culture is a part of the modernization strategy and adaptation to social-cultural landmarks. Compliance with this premise gives superior efficacy to the efforts of improving the organizational culture, especially when organizations become multicultural. Any organization can be seen as a social structure, consisting of a group of people who work together to achieve the goals of that particular organization. The success of an organization is contingent on the extent to which staff uniformly acts to achieve its goals. A major factor influencing personnel unit action becomes the organizational culture. Organizational culture has become a fashionable topic in recent years, a frequently discussed topic in both the academic and economic environment. Its importance is revealed mainly by the impact it has on the results of an organization. Thus, whether we speak of a public institution, a corporation or an NGO, organizational culture is one of the main factors that can determine the success or failure of a particular organization. An organizational culture oriented towards quality represents a warranty for organizational survival and growing further, whether is operating in a highly competitive market environment or in an unstable economic, social or political context. The organizational culture, through its components is the one that dictates employees’ behavioral rules, directs how employees perceive and represent their reality, the "desirable" way to react to environmental changes. Also, regarding the "quality" as a "measure of satisfaction", a qualityoriented organizational culture is an approach to reality (economical, societal, etc.) that consistently leads to satisfaction of all directly or indirectly interested in the organization (community, employers, staff, customers, suppliers etc.). By promoting quality management principles there are supported certain values that assist "quality"; this process establishes a set of behavioral rules (mostly informal) and (re) shape the way that employees perceive the reality within and outside the organization. Promoting quality management principles directly influences organizational culture. Organizational culture is presented more like a configuration with strong procedural elements, rather than as a structure in the classical sense. The essence of organizational culture is not what is visible on the surface, but what is shared by groups of 2

people in the organization, how they understand and interpret the world. Organizational culture is a combination of conscious and unconscious, rational and irrational, group and individual interconnected elements, with a major impact on the functionality and performance of the organization. Due to differences between departments and also differences between occupation and training, in the same organization there coexist multiple (sub) cultures. Thus one can determine specific forms of organizational culture manifestation in the major organizational subdivisions and in various professional groups existing in the organization. Also active organizations that have branches or divisions in other countries, implies the existence of their own culture for each unit. Both at the unit level of organizations and as well as at the level of various subdivisions of the same organizational unit, beliefs, aspirations and organizational behavior presents some specific elements that reflect the characteristics and conditions that define the activities conducted within them. If these manifestations of culture coexist, are in conflict or leading up to a common culture, depends on the existence of common experiences that allow solving various problems in the general structure of the organization. These manifestations at different organizational subdivisions are important especially in medium-sized and large organizations with activities of great complexity and diversity, where among the main compartment (sections, departments etc.) there are major differences. Regardless the particular form of organizational culture manifestation (in the organizational subdivisions or groups having the same profession) there are common elements that give the organization a unit structure, but unavoidable conflicts can occur between them; the main managerial task is to promote their convergence and to develop a homogenous organizational culture among organization. Developing a quality-oriented organizational culture for all groups within the organization determines (regardless hierarchical level, training level or the complexity of the work) a unified approach to organization’s activity and in relation to the economic, social or political context in which the organization operates. This homogeneous approach of the inside and outside reality of the organization is accomplished due to the fact that values and behavioral rules are imposed by the entire organization promoting quality management principles. The most important role in creating and (re) shaping the organizational culture is the management structure of the organization and especially senior management. Thus, management (especially top management) promotes certain values within the organization, 3

sets the main directions of approach of various processes in the organization; thus it is considered as the main model (pattern) for employers to address various situations within the organization and in relation to the external environment thereof. To (re) shaping the organizational culture towards quality, top management most often with the assistance of an external expert, establishes general directions. For example, these directions may be: increasing customer orientation, team spirit development, pragmatically activities approach, focusing on improving quality through preventive actions. The next immediate step establishes objectives, expressed as measurable, which are to be developed throughout the process of (re) shaping organizational culture and through which one can confirm the extent that the desired changes have occurred. Organizational structures that will participate directly in the project will also be established; means of communication between the various groups involved and forms for reporting results. Ultimately, main stages of (re) shaping organizational culture on quality are set out, such as: creating the general framework of the organizational culture analysis; organizational culture auditing and formulation of the primarily recommendations; implementation of actions to change the organizational culture; evaluation of cultural change and identifying ways to correction and improve the whole process. We will further detail each step:  Creating the framework of the organizational culture analysis - aims at preparing the conditions for organizational culture audit. The main steps of this phase are: setting team members who will become the main agents of cultural change; education and training of team members; identification of audit data needed to identify the culture and ways of collecting and processing them.  Organizational culture audit and formulating the first recommendations aims to identify factors that influence organizational culture and peculiarities of existing components. The main steps of this phase are: data collection through interviews, questionnaires and direct observations; analyzing data and formulating first conclusions; preparation and discussion with top management of the audit report and recommendations formulated.  Implementation of actions meant to change the organizational culture aims at shaping effective organizational culture towards "quality". This phase has the following main steps: setting up the program of reshaping 4

the organizational culture; education and training of staff; implementation and monitoring of planned actions.  Evaluation of cultural change - aims to assess the degree in which the constituent elements of organizational culture have been reshaped as targeted. Its main stages are: establishing organizational culture components to be evaluated, data collection and processing; identification of the building blocks of organizational culture and establishing a corrective and improvement action plan in relation to the initial objectives. Modeling the organizational culture on quality causes substantial changes to the overall management of the organization. The entire managerial processes assembly is reshaped towards achieving that level of quality demanded by all stakeholders in the organizations’ outputs. Reshaping the organizational culture on quality is required to be supported by managers who possess the necessary skills to address such a process. One of the most important skills is the ability to set up a direction for action and mobilize staff to go in the agreed direction (leadership). This quality allows them to effectively implement the changes implied by reshaping the organizational culture to support continuous maintenance and the improvement of organizational culture elements in the direction set by top management. Having a strong organizational culture, an organizational culture oriented towards quality involves: staff awareness on what is "quality"; consistent application across the organization, regardless the hierarchical level, of quality management principles; promotion within the organization of those values and behavioral norms that support the idea of "quality", the idea that any of the organizations’ purposes are to be achieved only by a constant concern in satisfying all those interested in the organization. The existence of a quality-oriented organizational culture within it implies the existence of values, beliefs, perceptions and representations strongly related to quality. "Quality" becomes an important element of the organizational cohesion (regardless of the specific activities carried out by staff) and also one of the most important factors that determine the success of the organization. 2. Organizational culture – a literature overview Organizational culture represents values and behaviors that contribute to the unique social and psychological environment of an organization. Organizational culture 5

includes an organization's expectations, experiences, philosophy, and values that hold it together, and is expressed in its self-image, inner workings, interactions with the outside world, and future expectations. It is based on shared attitudes, beliefs, customs, and written and unwritten rules that have been developed over time and are considered valid. Also called corporate culture, one can identify its elements by analyzing: 1.

the ways the organization conducts its business, treats its employees, customers, and the wider community,

2.

the extent to which freedom is allowed in decision making, developing new ideas, and personal expression,

3.

how power and information flow through its hierarchy, and

4.

how committed employees are towards collective objectives.

It affects the organization's productivity and performance, and provides guidelines on customer care and service, product quality and safety, attendance and punctuality, and concern for the environment. It also extends to production-methods, marketing and advertising practices, and to new product creation. Organizational culture is unique for every organization and one of the hardest things to change. Having established that organizational culture comprises a range of complex social phenomena, it is not surprising that scholars have identified corporate culture as a multi-layered construct which can be divided into layers according to these phenomena’s observability and accessibility (Shakil, 2012). Organizational culture has been defined as patterns of shared values and beliefs over time which produces behavioral norms that are adopted in solving problems (Owens 1987; Schein, 1990). The organization’s internal environment is represented by its culture and is construed by the assumptions and beliefs of the managers and employees (Aycan et al., 1999). Organizational culture manifested in beliefs and assumptions, values, attitudes and behaviors of its members is a valuable source of firm’s competitive advantage (Hall, 1993; Peteraf, 1993) since it shapes organizational procedures, unifies organizational capabilities into a cohesive whole, provides solutions to the problems faced by the organization, and, thereby, hindering or facilitating the organization’s achievement of its goals (Yilmaz, 2008). Defining organizational culture has not reached a consensus, there are over 160 different definitions published in the literature (Pitariu and Budean, 2007). Organizational culture is a manifestation of the developing ideas process in a specific context of dominance (employers dominating employees) and a context of conflict and contradictions. Ideas and cultural sets confront actors amid a series of behavioral rules, 6

rules that can be followed or resisted (Martin J., 2002). Explaining and predicting behavior can be achieved through a systematic definition of cultural variance (Chraif, 2010; Pitariu, and Chraif, 2009; 2008). Analysis of the organizational climate organizational represents the assessment of relations as perceived by members of the organization and strategies for their improvement. Organizational climate represents common or shared perceptions by members of an organization with formal or informal practices and procedures applied within, the conditions offered by the organization (Chraif, 2010). These perceptions are determined by individual characteristics and positions occupied by members. Organizational culture and climate forms the internal social environment that reflects the organization's impact on its members (Aniţei, and Chraif, 2009). For their determination there are qualitative and quantitative analysis methods (Chraif, 2007). Organizational climate is defined as common or shared perceptions of members of an organization on formal or informal policies, practices and procedures of. It is based on the perceptions of its members, being influenced by the individual characteristics of organizations’ members, which can be contrasted with the regulations imposed by the organization through the training and practice, which actually represents a product of the organizational culture. The organizational culture is based on the beliefs and values of the organization's members (Chraif, 2010), built over time, that are less noticeable, often located at a preconscious level. Shared perceptions and shared organizational rules refer to the internal social environment of an organization. New employees must undergo cognitive, emotional and perceptual training whereby psychological learn how to properly react and how to act in accordance with the precepts of the organization. Investigating individual perceptions is possible through traditional questionnaires, results can be compared with quantitative and statistical methods, with other variables such as job performance, turnover, job satisfaction, and others; results can be generalized to a specific population. If the diagnosis of organizational climate presumes especially quantitative methods based on statistical processing of questionnaires, investigating organizational culture is achieved through qualitative techniques. Lately, organizational consultants prefer using questionnaires, often supplemented by qualitative techniques (interviews, focus groups, workshops) in diagnosing organizational culture. There can be performed comparative studies between cultures or subcultures, data provided being more structured and easily understood by managers. 7

Organizational diagnosis process follows several stages. One of the most important steps is to collect data and feedback from organizational members. For a valuable organizational diagnosis it is important to make a correct interpretation of data, valid and consistent, regardless the method of data collection chosen by the researcher and the unique contribution of each procedure used in the overall picture. Each method has its limitations and advantages, so it is good that these methods are jointly applied (Beer and Spector, 2001). As a reference in cross-cultural research in organizations is the study developed by Geert Hofstede, who coordinated the first international study conducted in a US company in 1966 on more than 50 nations covering 72 countries. Hofstede analyzed approximately equal samples in all company, subsidiaries study being carried out in two phases, covering 1968 to 1972. Investigating cultural values resulting from the application of 116,000 questionnaires through statistical processing, results showed that work-related values vary in different cultures based on five fundamental dimensions. Philosophical substantiation is the Confucian dimension, which also dichotomizes cultures and organizational strategies in Asian and Western cultures (Hofstede and Bond, 1988). These dimensions were empirically tested in several geographical areas, being individually tested in forty countries, each of them occupying a rank position in a hierarchy and thus achieving cultural maps. (Hofstede, 2001; Pitariu and Budean, 2007). Hofstede proposed model is implemented in the business context even though it has been criticized, considering that methodological shortcomings and the results are speculative. Stevens has proposed students to solve a organizational problem depicted by a conflict between departments of a company, noting that the solutions given by students of different nationalities were not in agreement. Based on the findings, Stevens has described the "default model" of organization belonging to each culture. Germans rely on organizations like "well-oiled machine", where management intervention is limited to special cases. The type of the organization is formalized with viable and non-centralized operating rules. Inside British organizations situational requirements determine the structure, with no hierarchy and no rules. French organizations are hierarchical well structured, pyramidal and formalized. Awareness of cultural differences and the impact that culture has on the functioning and effectiveness of an organization, has extended cultural perspectives on organizational behavior in domestic, multicultural and international contexts, in the context of international partnerships between different companies and global business. Gelfan, Erez and Aycan (2006) provides a summary of studies on cultural differences manifested at various levels of organizational behavior: micro-level (the 8

implications of culture on work motivation, cognitions and emotions), meso-level (national culture impact on teams, leadership and negotiations) and macro-level (national culture impact on organizational culture and structure). The results reflect significant differences between individualist and collectivist cultures, between cultures that value power distance and those where this distance is very small (Pitariu and Budean, 2007). Synthesis elaborated by Gelfand, Erez and Aycan (2006) illustrates the narrow tendency approach to cultural differences manifested in organizational behavior, most research pausing conclusions on differences between cultural values, especially comparing collectivist with individualistic cultures. A few studies take into account other sources of cultural differences. Gelfand, Erez and Aycan stresses and confusion on cultural differences in organizational behavior. Theories are formulated and applied at the cultural level, without a thorough explanation of the causes due to which we can expect the relationship to be similar at different levels of analysis, while the measurements are made at the individual level (Gelfand, Erez and Aycan, 2006). Organizational diagnosis represents the process of collecting and generating valid and useful data about the organization and its sub-systems, and on the processes and patterns of behavior that occur in the organization (Beer and Spector, 2001). Organizational diagnosis contains processes, interpretation techniques and methodology. The most important processes are data collection and feedback from the organization consultant. Collection of information depends on the theoretical model adopted by the researcher, being useful to apply several methods in order to complete a consistent and valid interpretation. Combining the effectiveness of various methods requires a very good knowledge about their advantages and limitations, and an accurate assessment of how they complement each other (Beer and Spector, 2001). Controversies that arise when studying organizational culture consist of quantitative over qualitative approaches. Since culture is based on values and fundamental theories, often unrecognized and untested at the conscious level in organizations, there are supporters of quality procedures that are carried out for significant periods of time and in a comprehensive manner, for cultural attributes to be identified. Qualitative research methods addressing organizational culture offer a deeper understanding of organizational culture throughout participation over a longer period of time (anthropologist model) by applying a series of interviews. Common qualitative research on organizational culture regards ethnographic study, historical and clinical approach of organizational culture. 9

Standardized instruments for assessing various cultural traits consist of inventorying statements or terms that describe the prevailing norms and values within an organization. Quantitative research methods allow quantification and statistical processing of the results, being invited all members of an organization to express their views on organizational culture. Compared to qualitative approach, quantitative research involves lower costs and much lower time. The small amount of contextual data and impersonal questionnaires represents a disadvantage. Among the most frequently tested and validated instruments there is the Competing Values Model (Budean and Pitariu, 2007; Chraif, 2009; 2008; Chraif, 2010). When performing organizational diagnostic, data collection is done by different methods, for making inferences and interpretations. Over time, there have been developed several models of organizational diagnosis, some oriented towards qualitative, other supporting quantitative methodology, or a combination of both.

3. What is a culturally competent organization?

As we have seen, each organization owns a "culture" of policies, procedures, programs, and processes, and incorporates certain values, beliefs, assumptions, and customs. Organizational cultures largely echo mainstream culture in its sense of time orientation, perception, and use of time. An organizational culture may not lend itself to cultural competence, so that's where skill building comes in. A culturally competent organization brings together knowledge about different groups of people - and transforms it into standards, policies, and practices that make everything work. In the quest for understanding organizational cultural competence, we must first discover the meaning of this concept and the way organizations understand it. Reviewing the literature, one can identify four levels: 

"Cultural knowledge" means that organizations know about some cultural characteristics, history, values, beliefs, and behaviors of another ethnic or cultural group.



"Cultural awareness" is the next stage of understanding other groups - being open to the idea of changing cultural attitudes.



"Cultural sensitivity" is knowing that differences exist between cultures, but not assigning values to the differences (better or worse, right or wrong). Cognitive biases on this point can easily occur, especially if a custom or 10

belief in question goes against the idea of multiculturalism. Internal conflict (intrapersonal, interpersonal, and organizational) is likely to occur at times over this issue. Conflict won't always be easy to manage, but it can be made easier if everyone is mindful of the organizational goals. 

"Cultural competence" brings together the previous stages and adds operational effectiveness. A culturally competent organization has the capacity to bring into its system many different behaviors, attitudes, and policies and work effectively in cross-cultural settings to produce better outcomes.

Cultural competence is non-threatening because it acknowledges and validates who people are. By focusing on the organization's culture, it removes the need to place blame and assume guilt. Since becoming culturally competent focuses on the "how-to" of aligning policies and practices with goals, everyone is involved in the process. This "inside-out" model relieves the outsiders (or excluded groups) from the responsibility of doing all the adapting. Cultural competence has been defined by numerous scholars (Andrews & Boyle, 1995; Campinha-Bacote, 2002, 2007; Giger & Davidhizar, 2007; Leininger, 1978; Purnell & Paulanka, 2005, 2008; Spector, 2004) and organizations (Office of Minority Health, 2005). Although no universally accepted definition exists, many of the definitions address common themes. Two recurring themes are as follows: (a) recognizing one’s own cultural attitudes, beliefs, and biases in order to better understand the organizational practices, and (b) acquiring culturally based knowledge and skills in order to provide services in a culturally congruent manner. Cross (1989) emphasized three critical elements in this model of cultural competence: 1) self awareness; 2) culture‐specific knowledge; and 3) skills promoting effective socio‐cultural interactions by an individual. His model has been widely cited and used as the conceptual framework for cultural competence. There are many developmental models of cultural competency in the multidisciplinary field of diversity. However, a commonly used and referenced model has been the Cross Model. The Cross Model of Cultural Competence by Terry Cross (1988) offers both an institutional and individual framework to help gauge progress on various diversity initiatives. It describes cultural competency as movement along a continuum that is based on the premise of respect and appreciation of individuals and cultural differences. It is important to note that institutions and individuals can be at different stages of development simultaneously on the Cross continuum. 11

Table 1 - Cultural Competence Model Cross’ Cultural Competence Framework

(Adapted from Cross et al, 1988, 1989 and Ponterotto, 1988)

Cross-cultural competence has been conceptualized in many ways, but most definitions center on the ability to quickly understand and effectively act in a culture different from one’s own (Abbe, Gulick, & Herman, 2008; McDonald, McGuire, Johnston, Semelski, & Abbe, 2008; Selmeski, 2009). Cultural competence is best viewed as an ongoing process and an ideal to strive towards (Diller 2004). Rather than simply complying with legislation, meeting minimum standards of practice, or having a fixed end point, cultural competence is a process which continually evolves. When discussing cultural competence, it is important to distinguish between the cultural competence of individual providers of health and social services and cultural competence at the organizational level. At the individual level, cultural competence is typically viewed to consist of 3 main components: 12

1.

Cultural awareness – a sensitivity and understanding of one’s own cultural identity as it manifests itself though our beliefs, values and practices, as well as through our biases.

2.

Cultural knowledge – having knowledge of other cultures’ beliefs, values and practices that allow one to understand different worldviews.

3.

Cultural skills – having the professional skills to interact effectively with diverse cultures. (Campinha-Bacote, 2003; Kim-Godwin et al., 2001; Sue, 2001)

Organizational cultural competence, on the other hand, is commonly defined as an ongoing process with “a set of congruent attitudes, practices, policies, and structures that come together in a system or agency and enables professionals to work more effectively in cross-cultural situations” (Cross, Bazron, Dennis and Issacs, 1989). According to the literature, organizational cultural competence requires five essential elements, which should permeate every aspect of an organization and its staff members, including: 1. valuing diversity - means accepting and respecting differences between and within cultures. We often presume that a common culture is shared between members of racial, linguistic, and religious groups, but this may not be true. A group might share historical and geographical experiences, but individuals may share only physical appearance, language, or spiritual beliefs. Our cultural assumptions can lead us to wrong conclusions. As people move to new areas and meld with other cultures it creates a kaleidoscope of subcultures within racial groups. Gender, locale, and socioeconomic status can sometimes be more powerful than racial factors. Understanding situations such as this can lead to a better understanding of the complexity of diversity; acceptance of variations in communication style, behaviors, values, and attitudes as being legitimate and not just to be tolerated 2. having the capacity for cultural self-assessment - examination of one’s own organizational culture as it is expressed in the policies, values, structures and practices in place; the most important actions to be conscious of are usually the ones we take for granted. For instance, physical distance during social interactions varies by culture and miscommunication can be avoided if the organization does cultural selfassessment. Each organization has a culture. Surveys and discussion can 13

help members become more aware of the organization's way of doing things and can help it adjust to other cultures. This assessment is a continuing process towards cultural competence. 3. being conscious of the dynamics inherent when cultures interact, understanding the dynamics of difference – identifying an agency leader that

possesses

relevant

knowledge

can

help

avoid

potential

misunderstandings when two or more groups confront stereotypes and political power differentials (e.g., communication styles, etiquette, problem-solving methods, and help seeking behaviors); many factors can affect cross-cultural interactions. Bias due to historical cultural experiences can explain some current attitudes. An oppressed group may feel mistrust toward the dominant culture, but members of the dominant culture may be unaware of it or not understand it. Organizations planning to interact with varying cultures need awareness of such a dynamic if they want

to

be

effective.

Remember

that

organizations

can

be

intergenerational. A group that worked with an ineffective, culturally incompetent organization 15 years ago, may not know that the group has the same name but is in a "second life" a new staff, a new board, and a new approach to working with the community. This means the organization has some work to do, and must be aware of this dynamic in order to be newly effective. Being proactive rather than reactive about change produces a synergistic organization. Anticipating change is a basic dynamic in the development of synergy. Synergy happens only if people treat each other with respect and effectively communicate with each other. 4. having institutionalized cultural knowledge - research, demonstration projects, or establishing communication networks with community leaders and groups can help the organization determine what is culturally appropriate for the specific populations they are serving; cultural knowledge should be integrated into every facet of an organization. Staff must be trained and be able to effectively utilize knowledge gained. Policies should be responsive to cultural diversity. Program materials should reflect positive images of all cultures. 5. having developed adaptations of service delivery reflecting an understanding of cultural diversity - reassessing the organization’s 14

attitudes, practices, policies, and structure. When you recognize, respect, and value all cultures and integrate those values into the system, culturally competent organizations can meet the needs of diverse groups. (Cross et al., 1989; Hernandez et al., 1998; Mason, Braker & Williams-Murphy, 1995; Sue et al., 1998). These five elements should be manifested at every level of an organization, including policy making, administration, and practice. Further, these elements should be reflected in the attitudes, structures, policies, and services of the organization. The distinction between individual and organizational cultural competence allows us to determine which competencies individuals need to adopt to work with a racially and ethnically diverse population, while at the same time, to identify changes that the organization needs to adopt to become a system that is more culturally competent (Chin, 2002). Making such a distinction between individual and organizational cultural competence is important, as organizational cultural competence includes both individual- and institutional-level cultural competence. Therefore, a self-assessment of an organization’s cultural competence will not only evaluate cultural competence of its staff but also that of the organization as a whole (Cross et al., 1989; Hernandez et al., 1998; Mason et al., 1995; Sue et al., 1998). There are all types of diversity in an organization. However, some types of diversity have a larger impact on organizations than others because they have historical significance. These types of diversity are associated with a history of inequity and injustice where not every person or group has been treated equally because of them. These types of diversity include: marginalized or socially excluded groups, nationality, ethnicity, native language, race, gender, sexual orientation, social class, spiritual beliefs and practice, physical and mental ability Other types of diversity that should be considered but tend to be less salient include: age, educational status, family status, health status, style, skills and talents, customs, ideas, military experience, national, regional, or other geographical area, ownership of property, occupational status, socioeconomic status. Due to the fact that we are all connected through the increasing globalization of communications, trade, and labor practices, changes in one part of the world affect people everywhere. Considering our increasing diversity and interconnected problems, working together seems to be the best strategy for accomplishing goals. Because social and economic change is coming faster and faster, organizations understand the need for cultural competence. If organizations don't improve cultural skills they will face a cultural gridlock. 15

An organization needs to become culturally competent when there is a problem or crisis, a shared vision, and a desired outcome. An organization is ready to become culturally competent when groups and potential leaders that will be collaborating have been identified, the needs of the cultural groups are identified, the organization knows what was done before and how it affected the groups involved, and the organization is open to learning and adapting to better fit current needs.

4. Standards and indicators of organizational cultural competence A domain is a “major content area in which issues of cultural competence needs to be addressed” (Siegel et al., 2002). Within each domain, standards can also be further organized into sub-domains. The relevant culturally competent standards that have been identified are organized into the following five domains: 1.

Organizational norms, principles, and policies: defining the norms, principles, and policies of the organization, such as the inclusion of cultural competencies in the mission statement of the organization, leadership commitment to a culturally competent organization, and the presence of an advisory committee for cultural competence.

2.

Asset and need identification research related to cultural competence: identifying strengths and needs of the population being served, including the identification of community resources and barriers and issues related to cultural competence.

3.

Human resources management: policies and practices: formulating policies and practices related to employees of the organization, such as the representation of the target population at all levels of employment within the organization.

4.

Services and service delivery: developing culturally competent services and service delivery that are adapted to meet the needs of a diverse clientele, such as extended service hours and specific services for different cultural groups.

5.

Community

consultation,

partnership,

and

information

exchange:

communicating to consumers and the community at large regarding progress made towards achieving cultural competence.

16

Within these five domains, fifty-three cultural competency standards there have been identified cultural competency in health care systems. Typically, an assessment of organizational cultural competence consists of these multiple domains and standards. Each standard has also been operationalized in the form of an indicator. Indicators are measurable elements of assessment that “reflect substantial changes in people, policies, or systems” within an organization (Watson, 2000). The purpose of identifying indicators is to be able to assess change. Due to the complex, multidimensional nature of cultural competency, numerous indicators across multiple domains are required in order to obtain valuable and accurate information that is responsive to change over time (Geron, 2002). A comprehensive study has identified seven domains (or performance areas) for assessing cultural competence. These are the critical arenas or spheres in which cultural competence should be evident or manifest in an organization. These seven domains reflect to a great extent, although not exclusively, the underlying construct of cultural competence, as described below. 1. Organizational Values: An organization’s perspective and attitudes with respect to the worth and importance of cultural competence and its commitment to provide culturally competent services. 2. Governance: The goal-setting, policy-making, and other oversight vehicles an organization uses to help ensure the delivery of culturally competent services. 3. Planning and Monitoring/Evaluation: The mechanisms and processes used for: a) long and short-term policy, programmatic, and operational cultural competence planning that is informed by external and internal consumers; and b) the systems and activities needed to proactively track and assess an organization’s level of cultural competence. 4. Communication:

The

exchange

of

information

between

the

organization/providers and the clients/population, and internally among staff, in ways that promote cultural competence. 5. Staff Development: An organization’s efforts to ensure staff and other service providers have the requisite attitudes, knowledge and skills for delivering culturally competent services. 6. Organizational Infrastructure: The organizational resources required to deliver or facilitate delivery of culturally competent services. 17

7. Services/Interventions: An organization’s delivery or facilitation of services in a culturally competent manner (The Lewin Group Inc., 2001). Indicators represent the particular observable or measurable characteristics of an organization that signify cultural competence. The Lewin Group’s team (2001) has identified only those indicators deemed as critical and reasonable exemplars of organizational cultural competence to minimize complexity and facilitate the use of the assessment. Thus, indicators were classified into four types: 1) structure indicators, 2) process indicators, 3) output indicators, and 4) intermediate outcome indicators, as depicted below: 1. Structure indicators are used to assess an organization’s capability to support cultural competence through adequate and appropriate settings, instrumentalities, and infrastructure, including staffing, facilities and equipment, financial resources, information systems, governance and administrative structures, and other features related to the organizational context in which services are provided. 2. Process indicators are used to assess the content and quality of activities, procedures, methods, and interventions in the practice of culturally competent services. 3. Output indicators are used to assess immediate results of culturally competent policies, procedures, and services that can lead to achieving positive outcomes. 4. Intermediate outcome indicators are used to assess the contribution of cultural competence to the achievement of intermediate objectives relating to the provision, the response and the results. (adapted from The Lewin Group Inc., 2001). The "results chain" is the expected sequence of results to achieve the desired program objectives, beginning with inputs, moving through activities and outputs, and culminating in outcomes, impacts and follow-up. It is generally just a reference for developing performance indicators, as it obviously represents a simplification of reality. In practice, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between a program’s outputs and outcomes or between outcomes and impacts. An outcome indicator for a small project may represent an output for a larger program. In addition, there are often multiple intermediate results, both for outputs and outcomes.

18

When defining indicators, it is important to think of the types of indicators on a continuum in logical relation to the project's strategic objective. Where there are multiple intermediate results, researchers may end up with two sequential so-called "output indicators" or "outcome indicators". In other words, it doesn't matter so much whether you label something an output or an outcome indicator as long as it fits with the logical sequence of results of the program in question and fits the characteristics of a good indicator. Usually it is easier to define and measure simple output indicators, as impact indicators can be complex, costly, and difficult to measure. The time lag between program implementation and impact is significant. Moving towards impact, one can see that numerous contextual factors can influence results. Before-and-after organizational surveys are excellent tools for collecting comprehensive impact data for ex-post evaluation, but the time and cost they require make them impractical for regular program monitoring or evaluation during program implementation. Researchers often seek proxy measures that can inform about a program’s likely impact. Monitoring performance indicators during implementation can provide this information. Leading process and intermediate indicators can serve as proxies for impact indicators. Employee assessments, rapid organizational appraisals, and focus group interviews are useful ways of collecting qualitative impact data.

5. Assessing of Organizational Cultural Competence

A self-assessment of organizational cultural competence must critically examine the attitudes, practices, policies, and structures that evolve within an organization. An important first step is to define and adopt organizational standards for cultural competence (Olavarria et al., 2005). The purpose of the self-assessment process is to evaluate the attainment of a set of standards in addition to the work that is being done to achieve identified standards. A standard refers to a specific criterion for the purpose of comparison, monitoring, and evaluation in cultural competency performance (Siegel, Haugland, & Davis Chambers, 2002). Standards come into existence once organizational strategies are regulated and adopted, promoting the institutionalization of cultural competence. The validity, reliability, comprehensiveness, practicality, fit of the tool to cultural competence theory and identified standards are taken into account, when narrowing down the selection of potentially relevant cultural competence self-assessment tools to those most

19

appropriate. Given these criteria, one assessment tool was identified as containing key dimensions that were deemed relevant for evaluating the organizational cultural competency. The Organizational Culture Inventory measures 12 sets of normative beliefs or shared behavioral expectations associated with three general types of cultures: Constructive, Passive-Defensive and Aggressive-Defensive. These cultural norms are hypothesized to influence the thinking and behavior of organizational members, their motivation and performance, and their satisfaction and stress. Tests of three types of reliability – internal consistency, interrater, and test-retest and two types of validity – construct and criterion-related, on data provided by 4.890 respondents indicate that the inventory is a dependable instrument for assessing the normative aspects of culture. Obtained alpha coefficients support the internal consistency of the scale; tests for interated agreement show that significant variance of individuals’ responses is explained by their organizational membership, and tests for differences across time show the temporal consistency of the scale scores. Factor analysis results provide general support for the construct validity of the scales, most of which are related to both individual and organizational criteria as predicted (Cooke and Lafferty, 1983). The Organizational Culture Inventory (OCI) is the most widely used and thoroughly researched tool for measuring organizational culture all over the world. Developed by Drs. Robert A. Cooke and J. Clayton Lafferty, the OCI provides an assessment of the operating culture in terms of the behaviors that members believe are required to “fit in and meet expectations” within their organization. Four of the behavioral norms measured by the OCI are Constructive and facilitate problem solving and decision making, teamwork, productivity, and long-term effectiveness. Eight of the behavioral norms are Defensive and detract from effective performance (Human Synergistics International. Research and development by R. A. Cooke, Ph.D. and J. Clayton Lafferty, Ph.D.) The OCI tool stems from the ideas and research of many academics. The academics whose work influenced the development of the tool are depicted in Figure 1. This is presented visually to indicate the particular style(s) of the OCI culture circumplex that each set of ideas and research influenced. Figure 1 – The OCI circumplex and underpinning research (The University of Queensland Exploring Organizational Culture – findings report; 26 February 2013)

20

At the organizational level, research demonstrates relationship between Constructive culture styles measured by OCI and results, including employee involvement, safety and reliability, integration, creativity, adaptability and customer satisfaction. Similarly, social, research highlights the importance of Constructive styles and shows a negative relationship between Defensive and Competitive culture styles worldwide. OCI provides organizations with a visual profile of the existing culture (Current Culture) by behaviors that members believe should demonstrate for "integration and conforming to expectations." Such expectations determine how members approach their work and interact with each other. Instead, these behavioral norms have a significant impact on the organization's ability to solve problems, adapt to change and work efficiently. OCI results are displayed on profiles illustrating individual opinions (when considering a single member) or shared behavioral expectations that are present in the organization and represent its culture (when combining perspectives of community members). Results are presented in terms of 12 behavioral norms grouped into three types of culture Constructive, Passive-Defensive and Aggressive-Defensive. A special version of OCI, OCI-Ideal tool provides a tool to quantify, foreshadowing and communicating ideal or preferred organizational culture. Leaders or other members of the organization respond to specific questions in order to describe the types of behavior (cultural) that would maximize the effectiveness of their organization. The final result is an image of the Ideal Culture of the organization, based on common values and 21

beliefs. Ideal Culture Profile serves as a yardstick with which one can compare the current culture of the organization. Together, these profiles provide a visual analysis of the differences, the goals of cultural change and the foundation for identifying the levers needed to implement change. Above measuring the current culture, the actual form of the OCI instrument addresses key environmental consequences: satisfaction of individual members, intention to remain in the organization, clarity of roles and role conflict, and perception of organizational service quality. 6. Conclusions and implications

An organizational culture that creates entrepreneurial value requires regard to all persons, internal and external organization and promotion of services that not only meet consumer needs but also exceed them. This allows to obtain competitive advantage, providing confidence and courage to take responsibility and to promote own ideas. The main features of a future-oriented corporate culture are the desire to promote innovative solutions and the ability to identify and accept mistakes and weaknesses and to analyze the conception of innovative measures. The new concept of organizational culture facilitates innovation and learning, both by exploiting individual experience and organizational experience performing locally or internationally. Quantification and management of organizational culture are critical to bringing organizational values to life, to support the implementation strategies and to promote adaptability, achievement and sustainability goals. Organizations devote significant resources to the development of structures and systems (performance management) on one hand and to measure results (service quality) on the other hand. However, it is essential to understand the factors in this equation - the culture and behaviors - to ensure that initiatives are aligned with the values and lead the organization to accomplish the mission. In general, confirmation is required that the culture being developed is significantly correlated with high organizational performance.

References: 1. Abbe, A. (2008). Building cultural capability for full-spectrum operations. (ARI Study Report 2008-04). Arlington, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and 22

2.

3. 4.

5.

6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

13.

14.

15. 16. 17. 18.

Social Sciences. Abbe, A., Gulick, L.M.V., & Herman, J.L. (2007). Cross-cultural competence in army leaders: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Technical Report, U.S. Army Research Institute. Andrews, M., & Boyle, J. (2008). Transcultural concepts in nursing care. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins. Aniței M., Chraif M., (2008) A Diagnosis Model of Organizational Culture, în volumul The Scientific Session with international participation, “Titu Maiorescu” University, 31 May 2008, Editura Universitatii “Titu Maiorescu”. Aniţei, M., Chraif, M., Chitescu, A. (2009). A diagnosis model for the organizational culture in a private clinic, în Revista de Psihologie şi Ştiinţele Ediucaţiei, Universitatea Transilvania, Braşov. Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R.N., & Sinha, J.B.P. (1999). Organizational culture and human resource management practices: the model of culture fit. Journal of Cross- Cultural Psychology, 30(4), 501-526. Campinha-Bacote, J. (1994). Cultural competence in psychiatric mental health nursing: A conceptual model. Nursing Clinics of North America, 29(1), 1-8. Campinha-Bacote, J. (1997). Cultural competence: A critical factor in child health policy. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 12(4), 260-262. Campinha-Bacote, J. (1999). A model and instrument for addressing cultural competence in health care. Journal of Nursing Education, 38(5), 203-207. Campinha-Bacote, J. (2002). Cultural desire: The key to unlocking cultural competence. Journal of Nursing Education, 42(6), 239-240. Campinha-Bacote, J. (2002). The process of cultural competence in the delivery of healthcare services: A model for care. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 13(3), 181-184. Campinha-Bacote, J. (2003). The process of cultural competence in the delivery of healthcare services: A culturally competent model of care. Cincinnati, OH: Transcultural C.A.R.E. Associates. Campinha-Bacote, J. (2004). Inventory for Assessing the Process of Cultural Competence-Revised. From Transcultural C.A.R.E. Associates, Under Tools section. Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://www.transculturalcare.net Campinha-Bacote, J. (2004). A Culturally Competent Model of Care. From Transcultural C.A.R.E. Associates, Under Models of cultural competence. Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://www.transculturalcare.net Campinha-Bacote, J. (2005). A biblically based model of cultural competence in healthcare delivery. Journal of Multicultural Nursing and Health, 11(2), 16-22. Campinha-Bacote, J. (2007). The quest for cultural competence in nursing care. Nursing Forum, 30(4), 19-25. Campinha-Bacote, J. (2008). The process of cultural competence in the delivery of healthcare services at: http://www.transculturalcare.net/Publications.htm Campinha-Bacote, J., & Campinha-Bacote, D. (1999). A framework for providing culturally competent health care services in managed care organizations. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 10(4), 290-291.

23

19. 20. 21.

22.

23.

24. 25. 26.

27. 28. 29.

30. 31.

32. 33.

34. 35. 36.

Carter, R. (Ed.). (1999). Addressing cultural issues in organizations: Beyond the corporate context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Chin, J. L. (2000). Culturally competent health care. Public Health Reports, 115(1), 2533. Chraif, M. (2007). The influence of internal communication on the client’s satisfaction and personnel fluctuation in a fast food company, Modern Psychological Research, trends and Prospects, Ed. Psihomedia, Sibiu. Chraif, M. (2008). A strategic plan for evaluating the personnel fluctuation concerning the human resources from the Mon Plaisir SA organization, în volumul The Scientific Session with international participation, “Titu Maiorescu” University, 31 May 2008, Editura Universitatii “Titu Maiorescu”. Chraif, M. (2008). Predicting counterproductive work behavior in fast-food organizations, în volumul International Conference with international participation, “Titu Maiorescu” University 27 November 2008, Ed. Universitatii "Titu Maiorescu" Chraif M. (2010). Comportamentul Contraproductiv, Ed. Universitară, Bucureşti. Chraif, M., Stefan, C. (2010). A practical model for the development of public servants’ competitiveness and professional performance, Romanian Journal of Applied Chun, K.M., Organista, P. B., & Marín, G. (2003). Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement, and applied research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Cook, M. (1998), Personnel selection and productivity (III Ed.). New York, NY: Wiley. Cooke, R.A., & Lafferty, J.C. (1983, 1986, 1987, 1989). Organizational Culture Inventory. Plymouth, MI: Human Synergistics. Cooke, R.A. & Szumal, J.L. (1993). Measuring normative beliefs and shared behavioral expectations in organizations: the reliability and validity of the Organizational culture Inventory. Psychological Reports: Volume 72, Issue, pp. 1299-1330, doi: 10.2466/pr0.1993.72.3c.1299. Cross, T. et al (1988, 1989). Toward a culturally competent system of care. Washington, DC Geron, S.M., Smith, K., Tennstedt, S., Jette, A., Chassler, D., and Kasten, L. (2000). The Home Care Satisfaction Measure: A client-centered approach to assessing the satisfaction of frail older adults with home care services. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 55(5):S259-S270. Giger, J. N., & Davidhizar, R.E. (2008). Transcultural nursing: Assessment and intervention, 5th ed. Mosby. Giger, J., Davidhizar, R., Purnell, L., Harden, J., Phillips, J., & Strickland, O. (2007). American Academy of Nursing Expert Panel Report: Developing cultural competence to eliminate health disparities in ethnic minorities and other vulnerable populations. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 18(2), 95-102. Hall, R. (1993). A framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 14(8), 607–618. Hernandez, M. & Isaacs, M. (Eds.). (1998). Promoting cultural competence in children's mental health services. Paul Brookes Publishing, Baltimore. Hofstede, G. (1997). Culture and organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill. 24

37. 38. 39. 40.

41.

42.

43. 44. 45.

46. 47. 48.

49. 50. 51. 52.

Hogan-Garcia, M. (1999). The four skills of cultural diversity competence: a process for understanding and practice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1999. Kim-Godwin, Y. S., Clarke, P. N., & Barton, L. (2001). A model for the delivery of culturally competent community care. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 35(6), 918-25 Leininger, M., & McFarland, M. (2006). Culture care diversity and universality: A worldwide theory. CT: Jones and Bartlett. Mason, J.L., Braker, K., & Williams-Murphy, T.L. (1995). An introduction to cultural competence principles and elements. An annotated bibliography. Portland, OR: Portland State University, Research and Training Center on Family Support and Children's Mental Health. McDonald, D.P., McGuire, G.M., Johnston, J., Selmeski, B., & Abbe, A. (2008). Developing and managing cross-cultural competence within the Department of Defense: Recommendations for learning and assessment. Technical Report, Defense Language Office. Olavarria, M., Beaulac, J., Bélanger, A., Young, M., & Aubry, T. (2005). Standards of Organizational Cultural Competence for Community Health and Social Service Organizations: Report for Centretown Community Health Centre. Ottawa, ON: University of Ottawa, Centre for Research on Community Services. Owens, R. (1987), Organizational Behavior in Education, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Peteraf, M. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191. Pitariu H., Chraif M. (2008). Modern Approaches in evaluating professional performance. Designing behavioural scales, in the volume of The International Congress Modern Research in Psychology: Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research? Sibiu-Paltinis, 30 Octomber-02 Novemnber 2008, editor coordinator Marius Milcu, Editura Psihomedia, Sibiu, 2008 Pitariu H., Chraif M. (2009). The validation of scales with behavioural anchors, Revista de Psihologie, Ed. Academiei Române, 3/4/2009. Pitariu, H., & Budean, (2007). Cultura organizaţională, Editura de ştiinte cognitive, Cluj-Napoca. Pitariu, H., Chraif, M. (2009). Amateur and scientific approaches in the selection and the psychological evaluation of personnel. The issue of conjectural tests. The International Congress “Modern Research in Psychology: Directions and Perspectives”, Sibiu, 22-24 May 2009, pp110-118, Editura Universitara. Purnell, L.D., & Paulanka, B.J. (2008). Transcultural health care: A culturally competent approach, 3rd ed. F.A. Davis. Schein, E. (1990). Organizational Culture and Leadership, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Shakil, A. (2012). Impact of organizational culture on performance management practices in Pakistan. Business Intelligence Journal, January, 2012 Vol.5 No.1 Siegel, C., Haugland, G., & Chambers, E. (2002). Cultural competency in mental health systems of care: Selection and benchmarking of performance measures. The New York State Office of Mental Health, Nathan S. Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, Center for the Study of Issues in Public Mental Health. 25

53.

54.

55. 56.

57. 58.

59.

Siegel, C., Haugland, G., & Chambers, E. D. (2003). Performance measures and their benchmarks for assessing organizational cultural competency in behavioral health care service delivery. Administration & Policy in Mental Health, 31, 141-170. Siegel, C., Haugland, G., & Chambers, E. D. (2003). Performance measures and their benchmarks for assessing organizational cultural competency in behavioral health care service delivery. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 31, 141-170. Spector, R. (2004). Cultural diversity in health and illness. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Sue, D.W., Carter, R.T., Casas, M.T., Fouad, N.A., Ivery, A.E., Jensen, M., et al. (1998). Multicultural counseling competencies: Individual and organizational development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sue, D.W. (2001). Multidimensional facets of cultural competence. The Counseling Psychologist, 29(6), 790-821. The Lewin Group, Inc. (2001). Health Resources and Services Administration Study on Measuring Cultural Competence in Health Care Delivery Settings: A Review of the Literature. Prepared under contract with the Health Resources and Services Administration, DHHS. Yilmaz, C. & Ergun, E. (2008). Organizational culture and firm effectiveness: An examination of relative effects of culture traits and the balanced culture hypothesis in an emerging economy. Journal of World Business, 43, 290–306.

26