Factors That Influence Organizational Culture Change
Factors That Influence Organizational Culture Change
The quality of corporate governance is contingent upon the premise whether a given company’s organizational success meets a largely and multifaceted structure of elemental ideologies that result to the uniformity of beliefs, acceptance and discipline throughout a corporation’s hierarchy to follow informed decision stop management makes. This disposition synchronizes with whether there establishes an instant, timely response and adaptability of employees and managers to accede flexibility and obedience of command to cope to continuous changes in internal and external business climates. Cultural change influences the outcome of corporate success depending on a given corporate culture type. Specific types are not mentioned in the examination of corporations, but an amenable method acceptable depends on how this is admissible, and to what the extent, these factors are assessed for this change aligned to the outcome of corporate performance from which would be largely lay upon.
Upon the analysis process, fundamental factors are assessed for each corporate player, from the CEO to the employees and to how specific guidelines of ideology should rule. These fundamentals bear on, and are influenced by, the roles the CEO, its board of directors and its senior management team down to employees who all stand on a common ground that occurs to attain integrity of corporate governance. They should be able to agree on a common norm to basically and exercise a natural sense of integrity and diligence, a pervasive capture of a sound decision-making process agreeable to lower departmental hierarchy and to same-level decision makers or counterpart key people by which underlies the overall corporation performance. Combining with that is a bigger stake to this decision-making process and the salient knowledge of financial performance and collegial markets involved. This goes with the periodical delivery of timely financial performance with the “right-to-know” shareholder rights spell with to be aware of overall and contemporary corporate performance and contemporary activities. Another major facet is keeping close track the structure quality of internal control systems referenced to the continuous changing business, financial portfolio and management risks over a given period of time and strategic planning in subsequent periods.
Given the different hierarchy key players, from the CEO, its board of directors, senior managers, down to employees, the following guidelines give light how each role should be ideally conducted:
The CEO and Board of Directors. The CEO should be able to recognize from the onset when position is assumed the ebb and flows of the organization, with the root cause of current and prevalent issues. This is recognized by timely disclosure availed through meetings with departmental heads, subordinate senior managers, with quality of due diligence measures these issues and situations on a daily basis, and provide alternative solutions and a sensitive course of action in a timely manner. Keeping in mind tackling wide spectrums of corporate issues rests upon their complexity, presenting challenges, reckoning size and hierarchy structure of the corporate organization, and the inherent skills of managers. The CEO should have the inherent strength to delegate and harvest qualitative feedback from senior managers on their respective jurisdictions. The ability to provide timely solutions to these problems that dominate overtime depends on how large the cost involves, to what extent solutions may proficiently provide the maximum efficiency at the least cost. But with these types of matters, the CEO should have a keen knowledge and sensitive diligence to give appropriate execution at the right timely out of assessment and profile of its corporate assets. On the other hand, the CEO should be transparent, sensitive and able to delegate among senior managers reasonable volume of responsibilities, as well as how he can much strike the decision-making process’s bullpoints to determine, and to be decided upon, in between management positions what needs to stay confidential, to be discussed on a limited circle of executives or sensitive matters whether they need to be consulted further with its board management, who, in turn, need to employ a strong command, commitment and delegation of duties. The CEO usually is the extension spokesperson to lower management and its employees who discharges to, and commonly acts part of the board. Principles of Good Corporate Governance and Best Practice Recommendations (Anon., 2003)
Senior Managers. Senior managers, without necessary command of their CEO, should possess sound judgment and order execution for solution purposes over issues their junior managers and lower level employees encounter and that may encourage or hamper the requisite timely flow of operations associated with each position’s daily duties. The ebb disruption which spurs in between stages in the daily accomplishment of individual or operational duties which otherwise should fit to the desired flow of organization and technology applicable, should be keenly observed and where the gap underlies. Senior managers should approach their subordinate employee staff with these surfacing issues freely notwithstanding any attaching relationships in between that other organizations permit to exist in between which tends to jeopardize corporate integrity. However, a precaution is necessarily advisable when managers need to go past respective personal boundaries to encourage camaraderie and increasing transparency and communication between team member employees and their respective managers as an effective operating strategy.
Subordinate Employees.Nonmanagers should emphasize with caution their roles that impact their respective managers’ reliability and responsibility to maintain corporate governance, in turn, otherwise impairs overall corporate strategy. It is also to a mutual benefit when each position in their respective hierarchy, enjoy promotion benefits that improve corporate governance and strategy. Employees should keep in mind that training themselves and upgrading their skills with respect to a consistent changing trend in engaging with more increasing complex technology, it places in stake their self-worth and individual marketability for future prospective positions that require lofty and a larger scope of responsibilities in the event new technologies introduce in the corporate market. Particularly true, for example, in the financial markets and with the onset of international financial reporting in the globalized financial and trading industry require knowledge of Bloomberg software for critical analysis.
comments powered by Disqus