Organisational Behaviour Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4000 words

Organisational Behaviour - Assignment ExampleHofstede explains that civilisation is a group of individuals with a collective mind programming. Schein (1992) explains the need for individuals to vary to change without the need to impact the culture. It is crucial to understand the term culture before entering into the organisational culture. Cultures are deep-seated and pervasive. Schein (1992) explains that change is not possible without impact the culture. Similarly, organisation culture is a concept used to explain the similar collective mind programming of the individuals in the organisation. In most cases, when individuals work unitedly in a wok environment, with the set down regulations and framework on the job, the approach to work becomes a common aspect for all employees, hence making them a group of people with similar mind programming. Based on Hofstedes definition, this clearly makes an organisational culture. For around two and a half decades, the concept of organisat ional culture has been evolution and being accepted to a great extent. Considering an open systems perspective, it is clear that the culture of an organisation is important element and environmental condition which affects the systems and the subsystems. The organisational culture is also a very valu suitable tool for analysis of a company and is very effective in getting a clear understanding of the company. To be able to understand the concept of culture better, it is essential to understand the definition. The next sub section details the definition of culture for organisations. Culture has been described in legion(predicate) different manners and various different ideas have been put forth to explain the concept. Anderson explains nations to be an imagined community and Wallerstein explains that he is skeptical that we can operationalise the concept of culture ... in any way that enables us to use it for statements that are more than trivial (Wallerstein, 1990, p. 34). Another renowned author Hofstede has explained that there are four (later off to five) main dimensions of culture (Hofstede, 1880, 1984, 1991). In 1998, he claimed that the true shift in paradigm was proved by the acceptance of the concept of unique, specific and powerful discipline cultures. Considering his theory, this model can be evaluated in a number of manners. The theory portrays to a great extent the national cultures that have emerged in the recent geezerhood and his theory has been more focused on the rich origin of the culture. This has been argued to be misleading as it is to a great extent considered to be immeasurable. The findings have been argued to be based mainly on the predictive value and the reviewing of smaller scale replications is also essential. Hofstede has provided a very different approach to the concept of culture. He separate culture based on dimensions. These are a) Power / Distance, b) Individualism, c) Masculinity, d) Uncertainty/Avoidance Index, and e) Long Term Orientation. There have been a number of arguments regarding the accuracy of the theory. As explained by Brendan McSweeney, Hofstedes apparently sophisticated analysis of extensive data necessarily relies on a number of profoundly flawed assumptions to measure the software of the mind as did Mortons measure of the hardware, as it were, of the mind (Mc Sweeney, 2002, p. 116). Mc Sweeney moves on to also explain, Hofstedes claims are excessive and unbalanced excessive because they claim far more in terms of acknowledgeable characteristics and consequences