The Clash of Two Organizational Cultures

Culture is a pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration that has worked well enough to be considered valid, and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, feel in relation to those problems. It is quite clear that there exists a clash of organizational cultures within the Womens Co-Op. The Womens Co-Op provides member women health care services such as abortion and counseling centers. In the 1970s, the cooperative focused on internal integration, structuring its programs based on liberal feminism. However, in the 1980s, a crack opened. Planned Parenthood made overtures to the CHP to become a federation affiliate. The conservative faction of the CHP opposed the affiliation because of moral and political reasons. Right-wing activists denounced the proposed union as it would embellish the CHP as the breeding ground of health malpractice. Those who support the affiliation argued that it would lead to increased services to women.

Some officials of CHP played the role of negotiator. Others played the role of change champion. The minor officials of the organization were employee advocates. This diversification of professional roles is essential for the preservation and maintenance of organizational values. In this case, however, it is clear that the organization is ripped by conflicting values and ideologies.

Supervision was a bottom-top approach. Top officials of the CHP wanted to find consensus among subsidiary member clinics, in order to fully substantiate the pros and cons of the offer. Members were advised to air their concerns inside the organization in order to maintain privacy. Indeed, most of the meetings of the organization were held in private so as not to raise suspicion among the public.

Supervision can be effectively achieved by 1) redefining the organizations cultural focus, 2) clear definition of issues (pros and cons should be communicated clearly to all members), and 3) in this case, the officials used consensus to extract opinion from its members.

Diplomatic and communication skills are necessary for the resolution of the crisis. The negotiator needs to balance conflicting needs and try to bring the parties in one table. It is essential that a compromise is reached because it is quite impossible in this case for the parties to yield to each other. How to reach a compromise First, the negotiator needs to sum all the needs and priorities of groups within the organization. Second, the negotiator should reach consensus among the top officials. And lastly, heshe should consider the possibility of non-compromise. Indeed, in the state of affairs of the negotiation process, each party must face the reality of non-compromise. It is because there exist a contradiction of values between the participating organizations.

0 comments:

Post a Comment