Comments on: the cultural problem

By: Katherine

Katherine — Sun, 18 May 2008 05:38:56 +0000

Justin: Families can be dysfunctional, too.
Mark: Hmmm. The “company as machine” analogy may seem even more apt to tech company managers, many of whom got their start as engineers. (A group not noted for their people skills.)

By: Mark Earls

Mark Earls — Sat, 17 May 2008 22:57:14 +0000

Great post, mate. And spot on.
I find it striking that all the different kinds of managers I meet in all kinds of different sectors still prefer to describe and draw their businesses as if they were a machine or some technical thing at least; how they prefer technical sounding strategies and definitions of their challenges (“the business planning process” etc) to the honest acceptance that the reason why all businesses are tricky beasts is that they’re built on, with and by humans.
Of course, it’d be easier if businesses were more like machines but they’re not. And if strategies were like mechanical (i.e. human-lite) things — borne of a robo-mind and implemented by an army of replicants, maybe.
The sad truth remains that everything in business is about people, their interactions with each other and the ideas and assumptions that shape those interactions.
I’m not sure it’s just the tech business that suffer this way: finance, manufacturing, airlines and — god bless, em — government agencies are just as delusional about this stuff.
Go get ‘em!

By: Justin Thorp

Justin Thorp — Sat, 17 May 2008 17:39:16 +0000

I think the need and desire for a quality corporate culture has to be something that’s entrenched in your management and often’ isn’t.
I’ve been lucky to work at a company that’s run like a family. I realize that it’s something that will be harder to maintain as the company grows. I hope and pray that they won’t let things change… that it will stay a priority.

By: Pål Hivand

Pål Hivand — Sat, 17 May 2008 17:06:40 +0000

Matt: Maybe because tech solutions too often are implemented in order to solve problems that are in essence cultural.
A business that doesn’t communicate well all to often implement some kind of software or tech, when a good solution would be to just talk to the customer.

By: Matt Galloway

Matt Galloway — Sat, 17 May 2008 16:39:35 +0000

“Often with tech companies, we wrongly blame the problems on the tech itself.“
There is a much more generalized problem here. It’s not just tech companies. Technology is responsible for lots of stuff — good and bad, but too often in modern business it gets more blame for the bad than is really due. I assert that most all “technology” failures in business are really “culture” failings. ERP implementation, software development projects, web site design, etc. Technology is an easy scape goat.
Great cartoon, BTW.
–Matt

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Sat, 17 May 2008 15:56:04 +0000

Mike, I agree, it’s nothing new.
But what’s far more interesting to me is, the things one can do to combat it…

By: Mike Peter Reed

Mike Peter Reed — Sat, 17 May 2008 15:31:48 +0000

None of this is new as Robert Townsend's "Up the Organization: How to Stop the Corporation from Stifling People and Strangling Profits" proves. The book was first published more than 35 years ago. Some individuals and corporations "get it" and some don't. It seems like it's almost like a rite of passage. Oh, and it's not just tech companies.

By: Pratik Patel

Pratik Patel — Sat, 17 May 2008 12:52:01 +0000

Companies certainly do end up having internal conflicts, whether they’re related to the vision of its products/services or jsut personality conflicts. Often times, these companies neither have the wherewithall to deal with them–i.e., channeling these conflicts to the company’s advantage. Experienced executives and managers are able to help collapse these deviating visions into a unifying whole. I see Google as a prime example. Google encourages different thinking and creative projects and then is able to fit these projects into holes that appear to–sometimes not so seemlessly–make its ultimate mission unique and successful. That is certainly not to say that some of the company’s resources–especially human intellect and human beings–completely mash into a unified whole. People leave. They must be allowed to do so without recrimination. Companies often let differences fester without addressing them when signs are apparent. Most times, it’s too late.

By: John Martin

John Martin — Sat, 17 May 2008 12:20:57 +0000

“As with all things commercial, it’s the people that matter.“
Maintaining the corporate culture as an organization grows is incredibly difficult. Google has done it. Apple and Microsoft have, too.
Compaq lost it and was forced to sell out to HP, who had lost it years before.
So culture doesn’t track well to success?