Organizational Culture Frameworks

Why This Matters

When you're studying power and politics in organizations, culture isn't just background noise—it's the operating system that determines how power gets distributed, exercised, and challenged. These frameworks give you the analytical tools to decode why certain people hold influence, how decisions really get made (versus how they're supposed to be made), and what unwritten rules govern political behavior in any workplace. You're being tested on your ability to diagnose organizational dynamics, not just describe them.

Don't just memorize framework names and their components. Know what each framework reveals about power structures, political behavior, and organizational effectiveness. The real exam value comes from understanding when to apply each framework and how they complement or contradict each other. Ask yourself: does this framework focus on visible vs. hidden culture? Internal vs. external factors? Individual vs. collective dynamics? That's the thinking that earns top marks.

---

Layered Models: Uncovering Hidden Power Structures

These frameworks argue that culture operates on multiple levels—what you see on the surface rarely tells the whole story. The deeper you dig, the closer you get to where real power and political influence reside.

Schein's Three Levels of Organizational Culture

• Three distinct layers—artifacts (visible), espoused values (stated), and basic underlying assumptions (unconscious)—reveal how culture masks true power dynamics
• Basic underlying assumptions are where political behavior is truly shaped; these taken-for-granted beliefs determine who gets heard and whose ideas get dismissed
• Misalignment between espoused values and assumptions creates political opportunities for those who understand the gap between rhetoric and reality

Johnson's Cultural Web

• Six interconnected elements—stories, rituals, symbols, structures, control systems, and power structures—map the full terrain of organizational culture
• Power structures sit explicitly within the web, acknowledging that culture and politics are inseparable rather than parallel forces
• Diagnostic tool for change agents who need to identify which cultural elements reinforce existing power arrangements and which might be leveraged for transformation

---

Typology Models: Categorizing Power and Control Styles

These frameworks classify organizations into distinct cultural types, each with characteristic approaches to authority, decision-making, and political behavior. Knowing the type helps you predict the political game being played.

Cameron and Quinn's Competing Values Framework

• Four culture types—Clan (collaborative), Adhocracy (creative), Market (competitive), Hierarchy (controlled)—organized along flexibility vs. stability and internal vs. external focus
• Competing values means organizations face inherent tensions; political conflict often emerges when subcultures prioritize different quadrants
• Assessment tool that helps leaders identify current vs. desired culture, making it valuable for understanding resistance to organizational change

Handy's Four Types of Organizational Culture

• Power Culture concentrates authority in a central figure; political success depends on proximity to that center
• Role Culture distributes power through formal positions and procedures; politics plays out through rule interpretation and jurisdictional disputes
• Task Culture and Person Culture decentralize power to teams or individuals respectively, creating different political dynamics around expertise and autonomy

Deal and Kennedy's Cultural Types

• Risk and feedback speed create four types: Tough-Guy/Macho (high risk, fast feedback), Work Hard/Play Hard (low risk, fast feedback), Bet Your Company (high risk, slow feedback), Process (low risk, slow feedback)
• Political behavior varies dramatically by type—Tough-Guy cultures reward aggressive individual competition while Process cultures favor those who master bureaucratic navigation
• Decision-making patterns differ: fast-feedback cultures create rapid political cycles; slow-feedback cultures allow power to consolidate over longer periods

---

Performance-Linked Models: Culture as Strategic Asset

These frameworks connect culture directly to organizational outcomes, arguing that certain cultural characteristics drive success. They reveal how leaders use culture strategically—and politically—to shape performance.

Denison's Organizational Culture Model

• Four traits—Mission, Adaptability, Involvement, Consistency—each contribute to performance but can create political tensions when they conflict
• Involvement vs. Consistency represents a core political dilemma: empowering employees (involvement) can undermine the standardization (consistency) that other leaders prioritize
• Culture-strategy alignment is the framework's central claim; misalignment creates political opportunities for those advocating change

Kotter and Heskett's Culture-Performance Model

• Strong, adaptive cultures outperform over the long term—but "strong" can become "rigid" without adaptability
• Cultural alignment with strategy and environment determines success; political battles often center on whose interpretation of alignment prevails
• Change-resistant cultures fail not because they lack strength but because strength becomes an obstacle to necessary adaptation

---

Dimensional Models: Measuring Cultural Variation

These frameworks identify specific dimensions along which cultures vary, allowing for more precise comparison and measurement. They're particularly useful for understanding cross-cultural political dynamics and person-organization fit.

Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Theory

• Power Distance directly measures acceptance of unequal power distribution—high power distance cultures expect hierarchical politics; low power distance cultures see more open challenge to authority
• Individualism vs. Collectivism shapes political coalition-building; collectivist cultures require group consensus while individualist cultures reward personal initiative
• Uncertainty Avoidance influences tolerance for political ambiguity and risk-taking in organizational maneuvering

O'Reilly, Chatman, and Caldwell's Organizational Culture Profile (OCP)

• Person-organization fit is the central concept; political effectiveness depends partly on alignment between individual and organizational values
• Key dimensions include innovation, stability, attention to detail, outcome orientation, and teamwork—each creates different political environments
• Recruitment and selection implications mean culture shapes who enters and stays, creating self-reinforcing political dynamics

Schneider's Culture Model

• Attraction-Selection-Attrition (ASA) framework explains how cultures perpetuate themselves through hiring and turnover patterns
• Socialization processes shape newcomer political behavior; understanding how your organization socializes members reveals its political training program
• Strategic alignment between culture and employee behavior determines whether political activity supports or undermines organizational goals

---

Quick Reference Table

---

Self-Check Questions

1. Which two frameworks both use a four-type classification system but differ in whether they emphasize values tensions versus power distribution? How would you choose between them for a specific analysis?

2. If you needed to explain why a new CEO's change initiative faced unexpected resistance despite strong stated support, which framework's concept of "hidden" culture would best diagnose the problem—and what specific level or element would you examine?

3. Compare and contrast Denison's model with Kotter and Heskett's model: both link culture to performance, but what different aspects of culture does each emphasize as the key driver?

4. An FRQ asks you to analyze political dynamics in a multinational organization where headquarters (low power distance culture) clashes with a subsidiary (high power distance culture). Which framework provides the most useful analytical lens, and what specific dimension would you focus on?

5. Using Handy's typology, explain how political behavior would differ between someone navigating a Power Culture versus a Role Culture—what strategies would succeed in each, and why would the same approach fail if applied to the wrong type?