Küng-Shankleman, L: What is Organisation Culture?
According to Küng-Shankleman an organisation’s culture consists of a set of basic assumptions that are shared by all its members. These cultural assumptions enable an organisation to form a strategy and react appropriately to changing situations. Furthermore, Küng-Shankleman believes that national cultural processes have an influence on an organisation and that the cultural assumptions can often be traced back to the founder (Küng-Shankleman 14).
My question here is “Are these assumptions always clear for everyone?” It seems like everyone is supposed to know them, but most of the time they remain implicit. However, Schein's model offers a method to uncover and access these assumptions by numerous discussions between members of an organisation, for instance, about their believed mission and core competencies (Küng-Shankleman 17). But do organisations really use this method? Overall, I think that most members indeed know these assumptions and strategy processes, but if not, I think Schein’s method can be very helpful.
Besides, what if “it’s just a small Internet organisation, with only one, maybe two members?” Can you still speak of an ‘organisation’s culture’ then? I think you can, because it doesn’t really matter whether an organisation is large or small, people need to know their strategy and shared believes to function properly. Besides, on the Internet you often have frequently asked questions pages, and in a way these pages explicitly show what the makers of the site believe and assume.
De Mooij, M. Global Marketing and Advertising
The first thing that de Mooij mentions in his article Global marketing and advertising, is that in advertising it’s very important that something ‘fits’. Therefore a lot of effort must be put in understanding different cultures and apparently Hofstede has developed a model that distinguishes 5 dimensions. This model makes a systematic comparison of cultures possible. The first dimension is power distance (PDI), which means that some cultures believe in equality, while others have some sort of hierarchy. The second one is individualism-collectivism (IDV). In de Mooij’s opinion individualistic cultures are often universalistic, low-context cultures (de Mooij 79). Furthermore, he mentions masculinity/femininity (MAS) and uncertainty avoidance (UAI). And the last one is long-term Orientation (LTO).
All in all, according to de Mooij ‘classification of cultures is necessary to develop marketing and advertising strategies in the global market place’ (de Mooij 91). “But is it always this simple?” Even though I understand that a model like this can be very helpful, especially for advertisers, I’m not sure that it’s always possible to classify people. Besides, isn’t it true that people from the same culture can give very different meanings to the same product? Also, what about the product itself? Sometimes a product just isn’t successful. Overall, I’m sure that a lot of things said about cultures in this model are true, but I don’t think it’s wise to make everything depend on it.
Nixon, S. Advertising and Commercial Culture
According to Nixon today’s society is a ‘commercial society’ in which consumption and commercial expertise play an important part. In his article, Advertising and Commercial Culture, Nixon mentions the work of a few researchers. The first ones are Lash and Urry who believe in ‘reflexive organisation’. In other words, the fact that people are expected to be more reflexive and creative. The second ones are Scase and Davis who talk about trends within the ‘creative industries’ and four ‘general ideal type kinds of organisation’. And the third one is Featherstone, who talks about the ‘new cultural intermediaries’, or the ‘shapers of tastes’ (Nixon 11).
Apparently, Nixon has a few problems with all three analyses, but my question is “what does he himself propose?” I still don’t really have a clear vision of what his ideas are. He says that he’s especially looking for frames to better understand advertising, and that it’s likely that advertising can be more effectively explored through ‘commercial culture’ (Nixon 2). But how exactly? In the end he says that commercially produced cultural goods and services can be interpreted in more than one way and that people - including commercial practitioners - can use them to shape their (cultural) identities (Nixon 22). This sounds reasonable, but it’s not really a frame to better understand advertising, or is it?
McRobbie, A. From Hollyway to
In her article From Hollyway to Hollywood, McRobbie states that nowadays almost everything revolves around work. Especially in the creative industries, more and more people are self-employment and work on a freelance basis. More importantly, youth, ‘permanently transitional’ work and creativity are the key features of this sector (McRobbie 98). However, these key features have quite a few negative consequences. According to McRobbie many people lead very insecure lives and in today’s society it’s as if ‘work replaces the social’ (McRobbie 99). While Sennett and Beck also believe that neo-liberalism weakens the social ties, Leadbeater embraces this ‘talent-led economy’ (McRobbie 107)
Overall, McRobbie believes that many people have to go to great lengths to be able to keep their jobs and that not everyone can make it (or participate for that matter). So, my question here is, “do people really need to work this hard? And is age really such a decisive factor?” I guess, in a way it is. In the creative industries working hard and having ‘a talent’ is often very important and there are only a few people who really ‘make it’. So, most people work hard because they have to make ends meet, others do it because they just like the work and some do it because they want to be famous. Although I think it’s true that in certain areas of the cultural industry, age can be very important, I do believe that if you are very good at what you do, it is possible to continue working for quite a long time. All in all, I hope McRobbie is mistaken in believing that ‘work replaces the social’, but I’m afraid that nowadays many people do live the way she describes it.
