Managers and Corporate Cultures: The Case of Indian Organizations

Author(s): Pulin K. Garg and Indira J. Parikh

Source: Management International Review, Vol. 26, No. 3 (3rd Quarter, 1986), pp. 50-66
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40227807
Accessed: 20-09-2016 23:04 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Management International
Review

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
P.K.Garg/I.J.Parikh*

Managers and Corporate Cultures:

The Case of Indian Organizations

Introduction

The need to explicitly consider cultural context in understanding management and

organizations has been addressed by many scholars.
Independence in India brought a national thrust toward industrialization and techno-
logical development. This thrust provided opportunities to Indian organizations which
experienced unprecedented growth. This growth has been reflected in turnover, size,
territory, product mix, manpower and technology. Indian organizations have slowly
but steadily grown to be large and complex - requiring the introduction of both
structural system and behavioral level changes.
Management experts from prestigious U.S. and other institutions (educated and
trained abroad) accepted the role as agents of change to modernize Indian organiza-
tions. In the name of catching up with the Western World, Indian organizations
borrowed management structures, management knowledge, orientation, practices and
systems. These management structures and practices were primarily borrowed from
the United States of America and were anchored in the concepts associated with
business strategy and organization theory. Indian organizations initiated techno-
economic feasibility studies, market surveys, market research, business planning,
introduction of production planning, management information systems, policy formu-
lation, formal design of corporate structures and processes, and so on.
Similarly, business organizations in India borrowed the whole set of applied behavior
science theories and training modalities from the West. T groups, motivational
training, conflict resolution, team building and MBO became by words.
There was little or no attempt to study Indian reality and design structures, systems,
and management practices based upon such reality. By the early 1970s many Indian
organizations had experimented with the new and imported thrust of management
knowledge, orientations, practices and systems. But much of that imported did not
take root. The imported managerial technologies manifestly and intellectually proved
adequate in coping with shifts in tasks. Their logic was irrefutable. However, the
logical adaptations did not create in people the conviction for action and change.
These formal adaptations did not take into account the latent level emotional and social
universe of Indian managers in which their manifest behavior is grounded. Indian
managers' response to these formal recommendations for adaptation was simple and
direct - "they are academic but not practical."

* Professor Pulin K. Garg and Professor Indira J. Parikh, both Indian Institute of Management,
Ahmedabad, India. Manuscript received February 1985.

50 MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The unintended consequences of these new concepts, systems and orientations added
far more dysfunctionalities and thus offset any gains. Many of these organizations
were doing well in terms of ROI (Return on Investment). However, these organizations
were perpetually confronted with problems of managing people and various organiza-
tion processes. Management by crisis, anxiety, and fear became the three common
modes of management. Similarly, training, restructuring and replacing people were the
three common modes for dealing with interpersonal problems and handling stress.
Within this contextual scene, the authors of this paper began their work as a
consulting team with a wide variety of Indian organizations.

Sample of Indian Organizations

The authors engaged in consulting and research assignments in a fairly representative

sample of Indian organizations. In terms of ownership, the organizations reflect
heterogeneity: multi-nationals (where the parent company is located in a foreign
country); joint sector (where the financial equity is jointly held by the Indian govern-
ment; and private sector (which may include foreign collaborators). The managements
were controlled by boards representing the investory of both public and private
sectors. Public sector firms are wholly owned and financed by national or state govern-
ment. Family owned conglomerates issue stocks to raise a large part of the equity.
Family owned firms may be small or large organizations with one product to multi-
product and multi region locations within India. In terms of technology, the organiza-
tions ranged from labor intensive firms (such as construction firms), to assembly line
custom shops, and to continuous process firms. In terms of size, the firms varied from
small to mammoth. In terms of financial turnover, the firms ranged from rupees 2
crore ($ 2 million) to 800 crore ($ 800 million). In terms of diversification of products,
the organizations included coal mining, earth moving, construction, chemicals, textiles,
tire manufacturing, paints, petrochemicals, fertilizers, pharmaceuticals, trading corpo-
rations, hotels and cottage industries like handlooms.
The authors were invited by the organizations to address a wide variety of issues and
problems. Most issues and problems centered around achieving congruence between
managerial tasks and organization processes. Many of these organizations had
diagnosed their problems as issues of: (1) apathy and motivation; (2) lack of initiative
among middle and senior managers; (3) difficulties in communication, decision
making, and delegation; (4) concern over conflict and cooperation; including intra and
inter-departmental conflict as well as intra-division and inter-division differences; (5)
fragmentation of the organization between management, managers, staff and workers;
(6) lack of role clarity and accountability; (7) few qualified and competent managers
for senior positions; (8) large turnover of trained managers; (9) inadequate managerial
role effectiveness; (10) retraining of internally promoted workers; and (11) inducting
new personnel. This is neither a new or comprehensive list of organizational issues and
problems commonly experienced in Western organizations.
Our involvement with these organizations focused on the use of a culture specific
theme for action. Many of these organizations were willing to give of themselves and
provide us with an opportunity to experiment with this alternative approach.
We started with the assumption that there are organization problems which are unique
to India. Moreover, we needed to develop organizational constructs relevant to our
cultural setting.

MIR, Vol.26, 1986/3 51

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Concept of Culture

As a concept, 'culture' is not only intangible and vague but often so broad as to
encompass all human phenomena. Our concern was to discover the processes and
contents of culture that became operative in significant role transactions. These would
help us to understand and identify the operation of culture in organization analysis.
One anchor of the culture concept lies in the values, philosophy and myths of any
given society. Its second anchor lies in the psychological role models of the family, its
rituals, history, and essentially in the micro culture of the family. The values,
philosophy, and myths that are articulated set the norms and define the cognitive
maps of "Dos" and "Don'ts," and "Modes of Perception." Myths, folk tales, folklores,
sagas and remembered history are also part of this aspect of culture. This represents
the macro culture. The micro culture of the family provides the emotive maps of
behavior and presents cultural ideal role models to the individual. Individuals growing
up in a family often anchor their introjections of experienced culture into models of
significant roles in the family, caste and community. They also introject models of
structure and systems of family, caste and community. Similarly, in the quest of their
own symbolic and psychological identities, they cast and recast the heroes of myths,
sagas, folk tales, folklore and history.
Between the culture and the self, there is an interface. While having some commonali-
ties within a family membership, this interface has some uniqueness for each
individual. This interface holds the cognitive maps of roles, systems, systemic
processes, styles of being and becoming, meanings sought in life and the cognitive
maps of life space and world view. One part of the cognitive map "belongs" to the
family system as it is experienced by the individual. This part of the individuals
cognitive map serves as an anchor in the development of a map of the organization.
The process of forming the organization map - regardless of how well the organization
is formally designed - tends to regress to the map of the family system. The second
part of the individuals cognitive map is anchored in the nature of significant roles as
experienced in the family. Within the organization setting - regardless of the nature of
functional and task based role definition -, the pre-disposition of the individual is to
regress to the quality of role models experienced in the family, including ones self
perceptions as a being a member of the family. Thus, the Indian managers
membership as well as role relations tend to display familial patterns in the
organization.
The organizations consisting of individuals from the same cultural setting find it
difficult to "rationally" design and build infra-structures that lead to a convergence
and congruence between formal structures, tasks, roles, and organization processes. It
is extremely difficult in such organizations to prevent "regression" to familial patterns.
In such organizations, there are as many cognitive maps as there are individuals. Often
these cognitive maps may not converge or cohere. They become a mere assemblage or
at best a collage. They rarely become a gestalt. In the "rational" conceptualization of
organizations, the predisposition is to assume they are gestalts. Perhaps this is what
makes the culture concept intangible and difficult to articulate. Our work in India is
based on the assumption that organizations are - at best - assemblages of the
members cognitive maps. Our primary consulting task becomes one of discovering the
nature of significant cognitive maps at different levels and functions of management. It
is postulated that the exploration and study of these cognitive maps provide insights
into the operational processes of the organization interfaces - including structure and

52 MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
systems, managerial roles, strategy and culture, and leadership values. This diagnostic
perspective helps us to discover constructs and technologies for creating a collage and,
if possible, a gestalt of organization culture.
Culture to us if THE source of energy, direction setting (not goal setting) and THE
critical variable in formulating policy and designing action alternatives. The indi-
viduals' cognitive maps become the filter for operationalizing the thrust, policies, and
tasks of the organization. Unless these cognitive maps are mobilized towards
convergence and coherence, the formal organization processes remain frictitious and
organization action non-cohesive.
Behind all of the manifest managerial and business problems, Indian organizations
need to deal with the following interfaces:

1 . Structure and Systems Organization Interface

The problem of achieving congruence and convergence between the structure and
systems introduced for the efficient management of the tasks in relation to the
historical patterns of doing things in the organization.
2. Roles/ Organization Interface
The problem of achieving congruence and convergence between managerial roles
and complex tasks introduced in the organization in relation to the traditional role
attitudes brought from the family and social system.
3. Strategy and Culture/ Organization Interface
The problems of achieving congruence and convergence between strategy and struc-
ture in relation to the culture. The strategies and structures were borrowed from the
West. However, the culture comes from the agrarian modes of life patterns and
relationships.

Structure Organization Interface

Indian organizations have grown from small family firms with one product to multi
product, multi territory large and complex organizations. In this process of growth,
Indian organizations have designed complex structures ranging from departmentalized,
divisionlized, grid and matrix structures. The designers use formal criteria such as task,
technology, market product relationship, and geographical territory to design the
organization structures. These structures are then implemented through hierarchical
commands. After the initial flush of enthusiasm, most of these newly designed
structures do not operate as per the formal design. Due to the strong intervention of
culture (cognitive maps of the individual), these "rational" and well designed
structures remain stated on paper, but the congruent processes do not emerge. Studies
carried out by Chattopadhyay (1975), Chowdhry (1971), and Dayal (1972) reflect the
above theme.

Based upon our experiences with sixty organizations, Indian organizations in their
operationalization of management and organization processes - irrespective of size,
technology, complexity, structures, and tasks - converge to essentially three basic
structural prototypes. These structural prototypes are anchored in the joint family
system of the traditional Indian agrarian society. The Indian organizations formally
design corporate structures and forms. But the formal corporate structures and forms
do not converge with the actual processes and constructs. As a result, a cohesive
managerial culture does not emerge. The managerial cultures remain rooted in the

MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3 53

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
only model or system experientially available to them - the joint family model. At
best, the cognitive map of the joint family is developed to the extended family. The
extended family is based on parochial indentity which is linked to ethnic, linguistic
and sometimes caste and religious background.

Joint Family Structure. The basic characteristics of the joint family is that of a role
bounded structure. This structure has only two significant roles - husband and wife.
The rest of the roles - sons, daughters, etc - are proxy roles or the extensions of the
two significant roles. These extension or proxy roles are not of primary concern to the
structure or the system. Operationally, the relatedness, interaction and the transaction
between the two significant roles is that of husband and wife. The operational relation-
ship modality is aggressive vs passive and the reversal of this stance takes place
between the two significant roles. The locus of this system is sustainence and welfare
rather than development and growth.
Many Indian organizations, in responding to the opportunities in the environment,
experienced unprecedented growth and entered new and complex task horizons. They
designed and introduced formally congruent structures and systems for the emerging
tasks. But the emergent structures in operationalization converged to only two signifi-
cant role holders in the system.
The managing director or the chief executive (the husband counterpart) is the task
leader. He manages the external interface with the environment. In contrast, the
production or works (factory) manager (the wife counterpart) is concerned with
internal conversion and manages the internal interface with the organization. The
production system is like the kitchen and he plays the maintenance role. The nature of
interaction between the task leader (the managing director or chief executive) and the
maintenance leader (the factory, production or works manager) is very similar to that
of the husband and wife relationship. When one is assertive and aggressive, the other
is passive. Occassionally, this stance gets reversed when one acts authoritarian, the
other becomes placating and nurturing. Here too, the roles and stance may reverse.
The other organizational members feel disgruntled and dissatisfied. They play the
game of gaining patronage, support and protection of one or the other. There is sibling
rivalry between employees for recognition, affirmation and bestowel of attention, and
comfort and reward.

This model is frequently found in many family owned organizations where a large
number of employees are from the same or similar socio-cultural, ethnic and linguistic
communities. The work relationships are personalized. There is very little differentia-
tion between social structures and work structures. Surprisingly, the authors have also
found this emergent structure of the family model in multi-nationals. Many Indian
multinationals are populated by a set of homogenous people from the same elite
schools or colleges, and family settings and children of elite government officials.
Accordingly, the patterns of relationships and processes between the members and the
two significant roles remain similar to the patterns found in family owned organiza-
tions.

Family-like organizations very often have a mechanical and sequential, technology

and a departmentalized structure. Authority is centralized and the input-output
activities are controlled by the task leader. Management is by anxiety. There is
tolerance for "invisible" waste and low efficiency. The concept of effectiveness does not
exist. The emphasis and expectation on the employees is that of loyalty, obedience and
conformity.

54 MIR, Vol.26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Arbitration Model. In this model, the setting is enlarged. It includes and encompasses
the extended family. Here, three roles emerge. There is one patriarch role and two
sibling roles. All other roles are marginal. A significant amount of time and energy of
those occupying the marginal roles is spent in generating a cleavage between the
patriarch and the two significant siblings. Those in the marginal roles attempt to be
visible and significant in the eyes of the patriarch by proving loyalty and commitment.
They often attempt to displace the two significant sibling roles. The patriarch on the
other hand keeps bestowing sometimes to the one sibling and at other times to the
other sibling. This serves to keep the sibling rivalry alive. The two significant siblings
thrive on the attention, acknowledgement, and acceptance of the patriarch. The
siblings rarely form a cohesive team. They are very often caught in the emotional
processes of discrimination, deprivation, denial, or rejection.
Metaphorically, this model can be aptly described as the "monkey and the two cats"
structure. The patriarch performs the role of a monkey settling the dispute between the
two cats on the distribution of a loaf of bread. In attempting to be just, fair, and
rational, the monkey ends up eating the whole loaf of bread and essentially depriving
both. The patriarch serves as the resource controller. The two siblings are the doers or
the performers. The marginal roles are helpers. The locus of this system is resources
and their control and distribution.
Many Indian organizations responding to the national thrust of industralization
quickly grew and diversified in production. They designed new formal structures
based on functions and departments. As new functions emerged, the process of
fragmentation accelerated. The emergent operational structure converged to one
central authority figure plus two departments competing with each other for sig-
nificance with the centralized authority. The first and primary fragmentation took
place between the administrative (finance) and the technical (production) depart-
ments. The processes of functioning between these departments can be depicted in the
matrix shown in Figure 1.

As suggested in Figure 1, the two departments rarely cooperated unless there was a
crisis or a threat of survival emerged from outside. When only one department was in
crisis, the other tended to withhold support. Thus conflicts emerged which only the
patriarchical authority role could resolve. This "resolution" was typically achieved

Figure 1: Relationships Between the Administrative and Technical Departments Under

the Arbitration Model

Administration (Finance)
Routine Crisis

Routine - Apathy - Conflict

- Demotivation - Withholding of
support
1 2

(Production)
Technical 3 4
Crisis - Conflict
- Withholding - Cooperation
of support

MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3 55

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
through rewarding, placating or punishing one of the departments. The residue of such
"resolutions" often became a future source of conflict.
In an organization that operates through the arbitration model, the emphasis is on
responsibility, duty, evaluation, paucity of direct reward, lack of support and low
accountability. The marginal members often take license to break norms to achieve
their goals. Occassionally, they openly rebel over the process and experience of being
marginal members.
The formal structure of such organizations is typically functional departmentation.
These organizations are often at the threshold of being divisionalized. They are
usually found in large public sector organizations and heavy engineering industries.
The centralized authority figure very often finds himself arbitrating between two
divisions or two departments in allocating resources, rewarding for target performance,
and punishing for failures through the withholding of resources. The two significant
siblings, departments or divisions continue to remain fragmented. The fragmentation
emerges at various levels - such as between production and marketing, or between
finance and the rest of the organization.
Conflict often center around the "ownership" of the organization. The production
people feel that it is through their effort the organization has grown. Hence, they are
the "owners" of the organization. In contrast, the marketing people - with their formal
management education training - believe that they are the new "owners" of the critical
tasks for taking the organization to new heights. As new functions emerge, the process
of fragmentation keeps pace. Authority remains centralized in one person and no new
processes congruent with the structure are developed. These organizations introduce
management systems, re-design structures, and introduce modern concepts of manage-
ment. But the operational and emergent processes converge through the arbitration
model.

Extended Family: Caste and Community. In this model, there are as many roles as
geographical territories. Functions are linked through a radial relationship. The
multiple roles of the system are separated with each role bounded and restricted to a
mono-role. Each role is expected to sacrifice its multiplicity of other roles. The
emphasis is on control. Control is through fear. The dominant modes of control are
the bestowal of visibility as a reward and exile as punishment. Here the organization is
dominant as a representation of the community with one founder symbolizing the
value of upholding this system. All other aspects of life become secondary. The
"system" becomes the dominant force. It serves as an altar which all the rest can be
sacrificed. Metaphorically, this model can be described as the spider web structure - no
individual element is significant. The network which converging to the system,
becomes the significant overwhelming force for determining individual action.
The local, regional, national, and international horizons of many Indian organizations
expanded rapidly. They were territorially distributed far and wide. But the managers
and occupants of the roles in the territories defined themselves as "exiles". They often
wanted to locate themselves in the head quarters office for direct visibility. The
managers in the territories operated as mechanistic bureaucrats who emphasized
record keeping with little participation in decision making. These managers, however,
do provide evidence of target (objectives) fulfillment and personal committment to the
organization. Management is by censor, control, and allocation of resources. Reward
and punishment are determined by good behavior and good performance is considered

56 MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
a matter of duty. Social affiliations, status, and power by association are operative.
Loyalty without question is the hallmark.
A high premium is placed on visibility within the system and getting things done.
Constant availability, performance at command, and personalized relationships with
the central significant authority is the dominant theme. This type of structure provides
very little space or opportunity for members to interact with each other. The emphasis
is on performing in isolation and with strength. The security in such a system is that
- at any point of personal or work crisis - the organization stands behind the
individual with full support. This security at both the family (social) and work setting
levels binds the individual to the organization.
Indian organizations acting out the "extended family model" have designed complex
structures and re-designed functional linkages between departments, divisions,
products, and corporate structures. However, at the operative level, over time, all of
the new designs and processes are pulled toward the enduring structures of the societal
culture of the traditional agrarian ethos of India. This process takes place because
managers in Indian organizations continue to perform with the role processes,
attitudes, and orientations which are congruent with the personalized and affiliative
system of the family. There is a substantial lag in the development of structures
congruent with the tasks and socialization processes that are congruent with attitudes
and orientations.

Role and Organization Interface

Indian organizations - as mentioned earlier, in their attempts to keep pace with the
economic, environmental, national and international opportunities - followed the
successful organization structures and management processes of the West. However, in
their actual translation and operationalization, they converged to prototype structures
of primary social organizations. Similarly, in terms of managerial role processes, the
dominant force was a pull toward the primary social role models.
The concept of role in organizations includes expectations from the multiple structural
links established to accomplish the tasks. Secondly, the contents of the role are defined
by the organization which an individual translates into concrete behaviors. The third
aspect of the work role are the emergent expectations generated and stabilized (but
not necessarily articulated) through the process of working with others over time.
These expectations and their stabilization are constantly mediated by leadership styles,
organization processes, and culture. The significance of these mediating forces lies in
the fact that they modify and sometimes circumvent the rationally determined task
expectations. Linton (1936), Merton (1949), Parson (1951), Sarabin (1954), and Likert
(1961), emphasize the significance of role processes in organizations.
The concept of managerial role that Indian managers bring with them is influenced by
the attitudes and orientations created through a long period of socialization in non-
work situations [Chowdhary and Kakkar (1971)]. These orientations and attitudes
emerge from the internalized affective-cognitive maps of their social systems - in-
cluding the transactions between the self and the significant others in their social
systems.
According to Garg and Parikh (1976), role is a spatial (space) concept. By the very act
of birth in a family, the child experiences his/her role space and a network of relation-
ships as a member of the family. In the persons growth process, this space is anchored

MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3 57

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Figure 2: Matrix of Role Coordinates and Managerial Role Behaviors

Role Role Behaviors

Coordinates

Decision Exercise of Communication Evaluation Reward

making Authority & Information & Punishment

Responsibility

Authority

Equality

Identity

Source: Parikh Indira J. "Emergence of Work Identify in Indian Organizations": An unpublished

Doctoral thesis, Gujarat University, 1978

The role coordinates in relation to task performance can be understood in the context of large In-
dian organizations in the following ways:
Cultural/ Social System Prescribed Work System
Responsibility Job oriented Integration of Job, Link and
Role Bound corporate Responsibility Role
actualization

Authority Hierarchical Functional

One person Multi-person
Equality Lateral Lateral
Exclusion of peers Inclusion of peers
Identity Social familial Work and professional
and affiliative

Similarly, managerial role behaviors in relation to task performance can be u

lowing ways:
Cultural/ Social Identify Prescribed Work Identity
Decision Making Routine Using discretion
Exercise of Authority Downward Downward,
Explaining upward Lateral, & Upward
Providing evidence upward
Communication & Need to know - Information Task based operational
Information as Source of power realities
dissemination

Evaluation Personal and subjective, Task, functional,

based on social stereotypes, cooperation & collaboration
belonging and loyalty
Reward and Personal loyalty, Delegation
Punishment obedience, and conformity Training subordinates
Becoming dispensible

58 MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
in role coordinates while transacting with a network of relationships. In the organiza-
tion setting, the nature of the tasks, technologies and, structures determine the
prescribed managerial role and the behaviors to be performed in the organization.
Thus, the role of an individual in an organization is a construct of an inter-phase
between the internalized role coordinates in the primary system (i.e. the family) and
their orientations reflected in performance i.e. in the managerial role behaviors. Parikh
(1978) has designed a role matrix to help understand managerial roles and organiza-
tion interfaces in Indian organizations. This matrix is shown in Figure 2.

Indian managers are subject to the pulls and pushes of these two competing ethos and
processes. Organizations in the transition phase of Indian society reinforce and create
parallel competing organization cultures such as the following.

1. Organizations tend to foster structure and processes closer to the social and af-
filiative systems. Managers in such organizations respond through role processes
that reflect social identity.
2. The organizations in the process of their growth promote the work culture. The
culture of these organizations tend to reinforce and foster the professional
managerial identity.
3. Organizations often fail to provide consistent adaptations in either direction and
encourage partial, fragmented, or functional resolutions. The managers in such
organization cultures are subjected to double binds and evolve transient and
inconsistent patterns.

The very transitional character of the current Indian society suggests that it is difficult
to create clear and distinct organization cultures.
Some organizations retain the structures of the social system, while other adopt the
prescribed formal work structures. Once again, the mix of the employees tends to
create the operational structure and the culture of the organization.

Role/ Structure Model A study carried out in several organizations by Parikh and
Garg (1981) suggest that Indian managers and departments hold a fragmented and
partial cognitive maps of their roles as well as organization structures. Most of the
Indian managers perceived their roles representing "controlling" and "contributing of
resources" to the tasks of the organization. Similarly, the managers state that they are
either part of a structure (line) or the "infra-structure" (Staff/ Service) of the organiza-
tion for efficient and effective functioning. This model is shown as a matrix in
figure 3:

A managers role is theoretically located at the center point of the two dimensions in
figure 3. In performing the managerial role, Indian managers tended to converge in
one of the quadrants. Having converged and locating themselves or the departments
in one of the quadrants, it became very difficult for them to shift the location or
relocate themselves in the center of figure 3.

Quadrant 1. The data from various large organizations suggests that the personnel
function converges to quadrant one i.e., being resource contributors and performing
infra-structural roles. The personnel function is not expected to exercise authority.
Organizations often mobilize to dump all the dysfunctionalities of the system on the
personnel function. The personnel department also becomes the "whipping boy" of all

MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3 59

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Figure 3: Role I Structure Model

Intra-structure

1 (Staff/Service) 2

Resource Resource
Contributor

Structure
3 (Line) 4

Source: Parikh Indira J., and Garg Pulin K., "Family

A case, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad 3

other departments. The personnel holding such

remain functional. The personnel department
introduced in Indian organizations. Because one o
the performance appraisal system, the personne
the eyes of most employees. If the personnel
quadrant 1, it generates resentment in the other r

Quadrant 2. The maintenance and other staff role

Their role is part of the infra-structure and res
feelings of being under utilized and not apprecia
resort to apathy, resentment, and feelings of hel
may actively withhold their resources, turn pas
behaviors help counteract the feelings of being m

Quadrant 3. New role and new structures - espec

quadrant 3 of figure 3. They are part of the str
other organizational roles and functions perceive
commanding positions through their authority
the product managers often perceive a loss of au
of the system for any problems. A common cop
The ambiguity of the new structure and new ro
engagement with tasks or to withdrawal from the

Quadrant 4. The marketing and production func

of figure 3. They are part of structure and r
managers saw themselves the "owners" of the org
managers see themselves as the "owners" of the n
out of quadrant four in figure 3 generated anxi
their authority.

Implications. Organizations in their attempts to

tures and processes tend to experience a shift in
perceived as resource contribution and what g
such shifts the infra-structure (staff/ service) an
in the past by the role holders are also disturbe

60 MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
dysfunctional. The new prescribed roles which are now functionally supportive for
performing the tasks also change with the structure. Diffusion becomes prevalent in
the organization. The role holders then tend to hold on to resources which were once
available and known. The struggle to ensure the availability of old resources becomes
reflected in the inconsistent performance of managerial roles. Moreover, the role
boundaries became rigidly defined and authority became exercised without negotia-
tion.

Though the clarity of new boundaries of the role and structure are often visible, the
infra-structure processes to support new roles become masked and are experienced as
diffused. This creates further ambiguity and diffusion. Attempts to opera tionalize and
crystalize the new structure becomes subjected to forces of anxiety. This anxiety leads
to an emergent structure different from the one that was designed. More often than
not, the emergent structures converge to one the three structures from the familial
structure of the traditional agrarian Indian society.

Culture (strategy) Organization Interface

Indian organizations are experienced uniquely and drastically different by different

sets of people. The individuals who joined the organization at its inception and have
been part of the growth phase talk nostalgically of the group of dedicated people and
the central authority who brought the organization to its current stage of growth.
These individuals talk of the culture of togetherness and belonging. They have inter-
nalized the philosophy, perspectives, values, life styles, concept of managerial respon-
sibility, nature of organization tasks, and the evaluation criteria of success. The culture
experienced by the employees when the organization was small and during the process
of growth reflects the following characteristics.

l.The organization reflects cohesiveness at the top. It contains open conflict and
initiates and sustains processes of concensus.
2. The organization promotes an open operating culture and creates a sense of
belonging with the employees. In the initial phases the organization promotes
entrepreneurial involvement in the organization rather than merely employee
involvement to assigned tasks. Employees could get things done promptly. This
entrepreneurial phase created a culture of technological efficiency and a production
centered orientation.
3. The employees talk nostalgically of memories of early days. They experienced the
organization as informal, easy going, and open accessibility including the top. Rules
and regulations were minimal. When introduced new systems were more often
designed to maximize the task rather than constraining people in their role
performance.

As Indian organizations grew, new tasks, structures, and processes were introduced.
The culture of growing organizations becomes experienced as: (1) breaking down
autonomy, (2) tighter controls, (3) policies and strategies are merely communicated
from the top-down for implementation, and (4) the pattern of communications
develops the flavour of half disclosure. The process of senior-junior, staff line inter-
action diminishes and personal communication is eroded. The erosion of personalized
interaction and open accessibility is not the sole result of growth in size and more

MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3 61

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
levels of management. Employees attribute this erosion to the change of attitudes
about people in the minds of the management.
Other critical and significant aspects of the shifts in the organization culture in the
growth phase include the following:
1. A sense of significance to being one of the many and faceless.
2. Value differences and life styles bounded by limited aspirations and horizons to
widening of the aspirations and quality of living made possible by education and
professional training.
3. Organizational role differentiation and salary structures becoming more incongruent
with social and cultural differentiation. Todays managers do not accept the
traditional stratification in terms of life styles.
4. A shift from a sense of merely being functional assets to the self concept of profes-
sionals and as contributors of organization growth.
5. Feudal patronage to experiencing partnership in the process of growth.

Culture and Corporate Processes in Indian Organization. Introduction of new corporate

structures and processes are inherent in the growth of any organization. Indian
organizations commonly introduce new formal corporate structures. However, the
introduction and operationalization of corporate processes do not often emerge
formally. They are largely invisible and operationalized behind closed doors. The
professionally trained managers seek the development of corporate processes where
policy and strategy formulation requires their participation. The organizations intro-
duce the concept of teams to presumably integrate various levels of management.
However, the decision making of these teams is governed by the decision premises
made at the top. Thus, these teams get into the mode of procrastination, delays in
decisions, and raising issues but rarely confronting the decision with operating reality.
The generation of corporate processes in Indian organization is also influenced by the
nature of personnel. Most organizations are grappling to achieve coherence and
integration between the professionally trained managers, technicians, and production
people. The top management in many organizations believe that they are the only
ones capable of effectively managing and sustaining the business performance through
their own sagacity, insights, and policy orientations. Technical expertise has already
been built in the system. Thus, the demand of the new professionally trained managers
is that corporate processes be designed and institutionalized with their participation.
These managers create ambivalency in the remaining and more traditional managerial
cadre. These new managers are experienced as aggressive, pushy, demanding,
supportive of their own kind, talking jargonistic language, and being non-supportive to
the others less trained than themselves. The rest of the managers perceive themselves
as loyal, passive performers, obedient and sincere members of the organization.
As such, the managerial cadre has become fragmented into two sub-cultures. There
emerges in the organization a growing struggle between the traditional generalists and
new technocrats and professionals. The questions confronted by many Indian
organizations is how to integrate the various cadres and make them functionally viable
with each other as well as how to create a cohesive and integrative corporate culture.
Indian organizations are largely governed and conducted as monoliths held together
by the charismatic personalities of the leaders. This charismatic leadership often
represents to organization members the values of sagacity, integrity, dignity of labour,
hard work and honesty. It also reflects determination and persistence by the leadership
to create an organization culture of committment and values cherished by people.

62 MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Figure 4: Integrating Framework

Role

(2)

(1)

Self

(3) (4)

Environment

1. Cognitive Maps of Meanings 2. Cognitive Maps of Relatedness with other

Individuals

i. Symbols identities i. Role coordinates

ii. Quality of authority attributed ii. Cultural identities
iii. Meanings of living in the world iii. Leadership patterns relations
iv. Values of
(a) performance
(b) stability
(c) consistency
(d) continuity

3. Cognitive Maps of Organization systems 4. Cognitive Maps of Relatedness

i. Definition i. Life space
ii. Life space ii. World view
iii. Meaning of relatedness with iii. Relatedness in terms of
the system (a) Consumption
iv. Quality of legitimacy of (b) Replenishment
authority attributed to system

Indian organizations - irrespective of their current size, technology, and structure -

have been able to generate a sense of belonging in their inception and formation
phase. This sense of belonging is based in their feelings of being able to contribute to
the growth of the organization as partners in the process. The employees believe that
they have contributed to the moulding of the organization and to giving shape to the
dreams and vision of the leadership. The smallness of the organization generates a
culture where the individual is listened to and responded to as a person. This feeling of
belonging is anchored in the sense of partnership, trust, and easy personalized
accessibility with the leadership.
As an extension of the above process, the membership of the organization converges
and coheres to the values symbolized by the top.
Indian organizations appear to be based on the concepts of culture, self of the
individual, managerial roles, changing patterns of organization and the environment.
This can be illustrated in the following integrating framework.

Issues Confronting Indian Organizations

Our research in relation to this framework suggests a number of issues confronting

Indian organizations.

MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3 63

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 1 . The nature of new leaders and their involvement with organizations and sub-
ordinates.

2. The nature of power distribution among the senior managers and the new leaders.
3. The managerial qualities - both functional and psychological - which have
contributed to past success and which will build a culture and ethos for continuing
the entrepreneurial involvement.
4. The mix of managerial qualities need in the future, and the balance between
professionally trained personnel and other employees.
5. Issues of self renewal of younger managers who reach professional plateaus at a
rather young age.
6. The management of growing multi-unit structures and the development of
divergent cultures in various sub-systems.
7. The development of systems processes for managing success, growth, and integra-
tion.

8. The management and operationalization of emerging leadership. What kind of

infra-structural support and processes are necessary to develop leadership styles
that are congruent for the task demands and essentials of the organization culture.
9. Creating professionalism in management.
10. Generating processes of integration where corporate processes and policy formula-
tion are participative in nature. They include not only feedback but introduce
dialogue and processes of negotiation between the top and the various levels of
management.
1 1 . Designing corporate structures and introducing corporate processes by re-defining
relationships and modes of transactions between the leadership and the various
levels of management.
12. Managing growth and development and introducing processes of integration. This
is related to issues of: (a) relationship between multiple units; (b) problems of
managing multiple cultures reflected in language, region, religion, ethnic and caste
groups; (c) Issue of new entrants with a unique value system and the simultaneity
of four generations working in the same organization; and (d) issues of managerial
reward - both concrete and psychological - and issues of professional and self
renewal.

Summary

Our work and experiences with Indian organizations, and managers (Garg and Parikh,
1976 a) suggests there is an Indian identity. This identity revolves around basic
assumptions concerning the: (1) nature of man; (2) nature of group and society; and
(3) the nature of man's relationship with ones group. Consistent with the views of
Hofstede (1984) and others, these are drastically different from constructs and
assumptions of the West. Though some observed behaviors may be identical across
cultures, the processes and meanings underlying the behaviors are unique to the
specific culture.
Indian identity is concerned with perpetual ambivalency, low self worth, high
emotional and personal dependence, sacrocent boundaries of self, and a unique kind
of individualism. Similarly, Indian organizations are concerned with task based

64 MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
structures, meaning of authority, belongingness to the system, and issues of exclusion
and inclusion. Both individuals and organizations have to deal with deeply embedded
models of the son's role. Indians are ambivalent over created voluntary relationships
and re-defining old relationships. In "reality", Indians are confronting a world view
that is incongruent with their experiences of the family system.
Indian organizations are located in a culture in transience and flux. The social design
of a bygone era is anchored in assumptions that make a strange juxtaposition with
current reality. Individuals and organizations are in states of fragmentation and lack a
sense of wholeness. Work tasks and relationships seems to work to a point and then
comes against cultural blocks.
In our view, it is necessary to search for culture specific management theory, tools and
technologies capable of reaching the roots of Indian Identity - including its psycho-
cultural and soci-cultural processes. We have searched for the unique configuration of
data and processes within the highly diversified Indian culture whose pride has been
the slogan 'Unity in diversity and diversity in unity'. (Gary and Parikh Cross-Roads of
Culture: A forthcoming publications.)
Our approach is deeply anchored in the Indian tradition of Sankhya system of
philosophy. Our technology has evolved from the experiential mode of learning
through upanishadic stories. Our emphasis is on individual role and identity and their
relationship to the organization identity. Our work anchors itself in the beliefs and
findings that there is a socio-psychological continuity in the Indian identity from the
cultural past to the present. The essence of this continuity lies in the fact that Indians
are children of two cultures. Their emotional orientation to social reality is over-
whelmingly anchored in the traditional agrarian ethos. In contrast, their cognitive
orientation to social reality tends to be increasingly expressed in terms of the emergent
technological culture. Indian identity struggles with the emotive and cognitive com-
ponents of this life space. There is a need to discover the degree of congruence and
incongruence as well as convergence and divergence between these components of life
space. There is also a need to discover alternative and coherent components of life
space which can be reflected in the organization. There is a need to create a setting
wherein individuals can achieve coherence and congruence between the conflicting
elements in the organization.

References

1 Chowdhry, Kamla and Karkar, Sudhir (Eds.): Understanding Organizational Behavior:

Cases and Concepts (Bombay: Tata McGraw-Hill, 1971).
2 Chattopadhyay, G. P.: Dependence of Indian Culture: From mud huts to Company Board
Rooms. Economic and Political Weekly, 1975, 10 (22), 30-38.
3 Dayal, I.: Impact of Traditional Culture on Organizational Effectiveness: A Comment on
Research Methodology. A Quarterly Journal of Management Development, 1972, 3(1), 47-56.
4 Garg, Pulin K.: Organization Structure, Design and Development. Working Paper Series.
Ahmedabad, India: Indian Institute of Management, 1981.
5 Garg, Pulin K.: "Leadership, Other Cultural Issues and Organization Pathology" Part IV in
Organization Structure, Design and Development. Working Paper Series. Ahmedabad, India.
Indian Institute of Management, 1981.
6 Garg, Pulin K. and Parikh, Indira J.: Managerial Role Coordinates and Role Acts. Technical
note series. Ahmedabad, India: Indian Institute of Management, 1976.
7 Garg, Pulin K. and Parikh, Indira J.: Profiles in Identity: Indian Youth at Cross-Roads of
Culture. New Delhi, Vision Books, 1976 a.

MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3 65

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 8 Hofstede, G.: The Cultural Relativity of the Quality of Life Concept. The Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 9. Number 3 July, 1984.
9 Likert, R.: New Patterns of Management. New York, McGraw Hill, 1961.
10 Linton, Ralph: The Study of Man. New York: Appleton Century, 1936.
1 1 Merton, Robert: Social Theory and Social Structure. Glenco 111, The Face Press, 1949.
12 Parikh, Indira J.: Emergence of Work Identity in Indian Organizations. An Unpublished
doctoral thesis. Guyarat University, Ahmedabad, India, 1978.
13 Parikh, Indira J. and Garg, Pulin K.: Family Organization: Issues of Role Effectiveness: A
Case Study. Ahmedabad, India: Indian Institute of Management, 1981.
14 Parson, T.: The Social System. Glencoe 111, The Free Press, 1951.
15 Sarabin, T.: "Role Theory" in Gardner lindzey ed., Handbook of Social Psychology,
Cambridge Mass., Addison Wesley, 1954.

66 MIR, Vol. 26, 1986/3

This content downloaded from 137.189.171.235 on Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:04:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms