The Workplace Nowadays Is More Open and Tolerant - Essay Example

Running Head: THE WORK PLACE NOWADAYS IS MORE OPEN AND TOLERANT Name Course Tutor Date Introduction In the contemporary world, organizations are being warranted to change so as to accommodate new emerging issues. Organisations are being forced to change their old ways of doing things by adopting better modern ways. In the modern world, this has become essential for companies if they are to survive the brutally competitive environment. The issues of globalization and liberalization of markets have been cited as the key reasons why organisations have to keep on redrawing their blue prints and strategies. Among the issues that have been mostly affected by the modern world include organisational culture, diversity, leadership and ethics. Organizations have now become more accommodative and tolerant to these changes. Organisations that have maintained the old traditions regarding these issues have often been hit by turbulent times for not embracing the change (Peters & Waterman, 1982, p. 65). In this view, organisations can be considered more open and tolerant in comparison to previous years. The situation has not only affected Australian organisations but also organisations all over the world. Organisational culture is one of the factors that have really changed over the years. It is worth noting that it is based on norms, beliefs and traditions of a given organisation. There are major aspects that influence organisational culture and they include leadership, strategies, ethics, and diversity. Culture of an organisation forms the foundation under which an organisation is run and how it interacts with the external environment. This essay will critically evaluate organisational culture changed and how it has influenced organisations to become more open and tolerant. Organisational culture and its effect on openness and tolerance in the work place After the collapse of the Breton Woods in the 1970s and the occurrence of the first world major oil crisis, organisations were finding themselves in difficult economic situations. In order to maintain stability and growth, they had to embrace change within their portfolios. This need was followed by extensive studies which sought to understand the fundamentals of change, given the rapidly changing environment on how issues were conducted. As a result, from the studies and extensive research work, managers were given advisory ideas on how they would effect changes in their organisations to keep them running. It was eminent that change was inevitable both in personal and organisational capacities (Morgan & Spicer, 2009, p. 252). This called for a shift from old cultures that seemed to die off with the collapse of the Breton Woods. Many theories have been put across explaining the dynamics of change within organisations and how they have affected their operating dynamics. Organisational culture was in the past a static issue that helped to differentiate organisations from others. In the contemporary organisational environment, some of these cultures have still been left intact but with some alterations to accommodate necessary dynamics. In this view, organisations are more open and tolerant to new ideologies than they were in the past. The culture of an organisation gives it its identity and uniqueness that differentiates it from other players. Some of the cultural factors that have been affected include internal affairs, nature of activities undertaken by the organisations, corporate cycles, organisational diversity and size and social networks (Parker, 2000 , p. 10). In this regard, organisations have adopted new systems that enhance competitiveness and stability in a more liberalised and open international operating environment. Morgan and Spicer further argue that the modern organisation is so complex that it is a combination diverse variables that need to be regularly checked to achieve a balance that works best for specific situations. These changes, however, have not come easy. It has become increasingly challenging for organisations to come up with proven scientific criteria that can predict future changes and help control the effects to manageable levels. In the changing environment, different people interpret cultural change differently. It is a comparison of the ongoing process with what used to be the norm there before. The focus is on the on going process and the changes it brings with it to the work places (Jackson & Carter, 2000, p. 144). On the other hand, critical methods take practical approaches to how change is being effected and how it is affecting the organisation. For instance, researchers in universities have come up with models of change that could be applied in organisational contexts. The proposed changes can only be seen as tangible in a real scenario. The collectiveness of the models is applicable only rot some extents depending on the nature of organisations. This is achievable by guiding mangers, employees and consultants about how they might effect change in their individual organisations. The cultural change process involves a wide range of actors who sometimes have different opinions ad conception. The openness that is associated with the work place brings about the issue of conflict and misconceptions due to the open nature of culture. The dynamics allow actors to air out opinions on how issues should be conducted this way the probability of conflicts arising is high. However, the advantage of this is that different ideologies from various portfolios provide a wide variety of choice from which changes can be approached from (Morgan & Spicer, 2009, p. 260). In relation to culture, some of the affected areas include processes in organisations, identities and interaction with society. In the past, organisations acquired employees and required them to specifically carry out activities as outlined in the cultural blueprint. In the modern environment, it is more open and diverse as employees are encouraged to be ‘open minded’ and attach their identities to the organisations. The openness allows individuals to bring in their personalities to the work place. This is essential in taking advantage of special unique attributes those different people posses in achieving organisational goals. Bureaucratic approaches in the work place have been replaced by more open and accommodative entrepreneurial strategies among employees. Another aspect that has changed is the traditional organisational processes. This has been facilitated by business process reengineering in management capacities. The frequent changes in the work place have called for tolerance among employees as they seek to adapt to regular changes in their duties and responsibilities. In terms of organisational fields the changes effected revolve around consumer product, suppliers, distribution channels and market diversification. To keep up with current dynamics in the organisational environment, companies have widely attempted to shift their cultures. For instance, the British Airways airline has altered its policies which revolved around their flying routes. They adopted a system where emphasis was more concentrated on consumer experience and satisfactions. It is worth noting that, many organisations have found it difficult to alter their cultures due to resistance and resilience to the status quo. A change of culture depends on the ability to restructure aspects such as organisational mission, visions, and corporate perspectives (Jackall, 1988, p. 79). Managing a corporate culture and integrating it to the business strategy and objectives ids the key to success that many accomplishing companies have used. In the modern business environment, human resources strategies have been incorporated to the blueprints and strategic competencies to enhance productivity (Morgan & Spicer, 2009, p. 4). The modern culture acknowledges that human resource orientation has the capabilities of giving business organisation the competitive edge that is necessary for stability and growth. The culture has shifted to more diverse techniques where the focus is on individuals and their ability to bring unique features in the work place. This is the reason why companies are paying huge amounts of money to personnel they consider strategic to their strategies and objectivity (Dipboye, Halverson, Griffin, & O’Leary-Kelly, 2004, p. 134). Often companies operating in the same industry compete for high quality personnel. In an open competitive environment organisations acquirer to employees from their rivals by offering irresistible packages and benefits. In such cases, employees are allowed to act in flexibility in ways they deem appropriate in achieving overall organisational goals. For instance, proven successful mangers are allowed to employ their own strategies, given their expertise and know how in relation to their fields of operation In the past, the culture of discrimination in the work place in terms of race, gender, ethnicity and nationality was a rampant issue. In some cases, it was so open and even tolerated within the organisations. In the United States, discrimination was based on colour, minority groups, and disability. It is not until 1960 that that activists and human rights watchdogs raised major concerns over the issue. Over thirty yeas later, laws and regulations regarding the matter have been put in place to curb the vice. However, the culture is not completely dead as cases of discrimination in the workplace are still being reported al over the world. In the past, such cases went unreported and perpetrators unpunished. The modern culture advocates for equality and provision of equal opportunities regardless of personal affiliation to gender, race, colour and ethnicity (Ackroyd & Crowdy, 1990, p. 3). Recently the most form of discrimination that has emerged is based on the sexuality of the gay and lesbian community. This old culture has seen some organisations face legal suits and hefty fines. While it is evident that enactment of civil law right and regulations has reduced the case of discrimination, surveys have shown that this culture is still with us today. The suppression of the open old culture has brought about new ay of discriminations. The most affected persons are the disabled, aged, women and minorities. In 2003, a survey showed that 44% of women had been discriminated on grounds of their gender and a third of them had been sexually harassed. It is also a wide public perspective or view that disabled people are given lesser chances in the work place or discriminated against on the grounds of their physical shortcomings. The trend is also replicated in the labour workforce in terms of engagement in meaningful employment. In 2002, the unemployment rate in the United States amongst white was around 4.2% compared to 7.7 amongst the African American community. High positions of leadership and management are always left for men and not women. Further, when women make it to top positions of leadership in their careers, they are paid less compared to men (Dipboye, Halverson, Griffin, & O’Leary-Kelly, 2004, p. 136). The modern forms of discrimination can either be delicate or blatant. However, the modern organisational culture is against any form of discrimination. Bodies such as the Equal Employment Commission in the United States have been formed to handle complaints and cases of discrimination. Al this is in a bid to make the work place accommodative of people with diverse backgrounds in terms of disability, gender, culture, race, and disabilities. In the modern working environment, women have been forced to undertake the task of care giving to their dependants and earn a living at the same time. The open organisational culture has acknowledged this need for women and is more tolerant compared to the past. Women have to focus their attention between work and family matters. In some cases, this has seen them discriminated and denied opportunities on grounds of their divided attention. This has called for organisations to change their strategies to accommodate this ‘modern woman’. Mangers and employers n general allow working mothers to carry work home and take care of their professional responsibilities away from the work place. The value of families and the meaning they hold to specific individuals has not eluded the modern organisational culture. In the past, Women were expected to be caregivers and homemakers without corporate careers. However, some of the most accomplished women in today’s world have strong families and social lives behind them. In recent years, Australia and the world at large has experienced an increase in women who are actively participating in the labour market compared to those in care giving and home life (Pocock, 2005, p. 34). This is testament to the open and accommodative culture that the labour market has adopted in dealing with working women. The changing patterns in regard to household work, labour market and care giving have been incorporated in organisational cultures. Another aspect that has made organisations open and tolerant is the aspect of corporate social responsibility. In the past, organisations did not put corporate social responsibility among their strategies. Today, it is seen as a crucial and essential aspect that is necessary in the success of any organisation. Organisational culture has evolved where it now seeks to satisfy the expectations of all stake holders. Corporate social responsibility seeks to appreciate the efforts that an organisation owes its existence to. For instance, an organisation can have programs aimed at environmental protection and conservation. Corporations are encouraging their workforce to be more socially accommodative toward society (Banerjee, 2012, p. 53). The image that the general public has over an organisation is very important in achieving its overall success. CSR is a culture that enables society to view organisations in a positive way regardless of their activities. Studies have shown that organisations that have seriously embraced CSR are more successful than those that do not. Ethics revolve around the way people should conduct them both professionally and personally in the work environment. Each profession has a set of ethical codes of conduct that act as guidelines in the conduct of their responsibility. Generally, reasonable people are expected to have ethics such as integrity, accountability and honesty. The issue of ethics was not so much entrenched in organisational cultures as it is today. The interaction of the internal and external organisation is guided by ethics and standards that keep on changing in a dynamic environment. The culture of ethics has also changed drastically within the last few years. In the 1960s bodies that acted as watchdogs and regulators did not exist. In the current organisational setting, organisations have to comply with new standard. The ethics may apply to the industry as a whole or be more specific and concentrated to individual organisation. Most organisations today have ethical codes that their employees should adhere to while in and out of the work place. Employers are engaging in training sessions for their employees on how to be ethical compliant and competent (Parker, 2002, p. 109). Conclusion The modern organisational setting is more open and tolerant compared to the traditional one. This has been facilitated by significant changes in organisational culture and behaviour. The culture in organisations has changed from being conservative to more accommodating in terms of leadership, ethics, management, diversity, and strategies. The contemporary world is changing so fast that the work place has to be vigilant to ensure that relevant changes to their portfolios are made regularly. All these changes have been necessitated by the competitive nature of business environments and international liberalisation of markets. Organisations are putting more focus on people as individuals compared to the past. Individual human relations with organisations, be it employees, consumers, or any other stakeholders, has facilitated the aspects of tolerance and openness. As a result, the cultural blueprints that organisations follow have to be constantly evaluated and tested for the cureent environment. Organisations that have embraced flexibility, as opposed to rigidity, in their cultures have been able to deal with turbulent times associated with contemporary environment. References Ackroyd, S, & Crowdy, P, 1990, 'Can culture be managed?Working with raw” material: the case of the English slaughtermen’, Personnel Review, vol 19,no.5, pp. 3-12. Banerjee, S, 2012, 'Corporate Social Responsibility: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly', Critical Sociology , vol 34 no.1, pp. 51-79. Dipboye, R, Halverson, S., Griffin, R., & O’Leary-Kelly, A, 2004, Subtle (and Not So Subtle),The Dark Side of Organizational Behavior,Wiley,San Francisco.. Jackall, R, 1988, Moral mazes: the world of corporate managers Oxford, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Jackson, N, & Carter, P, 2000, Rethinking Organisational Behaviour: A Post-Structuralist Framework, Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Morgan, G, & Spicer, A, 2009, The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Parker, M,2002, Against Management, Business Ethics, Wiley, London. Parker, M,2000, Organisational Culture and Identity, Sage, London. Peters, T, & Waterman, R, 1982, In search of excellence : lessons from America's best-run companies, Harper & Row,New York. Pocock, B, 2005,'Work/Care Regimes: Institutions, Culture and Behaviour and the Australian Case', Gender, Work and Organization ,vol 12, no.1, pp. 32-49. Read More