Content uploaded by Danielle Hairston Green
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Danielle Hairston Green on Nov 24, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Institutional Culture Impact on Leading Teams and Mentoring
Hairston Green, D.Y. & Smith, L.S.
Prairie View A&M University
August 2015
APA Citation: Hairston-Green, D.Y. & Smith, L.S. (2015). Institutional Culture Impact on
Leading Teams and Mentoring. Proceedings of the New Mexico Mentoring Institute, New
Perspectives in Mentoring: A Quest for Leadership Excellence & Innovation, USA, 8, 998-1002.
Key words: leadership, soft skills, non-cognitive skills, collaboration, cooperation, team,
institutional culture
Abstract
Leadership Excellence is demonstrated by the ability to master C5E (Hairston-Green & Smith,
2014) which is guiding the development of a new paradigm in leadership excellence and
innovation; one of the 5 C's is Collaboration. Institutional culture, in which mentorship and
collaboration is established, has a significant impact on the outcome of success for the
implementation of change (Eckel & Grossman, 2005). Understanding institutional culture is an
important component to organizational growth and the acceptance of the idea of teamwork and
institutional diversity.
According to Jackson, Joshi, & Erhardt (2003), diversity has influence on team outcomes like
turnover and performance and is directly related to the level of cooperation, communication,
conflict and sharing of information. The challenge with cultivating diversity is that collaborative
members of the organization must be willing to accept and understand differences which is not
always an easy mission to accomplish.
As learners and emerging leaders, we are engaged in many team development opportunities.
Rarely, however, are we taught the lessons of successfully navigating through team dynamics or
managing a team. Understanding culture is an important component for successful
implementation of mentorship and collaboration within an institution. We propose to address the
goals to (1) identify the institutional culture that exist, (2) establish and communicate an
effective vision for collaboration, (3) recruit champions that will make up a driving team, (4)
align talent with tasks and (5) plan for small wins.
Introduction
Working effectively in teams isn’t the easiest skill to develop. In elementary school, we find
ourselves working on team projects with classmates whom we may not necessarily enjoy. In high
school, we choose members to be on our team when we are selecting the best players for our
gym activities. In college, we have team members assigned to us to complete major academic
projects that, regardless of effort, everyone will receive the same grade. Despite all of the
teamwork exposure that we may have had in our personal and academic development, rarely are
2
we taught the lessons and dynamics of successfully navigating through team engagement or
managing a team before being completely submerged into it.
Many organizations over the decades have adapted a variety of professional development
initiatives to support their employees in staying ahead of the changing and growing industries as
well as their individual professional growth. In addition to establishing professional development
initiatives, institutions have also embraced the concept of teamwork as another variable to assist
staff in working more efficiently with one another; tapping into unused talent, and embracing the
diversity within groups that ultimately aids institutional growth.
Importance of Topic
According to Jackson, Joshi, & Erhardt (2003), diversity has influence on team outcomes like
turnover and performance and is directly related to the level of cooperation, communication,
conflict and the sharing of information. Institutions that embrace diversity (thought, character,
drive, and initiative) can bring out the best of each person within that infrastructure (Rosenzweig,
1998). Although team members can identify with one another, they are known to work most
effectively and are more likely to establish trust and have less apprehension to engage in
groupthink (Eckel & Grossman, 2005).
Many institutions, however, may have developed a culture that is resistant to the idea of team
development therefore blocking possible innovation, creativity, and collaboration. Understanding
institutional culture is an important component to organizational growth and the acceptance of
the idea of teamwork and employee engagement. As we begin to develop and implement new
and innovative projects to help with the overall growth within an institution it is critical to first
(1) identify the institutional culture that exist, (2) establish and communicate an effective vision
for change, (3) recruit champions that will make up the driving team, (4) align talent with tasks
and (5) plan for small wins.
Literature Review
Institutional culture. “Organizational (institutional) culture is briefly defined as the
basic assumptions about the world and the values that guide life in organizations” (Schneider,
Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013, p. 361). These values and beliefs are taught to others newly entering
the organization or institution as the most appropriate behavior to successfully navigate through
the organizational structure. Much of which comes in the forms of stories and even myths that
are shared by those individuals who preceded the newcomers (Schein 2010, Trice & Beyer 1993,
Zohar & Hoffman 2012 as cited in Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013). Institutional culture
exists in the university setting also. Sporn (1996) shared that universities are very complex and
have features that are incredibly unique, which makes the task of understanding the culture more
difficult. Institutional culture thrives when it pays attention to the diversity of its members.
Diversity specialists and leaders have argued that organizations interested in surviving
and thriving in the twenty-first century need to take competitive advantage of a diverse
workplace. But to do so successfully, leaders and human resource managers must
redefine their management and leadership (Kreitz, 2008, p. 101).
3
Teamwork. According to Bolman & Deal (1992), corporate institutions have
increasingly relied on teamwork however it “often does so without a solid grasp of what make a
team work” (p. 34). A substantial body of published literature has addressed the importance of
team development, although the secrets that guide teams in understanding the true hidden
characteristics of team peak performance have been consistently ignored. Teamwork looks at a
group of individuals that are paired together by mandate or voluntarily to help achieve a goal,
develop an idea, or support a strategic direction, and are evaluated as one unit (Levi & Slem,
1995). Success of the team depends on the institutional culture. Teams with a clear vision and
milestones will tend to do better than those that lack these key variables. Consequently, those
teams charged with accomplishing an unclear goal, with moving target dates, and vague success
criteria tend to have the lowest success rate (Bolman & Deal, 1992). Institutional leaders who
subscribe to an institutional culture yet do not understand team dynamics, are unable to see the
benefits of teams, resist change, or have adopted behaviors of complacency will have the greatest
difficulty with development of successful teams.
Mentorship. In one of the first studies to describe qualities of mentors who are admired,
Cho, Ramanan, & Feldman (2011) shared that there are five themes that emerged regarding what
mentees look for in selecting mentors. These themes are admirable characteristics, how they
serve as a career guide, strength of time commitments, support of mentee’s personal/professional
balance and legacy of mentoring. Many organizations have implemented mentoring programs for
new staff to help new members (students and adults) transition smoothly into the new
environment by understanding policies, procedures, culture, mission and vision. In most cases,
the mentor is older and has been in the organization or institution for several years and has
demonstrated the capacity to help others transition smoothly. “When an older, more experienced
member of an organization takes a junior colleague ‘under his or her wing,’ a mentoring
relationship is said to exist” (Wilson & Elman, 1990, p. 88). Wilson & Elman (1990) suggest that
this type of mentorship aids in the socialization of new members and the sharing of knowledge
that was developed over years with the institution. This approach aids to the development of an
organization and the sustainability of new members.
Institutional culture impact
Consider that cultures vary based on two dimensions of processes, which are organic versus
mechanistic and internal maintenance versus external positioning. According to Herzog (2011),
the culture identities created by the commonalities of these dimensions include four types; clan,
adhocracy, hierarchy and market existing within known categories of institutions. These
institutions include for-profit/non-profit corporations, academia, military, and churches, to name
a few. For the purpose of this discussion, three cultures, which will be explored, are corporate,
academia and military.
Of the four culture identities, “leaders in a clan culture act as mentors or parent-figures, and
people share their personal values and goals. Clan cultures emphasize the development of human
resources, team cohesion, as well as employee morale and commitment.” Characteristics of
healthy, effective, and progressive cultures promote a positive identity not concerned with
accomplishments but rather self-worth derived from the reason for their existence. The people
who carry out a common mission embody personal and individual connection to purpose and
values. The mission should be envisioned and brought to life by self-aware, empathetic,
4
communicative, courageous leaders and those who believe in the bigger picture inspired by the
leadership. According to the Denison Organizational Color Model regarding involvement of
employee in a high functioning culture, “Teamwork is encouraged so that creative ideas are
captured and employees support one another in accomplishing work goals” (Involvement, n.d.).
Often times when tasks require teamwork, it is necessary to discuss the causes of dysfunction
within a team environment and Lencioni (2002) identified these as the absence of trust, fear of
conflict, lack of commitment, avoidance of accountability, and inattention to results.
Recognizing the lack of good qualities that promote teamwork brings awareness to the pitfalls
that can sabotage team progress and productivity.
Effective leaders use human physiology to foster buy-in and teamwork, which achieves the
vision, goals and objectives. When the natural physiology of team members is addressed, it can
lead to healthy culture and more productivity. According to Simon Sinek (2014) in his TED Talk
presentation of “Why leaders eat last” he speaks about a term noted as EDSO describing the
physiology that supports successful teamwork: Endorphins mask discomfort and take the edge
off of uncomfortable or traumatic, high pressure situations; Dopamine is produced when goals
are set and accomplished; Serotonin is produced when accomplishments are recognized and
Oxytocin bonds people and strengthens human connections. All of these are necessary in making
up the key essential elements in the successful facilitation of work accomplished by teams.
Teamwork and mentorship in corporate culture. Herzog (2011) stated “only the
corporate culture paradigm treats culture as an internal variable of the organizational system,
which can be shaped by corporate management to pursue strategic goals.” Corporate cultures
have been known to create tracks for their employees that support succession through
management trainee programs and mentorship in the form of shadowing as a common technique.
These programs foster the adhocracy culture known for emphasis on entrepreneurship and
creativity. Ideas thrive when groups of people working in teams conduct brainstorming sessions
and collaborate their diverse experiences and personal expertise.
Teamwork and mentorship in academia culture. Reasonable individuals operating
within an organizational culture but that function in silos can find themselves confined to issues
connected to their own beliefs and actions (Senge, 2006). Such beliefs can manifest themselves
into environments that are nurturing and enabling. At times, standards are lowered to instill
confidence that goals and objectives can be met through a false sense of accomplishment.
Accountability is not practiced for fear of openly hurting others' feelings. Instead of confronting
issues directly, they are managed indirectly through public confrontation, departmental memos,
or office gossip. Gatekeeper mentality and low risk tolerance for fear of retaliation are evident in
the culture. People are deprived of their enthusiasm because bureaucracy makes it difficult to
implement new ideas or complete simple tasks. People have an unbalanced need to feel
important, acknowledged and worthy.
Teamwork from the student perspective is limited to experiences brought from family structure
and interaction, team sports, school group assignments. No professional experience is acquired at
this stage in their lives. Maturity is also lacking which hinders their ability to exhibit the
5
emotional intelligence needed to recognize the implications and appropriate actions to handle
conflict as a result of team dynamics.
Overcoming the lack of experience and situational maturity observed in students is dependent on
the opportunity to build confidence. This self-assurance is built when a respected mentor
reciprocates respect and worthiness. Students want respect as peers by the seasoned professional
while seasoned professionals want students to work for and earn respect. When student’s voices
are not valued and their uniqueness is not recognized this leads to breaking down the lines of
open communication. The result can express itself as discriminatory behavior towards them
totally disregarding the opportunity to gain the fresh however un-tempered perspectives students
bring to more traditional ways of thinking. These observations in dysfunctional cultures impede
mentorship and collaboration.
How leadership is fostered and nurtured in academia is dependent on culture. Mentorship is the
dominant characteristic due to the professor/student relationship that prevails in the academic
environment. The presence of authority has to be maintained by the elder, which prevents
relinquishing control in the hands of a younger person. It is not uncommon for students with high
enthusiasm to lack the ability to discern appropriate etiquette and protocol. Many show evidence
of leadership confidence that still needs refinement. Leadership is inherently the power to
influence, which is a delicate concept to manage in this environment especially when power and
respect is commanded through achievement and titles represented by the achievements.
Teamwork and mentorship in military culture. Teamwork is fundamental. From the
onset of enlistment, personnel are taught to respect the concept of interdependency through the
assignment of a "battle buddy". They are assigned to groups of individuals that create a hierarchy
of systematic interdependent relationships. These relationships build on the strength of
individuals. Based mostly on a hierarchy culture which according to Herzog (2011) “puts strong
emphasis on formalized rules, procedures, and policies that govern employees’ actions in the
organization,” success is achieved by the introduction and complete submission to the objectives
of pre-determined goals. Mentorship is fostered by the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, a
college-based training program where individuals entering the military as future leaders are
given opportunity to learn from senior personnel. A new paradigm in military culture resulting
from recent changes in conflict engagement, according to McChrystal (2015), demonstrates that
teamwork through empowered execution transformed the way teams should think about power
and leadership.
Summary
Researchers agree that understanding organizational culture supports the success and growth of
an organization. Researchers rarely agree about what organizational culture really is but we do
know that organizational culture exists and that it plays a critical role in impacting the way those
within the culture behave. When there is clear understanding of what organizational culture exist,
leaders can equip themselves better with tools to help diagnose problems and perhaps even
implement strategies to change the culture.
6
References
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1992). What makes a team work? Organizational Dynamics,
21(2), 34-44.
Cho, C. S., Ramanan, R. A., & Feldman, M. D. (2011). Defining hte ideal qualities of
mentorship: A qualitative analysis of the characteristics of outstanding mentors. The
American Journal of Medicine, 124, 453-458.
Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2005). Managing diversity by creating team identity. Journal of
Economic Behavior & Organization, 58, 371-392.
Herzog, P. (2011). Open and closed Innovation: Different cultures for different strategies.
Springer Science & Business Media.
Involvement. (n.d.). Retrieved June 26, 2015, from The Denison Group:
http://www.denisonconsulting.com/knowledge-center/model
Jackson, S. E., Joshi, A., & Erhardt, N. L. (2003). Recent research on team and organizational
diversity: SWOT analysis and implications. Journal of Management, 29(6), 801-830.
Kreitz, P. A. (2008). Best practices for manageing organizational diversity. The Journal of
Acadmeic Librarianship, 34(2), 101-120.
Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team. John Wiley & Sons.
Levi, D., & Slem, C. (1995). Team work in research and development organizations: The
characteristics of successful teams. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 16,
29-42.
McChrystal, S., Collins, T., Silverman, D., & Fussell, C. (2015) Team of Teams: Rules of
engagement for a complex world. Penguin Random House. New York: NY
Rosenzweig, P. (1998). Managing the new global workforce: Fostering diversity, forging
cosistency. European Management Journal, 16(6), 644-652.
Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., & Macey, W. H. (2013). Organizational climate and culture. The
Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 361-388.
Senge, P. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. Double
Day Publishing. New York: NY
Sinek, S. (2014, December 4). Simon Sinek: Why leaders eat last. [Video file}. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReRcHdeUG9Y
7
Sporn, B. (1996). Managing university culture: An analysis of the relationship between
institutional culture and management approaches. Higher Education, 32, 41-61.
Wilson, J. A., & Elman, N. S. (1990). Organizational benefits of mentoring. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 4(4), 88-94.
