Modern Corporation and Chief Cultural Officer
Globalization, technological advancements, and other factors have influenced the development of the businesses and determined the direction in which the international business, economic and political environments evolved over the past decades. International mobility and diversification in all aspects of our life is the key element of globalization. One can argue that globalization is a powerful force that is driving the world to converge similarity and even commonality. The reality shows that increased access to technology, improved infrastructures and wide access to information drive individual interests and explain the eager of people in urban as well as rural environments for modernity allurements. One of the important characteristics of the modern business environment is the emergence of international and even global markets for standardized consumer products and services. Technology and Research & Development (R&D) geared the organizational ability to the new level of development, based on extremely large scale and scope of operations. International mobility of individuals contributed to this organizational growth as technology and modern products are recognized and equally demanded or desired across international borders (Keller and Horn, 2003). The debate around the exact outcomes and effects of globalization on consumption and community continue defining the academic and business discussions in this field. The point that should be made at this stage, however, is that business environment has achieved an unprecedented level of complexity, grounded on the three core aspects: diversity and changing cultural identity, internationalization of individuals and not only businesses, and changing relationships between humans and nature. Grant McCracken argues that consumption studies in the contemporary business environment are essential before they are critical. The author suggests that the dynamics of the market should bring the clear understanding of the role that goods play in people’s life. To be able to succeed in business, companies should continue focusing on cultural aspect and develop strategies that aim to understand and utilize diversity and cultural awareness as key internal organizational capability. That said, culture is critical for the long-term strategy of the business and, thus, modern organizations should work with Chief Cultural Officer, whose primary role is to like commercial, operational and Human Resource Management (HRM) functions within the company and build on strong strategy, arraying sustainable competitive advantage. This work seconds the argument of this professional and industry consultant, suggesting that contemporary companies can no longer compete in a long term without placing cultural and diversity awareness in the core of their strategy and change management programs. With that in mind, it is essential that the organization takes Cultural management on a different level, by setting up an internal structure, responsible for building cultural identity and integrity of the company. Whether it is a CCO, Diversity Manager or a specific project group within HRM function, however, should remain an individual choice for each of the organization, based on the right fit with the corporate governance structure.
The purpose of this discussion is to look at the role of a Chief Cultural Officer(CCO) as it is seen and introduced by McCracken, evaluate the existing business models with the strong focus on diversity and cultural awareness and analyze the impact of this role on the organization at all levels. One of the important conclusions that we are aiming to make is that globalization and internationalization of the business placed culture in the center of not only external relationships that organizations build with the society that they operate in but also internal culture, which is becoming increasingly complex and dynamic, demanding more flexibility and responsiveness of the companies. McCracken (2005) notes that cultural meaning is based upon the categories of culture, which is recognized on national and social group level. The author outlines several major dimensions, such as time, leisure and work time, uncertainty and planning and other elements. Indeed, when it comes to the analysis of social and work structures in different countries, one can observe a certain system and logic in a way diversity is built. While, on one side, each culture is exclusive and unique, all of them can be compared to a number of categories. An interesting framework, which further elaborates and supports McCracken findings, was built by Geert Hofstede (2001), who suggests that all cultures develop the identity based on their view and perception of six major dimensions: uncertainty avoidance, power distance, individualism as opposed to collectivism, masculinity as opposed to femininity, indulgence and long-term or short-term orientation. Additionally, the author suggests that an insight into the culture within the organization should be based on a set of different indexes, which include, mean versus goal oriented individuals, internal versus external drive, open versus closed systems,strict or easy-going, local or professional,degree of acceptance of leadership style and degree of individual bond with the company. The above dimension outline the complexity of the cultural background, which defines a modern organization. Under the influence o increasingly complex external environment, economic and political arena and other factors, diversity management and cultural awareness becoming paramount for organizational success. While Hofstede (2001) dues do not talk about the approaches and frameworks that would allow organizations successfully manage this cultural diversity, he builds an effective tool for further academic and business studies. Hogan (2012) takes this analysis further, looking at the challenges that the lack of cultural diversity can create for the company. The author argues that the lack of awareness and skills, which make individuals diversity competent can create an operational gridlock with escalating costs for the company as well as the community in which it operates. The point that the author is making is that each organization should develop a diversity and cultural competence model, based on the four basic stages: identification of organizational needs and change process; increase awareness, understanding, and internal skill set; develop strategic plan for cultural management, and monitor the progress on a regular basis. Based on that, the author seconds McCracken in his idea to incorporate the concept of Diversity Manager, which place the role, similar to CCO, introduced by McCracken. The benefits of the structural approach to cultural managements are evident, according to the authors, as the company builds on internal skills and capabilities in a long-term through HRM and training programs, controlled by an extremely experienced and emotionally intelligent individual, dealing with diversity.
There are a number of supporters to the idea of the fundamental role of CCO in the contemporary corporation. But while the idea of such function is extremely appealing to the organizations, it also finds its critics, which outline a number of relevant points. First of all, it is evident that the environment is changing and individuals are becoming more exposed to different social groups, having to expand their comfort zones. The opponents of cultural management in organizations suggest that structural approach to diversity management and constant reminding to individuals about this diversity can cause an adverse reaction even in those, who are highly emotionally intelligent and culturally aware. The professionals, supporting this view argue that cultural management should be incorporated into the operational and commercial structures as one of the objectives for each of the functional and top management professionals. Development of the skills in this area among people-management level employees will delegate the awareness and knowledge down the organizational hierarchy and will build on easier and more "friendly" internal organizational cultures. External cultural relationships management, therefore, should remain the responsibility of a marketing department, whose knowledge of the market and company's position will enable a healthy balance between culture and commercial goals of the corporations. By building on cultural management through indirect ways, rather than by implementing a function of Cultural Manager or Officer will allow the organization remain more flexible and avoid bureaucracy that can be built due to the contradicting goals that CCO and commercial management may have.
Another important argument, made by the opponents of implementation of CCO role in the companies is that such function will make the company less flexible and responsive to the external environment as an individual, who is assigned the role will become biased and will have little exposure to external environment to bring new knowledge and diversity competence to the organization. Ivancevich et al (2000) note that, instead, a company should apply the knowledge of project consultants, which bring external expertise and experience of working with other businesses. Another interesting view on the subject is outlined by Taylor Cox and Stacey Blake (1991), which identified the need for cultural focus among growing organizations in the global environment almost three decades ago. The authors suggest that implementation of a single role of cultural management will build on organizational structural complexity and create a conflict of interest between the HR department and Cultural Diversity Management. The solution to this situation would be to assign a Cultural Manager within the HR function, but it may cause a silo thinking, where HR management systems and training programs are built in the environment of competition rather than cooperation. The authors do not provide any recommendation on the way forward with regards to diversity and cultural management, but rather outline a number of issues and implications, related to different approaches to diversity management in contemporary businesses. Keller and Horn (2003) make another important point, outlining that a single role of CCO in the company will limit the outreach of cultural management on the international level as individual culture and view will interfere with group cultures. Additionally, cultural awareness and management demand innovation and creativity which can be better reached within the group environment, where individuals are highly aware of the strategic goals and operational functions in the company.
References
McCracken G. 2005. Culture and Consumption: The Theoretical Account of the Structure and Movement of Cultural Meaning of Consumer Goods. Available at https://jcr.oxfordjournals.org/content/jcr/13/1/71.full.pdf [Accessed 30 May 2016].
McCracken G. 2012. Grant McCracken: Why We Need Chief Culture Officers. PFSK Advertisement [Online]. Available at http://www.psfk.com/2012/09/culture-jobs-brands.html [Accessed 30 May 2016].
Keller, M. & Horn P., 2003. Strategic Management. 2nd Edition. Journal of Literature, 12(5), pp.66-89.
Hofstede G. 2001. Culture Consequences. Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. London: Sage Publications. Print.
Hogan M. 2012. The Four Skills of Cultural Diversity Competence. 4th Edition.Belmont: Brooks Cengage Publishing. Print.
Ivancevich J.M. & Gilbert J.A. (2000). Diversity Management. Time for New Approach. Public Personnel Management. Vol. 29., Issue 1.pp.75-92. Print.
Cox T. & Blake S (1991). Managing Cultural Diversity: Implications for Organizational Competitiveness. Academy of Management Executive. Vol.5,Issue 3, pp.45-56. Print.
