Culture vs. Climate

The History of Culture and Climate Research:

The academic study of organizational culture is not a new field of research. This area of research was established in 1910 in the United Stated by Hollingworth and Poffenberger (House, 2004; Weziak-Bialowolska et. al., 2020). Researchers began studying culture at a high level, first focusing their attention on how employees observe, experience, and make sense of their work environment or atmosphere. Meanwhile, the study of organizational climate was first introduced in the 1960s by Kurt Lewin (House, 2004). The concept of organizational climate did not catch on as a popular organizational concept until the 1980s (House, 2004; Hsiung, 2021). So, between the 1960s and the 1980s, the issue of organizational climate was overshadowed by the continued research and popularity regarding culture.

Culture

The study of organizational culture has its roots in anthropology. Like all fields of academic research, the study of organizational culture has evolved over the years. In the 1930s, researchers were initially interested in understanding employees’ attitudes, behaviors, and performance. In the 1960s, researchers began studying culture through the lens of fundamental organizational ideologies. Those topics that merited further research were cultural ideologies concerning the organization’s history, shared values, beliefs, and the underlying ideologies and assumptions held by employees. As research on organizational culture continued in the 1970s, exploration was further framed and was solidified by studying symbolic organizational events and specific artifacts that had stood the test of time. Examples of such events or artifacts are early products launched by the company, early acquisitions, or early organizational divestitures. Organizational culture is viewed by many as a key driver of organizational effectiveness and pride.    

Climate

Initially, climate was best described as what employees experience, see, and report as having occurred in their organizational interactions. As researchers continued to dig deeper into organizational climate, they expanded the definition, describing organizational climate as the employee’s perception of the organization and their role within it in the context of day-to-day practices, policies and procedures, and routines for how tasks are accomplished and other non-role-related activities completed. Finally, current definitions of climate incorporate reward and recognition processes and procedures. Contemporary researchers have even taken climate to the individual level by examining how employees perceive and feel about their manager, the organization, and the behaviors of fellow employees. Today, organizational climate has a streamlined definition. Organizational climate is about the recurring patterns of behaviors, attitudes, experiential perceptions, and descriptions of what happens in the immediate sphere of the employee. Who has, from the beginning of the development of organizations, impacted the sphere of the employee more than anyone else? The manager or leader.

Why Culture is Written About More Than Climate
Culture is written more about today than climate because it continues to be easier to examine. Business writers, both academic and non-academic, enjoy writing about such iconic organizational cultures as General Electric, Pepsi-Cola, Coca-Cola, The Walt Disney Co., Procter & Gamble, and United Parcel Service because their cultures were established 100 years ago or more. Those deep organizational histories make it easier to write about these organizational cultures than about ever-evolving organizational climates. As a former executive who worked in Talent and Learning & Development for General Electric (GE), Pepsi-Cola, and Procter and Gamble (P&G) during the period when P&G acquired The Gillette Company, I can tell you from first-hand experience that awareness of and pride in the culture of these organizations began immediately upon being offered a position and continued all the way through onboarding. On the other hand, the climate of the organization, division, or team I was about to join was not mentioned once in any of my onboarding experiences.

Writing about organizational climate is usually woven into some other organizational announcement, such as recent earnings, acquisitions, a new product launch, or a change in the senior leadership ranks. This is not to say that no one has ever written specifically about the climate of an organization. Take GE as an example. When Jack Welsch was the CEO, he acquired the nickname “Neutron Jack” for the vast number of employees he fired while leaving all the buildings intact. From talking to employees who worked at GE before I did, during Jack’s reign as CEO, I know that his actions instilled a climate of employment fear. When I got to GE, the climate had changed to a focus on technology and innovation. Why had this change happened? Because Jack’s successor as CEO, Jeff Immelt, purposefully worked to instill an organizational climate of employment stability focused on technology and innovation.

A Visual Model to Help Clarify The Differences Between Culture And Climate
When I was at GE, I was asked to develop a leadership program to strengthen the skill areas of Change and Innovation. With the aid of a brilliant training partner, Dr. Scott Isaksen, and his organization, Creative Problem Solving Group we set out to build this leadership program. As part of the development process for this program, I was introduced to a culture vs. climate model that I will never forget.

In collaboration with Dr. Goran Ekvall, whose early research focused on the distinction between culture and climate, Dr. Isaksen developed a culture vs. climate graphic model to help leaders, employees, and scholars identify the clear distinctions between these two concepts. The model is reproduced below with permission from Dr. Isaksen. See the model below.

The picture of a tree is a universal symbol that any person beyond the age of six can recognize. No explanation is needed of the relationship between the parts: the roots, trunk, branches, and leaves. On the right-hand side of the model are the two main components: Culture and Climate. Let’s start at the beginning of every organization by examining its roots. Said another way: what has and continues to hold up the organization all these years? As House, 2002 research clearly pointed out, culture—the roots of an organization—is made up of 5 dimensions: traditions, beliefs, values, history, and customs. The older the company, the deeper the roots or five dimensions are. Take GE as a case in point. When I arrived at GE, they were a 135-year-old company. Their traditions, beliefs, values, history, and customs were legendary. These five elements were not built by one single leader. These five elements were built over 13 decades!

As we move up from the roots of the tree into the trunk, branches, and leaves, we move into the climate. The graphic above clearly identifies what leaders’ impact more than anything; namely,  the above-ground portions of the tree, which represent the organizational climate. Ekvall, Isaksen, Lauer, and Britz's 2000 research and graphic offer a clear representation of 9 climate dimensions that leaders can impact to either grow, stagnate, or damage the climate of a team or division, depending on the scope of the leader’s control.

Those 9 climate dimensions are as follows: challenge/involvement, freedom, idea-time, idea-support, playfulness/humor, debate, conflict, trust/openness, and risk-taking. At a practical level, as a former leader with over 30 years of experience, I can not only easily identify the dimensions on which leaders should focus their attention but also recognize who and what their behaviors impact. Leaders’ behaviors, those skills being demonstrated day in and day out have more impact on the climate than any other organizational dimension. As research shows, and now a visual clearly identifies for us, why it takes decades and decades of toxic leadership climate to impact the culture. Part 2 of this topic I will share insights from the research regarding the most important of the 9 dimensions and the ways leaders can use those 9 dimensions to influence and grow a strong team or organizational climate.            

If you would like to know more about being a more engaging leader, schedule a free thirty-minute appointment with Leader Behaviors.     

References:

House. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations : the GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage Publications.

Hsiung, Colditz, J. B., McGuier, E. A., Switzer, G. E., VonVille, H. M., Folb, B. L., & Kolko, D. J. (2021). Measures of Organizational Culture and Climate in Primary Care: a Systematic Review. Journal of General Internal Medicine : JGIM, 36(2), 487–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-06262-7

Isaksen, S. G., Lauer, K. J., Ekvall, G., & Britz, A. (2000). Perceptions of the best and worst climates for creativity: preliminary validation evidence for the Situational Outlook Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 13(2), 171-184.

Weziak-Bialowolska, Bialowolski, P., Leon, C., Koosed, T., & McNeely, E. (2020). Psychological Climate for Caring and Work Outcomes: A Virtuous Cycle. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(19), 7035–. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197035