102: Club, Role, Task, Existential with Charles Handy
Handy explicitly calls out architects as belonging to Task and Existential ways of thinking. Do you agree?
Handy writes from a perspective that cultural models are tools and while all organizations are different, “there are some patterns that can be discerned, models that can be imitated, and … what matters most is getting the right culture in the right place for the right purpose.“ When cultural model and management align, he believes inefficiencies and dissatisfaction are less prevalent. Awareness of our own cultural subscriptions is critical to understanding how to manage organizational culture. Handy’s characterizations of cultural typologies are Club, Role, Task, and Existential. He uses visual icons to illustrate each type.
Club culture is found in small, entrepreneurial businesses. The “Zeuses” that comprise this culture are often charismatic, highly experimental risk takers. Individuals and the business need to be able to make quick, critical decisions. Face-to-face relationships with one another and with customers are important to maintaining this low formalized structure where trust is essential. Learning comes from an apprenticeship type relationship, change comes through exchanging people, and money or resources are the preferred method of reward.
Leave your personality at home in Role culture. Roles, responsibilities, and the authority that come with their associated titles give individuals power in this culture. High formalization means Role organizations are slow to adapt to change. If change does come, it is in the form of adjustments to roles, responsibilities or the rigid procedures which are critical for the proper functioning of the machine. “Apollonians,” who comprise this typology, are motivated by predictability and the ability to fill the obligations of their role. Individuals and the organization have a contractual or transactional mindset. Rewards are preferred in the form of added authority and the status that comes with it.
Task culture exists for the purpose of “continuous and successful solution of problems.” Knowledge, expertise, and creativity are valued above age or tenure making this culture expensive to maintain and therefore sensitive to economic volatility. Like an Adhocracy (Mintzberg), teams are constantly formed and reformed based on project needs. “Athenians” handle management challenges in the same way, through committees, however, these committees often have little influence due to the lack of overlap with formal authority. Change is possible by changing the problem to be solved. “Athenians” are motivated by variety of task and self-improvement. Satisfaction of results is enough reward for Athenians.
In Existential culture, “management is a chore” and “Dionysians recognize no boss.” Talent, individuality, and personal freedom are highly valued. The “Dionysians” existing in Existential culture, tie their identity to their craft similar to the Professional Bureaucracy. They are motivated by unpredictability and making large scale impact. Results are a reward for “Dionysians”; recognition is not necessary. Change requires negotiations. Talking about Existential culture as a collective is almost an oxymoron. Those who fit into this category reject that they belong to a category.
Rachel R Gresham
