Oceanic Pharmachem: Employee Expectations of Company Culture
Oceanic Pharmachem Private Limited (OPPL) believes that when employees start a new job today, they are increasingly paying more attention to the company culture.
When employees join an organization, they have to adapt to its culture. Many times, talented individuals stumble in their new role because they failed to read the cultural aspects. This happens because most organizations don’t explain the cultural rules to newcomers. Yet understanding to disclose the cultural values, plays a big role in the success of the employee and the company itself.
Following are the various dimensions of culture that require to be conveyed which have the greatest impact on employee expectations:
Companies differ in how they cultivate relationships, in how much they value collaboration, and in how much face time is required to get work done and make important decisions. In some organizations, the only way to influence others is by spending time with them in person. In others, emailing, texting, and video conferencing are preferred over in-person meetings.
The approach of relationships has to be conveniently conveyed to new employees when they arrive. For example, whether employees need to build a relationship with a colleague themselves for help or input on a project or should they be given a list of “go-to” individuals with whom they make the necessary connections & ask for assistance
For a new employee, the ways of communication have to be conveyed. Formal channels, like meetings that are always set in advance, and to which everyone comes well-prepared are traditional. Individualistic, spontaneous discussions with little or no documentation are steadily becoming a norm. The expectations have to be declared beforehand.
Presentation of information and its packaging has to be formalized. For example, whether meetings revolve around formal presentations, or can individuals informally share issues, debate topics, and engage in real-time brainstorming without being judged. Some organizations and departments prefer 50-page presentations with reams of details and analyses, while others prefer to work from a simple emailed agenda with a bulleted list of topics. The clarity of senior leaders’ response to formal meetings and strong recommendations, versus informal discussions, consistently results in a better decision making.
The variations in making decisions also impacts company culture in important ways. Some companies make real-time decisions in formal meetings, while others tend to finalize decisions offline. The implementation of the decisions made in the meetings is also crucial. Differences in the set of actions
in a meeting, and the informal decision-making mechanisms afterwards can be detrimental. Non agreements for political reasons tend to derail confidence.
Another aspect of decision-making is to declare a clarity of a bias for action or a bias for analysis and consensus. In organizations where the bias is for action, time and attention spans tend to be more limited, and decisions are made quickly. Employees pushing for an initiative, need to present their position clearly and give key stakeholders the information they need to make a decision. Other company cultures prefer a more protracted discussion of options, models, and strategies. More patience is required on the part of the employees, especially because this bias for consensus often means sending more supporting materials and analyses, and redoing presentations several times, before reaching a final decision.
Individual versus Group Perspectives
Some companies approach work as being largely the product of individuals, while in others it is the product of a collaborative orientation. If an organization is very individualistic in its approach, it will generally support a “hero mentality” that recognizes the ambitious individual. Rewards are often individually based, and performance management tends to be based on individual ratings where everyone’s unique contribution is justified to their peers.
Group-focused organizations provide more of a safety net in that risks and rewards are shared, but it may be harder for an employee to stand out as an individual and differentiate. These organizations tend to be flatter and more focused on shared goals and results. Once again, the key is in declaring how individuals are recognized and rewarded.
Another cultural factor that can have a profound impact on employees is the company culture’s orientation toward change. Most places are resistant to outsiders bent on change. Either the cultural cues are misread as to how disruptive the process should really be or the companies do not build the supportive relationships needed to back up on key decisions. Without a proper on-boarding advice, new employees may underestimate the cultural bounds they’d have to work within.
Pacing and buy-in are also critical factors. The main thing is, when new employees join, their previous achievements can have an effect on their actions. Most organizations hire employees for past experiences, but their future success will be determined by the cultural impact in the new environment and depending on how well the new culture is communicated, this impact can be amplified or derailed.