The role of organizational climate and culture in the school  (Page 7/17)

Such quantitative survey instruments for assessing organizational culture are readily available, e.g.,Kilmann and Saxton’s Culture Gap Survey (1991). However, these instruments tend to be superficial and are incapable of probing thedepth and uniqueness of an organization’s culture. As Rousseau (1990) commented, the uniqueness of each organization’s culture prevents outsiders from forming valid a priori questions. Schein(1984) further noted that using surveys to assess culture violates ethical research procedures in that it puts words into the mouths of respondents rather than captures their own words. Also, suchinstruments summarize and aggregate responses, possibly misrepresenting the respondents’true views.

Because organizational culture is a multi-layered phenomenon, different data gathering approaches maybe necessary to assess the various layers. Rousseau (1990) identified five basic layers of organizational culture, proceedingfrom the most superficial and observable to the most profound, yet least revealed or discussed. These layers were: (a) artifacts, (b)patterns of behavior, (c) behavioral norms, (d) values, and (e) fundamental assumptions. Connor and Lake (1988) discussed the sameconcepts but classified culture into three layers, rather than five.

At its shallowest levels, school culture is open to assessment by observation of behaviors and interactions,listening to stories, participating in rituals, and examining artifacts and written communications. To understand the sharedvalues, common understandings, and patterns of expectations, it is necessary to probe more deeply and into subconscious areas byexamining the authentic responses of organization members. Rousseau (1990) and Schein (1999) advocated the use of structured interviewsto gather these data. Schein noted that small group interviews are both more valid and efficient than individual interviews. However,to get at the deepest levels of shared culture, assumptions and beliefs, intensive individual interviews are probably the mostappropriate approach.

As with all qualitative research, it is essential that organizational leaders set aside their ownconceptions and values as they attempt to discern the shared values and beliefs of others in the organization (Rousseau, 1990; Schein,1999). However, the leader’s observations of behaviors and artifacts can legitimately provide the initial entry point thatleads to a deeper investigation of the underlying shared values, norms, beliefs, and assumptions.

With these definitions of organizational climate and culture and some insight into how to assess theseconstructs, the leader’s next challenge is to forecast how the school’s culture and climate will interact with the school improvement process. The section that follows explores variouspossible patterns of interaction.

Interaction of School Climate and Culture with the School Improvement Process

A school’s culture and climate can interact with the school improvement process in many ways and in all phasesof that improvement process. Figure 1 illustrates a typical school improvement process, which progresses from a planning phase toimplementation, and eventually to institutionalization of the desired changes. As Beach and Lindahl (2004b) discussed, inreality, school improvement processes are not as linear as diagrams such as Figure 1 suggest. However, the basic phases of the modeloffer a useful structure for examining potential interactions between the process and the school’s climate and culture.