Managing organizational culture for sustained competitive advantage

Organizational Culture and Sustained Competitive Advantage

Organizational culture is a defining feature of every organization. The unique culture that every organization displays has an affect on its ability to remain profitable. Culture can have either positive or negative affect on the ability of the organization to remain competitive. Much academic research up to this point has focused on theory and defining what is meant by culture and sustainable competitive advantage. This research expands theory by providing tools that can help companies manage organizational culture in such a way that it results in a greater competitive advantage. This research translates theory into practical applications that can be used by a number of organizations in various industries. The most important finding of this research is that companies can take measures to increase their competitive advantage by managing their organizational culture.

Organizational Culture and Sustained Competitive Advantage

Chapter 1: Introduction

Organizational culture is defined as a group that is separated by characteristics and features that set them apart from other groups. The characteristics of a culture can include beliefs, expectations, and norms the shape behavior (Hoecklin, 1995, p. 28). Organizational culture has a long history of being associated with competitive advantage. Bratton et al. (2010) if considered culture to be a deciding factor in the ability of the Japanese to gain a competitive advantage over their American rivals during the 1980s. Since then, organizational culture and its association with competitive advantage has been a key topic of interest among academic researchers.

Interest in the connection between culture and competitive advantage has developed into several different theoretical categories. Some of the more popular theoretical concepts in this area of study are the cognitive perspective, symbolic perspective, the structural and psychodynamic perspective. Defining culture has been a difficult task for researchers. Although there are now different camps of thought on the definition of culture, there is little disagreement that organizational culture has a significant impact on the success of the business. A literature review revealed that researchers are largely in agreement that organizational culture has a significant impact on competitive advantage. However, as with the basic definition of organizational culture itself, defining the impact of culture on competitive advantage has proven difficult.

This research will help to better define the connection between organizational culture and competitive advantage. It will explore both the tangible and intangible benefits and how organizational culture affects competitive advantage within the organization. This will provide a tool that organizations can use to help better manage organizational culture so that it results in the maximum benefits for the company. The purpose of this research will be to build consensus as to the effects of organizational culture on organizations. It will play an important role in assisting companies to leverage their organizational culture to achieve the greatest desired effect. This study will examine the cultural norms and standards within organizations using several general criteria developed through the literature review. It will then examine how managers interpret the effect of their own organizational culture on the competitiveness of their firm. It will use a combination of survey data and interviews to achieve this end.

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to provide organizations within means to consciously manage their organizational culture so that their unique culture can be leveraged to achieve the greatest sustainable competitive advantage possible. It will provide organizations with a tool that they can use to assess the components of their corporate cultural that will best serve them in achieving competitive advantage over their competition. This project will give organizations a means to turn theory into practice in terms of how their organizational culture relates to their future success as an organization.

Aim

The aim of this study is to provide organizations with a new tool that they can utilize to improve their performance in a world that is characterized by increasing competition. This study will help organizations utilize the plethora of information that has developed on the topic of organizational culture and its relationship to sustainable competitive advantage.

Background

Researchers divide culture into several components. Artifacts are the visible part of culture that includes tangible elements of the culture. In the business setting, this includes the decoration and design of the office building, as well as how the employees dress. Language and social behavior in different settings is also a part of cultural artifacts. Cultural artifacts are tangible and easy to describe for those both inside of the work setting and for outsiders. Many of these cultural artifacts are a part of company policy or formal rules within the organization. Casual Friday is one example of a cultural artifact within organizations.

Other components of the organizational culture are not so easy to define in a tangible way. One example of these types of cultural artifacts is values. Hofstede (1980) defines values as a preference for certain traits over other traits. The values are shared by those within the organization. These values may be a part of coherent corporate strategy as defined by the value statement of the organization. However, many times organizational values are more difficult to define in concrete terms. Values may develop organically or through a systematic strategic development plan.

Basic assumptions are another example of organizational cultural components that cannot be easily defined in concrete terms. Basic assumptions are often subconscious and are difficult to change for many people. Basic assumptions define every individual's emotions, thoughts, and reactions to their environment (Bratton Et Al, 2010).

Developing consensus among researchers on a singular definition of culture has presented a roadblock in the advancement of research on how cultural traits lead to competitive advantage for organizations. Despite efforts over 30 years of research, theorists continue to find difficulty arriving at an agreement as to a unified definition of culture. Instead, their efforts have resulted in the recognition of any different facets of culture. A lack of unified definition of culture has presented difficulty for researchers and the development of theories surrounding this topic. At present, researchers seem to choose their favorite definition, and perhaps add their own embellishment for use in their research studies. Therefore, when considering research on organizational culture one must first develop an understanding of what the author meant when they defined the term "culture" in their study.

Finding a unified definition of culture has proved difficult for researchers in this area of interest. However, this situation is further complicated by the inability to define the terms competition in competitive advantage. It is difficult to determine how to obtain a competitive advantage and how to sustain it without first achieving a unified definition of the term. This is been an issue that is plagued businesses and one which is not yet been successfully resolved.

Chandler (1962) found that a company's ability to attain a competitive advantage was closely tied to its overall strategy and approach and response to competition. Barney (1997) defined strategy as the organization's theory about how to compete successfully. This is an important definition, as it highlights the lack of concrete definition that permeates this area of research.

Barney (1986) found that if a firm wishes to become successfully competitive then it has to determine its strategy according to the structure of the industry and the nature of competition within the market. Both of these factors allow that organization to analyze its opportunities and threats in a meaningful way. The external environment determines the approach to strategy used by organizations. This highlights the principle that organizations do not exist in a vacuum, but as interactive members of a market segment.

The external environment of the organization must be considered in the determination of the type a strategy that will be utilized. The market is an external factor, while value creating resources and core competencies of the organization are considered internal factors. Resources that are less valuable are a source of internal weakness that should be eliminated or reinforced to ensure greater success of the firm, according to Barney (1991). The ability to exploit opportunities and eliminate weaknesses is the key to taking advantage of market opportunities and avoiding threats to their existence (Barney, 1997). Barney's work in this area highlights the importance of performing SWOT analysis in the development of organizational strategy.

The inability to achieve consensus as to a single definition of competition or competitive advantage places academic research in this area at a disadvantage. However, this does not appear to be a problem that can be resolved. The reason for this difficulty in attaining a resolution is that every industry in every firm has different structures, strengths, and weaknesses. What represents a competitive advantage for one firm may represent a weakness for another. Inconsistency across different industries creates inconsistencies in competitive advantage theory.

The inability to form consensus in this area is a key reason for the importance of this academic study. In order to be able to apply the theories developed in the area of organizational culture and its relationship to competitive advantage, companies must find concrete ways to apply them to their own business or industry. This study will survey a number of organizations in a variety of industries in an attempt to find consensus in the strategic application of organizational cultural concepts.

This study will not result in a unified definition of culture, competition, or competitive advantage that will apply uniformly to all organizations in every situation. However, it will serve in the development of criteria that organizations can utilize to help determine the characteristics of their own organization and how they can be used to an improve the sustainability of their organization. This research will play an important role in the development of processes for analyzing and developing an organizational culture that maximizes the organization strengths and minimizes its weaknesses. It will examine the state of knowledge in organizations regarding organizational culture and its connection to competitive advantage among study participants.

Dissertation Overview

This dissertation will be divided into six distinct chapters. Chapter 1 is the Introduction. It will explain the purpose of the research and how it fits into the context of research already in existence in this area. It discusses the aim and purpose of the research, as well as provides background that is relevant to understanding the place of the current research study within the context of theory regarding the topic.

Chapter 2 is the literature review. This chapter will explore this state of existing research on both organizational culture and on competitive advantage. It will explore the intersection of these two separate research areas in how they can be combined in the context of improving organizational competitive advantage. It explores the difficulties that are being experienced by companies and will offer possible solutions based on current research available in the area. Chapter 2 will more clearly define where the research study fits in the context of research already in existence in this area.

Chapter 3 examines the methodology that will be utilized in the conduct of this research study. It examines the design of the study, the instrumentation and methodology that will be utilized, the population and data collection techniques to be used. It will explore the limitations of the study as well as any issues that may affect the ability to collect meaningful data in the subject area.

Chapter 4 will present the results of the surveys and interviews. The data analysis will utilize charts and graphs to present the findings of the research in a manner which can be easily interpreted by other researchers in the organizations themselves.

Chapter 5 will provide an exploration of the results of the research in the context of the research found in the literature review. It will explore ways that the research can be utilized to devise programs within organization to help them utilize the organizational cultural traits to achieve the greatest sustainable competitive advantage.

Chapter 6 will present the conclusions of the research. It will examine the implications of the results obtained and will explore the future of research in the subject area. Chapter 6 will summarize the contents of the previous chapters in a manner that brings the research together as a whole.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Summary

This literature review found that culture and organizational culture are key components o a successful formula for building a competitive advantage that will help to win marketshare. Yet, this resources is being underutilized by many companies. In a survey by Bain Company, it was found that more than one-third of executives on a worldwide basis do not feel that corporate culture leads to a competitive advantage. However, they fail to realize that their answers reflect a lack of commitment to the company that translates into company culture (Meehan, Gadlesh & Hori, 2006). The inability to utilize culture to bolster competitive advantage was found to be a missing component in both academic literature and the real world setting.

In discussions about organizational culture, the element of national culture is often forgotten. However, national culture has a direct impact on the development and sustenance of corporate culture. The company first exists within the community and is beholden to community values as well as national values. National cultural values and their impact on organizational culture is often an element that is not considered regarding its affect on the company to build sustainable advantages utilizing corporate culture to leverage their position. When analyzing corporate culture, one need to consider national culture and its affect on company culture (Van Den Bosch and Prooijen, 1992). The same principles that can be applied to companies can also be applied to cities, as they attempt to utilize their unique culture to leverage tourism and to boost business (Landry & Wood, 2003). The impact of national culture on corporate culture was also found to be a gap in both the literature review and the application of knowledge about corporate culture in the real world.

Competition is also an important force in shaping companies. It forces them to continuously evaluate their business processes and strive for greater efficiency. They must continually make adjustments to reduce inefficiencies, restructure outdated operations, and introduce new products. Competition improves companies by making them continually evaluate their operations. Competition can be a motivating force for companies (Gandotra, 2010).

No product or concept is truly safe in the business world. Given enough time, money, and experimentation, any product or serve can be duplicated (Bradt, 2012). Bradt feels that culture is made up of five basic components. These are behaviors, relationships, attitudes, values and environment. In efficient cultures that result in a competitive advantage, companies must do things that are linked to both internal and external relationships, shaped byattitudes, and built on a solid base of values, along with an appropriate environment (Bradt, 2012). A company must have all of these traits in order to gain a competitive advantage. Of all of these traits, Bradt feels that attitude is the most important, because with the right attitude, all portions of the business can work together for a common goal. Products are often the focus of techniques and strategies designed to build a competitive advantage.

Culture is often referred to as a "soft" trait, but it is being taken more recently to be an integral part of business operations (Tharris, 2012). This was reflected in the survey results. Many managers felt that culture was not as important as products and price. This reflects a poor attitude towards the importance of corporate culture on the business. Culture is only one item on a long list of factors that influence the ability of a company to achieve a competitive advantage. Culture is listed along with design of the business and overall strategy. If any one of these elements is missing, the company will not achieve the maximum possible competitive advantage (Martzall, n.d.). Leadership plays a key role in the development of corporate culture. When leadership is ineffective, they will not be able to inspire the type of culture that drives competitive advantage. Rewarding employees was also found to be a key factor in business success for achieving competitive advantage (Riley, 2012).

The importance of culture in building competitive advantage is the principle element that will be addressed in this research study. It is expected that, as the literature indicates, many of the survey respondents will fail to see the importance of corporate culture as a key to business success. It is expected that many will not understand the importance of culture and will fail to be able to respond to the survey questions fully. The factors found in this literature review can be expected to have an impact on the results of the survey study. This research will address the gap in research that exists concerning the importance of culture on achieving a sustainable competitive advantage.

Chapter 3: Methodology

The purpose of this study was to examine the connection between organizational culture and the competitive advantage of the organization. Previous studies have attempted to quantify the results of sustainable advantage through profitability and corporate growth. However, this methodology is considered flawed because there are many factors that can influence profitability aside from competitive advantage. Many of these factors cannot be controlled, nor accounted for in a manner that would result in the ability to isolate the dependent variable. Many of the research studies utilized qualitative methods to assess the effect of culture on competitive advantage.

This study will utilize a hybrid research design to explore the hypotheses and research questions. The study will consist of a survey, administered to a sample of 40 participants. The survey is based on Mishra's four traits of organizational culture. In addition to the survey results, the study will also involve the conduct of three interviews to help obtain further information to support the results of the survey. This method will result in the identification of factors that can be used to consciously increase the sustainable competitive advantage of an organization through manipulation of organizational culture. The remainder of this chapter will provide details of the study methodology.

Design of the Study

The study design consists of two parts. The first part involves the conduct of a survey. The second part involves conduct of unstructured interviews. This study is a cross-industry survey and will provide a broad perspective on organizational culture and how it can be used to improve competitive advantage. It will also examine current attitudes on the importance of organizational culture in the achievement of sustainable competitive advantage. The survey will be distributed via email and will be returned to the researcher via the same route. The industries include auditing firms, banks, insurance companies, real estate companies, construction companies, engineering companies and logistics firms. This survey will be global in scope and distributed to companies located throughout Egypt, Europe, and Asia. This will allow the researcher to gain a broad perspective on the topic under study. It will also increase the ability to apply the results in a number of research and real world settings in the future.

In addition to the surveys, three interviews will be conducted with top management at three major Egyptian firms. The interviewers will be conducted by phone and will be unstructured. These interviews will allow top management to expand on how they utilize organizational culture to improve their competitive advantage. They will also be able to expand on the results of their efforts. These interviews will be considered in terms of their support or lack of support for the survey results. There will be used to help enhance the results obtained in the surveys. This research design will allow the researcher to attain a deeper understanding of the research topic than previous studies in this area.

Hypothesis

This research will explore several key hypotheses in order to gain the knowledge necessary for organizations to develop action plans based on these research results. The following hypothesis will be explored in this research study.

H1: The development of competitive an advantage utilizing organizational culture is a deliberate process, rather than occurring through accident.

Null hypothesis - The development of competitive an advantage utilizing organizational culture is not a deliberate process, but occurs through accident.

H2: It is possible for companies to develop a set of actions that will result in improved competitive advantage for their organization.

Null hypothesis - It is not possible for companies to develop a set of actions that will result in improved competitive advantage for their organization.

H3: Several factors can be identified that positively or negatively affect the ability of companies to develop an organizational culture that supports sustainable competitive advantage.

Null hypothesis - Factors cannot be clearly identified that positively or negatively affect the ability of companies to develop an organizational culture that supports sustainable competitive advantage.

Research questions

These hypotheses will form the guiding principles of the research study. However, in order to gain more clarity and the research topic and to develop meaningful ways to apply what has been learned, the following research questions will also be addressed through the research study.

1. What indicators of organizational culture are most effective in determining the ability to achieve a competitive advantage?

2. What role do involvement and adaptability play in the development of an organization's sustainable competitive advantage?

3. What role do openness, flexibility, and responsiveness play in the development of a sustainable competitive advantage?

4. How do involvement and adaptability result in the growth of the firm?

5. What role do consistency and mission play in profitability of the organization?

These research questions will help understand what needs to be changed for an organization to experience a higher degree of profitability and competitive advantage through changes in their organizational culture. Their development is loosely based on the work of Mishra (1995) and his work that identified four indicators of organizational culture. These questions will allow this research to expand on Mishra's work and determine how these for cultural traits can be manipulated to achieve positive results for the organization. These research questions will closely support the research hypotheses discussed earlier.

Definition of Terms

In order to understand the implications of the study and how it impacts the competitive advantage of an organization, one must first develop their own definition of the primary terms used throughout this research study. As we found in the literature review, many different definitions of culture, competition, and competitive advantage exist. It was also found that there was no universal definition that would meet the rigors of academic research. It was also found that previous studies utilized their own definition of culture and competitive advantage to help define the parameters of the research study. This too will be the approach taken by the current research study. The following represents the operational definition of key terms relevant to the study.

Competition. For the purposes of this research study competition will be defined as any firm that is operating in the same general category as the organization in question. Competition will be used broadly throughout this research study, as this sample population contains members of a number of different organizations operating in varied markets. Competition is defined by the company and by the characteristics of the market in which it operates. Competition, for the purposes of this research study will include any organization that sells a similar product or offers a particular service that is identical or largely similar to that offered by another company. The addition will not be defined by geography or by company size.

Competitive advantage. Competitive advantage will be loosely defined as any advantage that can be leveraged to increase sales of a particular product are service. As with the term competition, the term "competitive advantage" means different things in different markets. Market structure is a key determinant of the definition of competitive advantage. This definition is different according to market in which a firm operates. Competitive advantage is coming may be different forms and have different effects on the profitability and success of the organization. Competitive advantage will be determined by the structure of the market at the time the survey was taken.

Organizational Culture. For the purposes of this study, organizational culture will be defined as those characteristics that differentiate a particular organization from others in the same market. It will include both tangible and intangible components. However, the focus of organizational culture in this study will be intangible characteristics that can be best utilized to obtain a competitive advantage. Organizational culture includes many factors that can be determined in a concrete manner. For instance, the language and mode of dress are a part of the culture. However, these factors are not considered to be the most important and the ability to develop a sustainable competitive advantage. Characteristics such as values, communication, basic assumptions, morals, drive, and other similar factors will be used to define organizational culture. The definition of organizational culture will follow Mishra's four traits closely. These four traits will be used to define organizational culture throughout the study.

Instrumentation

This study will consist of two parts. It will consist of a survey questionnaire and unstructured interviews. The unstructured interviews and their results cannot be determined until the time the interview. Therefore this portion of the survey will not be discussed in the instrumentation section of the study. Instead, this section will focus on the survey questionnaire and its relationship to the research study at hand.

The research questionnaire is based on research that was done by Mishra (1995). Mishra found the four traits were indicators of organizational culture. Mishra included these four traits and interpretations as a means to describe organizational culture. Involvement and adaptability were measured in terms of flexibility, openness, and responsiveness. Involvement and the ability to adapt were considered to be precursors of firm growth. Consistency and mission are expressed in terms of integration, direction, and vision. Direction and mission were also considered necessary to achieve profitability. A culture that promotes involvement, adaptability, consistency, and mission is a culture that would allow firm growth and increased profitability. Mishra developed the Resource-Based View (RBV), which considers culture to beware, valuable, non-imitable, and non-substitutable in order to achieve the desired sustained competitive advantage.

The research instrument was developed with these traits in mind. The questions examine these four attributes in relation to the achievement of sustainable competitive advantage in the companies that were examined. The questions test for Mishra's four traits in the following manner. Questions 1 & 2 test for involvement. Questions 3 & 4 test for consistency. Questions 5 & 6 test for adaptability. Question 8 tests for mission. Question nine tests for the relationship between these four elements and value.

The next three questions test for RBV criteria, rareness, duplicability, and substitutability. Question 9 tests for rareness. Question10 test for the possibility of the organizational culture being copied. Question 11 test for the possibility of utilizing substitute resources to compete. The next portion of the questionnaire tests for the credibility of Mishra's study and the RBV. This portion of the survey will help to confirm if there is a real relationship between competitiveness and culture. It will examine the question of if firms can gain a competitive advantage based on their cultures, if the cultures meet Mishra's for cultural traits. It will also examine whether this competitive advantage can be sustained for a longer period of time. This survey will help to determine if a positive relationship exists between competitiveness and a firm's culture that is rare in cannot be copied or substituted.

Population and Sample

The sample population will be taken from managers in various industries. These industries include auditing firms, banks, insurance companies, real estate companies, construction companies, engineering firms, and logistics firms. The sampling techniques will be random, with a survey emailed to various companies around the world. It is expected that only a certain percentage of them will actually return the survey and choose to participate in the research study. The survey will be mailed out until a sample population of 40 surveys has been returned.

The final population demographics cannot be determined until all of the surveys of been returned as this study utilizes random sampling techniques. A list of potential firms will be derived through an Internet search. The sample population will represent a wide range of age groups, cultural backgrounds, and professional experience.

Data Collection

Data collection will be achieved through emailing the surveys to selected candidates. Candidates will be selected from companies found during an Internet search. An initial contact will be made explaining the nature of the study and asking the candidates to participate. The benefits of the study to their organization will be explained in this initial email. Participation in the study will be completely voluntary on their part. Once a return email has been received indicating that the candidate wishes to participate, the study will be emailed to them. They will have two weeks to complete the survey and will return the completed survey to the researcher. Once all of the surveys have been received the researcher will perform data analysis to determine if the hypotheses are supported.

Significance

This study a significant in a multitude of ways. The first and most obvious result of this study will be to provide organizations with the way to translate academic research on the relationship between organizational culture and competitive advantage into practical actions that can be utilized to improve organizational performance. At present, much information exists on the relationship between organizational culture and competitive advantage. However, much of this knowledge exists in theory and does not provide a practical solution that can be applied to daily business operations. This study will provide organizations with concrete knowledge that can be translated into actions with the goal of improving organizational performance and achieving a decided advantage over their competition.

The second affect of this study will be improvements in the organizational competitiveness of companies that participate in this research study. Organizations will gain useful knowledge about the row organizational culture and how it can be improved to achieve greater organizational effectiveness. The study will help companies gain insight into ways that they can improve their competitive advantage in the various markets that they serve. The study will have an impact on organizations that participate by providing them insight into their own organizations and ways that they can improve their competitive advantage in the future. The study provides information that organizations can utilize in a meaningful way to increase their profitability and sustainability both now, and in the future.

The third achievement of this study will be to advance research in the area of organizational culture and its ability to impact sustainable competitive advantage. The topic of organizational culture has been of interest to researchers for approximately 30 years. One of the key characteristics of research in this area is that it lacks a single unifying element. Many different theories continue to compete in this research area. Regardless of the stage of development of theory on organizational culture and competitive advantage, one thing stands out as missing: the ability to apply this research in a way that organizations can utilize to increase their own competitiveness lacks unity of theory. This research will provide a means to move towards the application of nearly 30 years of theoretical research in this area of academic study. This research represents the next step in the development of theory in this area of academic study. Theory is necessary to provide the background for further research. However, the development of theory does not in itself represent the desired end result. This research will help to advance research in this area so that theory can be applied in real world organizations.

Limitations of the Study

The qualitative portion of this study has several limitations that are inherent in any qualitative research study. The responses of the study will be coded according to criteria established. This method has the potential for bias in the coding of the questionnaire answers. Study participants may use different language to answer their survey and this can create difficulty coding the responses.

The sample size of this study is relatively small compared to the potential sample population that includes every organization in the world. It would be difficult to obtain a larger sample size given the resources and time frame allotted for this project. The sample population size was chosen for its ability to be achieved by the researcher. This will have an affect on the ability to generalize the study results. However, including companies in various fields will increase the applicability of the study results.

Chapter 4: Data Analysis

Data was a collected utilizing the email survey method of discussed in the methodology chapter of the dissertation. Each type of question on the survey required a different type of data analysis. The results of the analysis will be discussed in this chapter in the results will be presented graphically in a manner that is easy to interpret. The results of the study will be presented and analyzed with each question presented in the order it appears the questionnaire. The results of the study will be discussed and interpreted further in Chapter 5.

Part I - Demographic Profle

The first part of the research study contains demographic data for the study participants. The following summarizes each of the categories of the study participants.

A majority of the sample participants were between the ages of 20 and 40 years old and had been with their firm for under five years. This represents a sample population that has just started on their career path. There are likely to be more adaptable than older employees. This demographic group represents flexibility and a willingness to try new ideas to help the companies grow.

Sample Population by Industry

As one can see, those that will participants were spread over a number of industries. This will affect the results of the study, as competitive advantage differs according to market structure and the industry in which the company participates. This diverse industry representation improves the ability of the study to be generalized to a larger sample population.

Country Representation

A majority of the companies represented were located in Egypt. This is largely due to the location of the researcher and access to information about the individual companies. This creates sample bias in the population, and limits the ability to apply the sample results to countries other than those represented in this research study. The affects of this sample population bias will be discussed further in Chapter 5 of this dissertation.

Individual Question Results

Part 2

1. Do you consider that your firm allows its associates to actively participate in the decision making process?

A majority of the companies surveyed did not allow their employees to participate in important decision making processes within the organization. This is a reflection of organizational culture and the degree of autonomy of the employees. This reflects rather hierarchical company structures where the decision making ability is distributed disproportionately to upper management. The affect of sample bias in the population will be discussed in Chapter 5.

2. Do you notice a sense of collaboration between functional departments while accomplishing cross functional tasks?

The companies surveyed were split equally on this questions. Differences in how companies defined functional tasks and functional departments varied from company to company. Collaboration is also a term that can be ambiguous. This question is difficult to interpret in terms of the research hypotheses and questions for this study due to the inherent ambiguity contained within its wording. Cultural differences will also result in different answers to this question and will be discussed further in Chapter 5.

3. Do you recognize standard system procedures for accomplishing common tasks?

The answers to this question were surprising for several reasons. One would expect companies to have a set of policies and procedures in place for their daily operations. The fact that 49% reflected that they did not have a set of policies and procedures in place is surprising. When one takes this into consideration with question number 1, it would appear that a general tendency exists in the sample population for managers to dictate how and when the work is accomplished. This question may indicate that in lieu of policies and procedures, companies rely on management to dictate work and workload. This reflects a cultural dimension of the companies that were surveyed.

4. Does your firm have preset rules and regulations to control the way business deals are conducted?

The largest sample sectors in the study were from the banking and real estate industries. These are highly regulated industries and cannot simply dictate their own policies on business deals. This is a cultural dimension of the companies involved that reflects little ability to dictate their own business policies and procedures when it comes to business deals. The answer to this question is a reflection of the need to operate within governmental guidelines and laws, rather than a reflection of the companies themselves. The affect of county culture on the answers to this question will be discussed in Chapter 5.

5. Do you consider your firm to be customer oriented?

It is the goal of every company to be customer oriented. A business that is not customer oriented will not be in business for very long. However, recognizing the need to be customer oriented and actually achieving it are two different things. This question reflects the attitude that companies in the survey considered themselves to be customer oriented. This question reflects company opinions and does not serve to determine whether they actually achieve it or not. It is not surprising that every business surveyed considered themselves to be customer oriented.

6. Do you consider your firm to be flexible in responding to environmental turbulences?

The ability to adapt to changes in the environment is an essential quality for companies that wish to obtain a sustainable competitive advantage. A majority of the companies felt that they are flexible and able to respond effectively to changes in the environment. For the 40% percent that felt their company was not able to respond to changes in the environment, this represents cultural dimension that they could improve in order to increase their competitive advantage.

7. Are you aware of your firm's strategic orientation and its plans to achieve those strategies?

The answer to this question is largely dependent upon the position of the respondent in the organizational chart. Question number 1 reflected a lack of employee autonomy for those in lower positions within the company. This question is closely related, in that those that do not have decision making powers also do not have a grasp on the strategic goals of the organization. Nearly 57% indicated that they were aware of their company's strategic goals and strategy, which may indicate that the sample population consisted of a large portion in upper management.

8. Do you see your firm's culture as a valuable corporate asset?

Responses to this question were surprising. Organizations did not consider organizational culture to be an important asset for their company. The reasons for this answer will be further explored in Part 3 of the survey.

Part 3

Part 2 provided quantitative results and examine many of the issues of concern to the research study. Although this group of questions allows easy data analysis, does not provide the deaf needed to explore the topic being researched in this study. Therefore, if in order to gain further insight into the topic, a series of open ended questions were also asked of study participants. This group of questions allows participants to expand on the answers they provided during the first portion of the survey. Answers were categorized according to content and then analyzed using frequency distribution. This allows the researcher to gain insight into which answers were most common among study participants. The following frequency distributions represent the most common answers to the essay question portion of the study.

9. Your firm has a unique culture that contributes to outperform competitors.

To this question supported Part 2, Question 8 regarding the importance of organizational culture. In Question 8, 80% of the respondents indicated that they did not consider cultural to be an important element of their competitive advantage. The essay answers provided in Part 3, Question 9, support the previous response. In this question dearly 24% admitted that they had not thought about corporate culture as a component of competitive advantage. This was the largest categorical response of this question. Only 4% of the respondents felt that people were their greatest asset. Some other respondents felt that their corporate culture was a contributing factor to their competitive advantage, but they did not know why. The components of corporate culture that contribute to competitive advantage cannot be determined, then these components cannot be used to gain further competitive advantage. A small percentage of respondents felt that in order to determine if their corporate culture represented a competitive advantage, they had to have knowledge of other competitor cultures for comparison. The most important finding of this question is that corporate culture was not easy to define, and because it could not be defined, it could not be determined if are represented a competitive advantage.

10. Competitors should be able to duplicate your firm's culture by simply studying its historical path and social environment.

Part 3, Question 10 asked if competitors would be able to duplicate their firm's culture by studying its historical path and social environment. The responses to this question supported those to both question 8 and question 9. A surprising number of responses indicated that there was no written record of the development of their corporate culture. This group comprised the largest number of respondents to this question. The next largest category supported this position by indicating that their cultural traditions lie in oral, as opposed to written history. A small percentage of respondents did not even know what the question meant. The responses to these questions indicate that other competitors could not gain a competitive advantage and duplicate the corporate culture of the company as they would not have access to that information. However, this also indicates that the company itself that it does not have access to the history and development of its own corporate culture. Therefore, it cannot be studied, altered, or utilized in a way that is productive in the attainment of organizational goals.

11. Competitors could outperform your firm by using their own mix of value creating resources.

The responses to this question were perhaps, the most surprising of the entire questionnaire. A majority of the respondents felt that their products and price were more important than their culture and creating value. This indicates a lack of value being placed on organizational culture as compared to other components of the product mix. This is not a surprising response, considering that nearly 80% of respondents to Part 2, Question 8, indicated that they did not feel corporate culture was an important component of competitive advantage. This was not the surprising response, the most surprising response to the question was the number of respondents that felt their competitors utilized a mixture of value creating resources to gain an advantage. This was surprising, as some of the companies were considered to be number one producers in their industry. Even if they were a number one at the time of the questionnaire, and they recognized that their competitors could overtake them at sometime in the near future using a unique mixture of value creating resources. It appears that the respondents found it easier to look at someone else's value creating resources then to recognize the same qualities in their own.

12. Can your firm gain a competitive advantage through its culture? Please justify your answer.

This question provided the most varied responses of all the questions in Part 3. No one response stood out as significantly higher than the rest. The largest response to this question reiterated the belief that products are more important than culture for many of the companies surveyed. The next group of questions reflected companies that felt they had the right resources and people in place to gain a competitive advantage. The number of respondents in this category represented 27% of the total respondents. This is close to the 20% response obtained in Part I when asked a corporate culture played a significant role in gaining a competitive advantage. The final two categories of responses to this question indicated that corporate culture was important in gaining a competitive advantage, but the companies say you to put a system in place to be able to take advantage of culture and the opportunities that it offers.

If your previous answer is positive, could your firm sustain its competitive position? Please justify your answer.

A majority of the respondents reflected that they felt corporate culture was not important in gaining a competitive advantage. The number of No, answers to the previous question led to no need to answer this question. For those that did, the responses indicate that culture could be used to help maintain a sustainable competitive advantage. There were only two respondents that felt their company was doing a good job in this respect. Most of those who answered this question felt that their company could do a better job in this respect. Not enough "yes" answers were found on the previous question to consider this question valid, but from the responses that were received, it appears that opinions were in alignment with what could be expected from the literature review.

Summary

This chapter the dissertation provided the results to the survey questionnaire. Although some discussion of the responses was undertaken in some cases, particularly when making comparisons between the various questions, there many questions that still remain unanswered in that require further discussion. To fully understand the implications of the results of this study, a further investigation of the reasons behind the survey results and how they relate to the literature review must be undertaken. In the next chapter, a more thorough discussion of the results obtained in the survey will be presented.

Interview Results

In addition to the surveys, three phone interviews were conducted to gain more information on the research topic and to determine how the results affected real world settings. Three phone interviews were conducted with various businesses that operate in a variety of business settings. The first interview was conducted with a manager at Al-Tameer, a real estate and architectural firm that is one of the largest in the region. Corporate culture was found to play a significant role of their success, according to the manager. Collaboration is necessary for the firm to accomplish the size and scope of projects a pawn which it embarks. Corporate culture was found to be a key to the success of this firm. Employees were resistant to change when the company switched from being publically owned to private ownership. However, change management was handled in such a way that was the changes were achieved, in the employees began to see the results of the changes, they viewed the changes positively and were accepting of them.

The second phone interview was conducted with the human resources director of the Cairo Marriott. It was found that this business depends on corporate culture for their survival and existence. They have a diverse population of employees and a diverse population of clientele. Corporate culture is essential for the success of this large hotel complex. The hotel situation as an international hub makes corporate culture essential and customer service key. Diversity and acceptance of other cultures was found to be a key element to their continued success.

The third interview was conducted with the owner of a small design firm. Zewar Design. This interview revealed a lack of knowledge about the importance of corporate culture of their success. The manager had little knowledge of how managing corporate culture could help to improve a dwindling business. The manager was not receptive to the idea that corporate culture could help to turn the business around. He had little knowledge about how competitors were using corporate culture to gain a competitive advantage over his firm.

Summary

Results of the study were consistent throughout the survey questionnaire. Related questions produced similar answers and results. Hofstede's cultural dimensions for Egypt were reflected in the answers throughout the survey questionnaire. These factors enhanced the reliability and validity of the study results. The study did show bias and that a majority of the study participants were from Egypt. Cultural dimensions associated with Egyptian organizations were reflected consistently in the results of the study. This may limit the ability of the study results to be applied to companies in other countries of origin. If this is the case, and the company resides in a country that is significantly different in terms of Hofstede's cultural dimensions. The influence of traits associated with Hofstede's cultural dimensions and their consistency throughout the study limit the ability of the study results to be applied to organizations that significantly differ from those represented by the survey results.

Chapter 6: Conclusions and Recommendations

Several problems were confronted in research on the role of culture and its impact on attaining a sustainable competitive advantage for organizations. The key problems involve defining organizational culture as well as developing criteria to assess if it that met the rigors of academic research. For the conduct of this research, a functional definition of organizational culture and competitive advantage were devised. These definitions form the basis of the driving theoretical concepts of this research study. At the inception of this research, researchers were in agreement that organizational culture had a significant impact on competitive advantage. The purpose of this research was to build consensus on the effects of organizational culture on the ability of the company to leverage culture to obtain a sustainable competitive advantage.

The literature review found that, despite research that highlights the importance of culture in achieving a sustainable competitive advantage, this research is not making its way into the real world. The survey results supported the literature review in that a majority of the survey respondents were not aware of the importance of culture in achieving business success. Many failed to respond to the survey questions fully and to provide full answers, as requested by the surveyor. Their answers indicated a lack of knowledge about how culture could be utilized to boost their competitive advantage. Many of the respondents left blanks when asked to provide full explanations for their answers. As the literature review suggests, this may be due to a lack of knowledge about culture and competitive advantage. A majority of the respondents indicated that price and products were more important than culture, which explains their lack of response on the survey questionnaire.

It was found that organizations reflected the culture of their host country. Sample bias was found in the population that favored Egypt as a country of origin for organizations within the survey. The effects of the country culture found to play a significant role in organizational culture and its ability to utilize these traits to attain a competitive advantage. However, the study also found that organizational culture could be modified due to a recognized market need. A prime example of this is the tendency for drools and regulations within Egyptian organizations. Unexpectedly, organizations answered that they were able to be flexible in order to meet the needs of changing market situations. Flexibility would not be expected in an organizational culture that was dominated by rules and regulations. The results of this survey question indicate the ability to adapt ones organizational culture to meet organizational needs. These results support the key concepts explored by this research and indicates that a knowledge of wands organizational culture and the needs of the market can be utilized to make changes that are necessary to gain a competitive advantage.

Throughout the survey a lack of knowledge and ability to find ones organizational culture persisted. This indicates a need for further research and methods to help organizations define their cultural corporate culture. This study indicated a corporate culture could be modified to meet the needs of a changing market environment. However, companies would be better able to achieve the needed changes if they could find a formal system for defining their culture in the first place. This was a need that was identified through the conduct of this study and it is recommended that future studies attempt to address this important issue for both the academic community in the organizations that it serves.

This research posited that companies could change their corporate culture to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage. However, the inability to define one's own corporate culture limits their ability to make the necessary changes. They cannot measure the changes, nor can they measure the effects of the changes if they cannot first define them. The theoretical concepts presented at the inception of this study indicated the need to conduct a cultural SWOT analysis for the organization. In the future, this should be a goal of the academic community and the organizations themselves. However, the first step in achieving this will be developed a system for defining organizational culture. Until this first step is achieved, the information will not be able to be utilized in a way that is meaningful and can be used for positive change within the organization. The most significant finding of the research study is that organizations are not yet ready to utilize their knowledge about organizational culture in the conduct of a SWOT analysis or other structured organizational change to meet market needs.

This research supports the hypothesis that the development of a competitive advantage utilizing organizational culture is a deliberate process, rather than occurring through accident. The results of this study support this hypothesis through the absence of a deliberate process and the inability of companies to utilize this information. Companies throughout the questionnaire consistently indicated the need to develop a deliberate process within their organization. The second hypothesis of this study was that it is possible for companies to develop a set of actions that will result in improved competitive advantage for the organization. The ability of organizations to remain flexible to meet the needs of the market despite the existence of rigid rules within the organization supported this hypothesis and the ability to take actions to achieve their goals.

The third hypothesis of the study suggested that several factors could be identified that positively or negatively affected the ability of companies to develop an organizational culture that supports kids petit is just a noble advantage. The most important factor that supports this hypothesis is the recognition that companies need to develop some type of criteria for defining the factors within their own corporate culture that would support a sustainable competitive advantage. Companies indicated that they felt their competitors were able to do this, but they did not feel that they were able to define their own corporate culture in such a way that it could be utilized as an actionable portion of their overall strategic plan.

It appears clear from this research that the first recommendation is for organizations to develop a means for definitively assessing their own organizational culture, if as well as those of their competitors. Only when this step is achieved can they begin to include organizational culture as an element of their overall strategic plan. It is recommended that the academic community focus research on developing systematic methods for assessing one's own organizational culture. This will provide organization the research that they need to achieve the remainder of tasks associated with utilizing corporate culture to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage.

This research indicates that both organizations and the academic community recognize the need for further research. At this point, theory is advanced in the area of how organizational culture affects competitive advantage. However, although theory is advanced in this area, the ability to apply theory into practical way is still in its infancy. There many steps that need to be taken in order to transform theory into actionable steps that organizations can take to achieve their goals. This research provides a starting point for the further development of actions that need to be taken in this area of academic research. The most important contribution of this research has been the ability to define the problem and provide direction for future researchers in this area of study.

Although organizations in the research study that understood what corporate culture was were few, those that did, found it to be an asset that improved their competitive advantage. The key problem found during the course of the research was that many organizations could not clearly define their corporate culture, let alone what it meant to their organization. The purpose of the research was to understand how companies were utilizing corporate culture to boost their competitive advantage. The results of the study indicate that only a few, select companies are actually utilizing this information to their full advantage. A majority of the companies cannot define their corporate culture, let alone understand how it could help their competitive advantage. The study found that only a select few understand and utilize this valuable information.

What this means in the real world, is that only a select few companies recognize and utilize their corporate culture to leverage their position in the marketplace. A majority do not and it is a disadvantage for them. This means that academic research has filtered down to a saavy few who use knowledge to keep up with current business trends. However, this knowledge has not filtered down to the masses and is not considered standard business practice for a majority. This places the majority at a disadvantage to those that understand how to leverage culture to their advantage. For those that do not, the market itself will be the greatest teacher. When the majority begins to seriously examine what those that have success are doing, the concept that corporate culture is a driver of sustainable competitive advantage will take root.

It could be expected that as the principles examined in this research become more common and filter throughout the marketplace, that if the same survey were to be repeated in five years, the results would be significantly different. As this knowledge becomes more common, it could be expected that more would understand the importance of their own business culture and that they would be able to fill out the survey questionnaire more completely. The final results of this research indicates that although, a few companies understand and utilize culture as a part of their overall business strategy, a majority do not. This places them at a disadvantage, but they do not yet know why. It is expected that these dynamics will shift in the future and that more business will begin to understand how they can use culture to compete. For now, it seems that the academic community will just have to wait for this to happen. The market will be the best teacher on the importance of culture in achieving a sustainable competitive advantage.