From the Debunking Department:
How big consulting forms opine on culture is always interesting.
Because most regurgitate and repackage what their clients are already doing, they are echo chambers of the orthodox.
Their main problem? The absence of new thinking.
(spoiler alert: reporting case studies from clients is not new thinking).
Consider McKinsey. Their recent article on culture transformation has some good nuggets (namely: one size does not fit all). But their notion of what constitutes "established" levers for culture change -- role modeling, conviction, reinforcement, and skill building -- might sound reasonable but shows how far behind McKinsey (and other big consulting firms) actually are when it comes to new thinking on culture and change.
There are two main issues. Start with role modeling.
Role models are influential in many domains, including ethical decision making [1], entrepreneurship [2], and career choice, especially for women [3] (among others). But as levers for culture change, the evidence is weak. There are reasons for this having to do with the nature of culture. Additionally, for role models to be agents of change, role 'aspirants' (those aspiring to be like the role model) need to
...have the same goals as role models, and the same motives for attaining them
...perceive themselves to be part of the same group
...perceive similarities between themselves and the role model
...perceive role models as highly successful, attractive and competent
In other words, rather obviously, the role of role models in change is entirely dependent on role aspirants.[4] Which makes role modeling as a lever quite problematic. Wouldn't aspirants already be on board with any change promulgated by their own role models? And what does this say about all the other people in the organization who don't share the same role models?
This concept of role models is an example of the many oversimplified notions of leadership popularized by the media and consultants (who need leaders to hire them). If leaders simply behave in the 'right' (read role-modely') way, change will magically happen. This is lazy pseudo-science. It takes a half-truth -- that leaders matter in change -- and reduces it to synecdoche: leaders just need to walk the talk...
It might sound like common sense, but in matters of culture it's a lot more complicated. Why? Because people and groups are a lot more complicated.
Which brings us to the second and more salient issue. McKinsey's "established"recipe is actually based on mid 20th century behaviorist notions of culture change. [5] The core assumption is:
Culture = behavior
Therefore to change culture you change behavior.
Sounds reasonable -- until you realize what we now know about the brain and culture from cultural neuroscience and related fields renders behaviorist ideas of culture and change mostly obsolete.
Modern work shows that culture is not behavior but knowledge -- taken-for-granted beliefs and tacit assumptions about how to operate in a given domain. Behavior may relate to cultural knowledge, or, might be wholly independent of it, or, might be compensation for it (e.g. overly "nice" behavior as compensation for a cultural fear of conflict). People don't always behave according to cultural rules or values; behavior is far more idiosyncratic and context-dependent. And to exclusively focus on behavior in culture change one might be treating symptoms rather than disease.
To reduce culture to behavior is to radically oversimplify one of the most complex constructs of human experience. Which possibly explains why over 80% of managed culture change programs fail.[6]
So, what is the alternative? Two key points (and see below):
Cultural knowledge in organizations is embedded in practices -- everyday habits, routines and processes -- because this is where the most important knowledge about how to succeed as an enterprise resides. Think strategic planning, budgeting, go-to-market, product development, management control, and on. These are not just behaviors but formal and informal ways of getting things done that involve the complex interplay of people, processes, and tools. This is where culture resides, in these and similar practices.
To change culture is to change practices. Why? Because practices are what oblige people to do quotidian things in different ways. This is no different than changing something personal and deep-seated -- weaning oneself of sugar or smoking, for example. Until daily habits change, little else can change. [6]
Today we have at our disposal more up-to-date approaches to culture and change backed by ample evidence that recognizes the influence of context (task, profession, history, local ecologies, etc.) and how preconscious and harder to access cultural knowledge actually is.
That more business leaders aren't aware of this is a colossal failure of business schools, business media, and, yes, consultants. Ah, you say, but isn't it easier to sell leaders on behavior change than to talk to them about their own core assumptions and tacit beliefs? Sigh. True. Invoking the famous phrase from the Watergate era in the U.S., this is why consultants "follow the money."
1. e.g. Brown & Treviño (2014)
2 e.g. Bosma, Hessels, Schutjens, Van Praag, & Verheul, I. (2012)
3 e.g. Stout, Dasgupta, Hunsinger, & McManus (2011)
4 See Morgenroth, Ryan, & Peters, (2015)
5 See Cameron & Green (2004)
6 Smith, (2002)
7 White (2021); or Kronenfeld (2018)
