Sample History Essay Paper on Organizational culture

Organizational culture

Organizational culture can be described as the key beliefs and values that are shared in a company by the employees. The values in most cases pertain to the services offered to the clients, the commitment that an organization has towards employees, the level of efficiency, and ethical behaviors (Watkins, 2013).  The culture is not written but people can observe it through organizational stories, the office layout, the slogans, and the ceremonies. There are different functions that are performed by organizational culture some of which are positive while others are negative.

Positive functions of organizational culture

Culture has the ability to facilitate commitment among the employees in the organization making them move from trying to achieve individual interests to meeting the goals set in the company. It means that culture encourages employees to prioritize organizational interests rather than personal interests.  When employees are committed towards meeting the goals set in an organization, it increases the levels of productivity (Sinha, n.d). Culture also has the potential to improve the social system in the company making it more stable. Culture is considered as glue that promotes social stability thus holding the organization together. The reason this is possible is because it offers standards that acts as a guide to the employees especially what they are expected to do or say in the organization.

 On the other hand, culture acts a tool that controls all mechanisms in the company by shaping the behaviors and attitudes of major stakeholders such as employees and customers. It is because cultures have specific ethical standards that classify desirable behavior. In this case desirable behaviors are categorized into social responsibility and also the moral obligations that employers have towards the employees. Organizational culture also has a set of assumptions that acts as a guide to the employee’s behaviors (Sinha, n.d). It is these assumptions that make the newcomers or the new employees to become accepted in the company. For instance, through the culture, they come to understand the set rules of the organization and work towards obeying and conforming to them. Through this, their relationship with the employer and the employees is enhanced. At the same time, when an employee conforms to the rules, it encourages promotions and rewards making culture essential in an organization.

Negative functions of organizational culture

Organizational culture is seen as a barrier to change in an organization. It is because it promotes consistency and this cannot be effective in a dynamic business environment. It is because during the change process, they will resist it because they were used to a particular routine which was promoted by organizational culture. When this happens, culture ends up being a liability to the organization leading to failure in regards to performance (Watkins, 2013). On the other hand, organizational culture limits diversity in an organization. It is because strong cultures in an organization have been found to put more pressure on the workforce to conform to organizational styles and accept values. Employees who belong to diverse cultures in terms of race or religion may find it challenging to conform to the cultural values of an organization (Sinha, n.d). When this happens, the employer may consider them as unfit because of poor performance which can lead to retrenchment.

Lastly, culture can be seen as barrier to acquisitions especially when an organization wants to make decisions regarding product line or finances. The managers have to determine the possibility of the culture conforming to the new product line or financial statement that is about to be set. Organizational culture is developed by the business environment and the culture in the nation. It is because they form the basis through which the social processes and organizational processes are established. It is possible to change or eliminate organizational culture especially when it is considered as dysfunctional or does not benefit an organization in any way.

Low self-efficacy

Low self-efficacy has the potential to negatively affect the ability of an employee to perform specific jobs that had been assigned to them. It is because self-efficacy is directly related to workplace performance. It is, therefore, important for organizational managers to have a clear understanding of the role in which self-efficacy can influence the performance of the workers. Through this, they can help them to develop a higher level of self-efficacy by encouraging persistence whereby the employee is asked to make several attempts on tasks that they deem as difficult (Cherian & Jacob, 2013). It is because employees who have a higher level of self-efficacy tend to be more persistence when handling difficult task because they are confident enough. Employees with low self-efficacy should be allowed to learn slowly to develop confidence.

The intervention process can be handled differently in various organizational setting. For instance, the managers can decide to be more connected with the employees. Through this, they are able to share their deeper interests while evaluate the areas where they are struggling with in relation to particular tasks. At the same time, the managers can decide to set goals that are more challenging to enable the workers to develop confidence. On the other hand, the colleagues together with the managers need to show care by being supportive especially when the employee is handling difficult tasks (Cherian & Jacob, 2013). Low self-efficacy though exists among some employees is not a major issue because majority of employees are taken through training. 


Cherian, J. & Jacob, J. (2013). Impact of self-efficacy on motivation and performance of employees. International Journal of Business and Management 8(14), 80-89. Retrieved

Sinha, K. (n.d).Function and dysfunctions of organizational culture. Retrieved

Watkins, M. (2013, May 15).Organizational culture? And why should we care. Harvard Business Review.