Food Safety Magazine - June/July 2013
Food Safety Magazine - June/July 2013
Food Safety Magazine - June/July 2013
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Changing Culture<br />
Anyone who gives culture a thought can understand these concepts. The hard<br />
part is accepting how resilient culture is. Because culture defines a globally accepted<br />
template for action within an organization, by its nature it exists to resist change.<br />
This is the critical point every leader must clearly understand: There is no aspect of<br />
a company that is more difficult to change than the culture. A company that has<br />
never prioritized food safety in the past, and wishes to move in that direction, must<br />
realize that it is embarking on a journey. It will require time, perseverance and committed<br />
leadership. There will be resistance, much of it passive and well hidden, and<br />
there will be failure.<br />
But corporate culture can be changed if the leaders go into the process with an<br />
awareness of the scope of the challenge and a plan for overcoming the inevitable<br />
obstacles (for a success story, see “Cultural<br />
Transformation at Sunny Delight,” p. 44).<br />
Culture Types<br />
Over the years, many models of corporate<br />
culture have emerged in the business<br />
press, and managers can become quickly<br />
overwhelmed by the management-speak<br />
jargon that academics so often use. In<br />
most situations, the discussion can be simplified and distilled into two basic camps<br />
of corporate culture: role-based cultures and task-based cultures.<br />
Role-based cultures are most familiar to those of us who have worked in the food<br />
manufacturing space, and they have dominated Western companies for decades. In<br />
role-based cultures, authority, power and resources are driven by title and individual<br />
personality. Hierarchy and bureaucracy frame the structure of the organization.<br />
Decisions are passed down from authority figures to be carried out by the relatively<br />
powerless employees who form the bottom of the pyramid-shaped org chart.<br />
This culture results in a workforce that is largely disengaged from their work. Employees<br />
who have little or no discretion in making decisions or offering input to the<br />
decision-making “class” have no motivation to engage when problems emerge.<br />
The pervasive attitude among the frontline workers is “not my problem.” And in<br />
a very real sense, this is true. In an environment where the worker is told what to do,<br />
how to do it and how much time she has to get it done, she has no ownership of the<br />
task. When this person sees a problem developing that is not specifically part of her<br />
job, it is literally not her problem. That problem belongs to the quality assurance<br />
staff—or packaging—or customer service, but not to her.<br />
Task-based cultures, on the other hand, are far more inclusive of everyone within<br />
the organization. This culture type focuses attention on solving problems, accomplishing<br />
tasks and developing talents. A team-based approach to work is often used,<br />
and respect is earned based on expertise and professionalism. Power evolves from<br />
the accomplishments of the group rather than the position of the individual. Reporting<br />
lines in this culture are often complex and interwoven rather than straight up the<br />
chain of command. Hero leaders and departmental silos are not well tolerated.<br />
So which culture type is most likely to produce lasting results for companies that<br />
are attempting to entrench a commitment to food safety? Consider the reaction that<br />
line workers are likely to have when they discover an issue—is it “not my problem”<br />
or is it “we have a problem?”<br />
The First Step to Change<br />
The first step to creating lasting change to your corporate culture? Senior managers<br />
must accept that they will likely not face a more difficult challenge in their<br />
professional career. With this backdrop, the members of the executive team must be<br />
completely committed to cultural change. In fact, the success of the desired culture<br />
change can be predicted by the personal commitment of the CEO and senior team.<br />
This does not guarantee success, but a<br />
lack of personal commitment will practically<br />
guarantee that the initiative will<br />
fail!<br />
These changes will create discomfort<br />
at every level of the company, probably<br />
more in the executive suite than anywhere<br />
else. Some members of this group<br />
will accept that a new approach to leadership<br />
and management is necessary,<br />
and some will not. It is not unusual for<br />
change leadership to require changes in<br />
“Corporate culture is the sum<br />
of everything that makes up the<br />
modern workplace.”<br />
leadership, as this is not a group famous<br />
for its commitment to teamwork. Nonetheless,<br />
it is crucial that executives consistently<br />
model the behaviors they hope<br />
to engender in the larger organization.<br />
A failure here to “walk the talk” will<br />
result in systemic cynicism and apathy,<br />
and will encourage those who resist the<br />
change to soldier on. Author Donella<br />
Meadows, in Thinking in Systems, notes,<br />
“Purposes are decided from behavior,<br />
not from rhetoric or stated goals.”<br />
The clear message in both words and<br />
actions must be, “Resistance is futile.”<br />
Where Are You Now?<br />
With executive commitment in<br />
hand, the next step is “Where are we<br />
now, and where do we want to go?”<br />
There is only one effective way to<br />
create a complete picture of the current<br />
state of the organization, and that is by<br />
meeting with stakeholders. Of course<br />
this includes employees and managers<br />
from every department and at every<br />
level, but to really ensure that your reality<br />
is captured, be certain to include<br />
external viewpoints as well—feedback<br />
from suppliers and clients, even your<br />
own board members, will often provide<br />
a perspective that differs from the views<br />
of those who are too close to the problem.<br />
This data collection will take many<br />
forms, like town hall meetings, personal<br />
40 F o o d S a f e t y M a g a z i n e