Organizational Culture and Subcultures in the Spanish Nuclear Industry

Organizational culture determines the norms, values and behaviors of an organization, playing a key role in the safety of high-reliability organizations (HRO). Previous research has shown that differentiated subcultures can coexist within organizations, sharing some norms and values but not necessary everything From this perspective, this study was aimed at (1) describing the organizational culture of the Spanish nuclear industry and (2) determining the potential presence of organizational subcultures. To do that, a statistical analysis of organizational culture surveys (Organizational Culture Inventory®, N = 5825) handed over to all organizations within the Spanish nuclear industry, was carried out. Results allow us to accurately characterize the industry’s organizational culture, which is made up of predominant “Constructive”-style behaviors together with “Defensive” normative patterns of the “Conventional”, “Dependent” and “Perfectionistic” styles. Indications about the existence of various subcultures associated to the nuclear organization type, the sociodemographic aspect and the organizational structure component were also found. Certain safety implications potentially linked to the existence of subcultures and to the industry’s organizational culture are discussed.

Neo-Tribes or Subcultures?

Two contrasting views exist regarding subcultures: the classical view and the post-subcultural perspective of subcultures as “neo-tribes.” However, there is scarcity of empirical studies of organizational studies with the latter perspective. This study aims to examine whether there is sufficient evidence for subcultures to be considered as “neo-tribes.” To answer this question, empirical studies are examined alongside data from a recent quantitative study of staff in a higher educational institution. It is found that organizational subcultures have a floating membership, heterogeneity between members within subcultures, the absence of distinct boundaries, and changing values over time. It is concluded that, for practitioners, change in organizations will require managers to accept the continuous change, reassessment, and adaptation of subcultures, as well as a lack of cultural predictability and stability. For researchers, this study heightens the need to reassess studies opting for a suitable approach in identifying and examining organizational subcultures.

Factors Influencing Knowledge as Practice in the Knowledge Workplace

This chapter examines issues around sharing subjective knowledge as practice in an organization, exploring what knowledge means to those working with it, how knowledge sharing happens in practice, and what influences its effectiveness. It is suggested that knowledge as practice as internalized by individuals can be difficult to communicate for a range of reasons, many relating to the effects of organizational subcultures on employee self-efficacy. A case study is used to illustrate this, based on fieldwork carried out in a research organization using the appreciative inquiry method to look at influences on the individual practice of knowledge sharing. An environment that promotes cognitive and affective trust amongst an organization's employees may go some way to address these issues.

Recognising Influences on Attitudes to Knowledge Sharing in a Research Establishment

Knowledge sharing in organizations is influenced by several interconnecting factors, but there is little written on the individual perspective of those involved in sharing. An interpretivist, action research methodology was used to help members of a research organization determine what knowledge means for them and the knowledge sharing issues they face. Their shared Appreciations were that although they believed “knowledge-as-practice” was an essential aspect of their work, it was undervalued by the organization's clients and fund-holders, causing difficulties for the maintenance of knowledge capability, and influencing organizational subcultures. These included a “you should know” subculture and a risk-averse subculture, where staff perceive that there is a tendency to assign blame rather than to accept and learn from errors. An officially mandated culture of knowledge sharing is subverted by these subcultures, affecting individuals' motivation to share their tacit knowledge, their self-efficacy and consequent sharing behaviours.

Recognising Influences on Attitudes to Knowledge Sharing in a Research Establishment

Knowledge sharing in organizations is influenced by several interconnecting factors, but there is little written on the individual perspective of those involved in sharing. An interpretivist, action research methodology was used to help members of a research organization determine what knowledge means for them and the knowledge sharing issues they face. Their shared Appreciations were that although they believed “knowledge-as-practice” was an essential aspect of their work, it was undervalued by the organization's clients and fund-holders, causing difficulties for the maintenance of knowledge capability, and influencing organizational subcultures. These included a “you should know” subculture and a risk-averse subculture, where staff perceive that there is a tendency to assign blame rather than to accept and learn from errors. An officially mandated culture of knowledge sharing is subverted by these subcultures, affecting individuals' motivation to share their tacit knowledge, their self-efficacy and consequent sharing behaviours.