Freedom to act
Brief descriptions for the other three dimensions are also provided, with full visibility of the definitions available via the culture survey tool.
“Empowerment” – Low discretion vs. high discretion
This question is about the extent to which people are empowered to make decisions and solve tricky problems without upward referral. In high discretion cultures, people are trusted to use their judgement to make sense of information and respond appropriately to situations whilst keeping management informed. In low discretion cultures, people are encouraged to refer upwards where there is ambiguity and judgement is required.
Low degrees of freedom
People encouraged to refer upwards where judgement is required.
High degrees of freedom
People operate with high levels of discretion and empowerment.
- Current culture (your experience over last 6 months) 15%
- Required culture (the culture we need) 84%
- Desired culture (the culture you’d like) 52%
Typical Trade-offs
DOWNSIDES: Slower decision making, reducing customer responsiveness a; dis-engagement of experienced employees; high ongoing level of managerial effort
UPSIDES: Faster decision making at the customer interface; motivational benefits for experienced employees; managerial time commitment less over time
DOWNSIDES: Loss of direct managerial control over approach; higher risk of error with inexperienced employees
“Customer interaction”
This dimension of about how customers are managed and responded to, both externally and internally. Where degrees of freedom are high, employees typically interact with high levels of customer intimacy, agreeing to the delivery of products/services tailored to specific requests or needs. Where degrees of freedom are low, customer expectations are managed tightly with employees expected to coordinate and reference internally to a greater extent to ensure consistency of response. This dimension can also be construed as “act globally vs. act locally”, an extension of the “think globally vs. think locally” dimension under the FtT area. A conceptual comparison can also be made with the Toughness vs. Agreeableness Big 5 individual personality trait.
Customer consistency
UPSIDES: Consistent customer experience and standards; customers know what they are going to get, building brand trust and assurance
DOWNSIDES: Lack of consideration of (sensitivity to) specific customer needs risks alienating customers who value a closer and more personal business relationship
Customer intimacy
UPSIDES: Customers experience a personalised service, strengthening the emotional connection and increasing the chance of repeat business
DOWNSIDES: Risk that customer experience is variable, presenting brand, reputational and potentially also legal risks
Dimension description/explanation
“Work structure”
This dimension is the classic “what” and “how” distinction, and relates to the degree of control over the tasks and processes that lead to the achievement of agreed goals/objectives/outcomes. Where there is less direct control of tasks, but the goal is bounded by a range of parameters or success criteria – typically cost, quality and time – then this represents a more balanced position. Where these parameters are typically loose or left open, this reflects a higher degrees of freedom position. Many other experts recognize the prominence of this dimension of organisational culture, including Hofstede.
Low degrees of freedom
focus on approach & process
UPSIDES: Lower chance that things will go off-track en route to desired outcomes, reducing the risk of wasted time/cost
DOWNSIDES: Absorbs management time and reduces chance of better than expected outcomes; engagement risks for experienced employees (lack of empowerment and trust)
High degrees of freedom
focus on outcomes
UPSIDES: Scope for different and more effective approaches for achieving desired goals; provides the opportunity to exceed expectations. Less management time required.
DOWNSIDES: The looser the framework of success criteria within which a person or team is operating, the greater the risk that performance will go off-track; inexperienced employees may feel exposed.
Dimension description/explanation
“Working flexibility”
This dimension has an affinity with the work structure dimension. It is also to do with “how” work gets done, but is more specifically to do with the degree of control over when and where work gets done, and also the extent to which people are free to work outside of the strict remit of their role (and move between roles i.e. talent flexibility). This is particularly relevant in a post-Covid world where “flexible ways of working” became necessary and leaders realized that people could be productive without having to be physically present in the workplace. Flexible working practices are now a key feature of the modern workplace. The degree to which leaders exert control over when and where people get work done – and the degree to which they are willing to let talent work in or move to other business areas – is an important and distinguishing cultural factor with implications for employee attraction and retention.
Low degrees of freedom
Control over time/place/AREA of work
UPSIDES: Beneficial where inter-personal contact and coordination is important for working effectiveness, and to provide a consistent level of customer service; advantageous where people need close in-person supervision, or work requires high levels of continuity
DOWNSIDES: Often people do their best work outside of standard hours and location; negative impact on talent attraction and retention if job flexibility and horizontal moves are blocked
High degrees of freedom
Flexibility over time/place/AREA of work
UPSIDES: Provides an environment where everyone can do their best work, and develop experience + flexibility across work areas, as long as customers and colleagues not impacted; working flexibility now one of the most valued work benefits
DOWNSIDES: Risks to work effectiveness and customer experience where closer contact & coordination between team members is required, or where employees need closer supervision; too much talent movement creates discontinuity