Book Review: Disrupting Corporate Culture
Author: David G. White Jr.
“Culture is woefully inadequate to support the massive upheavals already upon us…” kicks off the concepts of fundamentally disrupted industrial revolution based on technological intrusion, artificial intelligence, etc… And then we throw COVID-19 into the mix. Nothing like being a goldfish in the blender when finger hovers over the “puree” button. Will we survive? Or are we about to become part of a goldfish smoothie?
But the introduction to cultural impact at the point of fashion is misleading. Pop culture is so much more than hemlines and skinny jeans. Leadership within the culture comes from ideas, conventional wisdom, and the complexity of science, relationships, and technology. An explanation of the value of historic conceptions of business related to the dynamics of religion, immigration, colonization, and organizational culture implies some basis of a modern perspective.
White appears to believe historic leaders, those folks currently at the helm, overestimate their influence. Yet, he lauds the demonstrable proof of individual influence. The appearance of conformity? I was confused by the concept of sophisticated modeling algorithms, cultural norms, and changing structural cultural dynamics.
Particularly when the mythical inevitability of norms versus change was discussed, the implied science of change indicated aspiring values and integration of the overall dynamic. I fully agree with the author when he said, Context Matters. The corporate culture within the confines of today’s managerial fulfillment lacks performance? Reading through the questions and answers in the text, I kept wondering if the study just hadn’t gone deep enough into the reasons for the current culture. Relegating current actions to mythology as problematic seemed an oversimplification of the transformation being discussed.
Within the discussions of the cognitive science of culture, the background explained much of the operational systems referenced in the problems and myths. The practice of environmental and experiential challenges being solved came with sustained adaptations. White’s explanation of these solutions expanded to include mental representations as well as physical knowledge and references. The core professionalization of his occupational groups included some origins that shared influence with what he referred to as a functionally grounded culture. These basic frameworks for corporate culture appeared to be based on real meaningful experiences. His references included artistic performance and appreciation as well as physical fundamentals.
When White moved from the physical realm of evidence to intellectual and physiological conceptualization, he typically left the cultural importance of historic comprehension behind. This new concept of demolishing history to move forward in proven broken political systems seems to be a “new normal” yet every author who breaches this topic refers back to the same failed postures.
In White’s case, the demonstrative view of socio-cultural evidence appeared to get stuck in the neural representations of education in bi-lateral systems. One can’t equal the other because they are radically different from the basis. The transformation from one to another means the two must be either equal in physical existence or dynamically relevant in cultural likenesses. Yet, that dubious little issue of historical culture and elements representative of all such experiences rise up in the dominant logistics and blow the variables of every scheme.
The models of leadership appear to work. Models and analogies of each segment make perfect sense in the realm of case studies and symptomatic surveys, but in the real world, the variables are misquoted, misrepresented, and malfunctioning. Persuasive discussions can be had on many sides of this analogy, and to be abrupt, these analogies sound feasible. Historical evidence indicates these practices and adaptations still lack substance. I appreciated that White referenced historic foundations and cultural norms as he continued working to find solutions through new concepts.
I would recommend reading this book and thinking through the processes. There are some viable options within the concepts, and trailblazers who are willing to take risks may find substantial success in their adaptations.
###
4.5 stars