Boosting Impactful Cultures at the Corporate and Subsidiary Levels

The conventional approach to ‘collating’ culture within various corporate entities as ‘organizational culture’ is inherently flawed since it tends to assume that there is a ‘binding’ foundation that ‘coalesces’ various differential elements under one roof.  The key consideration in the respective context is to draw a distinction between workplace culture (sum total of all kinds of interactions among the workforce) and core values (foundational elements of organizational ethics).  There is an overlap between the two aspects, however, culture is much more than the affective and affirmative embrace of the guiding principles of ‘goodness’.

Additionally, the prevalent ‘one size fits all’ approach frequently fails to establish organizational harmony within its various constituent elements and an undercurrent of indignation often rages beneath the facade of professionalism.  Consequently, the ‘blowback’ from ‘simmering resentment’ for being ‘routinely marginalized’ can become a huge challenge for unprepared organizations during precarious times, e.g., COVID-19 pandemic, economic downturn, market evolution, ecosystem transformation, etc.  An appreciation of the dynamic nature of cultural interactions between the corporate office and the various subsidiaries can be gained from the following depiction:

There are 11 key types of cultural interactions taking place in the above example, i.e.:

• Within the Corporate Office
• Within the Subsidiary No. 1
• Within the Subsidiary No. 2
• Within the Subsidiary No. 3
• Between the Corporate Office and all its 3 Subsidiaries
• Between the Corporate Office and the Subsidiary No. 1
• Between the Corporate Office and the Subsidiary No. 2
• Between the Corporate Office and the Subsidiary No. 3
• Between the Subsidiary No. 1 and the Subsidiary No. 2
• Between the Subsidiary No. 2 and the Subsidiary No. 3
• Between the Subsidiary No. 1 and the Subsidiary No. 3

The aforementioned cultural interactions are driven by a host of relevant factors, e.g., induction of new talent, performance segmentation of existing talent, succession tussles between senior managers for C-level positions, national/international mobility of employees to new locations, changes in leadership at the corporate office, reformulation of workforce/management at existing subsidiaries, operational expansion in new markets/territories/regions, coexistence of a multigenerational workforce, refinement of prevalent policies/procedures/practices, experimentation with new tools/techniques for workforce management, competition/rivalries between the leaders of the various subsidiaries for performance ratings, networking between employees of certain backgrounds/affiliations, posturing for increased investment/resource allocation by the various subsidiaries with the corporate office, personal agendas of powerbrokers within the management hierarchy, active grapevines unique to the corporate office and the various subsidiaries, national employment policies (e.g., Emiratization, Saudization, Qatarization, etc.), corporate engagement in merger & acquisition activities, increased emphasis on meaningful diversity & inclusion initiatives, influence of powerful unions, change in workplace dynamics due to incorporation of AI-driven technology, etc.

Consequently, the prudent approach in the aforementioned context is to proactively appreciate/accommodate/assimilate such contingencies since organizations are generally a complex mix of identities/interests/affiliations/attitudes that vary across multiple divides, e.g., geographic, racial, generational, nationalities, genders, professions, etc.  One of the ways this can be accomplished is by inculcating appropriate measures that espouse the uniqueness of cultures at their corporate office and the various subsidiaries in a sagacious manner by upholding not only the core values, but also, nurturing the richness that abounds within the expanse of their business operations.  Some of the common and specific factors that can be used to formulate conducive cultures at the corporate and subsidiary levels are given below:

Examples of Factors Influencing Head Office Culture

1. Inculcation of core values – binding principles for the organization
2. Trendsetting by top leadership – aligning the strategic direction of meaningful initiatives
3. Aspiration-oriented engagement initiatives that are primarily driven by embraced values observed in top/senior management – embodying/exemplifying the desired behaviors for the workforce
4. Norms and traditions ingrained in corporate folklore – sustaining the unique identity
5. Implementation of corporate policies/procedures/practices – manifestation and reinforcement of strategic imperatives
6. Influence of corporate power brokers – leveraging the ‘corporate’ power structure
7. Grapevine within the power corridors – navigating the labyrinth of ‘corporate’ politics
8. Tussles between competing functional groups – jostling for benefits/resources by specific interest groups at the corporate level
9. Oversight by relevant regulators – walking the ‘tightrope’ of regulatory control at the ‘corporate’ level
10. Relationships with peers, team members and supervisors – sustaining the beneficial/supporting networks within the ‘corporate’ environment
11. Thriving under fickle senior management – negotiating the pitfalls of supervisory challenges
12. DIBE practices that suit top leadership imperatives – sustainably strengthening the core competencies at the ‘corporate’ level

Examples of Factors Influencing Subsidiary Culture

1. Inculcation of core values – binding principles for the organization
2. Behavior of regional leadership – driving initiatives through attitude-driven traits
3. Local customs and traditions – leveraging indigenous characteristics
4. Implementation of subsidiary policies/procedures/practices – application of a ‘localized’ management system
5. Proliferation of local influencers, e.g., expats with connections at the head office, senior employees, trade and professional unions, cultural icons, religious clerics, community leaders, activist watchdogs, etc. – leveraging the ‘local’ power structure
6. Grapevine within the local workforce – navigating the labyrinth of ‘subsidiary’ politics
7. Tussles between competing functional groups – jostling for benefits/resources by specific interest groups at the ‘subsidiary’ level
8. Oversight by relevant regulators – walking the ‘tightrope’ of regulatory control at the ‘subsidiary’ level
9. Relationships with peers, team members and supervisors – sustaining the beneficial/supporting networks within the ‘subsidiary’ environment
10. Growth and development under the guidance of mentors – astute utilization of counseling resources
11. DIBE practices that conform to regional imperatives – sustainably strengthening the core competencies at the ‘subsidiary’ level
12. Inspiration-oriented engagement initiatives that are primarily driven by innate values inculcated during formative years – propounding the distinctiveness of motivational traits

One of the imperatives necessitating the development of distinct corporate and subsidiary cultural identities is the diminishing lifecycles of prominent organizations in the Digital Age (https://lnkd.in/f9T8bei).  The respective trend had been observed even before the onslaught of the COVID-19 pandemic and is likely to maintain its trajectory and, in some cases, become steeper, in the foreseeable future with the added challenges of trying to sustainably survive the impact of the Coronavirus predicament.  Consequently, strengthening the uniqueness of specific cultures at the corporate and subsidiary levels can help in increasing the bandwidth of strategic measures, e.g., ranging from charting the path for strengthening employment relationships with a diverse and multigenerational workforce to selling nonperforming/underperforming assets to interested parties with a clearly defined cultural component to facilitate ease in assimilation within the corporate setup of the new owners.  The health of any culture that takes root with the aforementioned aspects can be boosted by timely and honest management reviews to replenish its ability to withstand the corrosive aspects of insular thinking and imprudent experimentation that is generally buoyed by ephemeral executive fads or legacy proclivities.  Will you take up the challenge?