OrganisationalBehaviour and Internal Communication Assignment 1 Literature Review 1. Introduction (SASHA -DONE) 2. Organizational Cultural Research Models A. Schein’s Culture Triangle [Iceberg] (SASHA) B. Peters & Waterman (SHISHIR) C. CHARLES HANDY (JULIAN) http://www.managementstudyguide.com/charles-handy-model.htm 3.High Education Industry In Australia (FRANCISCO) a. The University of Queensland (FRANCISCO) b. Organization Culture and issues (FRANCISCO) OCAI ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE INVENTORY (OCI) INSTRUMENT UQ 4. Conceptual Model (SASHA) 5. Conclusion (JULIAN) Cultural Research Models For this research we will be examining 4 cultural survey models. Tentatively these are Edgar Schein, Peters & Waterman, Hofstede and Clegg. Literature Review SBM2106 Links to be sourced: https://image.slidesharecdn.com/d20940lorrainewrafter-151005152127-lva1-app6892/95/so-how-are-things-really-done-around-here-culture-11-638.jpg?cb=1444058597 http://agents2change.typepad.com/.a/6a00e551dd12f488340168e5cce233970c-pi Table 1 - Point Comparison Table (Draft - this should be the main instrument for analysis in Assignments 2 & 3) Comparison Point ¯ OCI OCAI** Edgar Schein’s Culture Triangle (aka Iceberg) Peters & Waterman’s Cultural Excellence Charles Handy’s Four Classes of Culture Scope (how extensive the methodology is and what it covers) Very comprehensive, covers 12 cultural factors Scope is very broad, covers all aspects of organisations and can focus on organisation level and beyond (inter organisation and wider society) analyses or hone down to macro and even micro level (departments or team) level analyses. Though the scope is not as broad as the other tools, it is compact in nature and covers almost all the major organisational culture. Scope fits within the University’s size as University functions as a community and the Four Classes of culture are representative of such an organisation or community. Application Tools (if there are online tools to apply the methodology easily) Difficult to research, possibly proprietary? It is easier to research Four Class model can be used to assess the type of culture that exists within an organisation Characterisation Typologies Uses 12 distinct behavioural patterns divided into 3 typologies constructive, passive defensive and aggressive/defensive style Uses a 3 tier analysis model in the figure of a triangle or more commonly an “iceberg” It uses six distinctive behavioral patterns Club or (Power) Culture: Role Culture: Task Culture: Person Culture: Theoretical Basis/Validity Reflects a wide range of management theories Based on the personal experiences of the model’s creator, Edgar H. Schein, during his time as a management consultant in several organisations, one of particular note being Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC). It is based on the core organisational experience He is a philosopher specialist in organisationalbehaviour and management. He was included within the Thinkers 50 which is a list of the most influential living management thinkers. Charles Handy also has a honorary Doctor of Laws, experienced in marketing at Shell International and was teaching in the London Business School History, extent & Range of Application Has been applied to 2 million organisations globally. Applied to different types of organisations incl. not for profit Developed in 1980. Data on application difficult to obtain (possibly proprietary?) or too broad to be applied directly It is easier to communicate and the result requires critical understanding of the organization Difficult to get data on how extensively his model is used. His model is foundational in analysing cultures therefore we consider his model to be justified. Utility of the results (how useful the results are in terms of changing org. culture) https://www.humansynergistics.com/docs/default-source/product-info-sheets/oci-product-info-sheet.pdf?sfvrsn=18 Difficult to determine, not much data available publicly it seems. Could be more applicable or interesting to interested persons rather than organisations. It is flexible to analyse all types of organisation. He has developed one of the most important models and current organizational theories. Although he does not provide specific solutions for every organization, he analyses and provides a good understanding for insights into how and why they have developed. Ease of Communication (how good the results are for communication and sharing with others in the organisation; graphical representation?) Difficult to communicate results as results require context in order to be interpreted It is easier to communicate and the result requires critical understanding of the organization Model communicates the cultural information on organisations in a simple format that can be analysed in great detail. Key References (e.g. Schein 2004) You need to mention authors’ name and reference number of dates here that matches the same in the reference list for the whole assignment) Schein, E. H. (2004). Riley, J. (2015). Burkus, D. (2014, December 2). Handy, C. 2011. Gods of Management: The Changing Work of Organisations Organisation Type Suitability (e.g. large global organisations, not for profit organisations, medium size tech firms etc.) Any size or type of organisation can be assessed based on the culture triangle It is flexible to analyse all types of organisation Depending on the company's objective and size, he identify different types of organizational culture. Can be broken down within the organisation to organisational departments, groups or teams. Advantages Thoroughly researched, easily framed and understood using diagrams It is based on entire research method and the framework is highly regulative Current theory applicable to different types of organizations. Easy to understand and identify key aspects within the organization. Disadvantages Requires great amounts of writing to interpret results, results can be vague or ambiguous in meaning It is based on entire research method and the framework is highly regulative Model doesn’t go into great detail and is simple on the surface, requires deeper thinking and analysis to extract results. However results can serve a real purpose once data is compiled correctly. ** Footnote: This popular methodology was going to be analysed as part of our assignment however due to lack of time we have had to cut it from our assignment Introduction Researching culture is an extremely deep and challenging task to perform for organisations yet it is critical to analyse as organisations have failed due to cultural failures in the past. Definitions of culture are so broad that no one culture can be seen to be “best practice”. This research is an analysis of the culture survey research undertaken by Nous Group for the University of Queensland (UoQ), which seeks to compare the assumptions of the aforementioned survey with other cultural survey methodologies to see where the gaps exist, if any. However in doing this research there were limitations imposed on us in that there was only a relatively short duration of 2 weeks to complete each of the 3 assignments which by nature limited our scope and our depth of research as well as a limit of approximately 3500 words in total which forced us to condense our work significantly. The primary research methodology which was used by Nous group in undertaking their research of UoQ’s culture was the OCI or Organisation Cultural Inventory survey model. This survey model attempts to provide a visual representation of the current operating culture of a given organisation’s staff or other members’ behaviours that are believed to be required in order to “fit in” and fulfill the requirements in order to remain part of said organisation’s operations. Human SynergisticsInternational . (2012). This contrasts with Edgar Schein’s Culture Triangle, Peters & Waterman’s Cultural Excellence, and Charles Handy’sFour types of Culture, which will each be discussed in the next section. Edgar Schein’s Culture Triangle [Iceberg] Edgar Schein developed the concept of process consultation after having worked for various clients as a managerial consultant for 15 years. In simple terms, Edgar Schein proposes that culture is subdivided into 3 layers - at the shallowest end of the scale are what he calls Cultural Artifacts. At the deepest end of the scale are what he calls Basic Underlying Assumptions. In the centreare what he calls Espoused Values. These subdivisions make the above assumptions based on Schein’s personal experiences working as a managerial consultant at companies such as Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC). In comparison to the data modelling performed by Nous for UoQ the methodology may seem more simple, however there is no such thing as simple when analysing something as deep and complex as organisational culture. Culture should, in theory imply shared, stable (social) structures within a group that also provide definition to said group. Once a sense of group identity has been established it becomes a stabilizing force which can’t be discarded or disregarded readily. This definition does not specify a size of a given social group. Schein, E. H. (2004). Figure (X) - Schein’s Culture Triangle Model Source: Riley, J. (2015). Level 1 - Artifacts The core of this level of cultural analysis is that it is often easy to observe as it represents all the sensations one experiences when first coming into contact with a culture one is unfamiliar with, but difficult to analyse and decipher. Examples of artifacts include the visible products such as the architectural designs, art styles, clothing, social order, myths, stories, values, ceremonies, etc. The problem with evaluating artifacts alone is that one’s own beliefs and values can be projected in the process of interpreting cultural artifacts. Schein, E. H. (2004). A great example of a cultural artifact is the Palo Alto office of IDEO which has the wing of an aircraft sticking out from one wall which some find to be a surprising and puzzling artifact, especially to those who don’t understand IDEO’s culture of creative and expressive playfulness. Burkus, D. (2014, December 2). Level 2 - Espoused Beliefs Schein points out that group learning signifies individuals’ values, beliefs and sense of how things should be, distinct from how they are in reality. When groups are formed, at first the proposed solutions tend to be a reflection of an individual group member’s personal views about right and wrong and what they think or believe will or won’t work. Those group members who rise above the others in their group will, through their influence over the others in their group, be eventually deemed or instated as the group’s leader and founder. However, in the early stages the group doesn’t have possess any shared knowledge. This is due to the fact that the group has yet to undertake any task or action and therefore there is no basis for determining the leader’s validity. Schein, E. H. (2004). Herb Kelleher famously responded to a variety of proposals from Southwest colleagues by repeating “low cost airline,” cementing the espoused culture of affordability. Burkus, D. (2014, December 2). Level 3 - Underlying Assumptions In team work, when solutions work repeatedly to solve problems, the solutions tend to be taken for granted. Hypotheses, supported by mere supposition, become normalised and treated as standard processes or procedures in reality. Generalised assumptions end up being taken for granted to the point where there is hardly any variation between individuals. For instance if the beliefs of a group are such that individuals’ rights exceed those of the group as a collective, they would be in total disbelief of group members committing suicide as a result of dishonouring the group. Assumptions that are subconscious in nature tend to blur or distort reality. E.g. if our education leads us to believe individuals will always seek to abuse our trust and take advantage of others, we behave in a manner that meets those assumptions as a result of our expectations. Someone looking idle may be looked upon as being lazy when in fact they could very well be engaged in deep and meaningful thinking about a particular problem. Absenteeism may be perceived as neglecting work rather than performing work tasks remotely. Schein, E. H. (2004). This model, although seemingly simple, actually requires the reader to have full access to decision makers of an organisation to conduct a full analysis about culture, which is beyond the scope of this assignment. Culture within an Organization Before moving ahead with the detailed analysis of such, one needs to understand what organisational culture stands for. The definition varies according to the different perceptions of the scholars. However, the basic definition of the organisational culture may be the following: An organisational culture is the behaviour of the individuals and the collaborative work forces who work together in an organisation. It is a cultural system of shared value and work ethics. In a single sentence, organisational culture can be defined as the civilisation of an organisation or a company (Alvesson&Sveningsson, 2015) Many of the scholars believe that the success of an organisation is highly mobilised by its culture and behaviour. There are certain rules and terms a company or an organisation sets in order to maintain uniformity inside it (Schneider, Ehrhart&Macey, 2013). Different theirs have been designed and proposed by the cultural anthropologists however, this paper is going to analyse and understand the frame of cultural model of Peters and Waterman. This is a venture to analyse the problems within the university in terms of its organisationalbehaviour and to recommend some positive solutions to those problems (Terry, Callan&Sartori, 1996). The study of organisational culture belongs to different schools of thought. These schools are the functionalist school, the structural-functionalist school, the ecological adaptationist school, the historical diffusionist school, the structuralist school, the cognitive school and the symbolic school of culture ( Hogan&Coote, 2014) Nous group was deployed for analysing the organisational culture of the University of Queensland. Nous has usedOrganisational Culture Inventory during the survey of the university. Nous group conducted the surveys from fifteenth October to thirty-first October, 2012. The survey encompassed 88 senior staff who was deployed to develop a draft on the vision and value of the University of Queensland. Nous group has disclosed the location of some of the employees and some were remained under confidence for survey. Expectation from the Employees: The university has, according to the survey report of Nous group, set a draft of expectation from the employees in terms of achievement, self-actualisation, humanistic encouraging, affiliation, approval, convention, dependence, avoidance, opposition, power, competition and perfection. In case of achievement, the organisation expects that its employee should set some challenging objectives that are realistic and they should try to solve the problem with effect. High quality production through substantial employability is highly expected from the employees. In term of humanistic supporting, the employees are highly expected to for providing supportive and constructive assistance to the coordinates. They are also expected to friendly in professional nature bringing up sensitivity pertaining to the satisfaction of the work-groups. Whether the university actually follows this particular frame, it has to be scrutinised. Peters and Waterman Cultural Model: Peters and Waterman in their book “In search of Excellence” (Chapter 3), has designed a model as a proposal for understanding organisational culture. They have emphasised on value share in association with structure, strategy, skills, staff, style of work and internal system of an organisation (Peters, Waterman & Jones, 1982). Organisational Culture and Staff Engagement (UQ): While understanding the staff engagement in the University of Queensland, it has been found that they have duality in expectations. However, the staff report of the university clearly states that there is a cohesive and collaborative culture in within the university. On the contrary, maximum numbers of staff are found to have shown negative impression pertaining to the management decisions and other culture aspects. Following issues have been brought to notice: • Negative competition • Ineffective Management • Burdens in Administration • Politics • Bullying The employees often strive in pursuit of excellence and they are not given space to show their creativity. There are several negative cultural aspects in the organisation i.e. lack of mutual respect, lack of creative thinking, lack of independent interventions and so on. Overall, lack of accountability and leadership quality has affected the employees in greater level. As per the cultural model of Peters and Waterman, an organisation must carry out individual creativity in order to provide ample space to the employees. In order to ensure corporate excellence, this model can be taken into account. Peter and Waterman’s philosophy of structural relation among the organisational element can be used to solve the problems pertaining to the staff engagement. The model suggests that the relation between each of the organisational elements can be strengthened through shared values. The following model can be used to suggest collaborative works in a much better way. Fig: Cultural Model Source: (Peters, Waterman & Jones, 1982 Management Drive-force in the University of Queensland: Few mechanisms have been initiated by the management level of the university to hold all the working staff of the university. Since the mid-level working staff keep complaining about the non-cohesive and non-collaborative work culture of university of Queensland, it needs to be checked whether the human resource managers take endeavours regarding staff engagement. Followings are the setbacks of the university in terms of staff management: Pre-job training is scarcely provided by the university to the new comers thus creating a void space of work-knowledge. Most of the learning process is done through live training in the university. Thus, the trainees feel perplexed as they are directly placed without prior knowledge of the work they are deployed to do. There is a huge lack of performance management in the university. Recommended Solution: JM Wood’s book Organisationalbehaviour suggests that all the organisations should possess the authenticity and positive approach towards their management drive force (Modaff, Butler & DeWine, 2016). Continuous intervention from the managerial authority helps the employees and the other organisational components maintaining competence while working with their company. In case of UQ, the management body needs to fortify the training and involvement process so that creativity can be extracted for organisational benefit. Charles Handy’s Four Classes of Culture Model In this model, Charles Handy talks about the organizational culture and the similarity that this has with the concept of a village (workers are citizens and company is the village), Thus the interaction between citizens in the village, create the cultural aspect. He indicates that a worker should have a sense of belonging to the company. Employees must have their own autonomy and there must not necessarily be a centralized power (Fisher, 2003). He also indicates that some procedures should be followed, but finally the company will find the way to associate itself in different groups, according to the interests and abilities of the people, with the aim of reaching a single common goal. Likewise, the organizational culture will adapt to the needs of the market and it is difficult for a company to follow the same organizational culture for its entire life. In this way, C. Handy identified 4 culture types and the company has to find the balance between them in order to create a positive organizational culture: Club or (Power) Culture: symbolized by the spider web since it indicates that the control over the organization is in the center and it spreads out to the rest of the organization. According to Handy (2011), this model of organizational culture applies to small companies as it allows them a rapid decision making process. Examples of this cultures are property, trading and finance companies. In general, there is good communication and empathy among employees. In the specific case of the University of Queensland, this type of culture is reflected since employees are encouraged to follow rules and procedures rather than lead. In this way, its primary style is Avoidance. High level management lead the organization and employees follow the rules to avoid making influential decisions. "UQ's culture was also often described as akin to a feudal system: those with power and influence thrive, while others curry favor to get ahead or keep their heads down to maintain their security" (NousGroup, 2013). This type of culture works well when it comes to standardizing processes and creating consistency within the organization. However, it diminishes the initiative and creativity of the employees. Role Culture: symbolized by the Greek temple. In this perspective, the individual's behavior is not that important. Instead, it focuses on the description of the roles within the organization. Usually applies to companies with a detailed organizational structure and each employee has a specific level of authority. This culture assumes that man is rational and that everything is solved and must be analyzed in a logical way and, at the same time, the activities are held together by a series of rules and procedures (Fisher, 2003). Regarding to this type of culture, the UQ has defined roles and job description for the employees that, at the same time, are governed under certain procedures established by the management of the University. However, this type of culture is being affected by managerial decisions due to the need of reducing costs and increasing productivity. As a result, the workload is becoming unsustainable and the job objectives are not being met (NousGroup, 2013). If the temple pillars (in this case are the activities that sustain the organization) are deteriorated, the current organizational culture can be affected completely. Task Culture: symbolized by the net. This type of culture sees management as an entity focused on problem solving. First define the problem, allocate resources, machines and whatever is necessary to reach a solution. In this way, different departments of the organization are integrated and there is no specifically defined power centralization (Cacciattolo, 2014). Examples of this culture are consulting firms, research and development departments. It is said that this culture has a short life as it focuses on solving existing problems, then companies have to move on to the next stage. In other words, it does not apply to repetitive tasks or activities. In the specific case of UQ, this aspect is reflected when employees come together to work on a team project. When it comes to teamwork, employees feel supported and motivated. However, when they work with other departments of the organization, they have a negative experience (NousGroup, 2013). This indicates that this type of culture has to be improved because, the nature of the industry in which UQ is located, these activities are common. Person Culture: In this culture, the organization does not have a purpose in itself, but the most important are the workers who use the company to fulfill their personal goals. In other words, the individuals believe to be superior to the organization (Handy, 2011). An example of this culture can be seen in an association of 4 doctors, each with a different specialty, who share an office, telephone and facilities to perform their job. They are independent and only need basic rules to operate. There is usually no centralized power in this culture. This type of culture is applicable to the case of the UQ since, on certain occasions, the individual research work is promoted, something that is common in the sector of the universities. Thus, UQ has the promotion system for academic staff, which rewards and encourages individual research achievement over teamwork and cooperation (NousGroup, 2013). After having analyzed the four types of culture defined by Charles Handy, it is said that all of them are applicable to the case of the University of Queensland. Continuing his idea about the similarity existing between the citizens of a village, in general the workers feel comfortable in the workplace since they perceive the University as a friendly community, flexible, supportive with a favorable environment. However, "while the physical environment is a delight for many, for some the immediate work environment is less than ideal" (NousGroup, 2013). This means that they are not satisfied with the organizational culture. (FRANCISCO) Introduction to Higher Education Australia and The University of Queensland as our Case Study In Australia the Higher Education or Tertiary Education sector is integrated by universities and other institutions for example, Colleges, Institutes, and Schools. There are 40 full Universities and about 130 education providers therefore it is considered as a very significant sector which in 2014 obtained around $30 billion in revenues. The aim of this industry is to enhance and give the students the skills, knowledge and practice needed for the coming challenges and future career success but also this industry plays an important role in boosting innovation and productivity. (Norton, A &Cakitaki, B., 2016). In this assignment will be studied and analysed The University of Queensland in terms of Organization Culture nevertheless, it is important to mention that this institution is one of the Australian’s leading research and teaching universities and founding member of the Group of Eight Australia (Go8). Its motto is described as “knowledge and hard work” and currently this university is employing 6,703 equivalent full time staff which serves up to 36,322 undergraduate students and 14,748 postgraduate students (The University of Queensland, 2017). As per our concern in this paper it is important to know which values are driving the organization and the beliefs and ideas in common shared by its members impacting and influencing the organization’s culture. This institution’s values are: Pursuit of excellence, Creativity and independent thinking, Honesty and accountability, Mutual respect and Diversity and Supporting our people (The University of Queensland, 2017). In order to understand what in the organization is being applied successfully or what needs to improve the University of Queensland ran a survey which was the Organizational Culture Inventory (OCI) between all its staff members. This tool basically, evaluate the ways in which the team members are projected to think and behave in relation with staff members and their activities. Thus, this double focus and change-oriented perspectives can define culture in the organization as “the shared values and beliefs that dictate the way managers and employees act towards each other and their work” (Cooke, R.& Rousseau, D., 1988). This survey is a quantitative method which measures 12 different behavioural paths associated with three general sorts of organizational cultures: Constructive, Passive/Defensive, and Aggressive/Defensive which are graphically described in the table below (Human Synergistics, Inc.). Figure (). Description of behavioural conducts according to OCI (Human Synergistics, Inc.) •Constructive Cultures: related to organizations in which staff members are invigorated to interact with others and do task in the way which facilitate them to achieve all needs (including achievement, self-actualizing, humanistic-encouraging, and affiliative cultures). •Passive/Defensive Cultures: In practice in this type of organizations the team members or employees believe that they MUST interact with others in a very defensive manner which allow them to feel not vulnerable with their own security (including approvals, dependent, conventional and avoidance cultures). •Aggressive/Defensive Cultures: in this type of organizational culture, is expected that employees approach their tasks in a forceful manner in order to protect their status and security (including power, competitive, perfectionist and oppositional cultures) (Human Synergistics, Inc.). It is possible to say that this instrument has been used for thousands of organizations and in such a wide range of purposes for example, to evaluate and observe organizational change, help with tactical alliances and mergers, encourage collaborative relations across and inside organizations (Cooke, R. &Szumal, J., Using the Organizational Culture Inventory to understand the operating cultures of organizations. , 2013). Therefore, the outcomes are useful and related to managerial effectiveness, quality of interpersonal relations, and individual well-being. In the case study the results in a broad scope tell that within The University of Queensland the main organizational culture behaviour style is Avoidance, the second style is Conventional. However,staff also has described some positive aspects of the organizational culture such as, it is a friendly community, supportive, flexible and high calibre of work colleagues. In contrast, the survey also says that one of the challenges for the organization is the practice of the culture of “the ends justifies the means” (Nous Group, 2013). Furthermore, it is important to mention that applying OCI in the organization brings some benefits such as, understanding the thinking and behavioural styles which meant to be practicing or are expected in the work environment, interact, manage issues and adapt employees to change and the results will help leaders and staff to understand and improve the organization culture of the organization (Human Synergistics Australia Pty Ltd, 2016). The data obtained from the culture survey research undertaken by Nous Group for the University of Queensland will be utilised for future study, analysis and comparison in our following assignments in order to determine whether this method was the most appropriate or if another existing models would reflect different outcomes of the culture practiced at this organization. Conclusion As can be seen from the table, the basis for performing assignments 1 & 2 is... We would have liked to have spent more time and energy going into more detail over this assignment as it was extremely interesting, however due to space limitations we have had to paraphrase and summarise heavily. We could only jot down a fraction of the actual learning we undertook, however and we hope we have demonstrated at least a basic understanding of the knowledge this assessment task required of us to understand, even if our actual understanding is much deeper and more rigorous. We hope to prove this is evident in carrying out assignments 2 and 3. References Alvesson, M., &Sveningsson, S. (2015).Changing organizational culture: Cultural change work in progress.Routledge. Burkus, D. (2014, December 2). How to Tell if Your Company Has a Creative Culture. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/12/how-to-tell-if-your-company-has-a-creative-culture Hogan, S. J., &Coote, L. V. (2014). Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: A test of Schein's model. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1609-1621. Human SynergisticsInternational .(2012). Organizational Culture Inventory®. Retrieved from http://www.humansynergistics.com/products-services/OrganizationDevelopment/OrganizationalCultureInventory Jackson, T. (2004).Management and change in Africa: A cross-cultural perspective. Routledge. Modaff, D. P., Butler, J. A., & DeWine, S. A. (2016). Organizational communication: Foundations, challenges, and misunderstandings. Pearson. Peters, T. J., Waterman, R. H., & Jones, I. (1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from America's best-run companies. Riley, J. (2015). Models of Organisational Culture - Schein. Retrieved from https://www.tutor2u.net/business/reference/models-of-organisational-culture-schein Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., &Macey, W. H. (2013). Organizational climate and culture.Annual review of psychology, 64, 361-388. Shafritz, J. M., Ott, J. S., & Jang, Y. S. (2015).Classics of organization theory.Cengage Learning. Terry, D. D. J., Callan, V. J., &Sartori, G. (1996). Employee adjustment to an organizational merger: Stress, coping and intergroup differences. Stress and Health, 12(2), 105-122 Cacciattolo, K. (2014, November). UNDERSTANDING ORGANISATIONAL CULTURES. Retrieved from European Scientific Journal edition vol.2 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431: https://www.google.cwjH-J7ysozTAhUni1QKHaPXAM8QFgglMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Feujournal.org%2Findex.php%2Fesj%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F4782%2F4596&usg=AFQjCNGu9WWP05K2iDzBagc4EnPMiYnxJg&sig2=om.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKE Fisher, L. (2003). The Paradox of Charles Handy. Retrieved April 02, 2017, from Strategy+business: Corporate Strategies and News Articles on Global Business, Management, Competition and Marketing: https://www.strategy-business.com/article/03309?gko=f3861 Handy, C. (2011, January 03). Gods of Management: The Changing Work of Organisations. Retrieved April 01, 2017, from https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=cG6f-mxkJo0C&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=%22Handy,+Charles+B%22&ots=VAt613WFDR&sig=g8k1j_DHQeW3dqEajH_-3GsOjIE&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22Handy%2C%20Charles%20B%22&f=false NousGroup. (2013, February 26). Exploring Organisational Culture – findings report, . Retrieved April 02, 2017, from Nous Group: https://reform-program.uq.edu.au/filething/get/1/nous-group-report-032013-all-staff.pdf