Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Corporation
Organizational effectiveness is a central theme in any organization. Organizational effectiveness can vary based on organizational culture adopted by an organization. The Competing values framework (CVF) and Images of Organization are two essential approaches that look at value dimensions related to the effectiveness of an organization[1]. The purpose of this task is to use the CVF and Images of Organization models to evaluate the organizational effectiveness of the Lockheed Martin Corporation. The two models will be used to establish challenges associated with establishing a working relationship with Lockheed Martin Corporation and estimate the CVF culture pattern and description of Lockheed Martin Corporation based on appropriate images of the organization.
Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin is an advanced technology corporation based in the USA that deals in aerospace, security, and defense across the globe. The corporation was founded in 1995 after the merger between Martin Marietta and Lockheed Corporation. It is one of the leading organizations in the USA in terms of profitability and number of employees. Notably, organizational effectiveness is a critical element in the Lockheed Corporation. In 2013, Lockheed Martin adopted a divisional matrix structure where the organization was divided into structures such as h Aeronautics, Missile and Fire control, and Space Systems. The matrix structure allows interdisciplinary connections among different functional groups.
The CVF is based on three value dimensions: flexibility and control, internal-external and stability and control. The internal dimension focuses on the well-being and growth of people in the society while the outside aspect focuses on the expansion and well-being of the organization itself.[2] The stability and control dimensions depict how the organizational structure impacts the stability and flexibility of the organization under the three dimensions, the clan philosophy, adhocracy ethos, market principles, and hierarchy beliefs.
Lockheed Martin Corporation despite having a matrix organization structure adopts a control (hierarchical) corporate culture. The hierarchical culture is defined by clearly defined levels and structures in the organization. The hierarchies in the organization ranked according to the levels of importance[3]. Rules, strict control, defined responsibilities, and top-down control is what defines the Lockheed Martin culture. Studies have established that most of the modern organizations cannot succeed without adopting elements adopted from other types of cultures[4]. Teamwork and competition are critical elements within modern organizations due to the dynamics of the external business environment and rapid changes in technology. The Lockheed Martin has adopted some elements of the clan culture by encouraging teamwork and organizations to ensure innovativeness in the organization. Subsequently, Lockheed Martin has instituted internal incubators (innovation programs) that allow employees to suggest and run new ideas thus promoting innovativeness in the organization. However, the innovation programs operate within the existing organizational culture that is defined through a hierarchical culture.
The clearly defined rules, procedures, and control in the organization play a critical role in improving organizational effectiveness by ensuring efficiency timeliness, constancy, and uniformity in the way of doing things in the organization. Consistency and uniformity are given vital importance at Lockheed as they ensure a sustained way of doing business and overcoming uncertainties in the market[5]. Additionally, the hierarchical culture ensures attention to detail, careful decisions, precise analyses, cautious and logical problem-solving strategies that promote consistency and reliability.
Studies have established that hierarchical culture impedes innovativeness in an organization[6]. The strict rules and procedures in a hierarchical organization restrict mutual interactions of employees in the internal environment of an organization thus impeding of sharing of thoughts that would otherwise bring innovativeness in the organization. Culture has been established to be the primary determinant of innovation in an organization since it either accelerates or derails innovativeness. Employee contribution is also very critical to an organization since innovation-based strategies are mainly developed by employees. Lockheed Martin encourages innovation through innovative programs that are governed through hierarchical culture. Therefore, it is possible that the hierarchical culture acts as an impediment to innovation in the organization. Employees experience limited autonomy since they are subjected to close monitoring and strict organization from their supervisors and managers leading to a mechanical and bureaucratic nature of relationships[7]. The arbitrary and bureaucratic nature of the organization leads to worker alienation and purposelessness thus undermining the role of employees in contributing to the success of the organization. Subsequently, the need to empower the employees through training and development programs is overlooked which in turn affects the employees’ morale negatively.
Analysis of Lockheed Martin using the Images of Organizations also indicates that the organization can be interpreted in different ways. Lockheed Martin fits the description under the metaphor of organization as a machine. The organization incorporates a bureaucratic culture which routinizes the process of administration in the same way a machine routinize production. Lockheed Martin is characterized by clear organizational structure, defined responsibilities, division of labor and transparent rules and regulations which are intended to ensure precision, speed, and reliability in its operations[8]. Scientific management is employed at Lockheed where the thinking is done by the managers and while the work is done by the employees. A stable environment in the areas that Lockheed operates which is characterized by replicated tasks which prompt Lockheed to use the mechanistic approach to promote accountability, precision, and efficiency.
Lockheed Martin also fits the description under the organization as a political system. Leaders and managers at the different levels of the organization hold different levels of power/authority. Additionally, the organization also maintains a bureaucratic organizational culture where strict rules, procedures, and regulations guide the actions of the employees. Power is the medium through which conflicts of interest are resolved. Employees at different levels of the organization have varied interests that bring conflict in the use of organizational structures, rules, and regulations. The organization must be open to such conflicts to promote an environment where conflicts do not derail achievement of organizational goals.
Organization as Psychic Prison also fits to describe Lockheed Martin Corporation. The Lockheed Martin Corporation is stuck in a preferential way of philosophy (bureaucratic culture) which confines originality, forbids change and limits new innovations. Group thinks it is the approach primarily employed in the organization, and all employees are supposed to conform and not deviate or challenge the ideas that are held by the organization. The approach is used to maintain peace, avoid conflict and ensure consistency and reliability in the way of doing business in the organization.
In conclusion, the hierarchical culture at Lockheed Martin Corporation impedes innovation, employee autonomy, creativity, new ideas, and organizational change. The organization should focus on adopting a more flexible organizational culture to promote innovation, employee autonomy, and morale.
Bibliography
Anicich, Eric M., Roderick I. Swaab, and Adam D. Galinsky. “Hierarchical cultural values predict success and mortality in high-stakes teams.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 112, no. 5 (2015): 1338-1343.
Jung, Chan Su. “Current-ideal culture incongruence, hierarchical position, and job satisfaction in government agencies.” International Public Management Journal, vol. 21, no. 3 (2018): 432-460.
Jan, Muhammad Adil, Syed Muhammad Amir Shah, and Kashif Ullah Khan. “The Impact of Culture on Innovation: the moderating role of Human Capital.” International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, vol. 4, no. 2 (2014): 607.
Stincelli, Elizabeth. “Is Innovation Dependent on the Hierarchical Leadership Pyramid?” Journal of Leadership Studies vol. 10, no. 1 (2016): 57-59.
Yu, Tianyuan, and Nengquan Wu. “A review of a study on the competing values framework.” International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 4, no. 7 (2009): 37-42.
Wagner, C., R. Mannion, A. Hammer, O. Groene, O. A. Arah, M. Dersarkissian, R. Suñol, and DUQuE Project Consortium. “The associations between organizational culture, organizational structure, and quality management in European hospitals.” International Journal for Quality in Health Care, vol. 26, no. suppl_1 (2014): 74-80.
[1] Tianyuan Yu and Wu Nengquan, “A review of study on the competing values framework,” International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 4, no. 7 (2009): 39.
[2] Yu and Nengquan, “A review of study on the competing values framework,” 39.
[3] Eric Anicich, Swaab Roderick, and Galinsky Roderick, “Hierarchical cultural values predict success and mortality in high-stakes teams,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 112, no. 5 (2015): 1338-1343.
[4] Mannion Wagner, Groene Hammer, Arah Dersarkissian Suñol, and DUQuE Project Consortium. “The associations between organizational culture, organizational structure and quality management in European hospitals,” International Journal for Quality in Health Care, vol. 26, no. suppl_1 (2014): 74-80.
[5] Chan Su Jung, “Current-ideal culture incongruence, hierarchical position, and job satisfaction in government agencies,” International Public Management Journal, vol. 21, no. 3 (2018): 432-460. “Current-ideal culture incongruence, hierarchical position, and job satisfaction in government agencies,” International Public Management Journal, vol. 21, no. 3 (2018): 432-460.
[6] Muhammad Adil Jan, Syed Muhammad Amir Shah, and Kashif Ullah Khan, “The Impact of Culture on Innovation: the moderating role of Human Capital,” International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, vol. 4, no. 2 (2014): 607.
[7] Elizabeth Stincelli, “Is Innovation Dependent on the Hierarchical Leadership Pyramid?” Journal of Leadership Studies, vol. 10, no. 1 (2016): 58.
[8] Anthony Suchman, “Organizations as machines, organizations as conversations: two core metaphors and their consequences,” Medical Care (2011): S43-S48.
