Section 1: Institutional Culture

This section concerns the kind of culture that exists in an institution. The National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS) has developed four types of institutional culture from studying over 300 four-year institutions. Each type of culture has certain characteristics, among them leadership style and certain strategic orientations. According to NCHEMS, approximately 50 percent of the four-year institutions studied have a congruent culture (one dominant institutional culture), whereas the remaining 50 percent have a diverse or heterogeneous culture. Their research has shown that approximately 40 percent of all schools have a clan culture, about 5 percent have a hierarchy culture, about 3 percent have an emergent-system culture, and about 1 percent have a market culture. The following provides a brief explanation of the four cultures and their salient characteristics.

What is our survey data telling us? The results indicate that Columbia's organizational culture is fairly heterogeneous. Respondents' perceptions of the organizational culture of Columbia are somewhat evenly distributed among three of the four cultural types identified by NCHEMS: Clan (33%), Emergent System (28%) and Hierarchy (24%). (About 15% of the responses indicated the Market culture as being the dominant one.) Of course, each response group (full-time faculty, part-time faculty and full-time staff) subtly highlights different aspects of the four types of institutional culture on their own circle of influence and interactions. Within this heterogeneous culture, the responses indicate that Columbia is committed to innovation and development and that its desire to be first in the field is an institutional passion that is shared by all.

The respondents' view of the institutional leadership style is also heterogeneous; however, a slightly dominant perception (30%) toward the leadership of the College being market-oriented -- placing high priority on results and efficient process -- is observed. Yet 25% of the responses describe the leadership as "clan"-like and another 25% felt the leadership is hierarchical, revealing the wide range of opinion concerning this issue. [Note: the written comments seem to suggest that the term "leader" is defined very inclusively - chairs, program coordinators, supervisors, top administrators - by the survey respondents.]

The following comments from survey respondents illustrate the range of perspectives on the institutional issues discussed in this section:

I have seen the morale of this institution decline.....The family atmosphere has changed to corporate. I don't feel the love I once did. I do my job for the students and their future, but I fear for them as well. There are a lot of good people here, but I think sometimes the bad outweigh them. This is a wonderful place that needs a positive facelift to bring it back....

When I started to work at Columbia almost ten years ago, the school was very divided and non-cooperative between departments. There were a lot of good traits like loyalty and pride in accomplishments, but the school was remarkably behind in a lot of areas, especially technology. The changes that have happened lately seem to me to be noteworthy and very encouraging. There is a lot more communication and cooperation between departments, and the leadership brings us all together toward a common goal. I didn't feel this during the first years I was here. Although we are on the right track, the communication should still be improved further. There are still a few departments that have a bunker mentality, seeing other departments as the enemy. Some of the legacy remains. But I am glad that I stayed here because I see such wonderful changes and potential for even more.

Data for this section

For further information, please contact: hwexler@colum.edu