Layers of Organizational Culture
Numerous scholars have proposed that organizational culture possesses several layers or levels that vary along a continuum of accessibility and subjectivity (Hofstede et al., 1990; Mohan, 1993; Rousseau, 1990; Schein, 1992). Schein (1985, 1992) concludes that there are three fundamental layers at which culture manifests itself: observable artifacts, espoused values, and basic underlying assumptions.
Observable Artifacts
Artifacts are surface-level realizations of underlying values that represent manifestations of deeper assumptions (Schein, 1992) or ideologies (Trice & Beyer, 1993). Artifacts include the
visible products of the group such as the architecture of its physical environment, its language, its technology and products, its
artistic creations, and its style as embodied in clothing, manners' of address, emotional displays, myths and stories told about the organization, published lists of values, observable rituals and ceremonies, and so on. For purposes of cultural analysis this level also includes the visible behavior of the group and the organizational processes into which such behavior is made routine (Schein, p. 17)
Trice and Beyer conclude that there are four major categories of cultural artifacts: symbols (e.g., natural and manufactured objects, physical settings, and performers and functionaries), organizational language (e.g., jargon and slang, gestures, signals, signs, songs, humor, jokes, gossip, rumor, metaphors, proverbs, and slogans), narratives (e.g., stories, legends, sagas, and myths), and practices (e.g., rituals, taboos, rites, and ceremonies). They recommend using ethnographic studies of these artifacts to decipher an organization's culture. It is important to note, however, that artifacts can be misleading in terms of interpreting organizational culture because they are easy to observe but difficult to interpret accurately (Schein).
Espoused Values
Schwartz (1992) notes that values possess five key components: "Values (1) are concepts or beliefs, (2) pertain to desirable end-states or behaviors, (3) transcend situations,
(4) guide selection or evaluation of behavior and events, and
(5) are ordered by relative importance" (p. 4). Espoused values are those that are specifically endorsed by management or the organization at large. In contrast, enacted values are those that are exhibited or converted into employee behavior. The difference between espoused and enacted values is important because the gap is related to employee attitudes and behavior (Clarke, 1999). Clarke's results revealed that employees were more cynical about a corporate safety program when there was a gap between management's espoused and enacted values about safety.
The role of values in understanding organizational culture was recently questioned by Stackman, Pinder, and Connor (2000). These authors note that the construct of values is an individual-level variable and that it is a logical error to attribute, other than metaphorically, human properties such as values to aggregations of individuals such as groups or organizations. Organizations do not possess values. Rather, key individual leaders possess values and these individuals can influence organizational goals, processes, and systems in directions that are consistent with their values. These authors conclude that it is meaningless to speak of an organization's singular culture or its values and suggest that future research should consider new modes of thinking about values and
their role in organizations. Future research is clearly needed to address the concerns raised by Stackman and colleagues and to determine the veracity of using aggregated measures of individual values as proxies for organizational values.
Basic Assumptions
Basic assumptions are unobservable and reside at the core of organizational culture, according to Schein (1990, 1992). Deeply held assumptions frequently start out as values that over time become so ingrained or are taken so much for granted that they take on the character of assumptions. When a basic assumption is strongly held by a group (e.g., Herb Kelleher, chief executive officer of Southwest Airlines, tells personnel that they, the employees, are a more important constituent than customers), employees will find organizational ^ behavior that violates this assumption as inconceivable (e.g., V Southwest Airlines' putting customer satisfaction ahead of employees' welfare). Schein concludes that basic assumptions are rarely confronted or debated and are extremely difficult to change. Challenging basic assumptions produces anxiety and defensiveness because they provide security through their ability to define what employees should pay attention to, how they should react emotionally, and what actions they should take in various kinds of situations (Schein, 1992). To date, research has not attempted to identify the antecedents or outcomes associated with an organization's basic assumptions. Moreover, Trice and Beyer (1993) and Hatch (1993) criticize Schein's proposal that basic assumptions represent the core of culture because assumptions ignore the symbolic nature of culture. Trice and Beyer suggest that ideologies represent the core content or substance of a culture. Ideologies are "shared, relatively coherently interrelated sets of emotionally charged beliefs, values, and norms that bind some people together and help them to make sense of their world" (Trice & Beyer, p. 33). Hatch also believes that Schein's model is deficient because it fails to consider interactive processes among artifacts, values, and assumptions. We concur with Hatch's evaluation and recommend that future work investigate the dynamic relationships among the levels of culture.