Numerous organizations that exist in the world can be divided into distinct categories based on several factors. For instance, Starbucks, Amazon, and Apple, with which I am familiar as a customer, can be characterized by either their employees, pursuits, or leaders. When reviewing each organization’s unique features, Starbucks corresponds with one of the typologies that focus on assumptions about authority and intimacy, whereas Amazon and Apple fit into typologies of corporate character and culture.
Starbucks as a Utilitarian Organization
The conduct of Stabucks’s personnel suggests that the corporation can be described by a classification that concentrates on power and closeness. Such a category represents the fundamental relationship between an individual and an organization, with the latter being coercive, utilitarian, or normative (Schein, 2017). Out of the three types, Starbucks correlates with utilitarian institutions that reflect transactional relations where employees are “rational economic actors” who receive payment in exchange for their work (Schein, 2017, p. 199). The staff in such enterprises is supposed to abide by all rules that affect the business’s performance (Schein, 2017). Accordingly, Starbucks’s personnel, especially baristas, are expected to follow several regulations so that all stores of the international coffee provider appear similar to clients. For instance, employees who directly interact with customers are anticipated to look happy, not wear colorful clothes and heels, and know different drink combinations (Ong, 2019). As a result, Starbucks’s staff’s income depends on whether they can create a friendly and professional atmosphere in their locations. The typology that is based on assumptions about intimacy and authority includes companies like Starbucks, where the personnel follows certain rules to get paid.
Amazon as an Adhocracy Organization
Amazon corresponds with one of the classifications of corporate character and culture due to the corporation’s pursuits. In particular, Amazon can be characterized by a four-category typology that ranks organizations based on their stability or flexibility alongside their internal or external focus (Schein, 2017). When regarding Amazon as a multi-industry business, rather than simply a retailer, the enterprise matches the adhocracy type that is adjustable, externally concentrated, innovative, and entrepreneurial (Schein, 2017). In addition to selling goods, Amazon produces TV shows and movies, delivers food, provides advertising services, interacts with intelligence agencies, and designs digital devices (Mitchell, 2018). Notably, while the company is interested in dominating markets, it does not fit into the market category of the typology because such a class is quite stable (Schein, 2017). In contrast, Amazon’s flexibility is expressed through the firm’s willingness to accept temporary losses for long-term outcomes (Mitchell, 2018). Therefore, Amazon seems to belong to adhocracy enterprises that prioritize their external activities and can adapt their operations in diverse sectors.
Apple as a Power-Oriented Organization
Apple corresponds with one of the typologies of corporate character and culture due to Steve Jobs’s impact on the corporation. Out of classifications that represent cultural essences in organizations, Apple correlates with the power-oriented category where businesses are dominated by charismatic founders (Schein, 2017). Although, after establishing Apple, Jobs was apart from the business for several years, the period when he served as the corporation’s CEO increased brand value and was influential for Apple (Kim, 2020). While some argue whether Jobs’s leadership was charismatic or transformational, many agree that charisma attributes, such as extraversion, energy, and enthusiasm, belong to both approaches (Williams et al., 2018; Hansbrough & Schyns, 2018; Kim, 2020). Consequently, Jobs has affected Apple by being a passionate visionary who valued social interactions and inspired employees to create items they would wish to use (Kim, 2020). Despite facing considerable challenges, Apple’s products were significantly innovated during Job’s administration (Kim, 2020). Therefore, Apple can be described as a power-oriented organization in which a charismatic founder has established a culture of high performance.
Measuring Cultures
Upon categorizing the three companies, it seems that quantifying culture dimensions is not always useful. The diagnostic quantitative approach refers to seeking insight into a culture by measuring its dimensions or looking for its typological models (Schein, 2017). Several issues arise when people attempt to estimate cultures because many assessments are based on surveys that typically fail to cover all internal and external dimensions, which are likely to be superficial (Schein, 2017). Nonetheless, numerically appraising dimensions can be practical when one has particular measurements and a clear goal. For example, companies may examine certain attributes they are interested in to compare specific firms when preparing for mergers or acquisitions (Schein, 2017). Consequently, quantifying dimensions can be useful under conditions of clarity of desired characteristics and outcomes but not when striving to capture the essence of culture in general.
Conclusion
To summarize, different typologies can describe Starbucks as a utilitarian company, Amazon as an adhocracy corporation, and Apple as a power-oriented enterprise. Categorizations of each of the three organizations can be explained based on certain features that are affiliated with cultures, such as employee behavior, pursuits, or the founder’s identity. Some insights I have derived from this activity are that several factors can be used to classify institutions and better understand firms, but dividing companies into specific groups can also be misleading. Because internal and external processes of an organization vary, many categorizations have limitations in assessing the true nature of a corporation. For instance, while Amazon and Apple fit into typologies of corporate character and culture, they can also be viewed as utilitarian firms due to having employees who obediently work in exchange for payment. Therefore, while classifying businesses can be practical in examining particular aspects, it may not be useful in understanding all processes.
References
Hansbrough, T. K., & Schyns, B. (2018). The appeal of transformational leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, 12(3), 19-32. Web.
Kim, H. (2020). Comparison of strategic leadership: Steve Jobs and Tim Cook. Business and Management Studies, 6(3), 17-25. Web.
Mitchell, S. (2018). Amazon doesn’t just want to dominate the market — It wants to become the market. The Nation. Web.
Ong, J. (2019). 20 surprising rules Starbucks makes its baristas follow. TheTalko. Web.
Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). John Wiley and Sons.
Williams Jr, R., Raffo, D. M., & Clark, L. A. (2018). Charisma as an attribute of transformational leaders: What about credibility? Journal of Management Development, 37(6), 512-524. Web.