Sometimes we confuse the issue of “freedom” versus “structure”.

In my experience, what really determines successful change more than any single factor, is clarity of the goal or direction, aka, the vision – not the style of the culture.

In large corporations in particular, people are often confused by multiple competing priorities. There is great value in a culture that prescribes an approach and an outcome – especially with an initiative as well-defined as implementing a new technology (versus one that is less define-able, such as “fostering creative spirit”). It provides people a safety net of knowing what’s expected, and generates speed of ROI on change.

This does NOT mean that there is merit in Company 1 v. Company 2 culture – both styles can be great cultures and both styles can support adaptability to change. This is not to say “spirit and morale” aren’t important … but it is very difficult to create “workforce morale” that is equal across a global organization of 10,000 or 100,000 employees. In that regard, spirit and morale are the responsibility of individual managers and how they cultivate that in their departments and teams.

The issue regarding “merit” of a culture is first and foremost one of strategy: In Company 1 v. Company 2 does the culture align with the strategy – yes or no? Perhaps Company 2 is still finding it’s way into the culture it needs to support its strategy, and thus change initiatives take longer. Or, perhaps it hasn’t defined that link between strategy and culture well enough yet for new programs to be optimized and efficient.