Organizational Culture in Universities in the 21st Century: A Retrospective, Perspective, and Prospective View
Abstract
The study of Organizational Culture (OC) is of paramount importance for understanding the internal dynamics of any organization, especially given the constant demands of its environment. The central objective of this research is to demonstrate the relationship between the prevailing system and organizational culture, as well as the implications of the latter for the interactions and actions of individuals within the parameters of the institutional vision and mission. It is established that OC cannot be imposed or simply "managed," but rather develops because of the vision and mission of its creators and the system of values, beliefs, and customs woven together socially over time. The shrub model of Rodríguez (2007) is used. This model distinguishes between: Leaves (Visible Part): Behaviors, ceremonies, language, physical environment, stories, symbols, and slogans. Roots (Invisible Elements): Values: Determining forces of how things are done, which ideally should be exemplified by leaders. Beliefs: Deeply ingrained mental models that influence action, and whose transformation requires individual and group reflection (Senge, 1990). Norms: Rules, roles, and relationships that guide behavior, including unwritten norms that can inhibit change and development. Applying this concept to the university setting, the article emphasizes that the University Orientation Course (COU) in the 21st century is crucial for achieving excellence; all of this based on research, teaching, and outreach, with a clear and well-understood vision and mission of its founders and the system of values, beliefs, and customs socially woven over time. A retrospective study will be conducted, considering university as a space for pluralistic thought, as always subject to transformation. Its autonomy should not imply an organic disconnection from the country's national projects (Bonilla-Molina, 2016). University crises are often present when transformation does not follow a holistic diagnosis framed within the nation-state's guiding plan. Looking ahead; The university community is influenced by internal (faculty, students, unions) and external power groups. Based on pluralistic thinking and science, the university requires a clear vision and mission, as well as a comprehensive epistemology, to understand itself and unify its work. And in the Prospects (21st Century): The future demands valuing the importance of the individual and their participation (Imbernón, 2008), adopting a new culture that promotes communication, teamwork, and democratic debate. A radical renewal for the university is proposed. Change and transformation are only achieved if individuals are committed. Leadership and organizational collaboration are the path to unifying transformation efforts. The university's mission should be the filter that defines coherent practices. It is concluded that the university, as a public good, must be a sustainable vanguard and a catalyst for change. The challenge is to develop a university culture based on service, collaboration, and social responsibility, promoting knowledge as a path to competitiveness and research as the true purpose of a high-performing university.
Downloads
References
Barth, R. S. (2004). Culture in question. En Jossey-Bass Publishers (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass Reader on educational leadership (2da. ed., pp. 159-168). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Bustos, C. & Inciarte, A. (2012). Dimensión comunitaria de la responsabilidad social universitaria. Opción, 28(68), 367-379.
Ginés-Mora, J. (2004). La necesidad del cambio educativo para la sociedad del conocimiento. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 35, 13-37.
Ginés-Mora, J. (2014). La Universidad: Un futuro incierto. Conferencia magistral ofrecida en la Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Río Piedras, en la celebración del 50ta aniversario del Departamento de Estudios Graduados de la Facultad de Educación, el 31 de marzo de 2014.
George, B. (2007). Of character, substance and integrity: Why companies need authentic leaders and not charismatic stars at the helm. The Focus, 12, 24-27.
Hunter, J. C. (1999). La paradoja: Un relato sobre la verdadera esencia del liderazgo. Barcelona, España: Empresa Activa.
Imbernón, F. (2008). Los retos de la universidad del futuro. Recuperado de http://univnova.org/documentos/6.pdf
Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge (3ra. ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lau, R. (2009). Características ideales de la Universidad futura. Reencuentro, 56, 130-133.
Llano, A. (2003). Repensar la universidad: La universidad ante lo nuevo. Pamplona, España: Ediciones Internacionales Universitarias. Recuperado de http://www.univforum.org/sites/default/files/RepensarUniversidad_es.pdf
Montañez-García, A. S. (2011). La transformación cultural de una escuela desde la perspectiva del director, los maestros y los padres. (Disertación doctoral inédita). Universidad de Puerto Rico, Río Piedras.
Pena-Vega, A. (2009). El porvenir de la universidad: Consideraciones sobre el futuro en un contexto mundial. Reencuentro, 54, 21-26.
Porter, L. (2007). La universidad imaginada: Universidad 2030, escenarios de futuro. THEOMAI, 15, 131-144.
Rifkin, J. (2000). La era del acceso: La revolución de la nueva economía. Barcelona, España: Paidós.
Rodríguez, A. (2007). Propuesta de modelos culturales orientados a la gerencia del cambio. Acimed, 15(4). Recuperado de http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/aci/v15n4/aci05407.pdf
Schlechty, P. (2005). Understanding the normative system. En Jossey-Bass Publishers (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass Reader on educational leadership (2da. ed., pp. 221- 247). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Senge, P.M. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York, NY: Doubleday.
