homework

Goffee & Jones (HBR, 1996) University Business School: A Fragmented Organization
https://hbr.org/1996/11/what-holds-the-modern-company-together

Despite how unpleasant it sounds to work where both sociability and solidarity are lacking, there are indeed environments that invite such cultures and do no harm whatsoever to the organization, its people, or its products in the process. Still, there is the stigma of an “unfriendly” organization to contend with, which is the reason this case study uses a disguised name for its subject.

University Business School is typical of its breed: it offers an M.B.A. program and several shorter executive programs. Its other products are books, reports, and scholarly articles. The school achieves all this smoothly, with remarkably low levels of social interaction of any kind among members of the community.

Take sociability. At UBS, professors work mainly on their own, researching their specialty, preparing classes, writing articles, and assessing students’ papers. Often this work is done at home or in the office, behind closed doors displaying Do Not Disturb signs. Many professors have demanding second jobs as consultants to industry. Therefore, when social contact does occur, it is with clients, students, or research sponsors rather than with colleagues. In fact, faculty members may actively avoid sociability on campus in order to maximize discretionary time for private consulting work and research for publication.

As for solidarity, UBS professors see themselves foremost as part of an international group of scholars, feeling no particular affinity for the institution that employs them. Their occupational group, they believe, sets the standards and controls outputs, such as journal articles. In addition, it shapes employment opportunities and determines career progress. There is no point, the professors’ thinking goes, concerning themselves with the goals and strategies of an institution that does not have direct bearing on their day-today work or future pursuits.

As we have said, however, none of this diminished sociability or solidarity compromises the competitive position of UBS, a highly renowned institution. The reason is that many professors do indeed do their best work alone or with scholars from other institutions who share similar interests. Moreover, M.B.A. and other academic programs don’t necessarily need input from groups of staff members; most professors know what to teach and are disinclined in any case to take the advice of others. Indeed, the only reason for meetings in this environment is to decide on academic appointments and promotions. This activity involves consideration of scholarship, which requires neither sociability nor solidarity. Finally, UBS need not worry that its employees are losing focus or urgency about their work—one of the biggest risks of low-solidarity organizations. On the contrary. UBS attracts a self-selecting group of highly autonomous, sometimes egocentric individuals who are motivated, not alienated, by the freedoms of the fragmented organization.

In short, the success of UBS underscores our point: there is no generic ideal when it comes to corporate community. If the culture fits, wear it.