sustainability Article The Organizational Culture of a Major Social Work Institution in Romania: A Sociological Analysis 1 1, 2 3 Florina Luiza Vlaicu , Alexandru Neagoe *, Laurent, iu Gabriel T, îru and Adrian Otovescu 1 The Department of Social Work, The West University of Timis, oara, Timis, oara 300223, Romania 2 The Department of Sociology, The West University of Timis, oara, Timis, oara 300223, Romania 3 The Department of Communication, Journalism and Education Science, The University of Craiova, Craiova 200585, Romania * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 31 May 2019; Accepted: 27 June 2019; Published: 29 June 2019 Abstract: This study aims to document the specific organizational culture existing in the General Directorate for Social Work and Child Protection (DGASPC) in the Gorj county, Romania. This is a major social work institution in Romania, but one which (like most other social work institutions in this country) have rarely been subject to the type of sociological research as the one reported in this article. The present analysis can help leaders in this organization and other similar organizations to assess and improve the cultural aspects that can influence the achievement of objectives, as well as the quality of the social services provided to service users. Our study has included 286 participants that hold various positions at DGASPC Gorj (social workers, psychologists, and educators). The chosen investigative instrument is the organizational culture assessment instrument (OCAI), a questionnaire designed to interpret organizational phenomena, developed by Cameron and Quinn and based on the conceptual framework of the “competing values framework”. The authors have identified four types of culture (clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market culture) and the tool allows an analysis of organizational culture based on the employees’ perception of the existing culture as well as also on their preferences regarding the way they would like to change the organizational culture in the future. The results show that the dominant culture is the hierarchy culture, closely followed by elements of clan culture. Other cultural dimensions are also explored and reported (leadership, success criteria, etc.). Keywords: organizational culture; public organization; social services; social work; competing values framework; real culture; preferred culture 1. Introduction The sustainable development of any organization is closely related to the culture of that organization [1–3]. Employees like to work in professional environments which resonate with their own values [4]. Knowing that the human factor is the key to high performance and profit, successful organizations value and invest in employees who identify with the values of the organization. At the same time, the creation of a strong, coherent, and sustainable organizational culture represents an important priority for good organizational leadership [5]. Organizational culture is an important concept in the field of management [1,2,6–9]. The interest for this concept was first developed in the private sector, but public institutions gradually discovered for themselves the value of this notion. The notion of ‘corporate culture’ is itself a witness to this reality. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3587; doi:10.3390/su11133587 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2019, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 18 Sustainability 2019, 11, 3587 2 of 18 1.1. Organizational Culture and the “Competing Values Framework” The concept of culture was developed mainly in the fields of sociology, anthropology, and social 1.1. Organizational Culture and the “Competing Values Framework” psychology through studies which dealt with the ethnic or national characteristics of various groups [10]. InThe general concept terms, of culture culture was represents developed the mainly sum of in all the the fields differences of sociology, that distinguish anthropology, existence and social in a socialpsychology group through from that studies in another which dealt group with or the commu ethnicnity or national [11]. Culture characteristics is not ofhereditary, various groups but it [10 is]. acquiredIn general through terms, culturelearning. represents It is shared, the sumit is not of all specific the di fftoerences single thatindividuals distinguish but existenceis transferred in a socialfrom generationgroup from to that generation. in another It develops group or over community time and [ 11is ].based Culture on human is not adaptability hereditary, but [12]. it is acquired throughAccording learning. to ItReisyan is shared, [13], it isculture not specific has the to singlecapacity individuals to shape but the is collective transferred interpretations from generation of events,to generation. as it includes It develops collective over time memory and is and based social on human practices. adaptability Consequently [12]. , culture is a societal elementAccording whose influences to Reisyan will [13], also culture penetrate has the into capacity organizations, to shape the with collective the implication interpretations that differences of events, inas organizations it includes collective in different memory countries and social are practices.often attributed, Consequently, partially culture at least, is a to societal cultural element differences whose [14].influences will also penetrate into organizations, with the implication that differences in organizations in diEdgarfferent Schein countries [15] are defines often the attributed, culture of partially a group at as least, a pattern to cultural of common differences underlying [14]. assumptions whichEdgar in the Schein past [have15] defines solved the the culture group’s of aproblems group as in a patternterms of of external common adaptation underlying and assumptions internal integration,which in the assumptions past have solved which thehave group’s functioned problems and are in termsconsidered of external valid, thus adaptation being passed and internal on to newintegration, members assumptions as the right whichway to have perceive functioned and address and are such considered problems. valid, thus being passed on to newGeert members Hofstede as the rightet al. way [16] to perceivecharacterize and address organizational such problems. culture by referring to several characteristics:Geert Hofstede It is etholistic al. [16 ](it characterize is more than organizational the sum of culture the parts), by referring it is historically to several characteristics: determined (representingIt is holistic (it the is moreevolution than theof sumthe organization of the parts), over it is historicallytime), it is determined connected (representingto elements theof anthropologicalevolution of the organizationnature (symbols, over time),rituals), it is is connected socially based to elements (created ofanthropological by the human natureresource (symbols, of the organization),rituals), is socially and basedis difficult (created to modify. by the human resource of the organization), and is difficult to modify. TheThe study study of of organizational organizational culture culture has has produced produced valuable valuable theoretical theoretical and and practical practical results results in in a a wide range of fields fields [17–19] [17–19] among many others. Spec Specializedialized literature literature contains contains a a variety variety of of models models forfor describing describing organizational organizational culture, culture, based based on on ex existingisting research. research. Thus, Thus, in in order order to to explain explain human human behaviorbehavior inin aa comparative comparative manner, manner, several several cultural cultural taxonomies taxonomies have have been developedbeen developed over time, over leading time, leadingto the representation to the representation of general of cultural general profilescultural [ 11profiles]. What [11]. has What been particularlyhas been particularly influential influential has been a hasmodel been which a model was developed which was by developed Kim Cameron by andKim Robert Cameron Quinn, and known Robert as Quinn, the “competing known as values the “competingframework” values [20]. Cameron framework” and Quinn[20]. Cameron identified and four Qui typesnn identified of culture, four taking types into of accountculture, twotaking factors: into account(i) Flexibility two factors: and discretion (i) Flexibility vs. stability and discretion and control; vs.and stability (ii) internal and control; focus andand integration (ii) internal vs. focus external and integrationfocus and di vs.fferentiation. external focus By representing and differentiation. these two By dimensions representing in athese matrix two (Scheme dimensions1), the in competing a matrix (Schemevalues framework 1), the competing appeared. values The framework four quadrants appeared. correspond The four to fourquadrants types ofcorrespond organizational to four culture types ofthat organizational differ according culture to these that twodiffer dimensions according (andto these four two values): dimensions (and four values): Flexibility and discretion Clan culture Adhocracy Hierarchy culture Market culture Internal focus and integration and integration focus Internal External focus and differentiation External and differentiation focus Stability and control SchemeScheme 1. CompetingCompeting values values framework framework [20]. [20]. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3587 3 of 18 The clan archetype is considered to be representative of a family-type organization