Introduction
Christopher Lueneburger, the managing director of Tower Brook, reminds organizations of the significance of innovation in recruiting workers in his book, the culture of Purpose. Lueneburger highlights the hiring process of employees as the primary concern affecting modern leaders in the evolving working environments and stresses the need to hire all-around individuals instead of the best minds looking for meaning (2014). The book’s theme is how contemporary leadership faces the challenge and complexity of building cultures of power within organizations. Observing the recent happenings across different startup companies with the rise of the coronavirus pandemic and the endless Russo-Ukrainian war showcases the significance of Lueneburger’s ideologies. According to Beer et al. (2019), numerous firms cannot survive the challenging economy even with competitive workers. Reviewing Lueneburger’s work and connecting the business philosophies incorporated throughout the source with the latest articles on business management and employee recruitment exposes readers to the procedures and processes of building a culture of Purpose.
Key Concepts of the Culture of Purpose
The culture of Purpose is a growth engine within organizations; the fundamental concepts adopted in Lueneburger’s work isolate productive leaders from incompetent managers. As a result, building a culture of Purpose begins with the interest of investors to pursue the goal of commercial success (Dumitrescu, 2018). Research conducted by the business editorial team at New York Times indicated that a company’s Purpose should be more significant than any other variable surrounding such environments (Le et al., 2020). At the same time, Lueneburger (2014) echoed that the Purpose of any business should be stiff enough to power organizational development and growth. Pursuing the course of production originates from the selection of leaders; therefore, any mistake in recruiting team leaders threatens the future of businesses (Newman et al., 2018). The culture of Purpose not only determines an organization’s performance and helps in projecting tough times during specific business periods. Building a culture of Purpose requires business owners to identify the right leaderships needs; having the right combinations of workers increases the chances of creating a conducive working environment for developing a culture of Purpose.
In addition, competency-based leadership can also empower employees to create powerful connections and cultures that focus on creativity and intelligent working. The culture of Purpose is a winning attitude that can be cultivated within workspaces to realize a more productive environment. On the one hand, Chunsheng et al. (2020) argue that the Purpose culture incorporates change management concepts. According to the journal, the core of good leadership starts with implementing cultures of Purpose and ends with adopting change managerial acts and policies. On the other hand, Lee and Yoo (2020) stressed that the meaning of culture lies in hiring the right talent. Although the two sources have divergent approaches to analyzing the concept of the culture of Purpose, both pieces articulate the perceptions of leadership in realizing a safe and productive business environment. Lueneburger (2014) portrayed the culture of Purpose as a mixture of hiring talent and implementing change management in molding workers into all-round people.
Innate curiosity within working spheres formulates a critical element for the existence of a culture of Purpose. Everyone, including minor employees, should be willing to know every form of event or action leading to a firm’s productivity for a better understanding of such organizational cultures (Cortellazzo et al., 2019). Even though curiosity annoys, the attribute can lead to the development of better insights into the management of administrative problems. Curiosity also develops gut instincts among individuals; training leaders to listen and respect everyone’s opinion builds a culture of Purpose. The powering of organizations to work as a team occurs with the familiarity of leaders with everyone’s traits, attitudes, and beliefs. The problematic stages encountered in learning the behavioral changes among workers showcase the significant role of curiosity in shaping the culture of Purpose.
Wages and salaries enhance the sustainability of employees in every job; however, the commercial elements of such forces reveal the concept of building a culture of Purpose. The knowledge of the startup and closure of businesses elaborates the ideas of the culture of Purpose (Miao et al., 2018). A thriving business incorporates the aspects of a culture of Purpose in setting organizational goals. Likewise, non-performing corporations view sustainability as a distracting item rather than a pillar of analyzing commercial performances. The culture of Purpose recognizes failure based on the openness and resilience of leaders in engaging other junior workers on current issues influencing production, sales, and supply chain management (Gobble, 2018). Critics from outside organizations help build the culture of Purpose because such approaches depend on the initial energy in creating trust among workers. However, the solid commercial drive and practical skills in hiring workers enhance firms to transform the critics into better change policies.
Theories of Culture of Purpose
Cultural theories explore the connections between human beings and how populations interpret and interact with their environments. Associating cultural theories to the concept of the culture of Purpose educates learners on the values of particular organizations. The digital world demands creative, innovative, intelligent, and multi-talented individuals for the progress of specific institutions. Organizational values offer a background of understanding to employees regarding their organizations and the habits that control people in such settings. The culture of purpose challenges individuals to be flexible to the changing working environments for better engagement in decision making. Cultural theories assist employees in identifying the dos and don’ts within particular spheres, and the outcomes of such knowledge help in the naturing of productive workers. In Mubarak and Noor’s (2018) opinion, building a culture of Purpose requires corporations to analyze the benefits which come with the implementation of modern recruitment mechanisms.
Steps for Creating a Culture of Purpose
Creating an organization with innovative, smarter, talented, creative, and power-winning individuals is a problem in the contemporary business environment. A recent study conducted on the U.S startup companies in the last decade regarding the building of organizations oriented on culture failed due to the overreliance of such entities on recruiting committed workers (Tekic and Koroteev, 2019). Waving into the company’s culture cannot occur instantly because the idea is to build a strong team driven by organizational Purpose irrespective of customers’ evolving wants. Lee and Yoo (2020) advise readers to consider the aspect of communicating the vision of change in any setting before deciding on the correct procedure for meeting the dreams of an inclusive workplace. However, the same study suggested the need to initiate a connection between customers, colleagues, and the community in formulating acceptable policies on the culture of Purpose.
Developing a path towards the realization of a common culture involves the first phase of creating workplace purpose. Any organization’s success depends on the paths incorporated in its earlier stages of operations. Lueneburger (2014) motivated readers to organize free training programs for recruits during the first weeks of assuming their tasks to familiarize the group with the company’s expectations. The seminar should focus on essential leadership principles to expand new employees’ critical thinking. The principles of developing a path to the culture of Purpose address the need to accommodate open ideas and the willingness to take risks on particular courses. The orientation program subjected to new workers must provide the team with alternatives for converting problems into opportunities to increase the probability of interacting with different mindsets (Gobble, 2018). Innovative thinking creates a safe space for constructing a culture of Purpose; thus, developing the desired environments creates excellent paths during the startup of new visions.
The second stage of creating powerful corporate cultures is buying employees’ trust. The bonding between leaders and workers develops on the foundations of good reputation and rapport; Khan et al. (2020) illustrated that getting workers on board after training exposes the population to their bosses’ expectations. Moreover, having employees’ trust boosts the morale and commitment of workers to building strong cultures. The provisions of team growth opportunities can communicate the intentions of a firm to develop a unique culture of operations. Nevertheless, Miao et al. (2018) warn managers of the dangers of continuous reinvention in building high employee satisfaction. Defining success in the second phase of culture building shapes the ability of organizational leadership to establish achievable goals.
The practice of idea sharing can boost the successful installation of cultures of Purpose in the workforce. Engaging workers in decision-making improves the methods of idea sharing across all departments within the domain industry; therefore, leadership should incorporate idea-generating competitions to boost the probability of having innovative environments. Alternatively, Lueneburger (2014) encouraged investors to incorporate the approach of inclusivity in establishing innovation rhythm to maximize the chances of consultations and association among workers. Productive cultures develop from understanding each other’s strengths and weaknesses within the production line; the knowledge of the disparities in workers’ abilities improves the team (Newman et al., 2018). Accelerating innovation in workspaces begins from collaboration; employing individuals based on academic merits and excluding talents can result in staff imbalance. The outcomes of such choices shutter the desire to create cultures of Purpose.
Significance of the Culture of Purpose
Organizations with purpose communicate their objectives, values, and expectations to employees precisely. Businesses possessing organizational cultures tend to be more successful than less-structured companies based on the availability of systems promoting productivity and engagement of employees (Cortellazzo et al., 2019). Lueneburger’s research on the culture of Purpose showcases the advantages of hiring talented, intelligent, creative, and innovative leaders over other recruitment firms. First, the book illustrates that organizational culture increases the engagement of employees. The clear expectations of a work environment inspire employees to commit to their tasks in the presence or absence of a supervisor. Similarly, organizations with Purpose adopt workable cultures that improve employee engagement on work duties and other social demands aligned to particular businesses. The atmosphere of positivity develops across departments with the rise of employee interactions; the only sure way to attain a positive environment involves connecting workers with similar goals but different abilities.
Besides, the powerful influence of organizational culture increases workplace productivity. Employees with different skills, personalities, talents, and intelligence raise the performance of corporations to higher and more impressive levels than entities depending solely on intelligent employees. According to Mubarak and Noor (2018), organizational culture brings people of similar interests and skills together; the outcomes of such connections end with the shaping of workplace structures. The overall effect of the structure of an organization leans on the elevation of productivity and motivation of employees to work as a team.
Furthermore, the culture of Purpose decreases turnover because the leadership approach acknowledges the contributions of every employee. The increased employee turnover rates originate from dictatorial leadership, where managers move with a specific team of workers and alienate non-productive individuals. A company is less likely to do away with workers whose presence matter to the organization (Tekic and Koroteev, 2019); valued and respected employees stay at work irrespective of external interferences. Lueneburger’s literature links organizational turnover to the cultures of Purpose to expose readers to productive workspaces’ benefits. Companies adopting productive corporate cultures spend less time and money hiring more workers due to increased turnovers.
The culture of purpose aids the transformation of ordinary workers into flexible brand advocates. The transformational power of culture initiates some sense of purpose to average employees because it provides excellent avenues of learning. In some cases, workers fail to deliver due to the rigidity of managers to apply similar working styles even when they fail to meet organizational goals. However, firms implementing cultures of purpose recognize every worker’s ability and involve everyone in improving operations.
Application of the Culture of Purpose
The concept applies to hiring the right people for the correct jobs. Lueneburger (2014) articulates the efficacy of the culture of purpose and equates the issue to modern challenges facing leaders in all capacities. In his argument, the partner at Egon Zehnder demonstrates the need to apply organizational cultures in building employee purpose and realizing corporate values. Conducive workplaces demand the presence of e right people to maintain employee performance; the only sure way to retain the correct employment procedures involves adopting a culture of purpose.
A culture of purpose also works in developing environmental rules and guidelines overseeing productivity and associating leaders and workers. The endurance of excellent employee-employer relations is pegged on the aspects of the powerful influence of culture; therefore, organizational cultures provide solutions for behavior changes. Transcend leaders use the tool to influence strategy within workspaces; Lueneburger’s piece advocated for corporate endurance in training workers into better sales ambassadors.
Conclusion
The culture of purpose defines the combination of the organizational values and the behaviors of employees depicted in specific work parameters. The influence of values and corporate culture on employee productivity communicates the primary theme of Lueneburger in his text. The aspects of the culture of purpose can be created only by incorporating more than one variable in the recruitment of employees. Well-structured organizations benefit more than less-structured organizations in the competitive market niche following the choices of such firms to adopt the policy of endurance. The theme of culture contributes to the installation of ideal plans and strategies in leadership; the transformative approaches of the culture of purpose distinguishes the framework from recruitment of workers solely suing academic qualifications.
Reference List
Beer, A., Ayres, S., Clower, T., Faller, F., Sancino, A. and Sotarauta, M., (2019). Place leadership and regional economic development: a framework for cross-regional analysis. Regional Studies, 53(2), pp.171-182. Web.
Chunsheng, L., Wong, C.W., Yang, C.C., Shang, K.C. and Lirn, T.C., (2020). Value of supply chain resilience: Roles of culture, flexibility, and integration. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 50(1), pp. 80-100. Web.
Cortellazzo, L., Bruni, E. and Zampieri, R., (2019). The role of leadership in a digitalized world: A review. Frontiers in Psychology,10(2), pp. 1-21. Web.
Dumitrescu, M., (2018). Artificial Intelligence Computational Basic Models and Analysis for Power Delivery Safety and Efficiency Evaluation. International Conference on Electronics, Computers and Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), 4(2), pp. 22-39. Web.
Gobble, M.M., (2018). Digitalization, digitization, and innovation. Research-Technology Management, 61(4), pp.56-59. Web.
Khan, M.A., Ismail, F.B., Hussain, A. and Alghazali, B., (2020). The interplay of leadership styles, innovative work behavior, organizational culture, and organizational citizenship behavior. Sage Open,10(1), pp. 1-16. Web.
Khan, M.H., (2018). Political settlements and the analysis of institutions. African Affairs,117(469), pp.636-655. Web.
Le, P.B., Lei, H., Le, T.T., Gong, J. and Ha, A.T., (2020). Developing a collaborative culture for radical and incremental innovation: The mediating roles of implicit and explicit knowledge sharing. Chinese Management Studies, 14(4), pp.957-975. Web.
Lee, Y. and Yoo, S., (2020). Individual profiles and team classes of the climate for creativity: A multilevel latent profile analysis. Creativity and Innovation Management, 29(3), pp.438-452. Web.
Lueneburger, C., (2014). A culture of Purpose: How to choose the right people and make the right people choose you. John Wiley & Sons.
Miao, Q., Newman, A., Schwarz, G., and Cooper, B., (2018). How leadership and public service motivation enhance innovative behavior. Public Administration Review,78(1), pp.71-81. Web.
Mubarak, F. and Noor, A., (2018). Effect of authentic leadership on employee creativity in project-based organizations with the mediating roles of work engagement and psychological empowerment. Cogent Business & Management,5(1), p.1-19. Web.
Newman, A., Herman, H.M., Schwarz, G., and Nielsen, I., (2018). The effects of employees’ creative self-efficacy on innovative behavior: The role of entrepreneurial leadership. Journal of Business Research, 89(6), pp.1-9. Web.
Sidibe, M., (2020). Brands on a mission: How to achieve social impact and business growth through Purpose. Routledge.
Tekic, Z. and Koroteev, D., (2019). From disruptively digital to proudly analog: A holistic typology of digital transformation strategies. Business Horizons, 62(6), pp.683-693. Web.