Session Zero. Building up the Identity of the Network 20

The aim of this report is to encourage the participants of the NW 20 SESSION ZERO to reflect on the activity of the network during 2004-2018, highlighting the features that define the general identity of the NW 20, and to try to describe the organizational culture of the NW 20.

Each individual or an organization has an aggregate of characteristics that make the said individual or organization recognizable and distinguishable from the others. According to Pruskus (2013), “[...] cultural identity means that a person perceives him or herself as a member of a specific socio-cultural group, and this allows that individual to perceive him or herself within the socio-cultural environment and to orient him or herself in the surrounding world (p. x)”. During the formation of the identity, people compare themselves to members of other social groups and try to categorize and distinguish themselves from other groups.

Organizational identity is a method selected for presenting oneself to the environment, reflecting the philosophy of that organization and highlighting the features that the organization wants to be associated with. Externally, this is manifested via corporate design, corporate communications, and corporate behavior.

When defining its identity and signaling it to various groups of the society, the organization is creating its corporate image – i.e. forming a certain reflection of its identity in the society and an aggregate of social evaluation. Organizational culture is one of the key elements of this aggregate.

Cameron (2005) proposed quite a universal model, where all organizational cultures are classified according to two dimensions of criteria: 1) flexibility, discretion, and dynamism versus stability, order, and control and 2) internal orientation, integration, and unity versus external orientation, differentiation, and rivalry. Based on those dimensions, four types of organizational culture are identified:

- hierarchy-oriented culture as a formalized and structured workplace with very clearly described procedures;

- market-oriented culture, focusing more on the external environment than on the inside of the organization;

- clan-oriented culture, reminding an extended family;

- adhocracy-oriented culture, aiming at promoting the ability to adapt and characterized by flexibility and creativity.  

According to Handy (1993), all organizational cultures, irrespective of the type, the size, and the activity of the organization, may be classified depending on how the organizational culture is formed, determined, and managed (consciously or not) by organization managers of all levels. According to this classification, there may be four kinds of organizational cultures: power (or club), role, task, and person. In this case, culture is understood as given and inherently characteristic of a concrete organization rather than something that is cultivated, fostered, and passed on and accepted by all members of the organization.

Hofstede (2005) designed a model of cultural dimensions, where organizations are understood as mini-societies with specific cultural and lifestyle structures. Culture is a collective programming of a person’s thinking and an aggregate of commonly accepted values, which is partially measurable. G. Hofstede identified five cultural dimensions that may be used to describe and compare individual cultures: Power distance, Uncertainty avoidance, Individualism/Collectivism, Masculinity/Femininity, and Long/Short Term Orientation. Values form the stable core of the culture, and there is a connection between the organizational culture and national and ethical factors. However, differences between national cultures are of anthropological nature, whereas differences between organizational cultures are sociological.

The object of this report is the activity of the NW 20 during 2004-2018, its manifestation at the EERA annual conferences, and the peculiarity of the NW 20, reflected in key- words  of the NW -  Innovated Intercultural Environments.

The report retrospectively surveys and generalizes the report’s topics and activities of the NW 20 during 2004-2018 via the application of the content analysis technique. During the first part of the SESSION ZERO, the results of the content analysis will be presented, whereas during the second part, the interactive discussion technique will be applied to draw the picture of the identity of the NW 20 using the organizational models proposed by Cameron, Handy, and Hofstede.

The experience of the previous years has shown that during the SESSION ZERO, new members of the network become familiarized with the activity, history, and peculiarity of the NW 20, meanwhile, the stable members of the NW 20 reaffirm their relationship with the network. And all participants together discuss its future activities, preserving the axis of the identity and organizational culture of the NW 20.

1.Pruskus, V. (2013). Vertybės ir kultūrinis indentitetas komunikacijos kontekste (Values and Cultural Identity in the Context of Communication). Logos, 77, 159-166. 2.Cameron, K. S. (2005). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: based on the competing values framework, (p. 258). Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. 3.Handy, Ch. (1993). Understanding Organizations. 4 th ed. UK, London: Penguin UK. 4.Hofstede, G. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hillbook Company. 5.ECER PROGRAMME, 2004-2018. Collection of booklets.