How does religion affect culture

The cognitive component of organizational culture is responsible for the way that unique meaning and reaction are ascribed to phenomena within and outside the organization. Inevitably, organizational culture impacts therefore all the processes taking place in an organization, as well as, eventually, its performance. This study is carried out at the level of the organization and is premised upon the fact that there appear similar patterns of culture across organizations operating in a particular region.

This region can be understood as either defined by geography or general societal culture. However, it must be underlined that organizational culture is also dependent on factors external to the organization.

Furthermore, some differences between organizational cultures in organizations can be explained by similar variations in culture-producing forces external to those organizations on the societal level [ 20 ].

This study is conditioned on the basis that value dimensions can serve to differentiate one culture from another. Therefore, value dimensions are applied to help illustrate the expected differences occurring between the researched organizations. The most commonly adopted framework for culture research is the one developed by Hofstede.

It was created for the first large-scale study of culture. Moreover, it has been praised by reviewers for its rigorous research design, a systematic data collection, and a coherent theory to explain national variations [ 28 ].

Through empirical research, Hofstede has identified four main dimensions which distinguish between cultures. In the business context, those four values have been repeatedly found relevant as well, especially when analyzing and clarifying differences observed in leadership styles [ 29 ] or managerial skills [ 30 ].

The four dimensions are considered to be suitable and fitting when examining differences in basic underlying assumptions of organizational cultures [ 4 , 16 ]. Those matters include the power in relationships, the ambiguity of life, the influences of groups, and the nurturing perspectives.

Each of the dimensions is presented with its basic assumptions [ 31 , 32 ] as in the tables below Tables 1 — 4. Individualism refers to the identity of self as based either solely on the individual or on the individual as part of a group or collective. General assumptions in individualism vs. General assumptions in power distance. General assumptions in uncertainty avoidance. The model is presented in Figure 2 below.

Model of basic assumptions of organizational culture based on national culture. Source: [ 4 ], p. This comprehensive model, embracing basic underlying assumptions of culture, can be used to describe organizational culture. Within this research, culture especially its religion component is treated as an independent variable [ 34 , 35 , 36 ]. This research focuses its scope on two organizations in the Podlaskie Voivodship North-Eastern part of Poland.

This diversity allowed for the creation of distinct value systems and attitudes. Nowadays, two largest ethnic groups in the region are the members of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. As in , the Voivodship has a population of 11, inhabitants [ 4 ]. Catholic and Orthodox congregations overall constitute 77 and However, in some areas, the proportions are significantly different. The choice of this research sample was purposeful.

The comparative study in this research includes two companies. Out of the two researched companies, one is located in a Catholic-surrounding, in a region where Contrastingly, the other company is located in an Orthodox environment, where the local population consists of The companies employ and 51 workers, respectively. The number of research participants amounted to 99, out of which 64 participants declared Catholicism, while 35—Orthodox religion.

All of the research participants came from religiously homogenous families. The family members of the participant would all declare the same religion as the research participant. This research has adopted the case study method, whose design allows to examine the relationship between organizational culture and religion. A questionnaire was used for data collection. It was made of numerous statements embodying the four cultural dimensions.

Each of the dimensions was represented by two polarized statements, with a grade scale in between them. On the left side of the questionnaire, statements expressing individualism, low power distance, low uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity were placed.

Contrastingly, the right side of the questionnaire included statements representing expressing collectivism, high power distance, high uncertainty avoidance, and femininity. Research data collection was followed by a statistical analysis, whose aim was to establish whether statistically significant differences occur between the answers collected from the Catholic and Orthodox respondent groups, all the while considering the hypothesis formulated during the course of the research.

The U Mann-Whitney test, which is very useful especially in the case of researching small groups, was applied to compare the medians in the two independent research groups. Contrastingly, the alternative hypothesis assumes the opposite, which is that significant differences with regards to the four dimensions of culture do occur between the respondents from the Catholic and Orthodox environments.

With regards to the research results, figures depicting influences of basic assumptions of organizational culture have been presented below in Figure 3. Models of basic assumptions of organizational culture influenced by religions. The results of the research study confirm that a relatively high level of individualism, relatively low power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity characterize organizational cultures where the environment is dominated by the Catholic religion.

Contrastingly, the organizational culture derived from the Orthodox environment is characterized by a relatively high level of collectivism, femininity, power distance, and the relatively low level of tolerance of uncertainty. Following the presented model of organizational culture was the process of verifying the research results.

In order to do that, another study of both previously described companies was carried out and was completed by the same group of respondents.

The second study aimed to identify differences in cultural assumptions in organizational cultures of both investigated organizations. This study was carried out with the use of a survey, which, as the previous one, included opposing statements and a ranking scale in between each pair. There were eight opposing statements in total: each two regarded one of the four dimensions. The scale placed in between the opposing statements had 9 points.

The opposing statements used in the survey follow in Tables 5 — 8 below. Power distance was illustrated by the following statements:. Uncertainty avoidance was illustrated by the following statements:.

The results of the research confirm the reliability of the proposed models of organizational culture in the environment of the Catholic and Orthodox religions. Additionally, the results confirmed that statistically significant differences with regards to the dimensions expressed by statements from tables above do occur.

The results thereby demonstrate the usefulness and practical aspect of the presented models of organizational culture. As per the research results, it can be assumed that the organizational culture in companies dominated by the Catholic religion is rather task-orientated while in companies dominated by the Orthodox religion—it is rather relationship orientated. This should serve as an indicator for managers when dealing with subordinates.

However, it must be added that despite the differences, there are also numerous similarities bonding the two confessions. Hence, both differences and similarities between the two groups will have an impact on the company culture. Preferences for values and cultural dimensions often stem from religion. It is the sources of guidelines for employees to recall and rely on when making difficult decisions at work. Religion, therefore, proves to be an impactful factor co-creating culture.

This is also true in the case of business and organizational culture. Due to its exceptional influence, organizational culture is one of the most intensely researched concepts within its field. It can influence the behavior of the organization members as well as the performance of the organization as a whole. No organization and no organizational culture are created in a vacuum or arise from nothingness. The forces external to the organization and its entire environment help shape the culture within.

However, as the organization develops, the influence of the environment systematically increases. The exchange with the external environment intensifies, the inflow of new employees increases, and new needs like adapting to changes on the marker, making acquisitions or mergers arise. The external impact, although changing with time, will always remain as one of the culture-producing factors for the organization. Therefore, if the external values of the environment and internal values of employees do not support the organizational culture, there is a risk for the company of not achieving corporate objectives.

The impact of religion on the process of creating organizational culture cannot be overestimated. Based on this research results, conclusions for managers can be drawn. In general, Catholic culture requires more individual motivation and rewards systems, while the Orthodox culture—group motivation and rewards systems. There are some excellent resources to assist us in exploring such questions. One of the most pressing questions related to our study is whether religious and cultural actors and agendas have more of a positive or negative effect on global affairs.

As we have seen above, these elements relate to some of the deepest levels of human experience, both individually and internationally. The study of international relations shows that the answer may be to draw on both strategies, since religio-cultural identity inhabits a space somewhere between the problems of conflict and the possibilities of cooperation. The influential scholar Martin E. Marty would add that such an approach helps us to deepen our understanding of world politics as it really is.

The number of alternative examples in IR is potentially unlimited — so as you read on, keep in mind other instances where the elements of religion and culture contribute to violence and peacemaking. In many ways this was an accurate description because the conflict between the Soviet Union and the West had shaped the dynamics of global affairs for half a century. But, what would this new order look like?

One answer was offered by Samuel P. Huntington , who suggested that world politics would no longer be shaped by a clash of ideologies e. With this hypothesis, Huntington still assumed that global politics would be shaped by conflict as much as the Cold War before it had been. The significant shift in thinking was the prominence that religious and cultural identity would play in shaping the conflict.

This creates fault lines between individuals and peoples who will inevitably fall into serious conflict over these deep and abiding differences. Although it is worth noting that the administration of George W. Religion and culture are central to this framing. At the end of the Cold War, rather than assuming the continuation of a conflict-driven world as Huntington did, some saw the new world order as an opportunity to redesign the way international affairs was conducted.

What would such a politics look like? Some policymakers imagined a world where multiple actors — not just powerful states — could contribute to a collective process of stability and accountability. Religio-cultural voices were increasingly considered an important part of this conversation. Accordingly, an alternative approach to that of Huntington came from a United Nations consultative group known as the World Public Forum, which began an initiative in called the Dialogue of Civilizations.

Thus, in stark contrast to the clash of civilisations assumption that religion and culture are causes of conflict, the Dialogue of Civilizations deploys the same broad elements as resources for building bridges between individuals and peoples in the development of sustainable peace and cooperation.

What is the value of such a change? The Dialogue of Civilizations potentially offers a more equalising approach, whereby religion and culture become an extension of politics based on shared interests. Which framework makes more sense to you? Does the rise of religion and culture in international affairs encourage clash or a dialogue? Do religious and cultural elements of politics enable us to live together in cooperation or do they disconnect us in ways that lead to conflict?

Applying the logic that we introduced at the start of this section, one answer is that elements of religion and culture contribute to both clash and dialogue, to both conflict and cooperation. The benefit of this approach is twofold. First, it encourages us to look closely at specific elements of religion and culture — as we have done in this chapter — instead of forcing such complex phenomena into a singular assumption about conflict or cooperation.

This kind of ambivalent outlook allows us to consider how the precise elements of religion and culture are used in violent and peaceful ways. For every cultural symbol of hate, we see as many cultural symbols of healing and peace. For every religious movement of violence, we see as many religious movements for reconciliation. Beyond the issue of peace versus violence, it has also helped us understand the need for particular consideration about the extent of religious and cultural influence on politics throughout the world.

For example, on religion, Jonathan Fox , 7 writes:. Cultural factors are similarly dynamic, both in influence and in the forms they take.

In this chapter we set out to draw a diagram of religion and culture in world affairs. The aim was to show that religious and cultural factors matter if we want to deepen our understanding of international relations.

The method has been to define elements of each concept and consider the impact of these elements on aspects of our individual, national and international experience. Hopefully, you are convinced that understanding religious and cultural issues is necessary if you want to join some of the most important discussions about world politics today.

There is little that concerns IR today that does not involve elements of religion or culture, or both. Equally, it is important to recognise as a final thought that we have only just begun to explore these issues and we need to go deeper in our consideration of the importance of religious and cultural actors and interests.

Understanding them will help us better understand an ever more complex and divided world. John A. His research interests are related to themes of religion and international development, religion and foreign policy and the IR discourse on post-secularism.

Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing. E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view.

Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks! Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.

Religion and Culture John A. Image by James Jardine. Sacred symbols re defining what is real The second element of religion are rituals that re-order the world according to religious principle. He wrote: The eloquence of this liturgy [communicated] one, simple, cogent, tremendous truth: this church, the court of the Queen of Heaven, is the real capital of the country in which we are living. Sacred stories connecting past, present and future The third element of religion is teaching traditions based on stories of significant figures, events and ideas from the past and beliefs about the future of time itself — like a spoiler alert about the end of the world.

A community worshiping and acting together The fourth element common to most religions is the need for believers to belong to a faith community in order to practice sacred rituals and reinforce the truth of sacred stories.

Elements of culture We can approach the term culture in the same way we have considered religion. Common life practised in society The first element of culture has to do with common or shared life. Symbols of group identity The second element of culture are symbols of identity. Stories of our place in the world The third element of culture is the power of story.

Religion and culture: difference and similarity We have explored elements of religion and culture and offered various brief examples from an individual, national and international perspective. Can we all live together? Religion and culture create a dialogue of civilisations At the end of the Cold War, rather than assuming the continuation of a conflict-driven world as Huntington did, some saw the new world order as an opportunity to redesign the way international affairs was conducted.

The importance of precise thinking Which framework makes more sense to you? Conclusion In this chapter we set out to draw a diagram of religion and culture in world affairs. About The Author s. My main purpose is to illustrate how macrocultural factors such as materialism and individualism can affect the expression of the spiritual, including religion, to influence health and wellbeing.

Religious belief and practice enhance health and wellbeing, although aspects of this relationship are contested. The psychological literature suggests that the benefits to wellbeing flow from the social support, existential meaning, sense of purpose, coherent belief system and moral code that religion provides. This has been their social function. All in all, wellbeing comes from being connected and engaged, from being suspended in a web of relationships and interests. Many of the sources of wellbeing are interrelated, the relationships between sources and wellbeing are often reciprocal, and one source can compensate, at least partly, for the lack of another.

People can find meaning in life at a variety of levels. Many people today find meaning in the pursuit of personal goals. There is also the level of identity with a nation or ethnic group, and with a community. At the most fundamental, transcendent level, there is spiritual meaning.

Spirituality represents the broadest and deepest form of connectedness. It is the most subtle, and therefore easily corrupted, yet perhaps also the most powerful.

History suggests that a measure of both balance and stability in meaning in life is crucial to personal wellbeing and social cohesion. When too much meaning is attached to things that are fragile, transient or ephemeral, disappointment and failure become more likely.

But the imbalance can also be in the other direction, with the search for meaning and belonging ending in the total subjugation of the self — in, for example, religious fundamentalism or nationalistic fanaticism. Many sources of psychological wellbeing are also related to physical health, including longevity.

For example, socially isolated people are two to five times more likely to die in a given year than those with strong ties to family, friends and community.

Some argue that the association is not robust and may depend upon unknown confounders and covariates. Furthermore, the mainly statistical correlations on which the associations between religion and health are based barely scratch the surface of the role of spirituality. Its nature is mysterious and elusive, making it extraordinarily difficult for science to define and measure.

Integration is optimal when the two sides are in balance, and part of this balance requires constraining human needs. Two powerful cultural factors that work against spirituality in Western societies today are materialism and individualism, especially in combination.

I have written about their influence on health elsewhere. Historically, individualism was concerned with freeing the individual from social regulation, including by the Church.

But, as sociologists have noted, it is a two-edged sword: the freedom we now have is both exhilarating and disturbing, bringing with it both new opportunities for personal experience and growth and the anxiety of social dislocation.

The hazards of individualism are growing as it becomes increasingly associated with the belief that we are independent of others. Morality is an important dimension of religious belief and practice. Values provide the framework for deciding what is important, true, right and good, and so have a central role in defining relationships and meanings.

Virtues are concerned with building and maintaining strong personal relationships and social affiliations, and the strength to endure adversity. Vices are about the unrestrained satisfaction of individual desires, or the capitulation to human weaknesses. Individualism and materialism reverse these universal virtues and vices, thus weakening one of the core social functions of religion, one which is central to health and wellbeing.

Cultural messages can create tension, conflict and confusion within individuals when they run counter to religious beliefs and teachings, making it harder to integrate religion into their lives.

In other words, for all the health benefits it can confer, religion is no panacea. For example, Americans stand out from the people of other developed nations in the strength of their religious belief and observance. Yet the US compares poorly on many social indicators, including life expectancy, crime, poverty and inequality. At least part of the explanation can be found in an analysis a colleague and I carried out of the cultural correlates of youth suicide in developed nations.

If social integration is central to health, religion is one important means, but only one. And its effectiveness in this regard may depend on the ways religious belief is explained and practised. While Durkheim emphasised the role of institutions in integrating individuals into society, and so setting limits and giving direction, cultures as a whole can serve a similar role, both directly and through their effects on social institutions.

They can affect the expression of the spiritual, including through religion. Another metaphor is of religion as a vessel or jug, the spiritual contents of which can become spoiled or adulterated by other belief systems.

Religion can still function as a source of social support and meaning under these circumstances, and provide incentives to lead a healthy lifestyle.

Religions can be made so rigid and sclerotic by inertia, bureaucracy, politics and corruption that they become self-serving institutions lacking any higher purpose; worse, they can become potent ideologies of oppression and abuse.

Religion serves humanity best when it embodies and expresses the spiritual as purely as possible, with only a limited influence of institutional and political agendas. The Jewish prayer book, Gates of prayer , captures what religion, as an expression of the spiritual, offers:.

Religion is not merely a belief in an ultimate reality or in an ultimate ideal. Religion is a momentous possibility. Modern Western culture, with its emphasis on personal consumption and self-gratification, betrays this ideal — at considerable cost to health and wellbeing.

The restoration of a stronger spiritual dimension to life will be important in turning around this situation. Publication of your online response is subject to the Medical Journal of Australia 's editorial discretion. You will be notified by email within five working days should your response be accepted.