tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4058766287077382431.post5361429912310435716..comments2024-03-23T04:01:39.348-04:00Comments on Understanding Society: The culture of an organizationDan Littlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15953897221283103880noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4058766287077382431.post-16329793706520634902017-12-29T16:53:42.753-05:002017-12-29T16:53:42.753-05:00I like your post. Based on my career in USDA I...I like your post. Based on my career in USDA I'd offer these observations:<br /><br />My agency was created by the New Deal (originally Agricultural Adjustment Administration). I had exposure to the Soil Conservation Service and the Farmer's Home Administration, also created in the New Deal.<br /><br />I think it's fair to say all three agencies recruited their program personnel from rural residents, and particularly from graduates of the land grant universities. All three hired their clerks in local county offices mostly from local women, mostly not college-educated, but promoted their DC managers from the mostly male heads of the county offices. This pattern held up to the mid 80's, when it started to change, under the impact of automation and the rising cost of living in DC.<br /><br />The circumstances of creation did IMHO affect the culture of the agencies. On the one hand they started off as Democratic units, but on the other they drew from what become the more conservative areas of their states. Politics continue to affect the management of the agencies--top level managers change with each change of political party. <br /><br />The mission of the agencies also affects the culture: my agency issued payments to farmers, responding to programs passed by Congress. Issuing payments is different than issuing loans as FmHA did, and the difference created differences in culture, differences which might not be obvious to the outsider, but IMO were real. Over time FmHA became more and more bank-like, as auditors and scandals took their toll, meaning they could not react as quickly to changes in law.<br /><br />I always believed the prime value in my agency was speed of execution: We almost always had very little time to implement the various laws passed by Congress, so getting the checks in farmers hands was very difficult, but something we took pride in, and for which we'd get compliments from Congress. <br /><br />SCS was created as an educational institution, and its culture was tested when Congress changed programs so it was forced to work in enforcing rules, rather simply encouraging conservation.(The fact that the district conservationist had a government truck to do his outreach, while my agency's clerks had to answer his phones, caused resentment, and increased the sense of "us" and "them".)<br /><br />To some extent it's misleading to label these agencies as having a "culture". At least in my agency the differences were considerable when comparing the program areas, with the personnel recruited from the county offices across the country, and the administrative areas, with personnel with a more diverse and urban background.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Bill Harshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02094598931693185805noreply@blogger.com