CASE – FALCON COMPUTER

Brief Introduction
The case regarding the Company ‘Falcon Computer’ deals with organization-
specific culture and values. As per the case, Falcon Computer was a new firm in
the Silicon Valley area of California (U.S.A), having been created just 8 months
earlier. Since the organization was in a start up phase, the managers of the firm
decided to create and instill the type of culture they thought would be most
appropriate for their organization. And it was for fulfilling this objective that the
‘Falcon Values’ document was created which described the culture of the
Company as the management saw it. The organizational culture statement covered
such topics as treatment of customers, relations among work colleagues, preferred
style of social communication, the decision-making process and the nature of the
working environment.
After being hired as a software trainer, Peter Richards read over the ‘Falcon
Values’ statement only to be struck by the wide discrepancy between the values
expressed in the document and the actual employee behaviour in the organization.
For example, the Falcon Values document contained statements such as this:
“Quality: Attention to detail is our trademark; our goal is to do it right the first
time. We intend to deliver defect-free products and services to our customers on
the date promised.” However, Richards had already seen shipping reports showing
that a number of defective computers were being shipped to customers. Also, his
personal experience supported his worst fears. When he borrowed four brand-new
Falcon computers from the shipping room for use in a training class, he found that
only two of them started up correctly without additional technical work on his part.
Another example of the difference between the Falcon Values document and
actual practice concerned communication within the organization. Even though the
executives talked about facilitating open communications whenever they met to
discuss the Falcon Values document; Richards, however, hadn’t seen much
evidence of such communication. He believed that the real organizational culture
that was developing at Falcon was characterized by secrecy and communication
that followed the formal chain of command. Having witnessed the reality,
Richards soon became disillusioned and also confided in a co-worker that “the
Falcon Values document was so at variance with what people saw everyday that
very few of them took it seriously.” Employees quickly learned that hierarchy,
secrecy and expediency was truly emphasized in the organization ignoring many
of the concepts incorporated in the values document.
Despite his frustration, Richards stayed with Falcon until it filed for bankruptcy
two years later. The case finally closes with Richards cleaning out his desk and
thinking to himself that next time he’ll pay more attention to what is actually going
on and less to what top management says is true. Furthermore, he thought to
himself that values just cannot be created.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION –

Qs.1) – What is more important, the statements in a corporate culture document or
actual managerial behaviour?
Ans.1) – Here it is not easy to say which is more important either the statement in
corporate culture document or actual managerial behavior. Because organizational
culture increases the behavioral consistency of the employees and the behavior of
the employees in an organization represent the picture of the organizational
culture. In today’s workplace, the role of culture in influencing employees’
behaviour appears to be increasingly important. And at the same time, employees’
actual behavior is also important which in turn depicts that organization is having
a good culture and proper implementation process of the culture is being followed.
So here incorporation of the culture in employees’ behavior is more important.
Because once the corporate culture document is ready the behavior of employees
depends upon whether it is properly implemented or not.
Since “Falcon Computer” was a new firm so creation of the document called
“Falcon Values” which described the culture of the company was fine but they
hadn’t decided as to how the statement in the ‘Falcon Values’ document would be
implemented in actual practice. And thus there emerged differences in the
statement in the ‘Falcon Values’ document and the actual practices of the
managers and the employees. There should be proper communication and
implementation (ex – Telling Stories - Ford motor, Nike etc. Rituals – Wal-Mart,
IBM, Ericsson, PriceWaterhouse-Coopers etc. and many more...) of the
organizational culture so that the statement mentioned in the corporate culture
document is congruent with the actual behaviour of the employees.
Qs.2) Why did the Falcon executives act as they did?
Ans.2) The Falcon executives acted as they did because they wanted to maintain
their supremacy in the organization by virtue of the positions held but at the same
time also wanted to create and maintain such an organizational culture that every
employee in the organization could identify with. Through the “Falcon Values”
document, the executives did want to develop their own organization – specific
culture but they also wanted to make sure that their positions in the organization
hierarchy were maintained. While the executives wanted to create and thereby
project a common culture in the organization, the reality was that hierarchy,
secrecy and expediency was truly emphasized in the organization ignoring many
of the concepts incorporated in the values document.

Qs.3) Why didn’t employees like Richards blow the whistle on Falcon,
challenging the inconsistency between values and behavior?
Ans.3) The Employees did not like Richards Whistle Blow because they were
themselves very much part and parcel of Falcon’s Organizational culture.
-When the culture was planned and implemented in the organization, probably top
management didn’t include all the employees but when they implemented it, it
affected each and every employee of the organization. All the employees became a
part of it and became habituated in that culture, they adopted the culture and even
made some internal changes (in their value system). So blowing the whistle and
changing the culture was like pulling them out of their comfort zone.
-Blowing whistle is the previous stage of change. As we know changes are always
prevented in an Organization (sometimes because of financial loss, sometimes
because of fear of unknown, some times because of selective information
processing etc). Also, the employees didn’t like the whistle blow as a predecessor
of Organizational Change.
-And here as the employees were also practicing the wrong culture, they didn’t
want the whistle to blow.
Qs.4) How can executives go about changing the old values that govern an
organization?
Ans.4) It is very hard to change the old values or culture. So, first of all, it should
be observed that whether the value is good or not. The question ‘Is the value
causing any problem to the goodwill of the organization?’ should be asked. If so,
then first of all, the higher authorities should be made to understand that with time,
some old values might become obsolete which in turn necessitates the changing of
the values for the betterment of the organization. Then the needed amendment
should be made in the culture, as the culture is imbibed by the employees of the
8organization. So, first of all, the higher executives should bring in the change and
then they should also ask the employees to do the same & thereby help them to
change their organizational culture. In this way the executives can go about
changing the old values that govern an organization.

A case Study on Falcon Computer

 By

Group No.6
Group Members:
1. Arindam Dey
2. Abhijeet Sarkar
3. Kathakali Majumder
4. Pavan Kumar Singh
5. Payal Sinha
6. Jayeeta Sen

Submitted to : Dr. Kavita Shastri