Organizational Culture Theory, articulated by Pacanowsky and O’Donnell-Trujillo, remains an important influence on organizational communication theory and research. To evaluate the effectiveness of the theory, we discuss three criteria: heurism, utility, and logical consistency.

Heurism

The appeal of Organizational Culture Theory has been far and wide, resulting in a heuristic theory. For instance, it has framed research examining Muslim employees (Alkhazraji, 1997), law enforcement officers (Frewin & Tuffin, 1998), and pregnant employees (Halpert & Burt, 1997). It has influenced scholars to consider organizational culture in how they teach their classes (Morgan, 2004). And relevant to us in the educational arena, the theory has been used to study the stories of undergraduate students and their perceptions of “fitting in” at college (Kramer & Berman, 2001).

Utility

The theory is useful because the information is applicable to nearly every employee in an organization. The approach is useful because much of the information from the theory (e.g., symbols, stories, rituals) has direct relationship to how employees work and their identification with their work environment (Schrodt, 2002). Because the theorists’ work is based on real organizations with real employees, the researchers have made the theory more useful and practical.

Logical Consistency

The logical consistency of the model should not go unnoticed. Recall that logical consistency refers to the notion that theories should follow a logical arrangement and remain consistent. From the outset, Pacanowsky and O’Donnell-Trujillo tried to remain true to their belief that the organization’s culture is rich and diverse; they felt that listening to the communicative performances of organizational members was where we must begin in understanding “corporate culture.” This is the basis from which much of the theory gained momentum.

Still, some believe consistency is lacking. Eric Eisenberg and H. L. Goodall (2004), for instance, observe that Organizational Culture Theory relies heavily on shared meaning among organizational members. They comment that stories, for example, are not shared similarly across employees: “different stories about the organization are told by different narrators” (p. 134). That is, although the theory posits that stories are told and retold and contribute to the culture of an organization, the stories may not have shared meaning.

Pacanowsky and O’Donnell-Trujillo were among the first communication scholars to examine organizational life by looking at both employees and their behaviors. Perhaps looking at organizational culture in this way will enable researchers to appreciate the importance of connecting with the people and their performances at work.