Rigid Rules or Flexibility? How Culture Shapes the Way We Work
- Marcela Peterson
- 2 hours ago
- 2 min read
Marcela Peterson
Organizations often rely on norms and procedures to maintain order. In some contexts, as shown in the research of Chan and Gelfand (1996), this tightening of rules — known as tightness — creates environments where deviation is minimally tolerated. In others, flexibility (looseness) allows for freer interpretation of norms, encouraging adaptation and creativity.
This cultural difference is more than an academic curiosity; it shows up directly in the daily life of companies. In more “tight” contexts, predictability increases and mistakes tend to be punished, which can lead to greater discipline but also fear of taking risks. In more “loose” environments, people feel comfortable suggesting alternatives and exploring new paths, though the risk of lack of coordination also grows.
I believe that many tensions we see in organizations stem from this delicate balance. Very rigid rules can suffocate innovation, while the absence of clear guidelines can lead to confusion and even injustice. The challenge for leaders is to calibrate how much structure and how much freedom they provide, considering not only national culture but also the organization’s own identity.
At the same time, the perception of justice sits at the core of this equation. In very tight systems, employees may feel that any misstep is treated disproportionately. In excessively loose environments, the feeling may be one of arbitrariness — where each person interprets the rules in their own way. In both cases, trust weakens.
There is no universal formula. Rules and flexibility are management tools that shape behavior, motivation, and engagement. Organizations must reflect: do we want an environment where obedience is the highest value, or one where adaptability is the central virtue? The answer to this question defines not only the work climate but also the type of results the organization will be capable of achieving.
Comments