Why Cultural Change Efforts Often Fail Without Structural Reform

This is from Chapter 6 of my book which discusses the relationship between the structure of an organisation and it culture. This section discusses why cultural change by itself is often insufficient. The topics discussed here will feel very familiar to most Agile coaches because it's something we see on a day-to-day basis. With an understanding of the ideas in Part 1 of my book (Kane's Law: "The structure of an organization dictates the distribution of power, decision-making authority, and the organization’s capacity for innovation or adaptation.") we can understand why structural reform needs to happen. 

Let's dig in ...

Organizations frequently launch cultural change initiatives aimed at improving collaboration, fostering innovation, or aligning behaviors with strategic goals. However, these efforts often fall short when structural barriers are not addressed. Here’s why:

Misalignment Between Culture and Structure

One of the most common reasons cultural change efforts fail is that they ignore the structural context in which culture operates. For example, if an organization seeks to promote a culture of innovation and risk-taking but retains a rigid, hierarchical structure where approvals must pass through multiple layers of management, employees are unlikely to feel empowered to take risks. The disconnect between the desired culture and the existing structure creates friction that stifles change (Kotter, 1996).

Similarly, efforts to build a collaborative culture will struggle if the structure continues to reinforce silos between departments. Without changing how teams are organized and how they communicate, the culture change remains superficial, leading to frustration and cynicism among employees (Edmondson, 2012).

Structural Inertia as a Barrier to Change

Structural inertia refers to the tendency of organizations to resist changes to their structure due to perceived risks and challenges. Altering the power dynamics embedded in the structure—such as reducing layers of management or shifting decision-making to cross-functional teams—requires overcoming significant resistance

from those who benefit from the current system. This inertia often makes cultural change impossible unless structural reform is undertaken simultaneously (Hannan & Freeman, 1984).

For example, an organization seeking to adopt a more Agile culture —one that encourages flexibility, adaptability, and faster decision- making—will find itself at odds with a traditional, hierarchical structure where decision-making authority is concentrated at the top. Without flattening the structure and empowering teams, the cultural shift will remain an aspirational goal rather than a reality (Denning, 2018).

Symbolic vs. Substantive Change

Many organizations focus on symbolic actions in their cultural change initiatives—such as introducing new values, training programs, or recognition systems—without making the substantive structural changes required to support the new culture. While these efforts can raise awareness, they rarely produce lasting change. For instance, introducing a values statement that emphasizes collaboration will have little impact if the organizational structure still promotes departmental silos and individual competition (Schein, 2010).

Power and Resistance

Cultural change often involves a redistribution of power, which can create resistance among those who have traditionally held control. For example, shifting from a command-and-control culture to a decentralized, collaborative model requires managers to relinquish some decision-making authority to frontline teams. Without accompanying changes to the structure, middle managers are likely to resist, undermining the cultural change effort from within (Pfeffer, 1992).