Every organisation lives in two worlds at once. One is visible, charted in plans and structures, measured in revenue, cost, and performance indicators. It is the world of strategy decks, budgets, and operating models. The other is quieter. It exists in the stories people tell one another, the assumptions they share, the unwritten rules about what is safe, what is admired, and what is ignored. Leaders often insist that the first world is where the real work happens. The second, they say, is soft. Intangible. A backdrop.

This is the heart of the myth. Culture is treated as mood music, important perhaps for morale but secondary to the practical work of execution. It is something to “get right” once the strategy is finished, a side project for HR rather than a core concern for the executive team. The language gives it away. Strategy is hard. Culture is soft. Strategy is concrete. Culture is vague.

Edgar Schein offers a very different view. He describes culture as the pattern of shared basic assumptions that a group has learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration (Schein, 2010). These assumptions become taken for granted. They shape what people notice, which questions they ask, how they make decisions, and how they respond to uncertainty. Seen this way, culture is not a background feeling. It is the lens through which the entire organisation sees itself and its work.

If we take Schein seriously, the idea that culture is soft becomes hard to sustain. Strategy may dictate direction. Culture determines how that direction is interpreted and enacted. It influences whether people tell the truth, whether they raise risks, whether they collaborate, and whether they persist. It shapes the lived experience of work, whether or not leaders pay attention to it.

The problem with seeing culture as soft

The trouble with the “soft stuff” label is not just that it is inaccurate. It is that it encourages leaders to misdirect their attention. When culture is seen as intangible or secondary, it becomes easier to focus on the visible elements of organisational life: structures, targets, products, processes. These can be adjusted, measured, and reported. Culture work, by contrast, involves surfacing assumptions and confronting contradictions between what the organisation claims to value and what it actually rewards. Labelling culture as soft is one way to avoid this discomfort.

Culture also appears soft because it is hard to see directly. Leaders do not encounter culture as a single object. They encounter it as patterns: who speaks in meetings, how conflict is handled, what happens when a deadline is missed, how new joiners are treated, whether people admit mistakes. Because these patterns feel ordinary, they are easy to overlook. The organisation experiences them as “how things are”, not as choices that could be different.

Treating culture as soft has consequences. It encourages the belief that culture sits apart from performance, rather than underneath it. When results are disappointing, leaders look first to strategy, structure, or talent. Culture remains largely unexamined, even though it quietly shapes every one of those elements.

What the evidence actually shows

Empirical research paints a more demanding picture. John Kotter and James Heskett studied more than two hundred organisations over an eleven year period to explore the link between culture and performance (Kotter and Heskett, 1992). They found that companies with strong, adaptive cultures significantly outperformed those with weaker or misaligned cultures across revenue growth, workforce engagement, and stock price. Their conclusion was not that culture is a “nice to have”. It was that culture is a central driver of long term economic performance.

Jennifer Chatman and Charles O’Reilly, reviewing decades of research, argue that culture acts as a system of social control that coordinates behaviour at scale (Chatman and O’Reilly, 2016). Shared norms and expectations influence how people interpret situations and how they act in them. When culture aligns with the organisation’s strategy, it enables coordination, commitment, and clarity. When it does not, it produces friction, fragmentation, and drift. Because culture operates through meaning rather than mandate, it can be a powerful source of advantage that competitors struggle to imitate.

Schein’s work connects these findings to daily life. He emphasises that culture shapes perception itself (Schein, 2010). It influences what issues are seen as important, what risks are downplayed, and what successes are celebrated. Leaders who ignore this often find themselves disappointed that a well designed strategy does not land as expected. The plan may be clear, but the meaning people attach to it is shaped by a culture they barely see.

Taken together, these strands of research point to a simple conclusion. Culture is not soft. It is consequential. It influences both the quality of human experience inside an organisation and the results that organisation achieves over time.

The false dichotomy: hard strategy versus soft culture

The myth that culture is soft rests on a false dichotomy. It imagines a world in which leaders must choose between the “hard” work of strategy and the “soft” work of culture. In this framing, strategy is rational, analytical, and objective. Culture is emotional, subjective, and imprecise. The leader’s task is to focus on the hard side and hope that the soft side will follow.

This split is misleading. Strategy and culture are not rival domains. They are two aspects of the same system. Strategy articulates choices about where to play and how to win. Culture shapes how those choices are interpreted and enacted in daily behaviour. When leaders privilege strategy and neglect culture, they create plans that do not travel. When they privilege culture and neglect strategy, they foster energy without direction.

Kotter and Heskett’s work suggests that the most effective organisations are those in which culture is both strong and adaptive, able to support a clear strategic intent while adjusting as the environment changes (Kotter and Heskett, 1992). Chatman and O’Reilly likewise emphasise that culture becomes a strategic asset when it is aligned with the organisation’s goals and is reinforced through systems and practices (Chatman and O’Reilly, 2016). The relationship is not either/or. It is mutually shaping.

The hard versus soft distinction also obscures where difficulty truly lies. Developing a thoughtful strategy is demanding, but the work of shifting shared assumptions, behaviours, and stories is no less rigorous. Culture work asks leaders to examine how their own actions contribute to the patterns they see around them. In that sense it is not softer than strategy. It is more personal.

What leaders misinterpret as “soft stuff”

Part of why culture is underestimated is that many of the activities that shape it are mislabelled as soft. Time spent on meaning making is seen as separate from execution. Time spent on reflection is seen as a pause from real work. Storytelling is dismissed as embellishment rather than recognised as a primary way people make sense of what happens around them.

When leaders invest in conversation, invite questions, and surface concerns, it can look on the surface as if nothing concrete is being produced. Yet these interactions are often where culture shifts. They are where people decide whether to trust, whether to commit, and whether to speak. To call this soft is to misunderstand how human systems change.

Similarly, work that protects relationships is often treated as a luxury. Repairing a breach of trust, acknowledging a misstep, or making time to understand how decisions were experienced can all be viewed as emotional labour separate from performance. In reality this labour is what allows performance to be sustained.

The label “soft stuff” therefore does more than belittle culture. It belittles the practices through which culture is created, maintained, and altered. It tells leaders that they can safely postpone this work, when in fact it is shaping the conditions for every decision they make.

Examples that show culture as infrastructure

The concrete power of culture becomes visible when we look at organisations that treat it as infrastructure rather than atmosphere.

At Microsoft, Satya Nadella’s emphasis on a growth mindset was not a branding exercise. It was a deliberate effort to redefine how people related to learning, failure, and collaboration. The resulting cultural shift enabled strategic moves into cloud services and new forms of partnership. The strategy was important, but it was the cultural change that made the strategy livable.

In organisations such as Toyota, culture is embedded in routines as much as rhetoric. Continuous improvement is enacted through practices that involve everyone in identifying and addressing problems. Culture becomes a system of participation, not a slogan on a wall.

In safety critical sectors such as aviation, culture determines whether procedures work. Written protocols exist everywhere. What differs is whether people feel able to raise concerns, admit uncertainty, and challenge decisions when necessary. A strong safety culture is not soft. It is one of the hardest constraints on behaviour, and one of the most important protections for the public.

These examples illustrate a common pattern. Culture is not a layer added on top of work. It is the way work is done.

Towards a more useful framing

A more honest starting point is to acknowledge that culture is the lived reality of an organisation. It is how people experience power, purpose, and belonging. It is the set of tacit agreements about what matters and what does not. When leaders treat culture as soft, they risk leaving this reality unexamined and unmanaged, even as it shapes every outcome they care about.

A more useful framing is to see culture as a strategic context that can be understood, influenced, and aligned with intent. This does not mean reducing culture to a set of metrics. It means paying attention to patterns: which behaviours are admired, which are quietly punished, which stories spread quickly, which topics stay underground. It means noticing where culture supports the organisation’s aims and where it undermines them.

Leaders do not control culture in a direct, mechanical way. They participate in it. They influence it through what they model, what they ignore, and what they choose to confront. Responsibility begins with attention.

Four reflective questions for leaders

Leaders who wish to move beyond the myth that culture is soft might start with four quiet questions:

1. What does everyday behaviour say about what we truly value here?

Cultures reveal themselves in moments of pressure and choice. The real values of an organisation are not found in posters, handbooks, or leadership speeches but in the patterns that repeat across everyday interactions. When deadlines tighten, do people collaborate or retreat into silos? When mistakes occur, do colleagues lean in with curiosity or step back in self-protection? When someone raises a difficult concern, do leaders thank them or quietly mark them as trouble?

These micro-behaviours are the organisation’s true operating system. They show what is rewarded, tolerated, or discouraged. They show whether people feel able to take risks, whether they trust one another, and whether they believe the organisation honours its stated commitments. Leaders who pay attention to these small signals often discover that the culture is telling a very different story from the one written in strategy documents. The question is not rhetorical. It asks leaders to look closely at the “normal” behaviours that shape every outcome.

2. Where does our current culture quietly contradict our strategy?

Misalignment between strategy and culture is one of the most common and costly forms of organisational friction. A strategy may prioritise innovation, yet the culture may reward predictability. A strategy may emphasise customer obsession, yet internal processes may privilege hierarchy over responsiveness. A strategy may rely on speed, yet the culture may punish mistakes so harshly that no one dares to move quickly.

These contradictions are rarely deliberate. They emerge from legacy habits, historical incentives, and unexamined assumptions. But they matter, because culture always wins the long-term contest. People follow the patterns that protect status, safety, and belonging, even when those patterns undermine strategic goals. This question asks leaders to look not at what the strategy says, but at how the system behaves. It invites an honest audit of where the organisation is quietly signalling, “Do as we’ve always done,” even while the strategy urges something new.

3. What do new colleagues learn about us in their first ninety days, without anyone explicitly telling them?

Every culture has a hidden curriculum. New colleagues absorb it long before they understand formal processes. They watch who speaks and who remains quiet. They notice how decisions are really made. They learn which truths are welcomed and which are risky. They sense whether success depends on expertise, relationships, politics, or proximity to certain leaders. No one explains these rules. They are learned through observation, intuition, and a desire to belong.

These early lessons are powerful because they set expectations for years to come. If new joiners learn that initiative is welcomed, they take more of it. If they learn that missteps are punished, they protect themselves. If they learn that difficult questions are unwelcome, they stop asking them. Leaders often underestimate how quickly these tacit rules shape behaviour. This question invites leaders to step outside their own familiarity and see the organisation through a newcomer’s eyes, where cultural truth is often most vivid.

4. In what ways do my own habits reinforce the culture we have, rather than the culture we say we want?

Leaders rarely intend to reinforce unhelpful cultural patterns, yet their habits often do exactly that. Every leader broadcasts signals through their behaviour: whether they listen or interrupt, whether they admit uncertainty or perform certainty, whether they invite challenge or close it down, whether they act consistently or rely on exceptions. These habits accumulate into norms. People watch leaders for clues about what is safe and what is expected. Over time, these small acts become cultural anchors.

This question asks leaders to examine themselves with honesty. Do I reward speed but behave reactively? Do I talk about empowerment yet make decisions unilaterally? Do I say we value learning yet avoid discussing my own mistakes? Do I encourage collaboration yet praise only individual achievement? Culture shifts when leaders’ behaviour becomes a daily model of the organisation they are trying to build. Without this alignment, every cultural ambition remains conceptual rather than lived.

Actions leaders can take to make culture a strategic asset

Reflection creates awareness, but culture only shifts through sustained, intentional practice. Leaders who treat culture as infrastructure rather than atmosphere recognise that it is built through everyday signals, not occasional speeches. The following actions help turn culture from an abstract ideal into a lived, strategic reality.

1. Make cultural expectations explicit, behavioural, and lived

Most organisations display values, but few translate them into observable behaviours that shape decisions under pressure. Leaders can begin by identifying three to five non-negotiable behaviours that support the organisation’s strategic direction. These must be specific enough to guide action. For example:

• how people are expected to raise risks

• how disagreement should be handled

• how decisions are escalated

• how mistakes are processed

Leaders deepen cultural clarity by modelling these behaviours consistently, narrating why they matter, and intervening gently but firmly when alternative behaviours appear. Over time, these practices become the organisation’s operating code.

2. Anchor culture through systems, routines, and incentives

Culture becomes fragile when it depends on goodwill rather than design. People follow the signals embedded in routines, workflows, and consequences. If the organisation prizes collaboration but rewards only individual output, culture will fracture. Leaders strengthen cultural coherence by aligning:

• performance conversations with the behaviours expected

• promotion criteria with the culture being built

• onboarding with the cultural narrative

• meeting structures with openness and participation

• recognition systems with learning and contribution

These systemic anchors make culture durable because they shape what people repeatedly experience, not what leaders occasionally emphasise.

3. Close the gap between intention and behaviour

Nothing undermines cultural credibility faster than inconsistency, particularly from senior leaders. People watch leadership behaviour with a level of scrutiny leaders often underestimate. They interpret silence, shortcuts, or deviations as evidence of what truly counts. Closing the say–do gap involves:

• explaining the rationale behind decisions

• acknowledging when personal behaviour falls short

• actively correcting misaligned practices

• making transparent choices that reinforce values even when inconvenient

When leaders do this openly, they signal integrity. They also reclaim culture as something dynamic, shared, and adjustable, rather than something declared in posters.

4. Build cultural insight into every strategic conversation

Strategies that ignore cultural realities rarely survive contact with daily work. Leaders can elevate culture by asking cultural questions at the same level of seriousness as financial and operational questions. Useful prompts include:

• Which parts of our current culture will amplify this strategy?

• Which habits, loyalties, or unwritten rules will quietly pull against it?

• What stories do people already tell that will support or undermine this shift?

• What behaviours must be strengthened or retired for the strategy to live?

This practice turns culture into a strategic constraint and an enabling condition. It also prevents the familiar pattern in which culture is treated as an afterthought once the strategy has already been launched.

5. Use storytelling to reinforce identity and possibility

Culture spreads less through memos and more through narrative. People remember stories because they organise meaning, identity, and aspiration. Leaders who share examples of the organisation acting at its best shape the stories others repeat.

Effective cultural stories:

• explain why something mattered, not only what happened

• link present behaviour to organisational purpose

• normalise vulnerability, learning, and curiosity

• reinforce what the organisation wants to stand for

Storytelling is not ornamentation. It is the mechanism through which culture becomes self sustaining.

6. Create regular spaces for sensemaking

Change, uncertainty, and growth all depend on shared interpretation. Yet most organisations spend far more time updating plans than understanding experiences. Leaders who create structured pauses for reflection build the connective tissue of culture.

These spaces might include:

• after action reviews that focus on learning rather than blame

• team dialogues about assumptions, tensions, or ethical dilemmas

• cross departmental conversations that surface competing interpretations

• reflective pauses at the end of meetings to check alignment

Sensemaking builds psychological safety, reduces distortion, and strengthens trust. It also helps people understand how culture is evolving and what it demands of them.

7. Treat culture as an iterative craft rather than a campaign

Culture shifts not through slogans but through accumulated practice. Leaders who approach culture as craftsmanship understand that it requires patience, attention, and continual refinement. They take the long view. This craft involves:

• noticing patterns

• adjusting expectations

• reinforcing small wins

• removing outdated rituals

• inviting feedback from across the system

By treating culture as a living system rather than a project to complete, leaders create the conditions for adaptability, coherence, and sustained performance.

Further reading: three essential books for leaders shaping culture

If you want to deepen your understanding of organisational culture beyond slogans and surface-level advice, these three books offer rigorous, practical, and enduring insight.

Organizational Culture and Leadership (Edgar H. Schein, 2010) This is the definitive academic foundation for understanding how culture forms, embeds itself, and evolves inside organisations. Schein provides a clear, structured framework that helps leaders diagnose cultural dynamics with far more accuracy and depth.

Leading Culture Change: What Every CEO Needs to Know (John Macdonald, 2011): Macdonald’s book offers a high-level, executive-focused perspective on culture transformation, grounded in real corporate examples. It is especially valuable for leaders who must align senior teams and manage culture at scale, rather than only within individual units.

Organizational Culture: A Guide to Inclusive Transformation (Melissa Daimler, 2022): Daimler brings a modern, inclusive lens to culture, emphasising systems, behaviours, and alignment rather than slogans or values posters. This is a practical, contemporary guide for leaders building cultures that are both high-performing and human-centred.

Closing reflection

It is tempting to treat culture as soft because doing so allows us to keep our focus on the visible and the controllable. Yet the evidence and experience of organisational life point elsewhere. Culture shapes what people notice, how they decide, and how they respond to pressure. It influences performance as much as any plan.

The myth that culture is soft persists because it offers leaders a form of protection. It suggests that meaning, identity, and belonging are secondary concerns, optional rather than central. The reality is more exacting. Culture is not the background to the work. It is the medium in which the work happens.

When leaders recognise this, their task shifts. They stop asking whether culture matters and start asking how it is operating here and now. They pay attention to the stories people tell, the patterns they repeat, and the signals they send. They understand that organisations evolve not only through decisions and structures, but through the shared assumptions that sit beneath them.

Culture is not soft stuff. It is the hardest thing to change and the quiet force that makes everything else either easier or harder. Treating it as such is not an act of sentiment. It is an act of strategy.

Do you have any tips or advice for making culture more front and centre?

What has worked for you?

Do you have any recommended resources to explore?

Thanks for reading!

Sources:

Kotter, J.P. & Heskett, J.L. (1992) Corporate culture and performance. New York: Free Press.

Schein, E.H. (2010) Organizational culture and leadership. 4th edn. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Chatman, J.A. & O’Reilly, C.A. (2016) ‘Paradigm lost: Reinvigorating the study of organizational culture’, Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, pp. 199–224.