The 50th Law (with 50 Cent)

Group culture: When we travel to another country, we are aware
of the differences in culture from our own. Not only do the inhabitants
have their own language, but they also have customs, ways of looking
at the world and thinking, that are different from our own. This is
more pronounced among nations which have long traditions, but to a
subtler extent we can see the same thing happening with a company or
office. It is all part of the social force blending and knitting the group
together based on the particular chemistry of its members.
When looking at your own group and its culture, think in terms of
style and the overall mood that prevails. Is it loosely structured, with
an easygoing style? Or is it organized top down, its members afraid of
stepping out of line or breaking discipline? Do its members feel
superior and separate from the rest of the world, displaying an elitist
attitude, or does the group pride itself on its populism? Does it see
itself as cutting-edge or more traditionalist?
Does information flow easily throughout the group, giving it an
open feel, or does the leadership control and monopolize this flow?
Does it have a masculine feel to it—a hypercompetitive edge and a
more rigid chain of command—or does it have a more fluid, feminine
spirit that emphasizes cooperation over hierarchy? Does it seem
riddled with dysfunction and disunity, its members more concerned
with their egos than with getting actual results, or does it emphasize
productivity and the quality of the work? To answer these questions,
don’t pay much attention to what the group says about itself, but rather
examine its actions and the emotional tone that prevails within.
Its style can have degrees of the above qualities, or combinations of
them, but the group will always have some type of identifiable culture

---

and spirit. Two things to keep in mind: First, the culture will often
center on an ideal that the group imagines for itself—liberal, modern,
progressive, ruthlessly competitive, tasteful, et cetera. The group may
not live up to this ideal, but to the degree that it tries to, the ideal
operates as a myth that binds the group’s members. Second, this
culture will often reflect the founders of the group, particularly if they
have a strong personality. With their own rigid or loose style, they have
put their stamp on the group, even if it numbers in the thousands. But
leaders who enter a group or company that has its set culture will often
find themselves completely absorbed by this culture, even though they
might think of altering it.
The U.S. Department of Defense, housed in the Pentagon, emerged
from World War II with a very strong, hawkish spirit. Both presidents
Kennedy and Johnson had their own views on the Pentagon and
altering its culture; they both wanted to avoid entangling the U.S. in
the Vietnam War. But this aggressive culture ended up altering their
ideas and dragging them into the war. Many film directors in
Hollywood have thought of doing things their own way, only to find
themselves swallowed up by an entrenched culture that emphasizes
top-down control and micromanagement by producers, with their
interminable notes. This culture has existed for close to ninety years,
and no individual has been able to alter it.
Better to be aware and realize that the larger the group and the
more established the culture over time, the more likely it will control
you than the other way around.
One thing to keep in mind: no matter the type of culture, or how
disruptive it might have been in its origins, the longer a group exists
and the larger it grows, the more conservative it will become. This is an
inevitable result of the desire to hold on to what people have made or
built, and to rely on tried-and-true ways to maintain the status quo.
This creeping conservatism will often be the death of the group,
because it slowly loses the ability to adapt.