Culture cause or effect?

I was about to give up hopes of getting anything useful out of the Organizational Design class this term, mainly because the concepts we've learned thus far seem so nebulous and have so little predictive value as to whether an organization will be successful or not. You see, correlation does not imply causation. For example, take Southwest Airlines. In the airline industry, it's fair to say Southwest has been successful where most of its competitors have failed. After taking a Southwest flight, one might get the impression that the airline is successful because they nurture a culture of fun and creativity and that is the secret of their success. But if we were to impose the Southwest "culture" on US Airways, would it help turn that company's fortunes around? Not likely. You see, Southwest Airlines is more than just about perky flight attendants - they hire good people, leverage operational efficiencies and execute on their strategy better than other airlines. But is it because of the culture at Southwest that it is able to excel in these areas? Aye, there's the rub.

You see, strong companies foster strong cultures that align their employees interests with the mission of the company. All companies have a culture, but its effectiveness depends on whether the mission is relevant and adaptable. So I guess the object lesson here is that by studying other companies and cultures and learning what worked for them and what didn't, we can begin to discern those concepts and frameworks that are a good "fit" with our own companies and reject those that aren't. Who said this was easy?