Organizational culture is created gradually by founder leaders on the basis of their values, assumptions and beliefs. Organizational culture is tangible in terms of the architecture of the company, office layout and exhibits and intangible in terms of behaviour of employees, decisions, policies and procedures. This article aims to perform a comparative analysis of some of the founder leaders of Indian and American businesses and their influence on the culture of the organization. The study adopts the case method research design where the focus is on the specific interesting cases, articles and interviews of the founder(s) in their formational years and cases when the company had a stable organizational culture. The unit of analysis is the founder leader. The company’s culture is evaluated using Schein’s Model of Organizational Culture while that of the founder leader is evaluated using Hofstede’s model of cultural dimensions. This study does not equate national culture to individual’s culture to avoid ecological fallacy of interpreting country-level relationships being applied to individuals. The study shows that there exist layers of subcultures in each individual. The article discusses an interesting paradigm, that is, the culture in which they are born/trained and the culture they adopt intentionally. When founders adopt other cultures, some traces of adopted cultures are reflected in the organization. The article concludes that founder leaders’ culture needs a better framework in order to see its effects on the organization. Hofstede’s model does not show the relationship between different layers of the culture. Hence, the model seems inadequate to be applied to analyse founder leaders.

中文翻译：

---

创始人领导者与组织文化：基于舍因组织文化模型的印度和美国创始人领导者比较研究

组织文化是由创始人的领导者根据其价值观，假设和信念逐步创建的。组织文化在公司的架构，办公室布局和展览方面是有形的，在员工的行为，决策，政策和程序方面是无形的。本文旨在对印度和美国企业的某些创始人领导人及其对组织文化的影响进行比较分析。本研究采用案例方法研究设计，重点是针对特定有趣的案例，创始人在其成立年份的文章和访谈以及公司具有稳定组织文化的案例。分析单位是创始人的领导者。公司的文化使用Schein的组织文化模型进行评估，而创始人领导人的文化则使用Hofstede的文化维度模型进行评估。这项研究没有将民族文化等同于个人文化，从而避免了解释国家层面关系应用于个人的生态谬误。研究表明，每个人都存在亚文化的层次。本文讨论了一个有趣的范例，即他们出生/受过训练的文化以及他们有意采用的文化。当创始人采用其他文化时，组织中会体现一些采用的文化痕迹。本文的结论是，创始人领导者的文化需要一个更好的框架，以便了解其对组织的影响。霍夫斯泰德（Hofstede）的模型并未显示出文化不同层面之间的关系。因此，该模型似乎不足以用于分析创始人领导者。