Manafing People

INTRODUCTION

Culture means different things or feelings to different people and individuals can be easily differentiated on this basis. Culture can generally be defined according to civilization, worldview, symbols, society, region, belief systems, and by attitudes and values of people. In the words of Stacey (1996 cited Stonehouse et al., 2004, p.90), “The culture of any group or people is that of beliefs, customs, practices and ways of thinking that they have come to share with each other through being and working together. It is a set of assumptions people simply accept without question as they interact with each other. At the visible level the culture of a group of people takes the form of ritual behaviour, symbols, myths, stories, sounds and artefacts.”

Cultural diversity is everywhere. Various cultures might share same basic concepts but they are perceived entirely in a different manner. This dissimilar way of perceiving is the foremost thing that creates difference in attitudes and values all over the world. Main problem arises when a person from one culture has to change to another one. Westwood and Posner (1997) argued that Managers with different cultural background may possess different work values. This paper will review literature and attempt to show: cross cultural challenges that managers are facing across the world. With his concept of cross-cultural dimensions Hofstede (2001 cited Steers and Nardon, 2006) gives a framework for understanding the impact of culture on values. Because of focus of this research out of the five dimensions Individualism-Collectivism, Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Masculinity and Femininity and Confucian Dynamism, just the first two shall be explained in relation to work values and differences shall be explained on the basis of functions of management. According to Tung (1999, p.62), “the cultural values that are typical of a particular society can influence what is effective in terms of management process”. According to study by Ralston et al. (1999), individualism-collectivism continuum have been identified as perhaps the best means to measure values differences between eastern and western cultures. As observed by Czinkota et al. (1999), because of increase in competition and world trade, new markets have been opened up and it has encouraged various organisations to expand their operations across the borders. More people have started to relocate themselves in different countries because of increasing job opportunities and thereby increasing debate in the subject area. This has led the author to focus more on this area, which is culture and work values of employees.

CULTURE AND CROSS CULTURAL CHALLENGES

Erez and Earley (1993 cited Graham, 2001) said that most scientific definitions of culture revolve around the notion that it is represented by the values, expectations, and behaviours that are learned, shared by a group of people (i.e. a ‘cultural group), and transmitted from generation to generation. Furthermore, Herbig and Dunphy (1998, p.13) states that “Culture is the sum total of a way of life, including such things as expected behaviour, believes, values, language, and living practices shared by the members of a society; it is the pattern of values, traits, or behavious shared by the people within a region”. From a business perspective, culture can be viewed as operating at four levels, those of the nation, business, industry and organisation. Common ingredient of all is values, attitudes, assumptions, beliefs and norms shared distinctively at different levels.

Cultural differences clearly exist at a number of levels – national, regional, industrial, organisational, etc. – and they exist within organisations. In fact, departments within same organisation may also develop distinctive subcultures (Stonehouse et al. 2004, p.255). Most of the people tend to believe that their values are shared by others and it’s universal. The problem arises when people find it difficult to realise or accept the fact that others do not share some of their most deeply held ideas as they belong to different culture. As purposed by Griffin and Putsay (1999), “Culture affects and reflects the values of members of a society.” Values lie at the heart of Hofstede’s (1980 cited Wallace et al., 1999) model of the component parts of culture.

Although, there are various cultural dimensions proposed by various authors to differentiate culture from one another, the famous revolving around differences on the basis of values have been given by Hofstede and Trompenaars. However, in this paper differences have been analysed keeping in mind dimensions defined by Hofstede.

HOFSTEDE’s CROSS CULTURAL DIMENSIONS

Source: Hofstede (2001 cited Steers and Nardon, 2006, p135)

The dimension Individualism-Collectivism is a parameter to differentiate two types of cultures: In individualistic cultures people have a tendency inculcate the value of individual identity and rights (e.g. independence or self-sufficiency) more than that of the group. On the other hand, people from collectivist cultures tend to rate shared group identity, its values, goals and principles (e.g. group-harmony) higher than that of the individual. While individualism is to be found mostly in western countries, like Europe and North America, collectivism is more common ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

HOFSTEDE’s CROSS CULTURAL DIMENSIONS

Source: Hofstede (2001 cited Steers and Nardon, 2006, p135)

The Power Distance dimension provides an extent of how the powerless individuals of a society expect to be treated. In low power distance cultures, the individuals have the tendency to expect power more bottom-up orientated, to be self-directed and treated in the same way. As compared to low power distance culture, in high power distance cultures people tend to accept power to be more centralized, hierarchical and top-down orientated (Hofstede and Bond, 1984 cited Ting-Toomey, 1999). Eastern Culture as Malaysia, China, or Singapore for example show a high score on the power distance index (Hofstede and Hofstede 2005 cited Phuong-Mai et. al., 2006), while Western countries like the USA, Germany, Israel or Ireland score low (Hofstede, 1991 cited Ting-Toomey, 1999).

WORK VALUES AND CHALLENGES

Work values of an individual or employee is a part of his total values, which he/ she derives from respective culture. Dose (1997) proposed that work values are evaluative standards relating to work or the work environment by which individuals discern what is 'right' or assess the importance of preferences. Work-related values refer to the goals or rewards people seek through their work, and they are expressions of more general human values in the context of the work setting (Schwartz, 1999, p. 41).

Cross cultural challenges related to work values have been discussed by numerous authors from the beginning of the research in this area. However, most cited and famous research has been conducted by two prominent researchers namely, Geert Hofstede and Fons Trompenaar. Trying to make sense of cross-cultural differences when hundreds of countries and cultures are involved is an extremely difficult task and one way to make things easier is to identify a core set of values that are shared by specific country clusters (McFarlin and Sweeney, 2006, p.115). Hofstede clustered countries according to work-related dimensions and his work represents the largest and most influential effort (McFarlin and Sweeney, 2006, p.120).

PROBLEMS OF WORK VALUES AND INDIVIDUALISM – COLLECTIVISM

Planning: In an individualistic culture, an employee usually comes to the point directly as compared to collectivist society where people would like to build a rapport first. As reported by Seliger et al. (1997), “since cultural factors influence the way of dealing with time and plans the cultural impact is expected to be most important in underlying approaches to planning”. Because of this value of personal relationship building, consumption of time in planning process varies. For example, Graham (1984 cited Gulbro and Herbig, 1999) reported that Japanese emphasize more on building personal relationships first as compared to Americans, which results in more time consumption in one stage Because of this conflict and breakdown can occur and the possibility of failure increases. Another example (Appendix 1) shall be more helpful in making the point clear. In an individualistic culture, a single person has usually been given the decision making authority whereas in collectivist culture, group of several people would join and with consensus come to a decision that result in taking more time. According to Coulson-Thomas (1992, p.196), “Japanese may appear slower than American equivalents because they look at all the aspects of a problem, whereas Americans have been encouraged to make quick decisions” Again, due to completion of same task at two different timing, chances of conflict and breakdown can occur.

Organising: Individualistic culture believes that information shall be made available to anybody who needs it within the organisation as compared to collectivist culture, which may withheld the information to gain or maintain power (Appendix 1). This results in difference in organising materials at the time of requirement.

Staffing: In the individualistic culture, people tend to believe that the best deserving candidate should be given the job or position vacant. In contrast to this, collectivist culture seems to give preference to family considerations, friendship while recruiting (Appendix 1). Another point of difference can be taken as the way employees from individualistic and collectivist culture perceives the relationship between employer and employee. In individualistic societies, as cited by Ramamoorthy et al., (2007), employer-employee relationship is considered to be contractual in nature. But, in collectivist culture, it is treated as a lifetime relationship. The importance given to group values discourages the managers to move from one company to another in collectivist society, but, at the same time high degree of mobility in individualistic culture is treated as a negative gesture (Hill, 2007). Problem may arise when people with such different values interact. An employee from collectivist society might not consider doing business with a person who lacks loyalty and does not consider long term relationships.

Directing: Directing means implementing the plans lay down by the management and one aspect of it is communication. Different communication style can also pose a problem for international managers. For example, an employee from individualistic society prefers direct talk whereas someone from collectivist society prefers indirect communication. This different style of communication may result in the newly hired manager being dysfunctional in his new working environment, which could be very expensive (Wursten, not known).

Controlling: In collectivist culture, controlling is seen as collective exercise and measures are drawn by group of people, which can be time consuming. Furthermore, schedules are considered important but only in relation to other priorities (Appendix 1). But, in individualistic culture, one man can take care of controlling process, thereby, saving time. Another aspect of Controlling is co-ordinating activities. Here, the problem arises as the employees from individualistic background tend to compete with their colleagues; they find it difficult to cooperate. In comparison to it, employees from collectivist background finds harmony in working in groups (Hill, 2007).

PROBLEMS OF WORK VALUES AND POWER DISTANCE

Gulbro and Herbig (1999) reported one main problem that is faced by international managers due to different work values. They proposed that in high power culture, compromise may be treated as a sign of weakness and people from high power distance culture usually spend less time in compromising as compared to someone from low power distance culture. Because of this difference in value, US business firms trying to negotiate business in China performed badly when compromising too quickly Lubman (1993 cited Gulbro and Herbig, 1999). Moreover, people in low power distance cultures likes to work individually and independently and the problem may arise when they have been transferred to some other country and expected to

Work in an environment where clear authority is established and direct confrontation is avoided. They might feel suffocated as directions are usually defined in high power distance culture.

CONCLUSION

In this paper, author tried to evaluate the differences existing between managers working at international level because of different work values in different cultures. This has been done by using Hofstede’s cultural dimensional model. Although, the soundness of other dimensions defined by him has been criticised on many grounds by various authors, the individualism – collectivism dimension has been accepted as a powerful indicator of differences among societies (Ralston et al., 2008). An organisation operating at an international level have to take care of cross-cultural issues as its business can be ruined if cultural differences cannot be understood and handled accordingly. There are various challenges that have been emerged by the globalisation process and cultural differences are one of the most debated amongst all. The main challenge facing managers lies in understanding differences, utilising the advantages that stem from different styles and approaches, adjusting and adapting to succeed with different people, in different partnerships, and in different markets.

In the end it can be concluded that values do have an impact on people and, are, in turn, created by culture and other factors. A solution that helps in minimising the clashes between employees working at international level is required. However, more research along these lines would be of considerable benefit to the field.

REFERENCES

Coulson-Thomas, C., 1992. Creating the Global Company: Successful Internationalisation. London: McGraw Hill

Czinkota, M., Ronkainen, I., and Moffett, M., 1999. International Business. 5th ed. USA: The Dryden

Dose, J. J., 1997. Work Values: An Integrative Framework and Illustrative Application to Organizational Socialization. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70 (3), 219-240.

Graham, J., 2001. Culture and Human Resource Management. In: Rugman, A. and Brewer, T., Oxford Handbook of International Business. NY: Oxford University Press, 505-536

Griffin, R., and Pustay, M., 1999. International Business: A Managerial Perspective. 2nd ed. USA: Addison-Wesley.

Gulbro, D.R. and Herbig, P., 1999. Cultural differences encountered by firms when negotiating internationally. Journal of Industrial Management & Data Systems. 99 (2). 47 – 53. Available from: . [Accessed 15 Nov 2008].

Herbig, P. and Dunphy, S., 1998. Culture and Innovation. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 5 (4), 13–21.

Hill, L.C., 2007. International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace. 6th ed. NY: McGraw-Hill.

McFarlin B.D. and Sweeney, D.P., 2006. International Management: Strategic Opportunities and Cultural Challenges. 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Phoung-Mai, N., Terlouw, C., and Pilot, A., 2006. Culturally appropriate pedagogy: the case of group learning in a Confucian heritage Culture context. International Education, 17 (1), 1-19.

Ralston, D.A., Egri, C.P., Stewart, S., Terpstra, R.H., Kai-Cheng, Y., 1999. Doing business in the 21st century with the new generation of Chinese managers: a study of generational shifts in work values in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 30 (2), 415-28.

Ralston, D.A., Holt, H.D., Terpstra, R.H., Kai-Cheng, Y., 2008. The impact of national culture and economic ideology on managerial work values: a study of United States, Russia, Japan, and China. Journal of International Business Studies. 39, 8 – 26.

Ramamoorthy, N., Kulkarni, P.S., Gupta, A., and Flood, C.P. (2007). Individualism – Collectivism orientation and employee attitude: A comparison of employees from the high – technology sector in India and Ireland. Journal of International Management. 13 (2), 187-203.

Schwartz, S.H., 1999. A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48 (1), 23-47.

Seliger, G., Weber, H.C., Krutzfeldt, D., and Lichte, J., 1997. Cultural factors in Factory planning. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 13 (7). 478 – 487.

Steers, R. and Nardon, L., 2006. Managing in the Global Economy. New York: M.E. Sharpe.

Stonehouse, G., Campbell, D., Hamill, J., Purdie, T., 2004. Global and Transactional Business: Strategy and Management. 2nd ed., West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons

Ting-Toomey, S., 1999. Communicating Across Cultures. New York: The Guildford Press.

Tung, L. R., 1999. International Encyclopaedia of Business & Management: The IBEM Handbook of International Business. London: Thomson Learning

Wallace, J., Hunt, J., and Richards, C., 1999. The relationship between organisational culture, organisational climate and managerial values. The International Journal of Public Sector Management. 12 (7), 548-564. Available from: [Accessed 6 Nov 2008].

Westwood, I.R. and Posner, Z.B., 1997. Managerial Values across Culture: Australia, Hong Kong and the United States. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. Vol 14. 31 - 66.

Wursten, H. (not known). Intercultural Management: Intercultural Issues in Recruitment. Available from: . [Accessed 15 November 2008].