Global Management Models: Role of Culture and Communicating Across Culture - Assignment Example

Global Management Models Discussion Questions Jimmy, September 2009 Chapter Role of Culture The role of culture is significant for global management models because there are important differences in attitudes toward time, change, material factors, individualism, and so on between different cultures. Indeed, it is a critical factor in the global economy, as the need is for organizing the various cultural dimensions “to avoid costly mistakes in conducting international business (Wong-Ming Ji). In the international context, these differences can easily lead to conflict type scenarios when the differences are stark. The potential is greater in proportion to the degree and length of interaction. This of course can have operational implications for organizational management. These types of operation conflicts that could occur are discussed with examples, including a look at countries in which the family and its extensions play an important role in the workplace with a focus on Japan, how the managerial function is affected, and what a manager can do about these influences. Then, collectivism will be discussed as it applies to the Japanese workplace together with a consideration of the managerial functions that it affects. Finally, the role of Islam will be examined in managing cross-cultural relations and business operations. Individualism is not a dominant characteristic of culture globally; rather it is peculiar to the cultures of the USA, Canada, Western Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. It places value on “autonomy, initiative, creativity, and authority in decision making” (Moore and Woodrow, 1999). The rest of the world has a more collectivist dimension in which “group conformity and commitment is maintained at the expense of personal interests” (Ford, 2001). Thus, the group is valued above the individual, and inter-group harmony, called wa in Japanese, is the greater priority. The implications for management are that both types view conflict differently. While individualists are better able to face conflict and deal with it as it arises, collectivists would rather avoid the situation, which would be seen as disgracing, especially if it is of an interpersonal nature. Attitude towards time differs roughly by the same global divide as for individualism-collectivism. Many westerners are stricter with scheduling time and perceive it as linear whereas others are more flexible and perceive it as cyclic. The perceived speed of time also highlights differences. For example, in English time ‘flies’ whereas in Spanish it ‘walks’ (Venter, 2006). These differences have wide implications because time is a fundamental component of all processes, and how people perceive time influences how they manage their time. An international investigation of time within and between cultures concluded that sensitivity to cultural differences in the perception of time is necessary when introducing time-management programs, and offers a ‘work smarter not harder’ solution for the current climate in which ‘more has to be done and has to be done now’ (Venter, 2006). Hofstede (1980) and Trompenaars (1994) both found the Japanese to be a collectivist culture (Albrecht, 2001: 91). In the Japanese workplace, collectivism means for example, “individually based pay for performance arrangements would not be as effective as group incentive systems, such as gainsharing” (Albrecht, 2001: 91). As Vance et al (1992) found out, the management would also need to “value recognition and praise more than monetary rewards”. Thus, the collectivist dimension affects the managerial functions of planning because it needs to be a more coordinated approach; organizing because it needs to be more participative; staffing because it needs to facilitate inter-group harmony; motivating because it needs to use more group incentive methods etc. More fundamentally, Japanese management models take a ‘bottom-up’ approach because it raises “the morale of all employees by using a method of decision-making that allows everyone to feel they are participating” (Keeley, 2001: 156). Related to collectivism is the issue of commitment, in particular the role of the family in the workplace. As Besser (1993) pointed out, in Japanese culture “commitment was a complex attitude strongly influenced by the norms, sanctions, and pressures of the small group, family, and community rather than strong attitudes of commitment to the organization. In a study by Randall (1993) in which 27 countries were reviewed for organizational commitment, it was found that this was lower in more collectivist countries such as Japan and South Korea than in more individualistic countries, but normative commitment would be higher. This clearly affects the managerial function because workers are greatly influenced by factors external to the organization. Managers have to then take into account issues relating to the ‘nonwork domain’. Conceptually, this can increase their understanding of the relationship between the work and nonwork domains, but it demands extra responsibilities for management such as the need to strengthen group identities and make provisions for the nonwork domain. To an extent, this is already common in individualist cultures, for example, when maternal leave is given. In Egyptian society, which is also collectivist, loyalty to the organization is also crucial but this is attributable to the strong Islamic work ethic (Cohen, 2003: 273). It is the same in China with strong traditional values. Japan and France are good examples of countries with contrasting cultures, yet the alliance between Nissan and Renault is an exemplary model for global management. The main reason why the Nissan-Renault alliance has worked is because, in the words of the chief executive, Carlos Ghosn, “decision-making respected corporate and cultural differences as well as workers’ loyalty to each company” (Kageyama, 2008). It is this global management formula that takes into account the cultural aspects of the relationship that has kept the alliance strong even after a decade. In the Hansard Business Review, Ghosn wrote that the key was to balance the needs for radical strategic changes and safeguarding identity as these “can easily come into conflict” (Peng, 2008: 255). Ghosn relates further, “I knew that if I tried to dictate changes from above, the effort would backfire, undermining morale and productivity. But if I was too passive, the company would simply continue its downward spiral” (ibid: 256). The new management model installed a performance-based promotion system (which replaced the Japanese seniority system), created nine cross-functional teams, and pursued relentless efforts at integration through its ‘Business Way’ program and training workshops. An instance of a mild conflict resolution is when both companies were painting a shared plant in Brazil. The Japanese wanted to paint it white so that dirt and grime can be spotted more easily and cleaned whereas the French wanted to paint it gray so as to hide the dirt and grime. In the end, management agreed that white would be better. It is also noteworthy that Nissan has a higher inclusion of non-Japanese among its executives than rival companies (Kageyama, 2008). Global managers can be effective through cross-cultural training, which develops ‘cultural intelligence’ and the competence required for effective global management (Wong-Ming Ji). The first thing is to know and understand the different dimensions of culture as identified by Edward Hall, Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, Hofstede, Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner and others. However, there is a tremendous amount of guidance for global managers and global management models that can be gained from the world’s religious and spiritual systems. An example from Islam follows. Islam offers a real solution designed to unify mankind (nás), which has a useful practical role in fostering cross-cultural relations and improving business operations. Islam is a universal religion whose teachings are addressed to the whole of mankind irrespective of any division, and whose racial and cultural harmony is most visibly evident to outsiders in the annual pilgrimage (hajj). In the farewell sermon, the holy prophet Muhammad (SWS) reminded us that no one race has superiority over another, and in the holy Quran, Allah (SWT) tells us, “O mankind! We created you from the same male and female, and rendered you into distinct peoples and tribes that you may recognize one another (not that you may despise one another). Verily, the most honorable of you in the sight of Allah, is the (one who is) most righteous of you…” (Holy Quran, 49:13). As far as business operations are concerned, Islam stresses the virtues of fairness, justice (adal), mutual respect, equality, tolerance and fluidity, and encourages proper planning and organization (tanzím) and strong links in trade (tijárah). For example, Allah (SWT) says that only those people should be entrusted who are worthy of the responsibility (ibid, 4:58). This command alone can have a significant bearing on the success of any global business venture because if the right kind of knowledgeable and understanding management is at the helm of operations, it can best deal with all issues including those related to culture. References Albrecht, Maryann H. (2001). International HRM: managing diversity in the workplace. Wiley-Blackwell. Besser. (1993). In Cohen, 2003, p. 265. Cohen, Aaron. (2003). Multiple commitments in the workplace: an integrative approach. Lawrence Eribaum Associates. Ford, John. (2001). Cross Cultural Conflict Resolution in Teams. Mediate. Retrieved June 14, 2009 from: http://www.mediate.com/articles/ford5.cfm Kageyama, Yuri. (2008). Nissan-Renault alliance still going strong, Ghosn says. The New York Times. Retrieved September 24, 2009 from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/asia/28iht-ghosn.4.10542826.html. Keeley, Timothy Dean. (2001). International human resource management in Japanese firms: their greatest challenge. Palgrave Macmillan. Moore, Chris and Woodrow, Peter. (1999). Mapping Cultures-Strategies For Effective Intercultural Negotiations. Track Two. Culture and Conflict. Vol. 8, No. 1. Peng, Mike W. (2008). Global Strategy. Cengage Learning. Quran, Holy. English translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. Randall. (1993). In Cohen, 2003, p. 266. Vance, C.M. et al. (1992). An examination of transferability of traditional performance appraisal principles across cultural boundaries. Management International Review. Vol. 32, pp. 313-326. Venter, F. (2006). The Cultural Differences in Time and Time Management: A Socio-Demographic Approach. Acta Commercil, pp. 39-49. Retrieved September 24, 2009 from http://search.sabinet.co.za/images/ejour/acom_v6_a5.pdf. Wong-Ming Ji, Diana J. N.d. International Cultural Differences. Encyclopedia of Management. Enotes. Retrieved September 24, 2009 from http://www.enotes.com/management-encyclopedia/international-cultural-differences. Chapter 2: Communicating Across Culture Language differences and communication, or rather miscommunication, is perhaps the most common root of cross-cultural conflicts. They add an extra level of complexity to all communications (Johnson), and misunderstandings can arise inadvertently. How culture affects the process of attribution in communication is examined, and the relationship between language and culture, in particular body language, and the role of such nonverbal communication in business relationships. The discussion is then extended to the role of information systems in a company. In communicating, Asians are more listening-centric, and tend to be less specific about things whereas many westerners come across as very blunt or direct. To the latter, Asians are perceived as ‘beating around the bush’ (Ford, 2001) and there are often implied meanings in their communication due to the lack of directness. The listener is expected to make inferences from this and simply ‘get the message’ which is not always so obvious to the inexperienced. An advantage of this approach however, is that direct confrontational conflicts occur much less, and this is more so because collectivist cultures give greater priority to mutual commitment, conformity and harmony (Carsten, 2007: 28). However, this does not preclude the fact that tensions do not exist. When they do arise, they are either subdued or swept aside to avoid conflict. Attribution in communication is the process by which someone seeks an explanation of another person’s behavior. The theory stems from the work of Fritz Heider (1958) who considered all behaviour to be determined by either internal or external factors (12manage, 2009). Attribution involves perception, a judgement and determination of the attribute. It occurs for instance, when a misunderstanding arises and the other person’s behavior is blamed for the ensuing confusion. Culture affects this process as a result of the following variables: attitudes, stereotyping, social organisation, thought patterns, roles, language (spoken and written), nonverbal communication and time. “Different cross-cultural conflict styles and facework behaviours create different attribution biases and tensions” (Ting-Toomey, 1999: 218). The additional barrier to communication due to cultural differences thus adds to the complexity of communicating. In management, attribution has implications for example in appraisal schemes in HRM. Language is inextricably tied with culture because language is one of the identifying features of a culture, and cannot be interpreted correctly without understanding the culture. The cultural barrier to communication is called ‘cultural noise’. Moreover, people who are raised in a particular culture, acquire not only a distinct language but also peculiar habits and other behaviours that are also a form of communication. Even countries with the same language exhibit both linguistic and behavioural differences. For example, English is an international language spoken in several countries, but there are equally several varieties of English between which there are important differences that can be a cause of misunderstanding. It is not only due to differences in accent or vocabulary, but even the same words can acquire differences in meaning. Even within a single country and language, the existence of subcultures can lead to differing interpretations or specific words or phrases in the form of regional expressions and variation in the meanings of idioms. Nonverbal communication is another factor that can add noise to the communicaton process. It includes kinesic behavior, object language, paralanguage, and proxemics. Taking body language, cultural differences manifest by such things as the amount of physical touch involved, the conversational distance between the people, and the nature of same/cross-gender interactions. For example, for Americans it is common to look straight at the other person during communication. In the Middle East, it is common to be closer while communicating and touch may also be involved in the process. In the Far East, it is more common not to look at the other person in the eye when speaking and it is respectful to bow than to touch. In South America, for instance, personal space and comfort distances tend to be quite small whereas in North America they become larger (Marshall, 2009). Ways of minimising misunderstandings due to language differences and preventing the situation deteriorating to one of conflict are raising awareness of important differences, establishing channels for healthy flows of information and communication, and by improving communication skills in the organisation. So, discovering the differences and realising how significant they are, is the first hurdle. Global managers can lead the way by their acquaintance with language differences, which is an essential skill in today’s global workplace. Other strategies include the use of simplified wording, being specific with requirements, allowing questions to be raised or clarifications to be made, and so on. Also, information systems can play a very important role in a global organisation. Such a system would consider would identify from where the information being communicated originates, the available and used channels of communication, and how that information flows through the system. References 12manage. (2009). Attribution Theory. 12Manage: The executive fast track. Retrieved September 24, 2009 from http://wps.prenhall.com/wps/media/objects/124/127021/chap00.doc. Ford, John. (2001). Cross Cultural Conflict Resolution in Teams. Mediate. Retrieved June 14, 2009 from: http://www.mediate.com/articles/ford5.cfm. Heider, Fritz. (1958). In Ting-Toomey, 1999. Johnson, Karen. (N.d.). Working through language, time, and cultural differences. Bacon’s Information Inc. Retrieved September 24, 2009 from http://www.logigear.com/newsletter/working-through-language-time-and-cultural-differences-part-1.asp. Marshall, Jane (Ed.). (2009). Body Language Across Cultures. Retrieved September 24, 2009 from http://wps.prenhall.com/wps/media/objects/124/127021/chap00.doc. Ting-Toomey, Stella. (1999). Communicating across cultures. Guilford Press. Read More