Cross Culture Management - Report Example

Management Management Introduction Cross-cultural management is the aspect of managing by incorporating various cultural dimensions (Bidgoli 2010). It is important to understand how cultures affect various practices of management. Cross-cultural management is challenging since such managers have to understand and respect the different cultures that exists in their management areas to avoid cultural conflict. Issues of cultural conflicts could result into the organization in question suffering from losses. It is also important to understand the similarities and the differences that exist in various contexts of the management and the organization in relation to the varying cultures. Understanding this is aids in increasing effectiveness of global cross-cultural management. Most companies have business associations with various customers, companies, and stakeholders in other cultures or countries. Most of the employees in such companies encounter individuals that belong to other cultural backgrounds often. Though, it is challenging to comprehend individuals that belong to other cultural backgrounds in comparison to persons that belong to one cultural practice. Hence, the management of cross-culture facilitates in ensuring that employees in an organization have the potential of comprehending different cultures and their practices, which ensures that they establish an effective working environment for all persons irrespective of their cultural affiliation. To understand better the cross-cultural management, it is important to understand the theories behind this concept. One of them is the cultural dimension by Hofstede’s, which illustrates how communication occurs among different cultural based communities. This dimension was coined by Geert Hofstede. It is able to describe the effects of a culture of a society on its member’s values and the relation of these values to behavior (Hall 2012). The model incorporates various culture dimensions including the issue of femininity, level of uncertainty avoidance, individualism, masculinity, power distance and collectivism. The other culture model is Edward T. Hall’s model of cultural dimensions. The model has various dimensions including personal space, low vs. high-context and monochromatism vs. polyschromatism. This project is aimed at explaining these cultural dimensions and how they affect various business decisions made. It shows the practical value of the cultural profiling tools and how useful they are to leaders. It also provides candid recommendations on the way forward and a conclusion. Literature review According to Paul (2009), power distance depicts the ability of individuals in the various organizations and institutions to show that persons who are less powerful accept that power is unevenly distributed. He asserts that individuals in the society who do not question power distance accept various hierarchies without requiring any support. Communities that have a lower power distance focus on the attainment of equality in the distribution of power. The author indicates that cultures that advocates for a lower power distance accept consultative and democratic power relations. Thus, in institutions or organizations, it is important for the management to advocate for a lower power distance. Vance (2009), points out that there exists levels of individualism vs. collectivism. This is the level in which there is an integration of persons into different categories. For societies that are individualistic, the issue of stress becomes an achievement of the individual and his or her rights. Such societies require for individuals to stand up for themselves and most of their immediate families. According to the author, for societies that are collective, there is a predominant action of the individuals based on the cohesiveness of an organization. These persons tend to have large families on the extend fashion, which act as a means of preservation and gaining of loyalty. For the organizations, it is important for cross-cultural managers to enhance collectivism in their organizations by ensuring that all their employees act predominantly and in a collaborative effort to ensure that they produce the expected results. According to Hofstede (2003), masculinity vs. femininity is the way emotional roles are distributed between various genders. In masculinity, values include assertiveness, materialism, and competitiveness in addition to high demand for power and ambition. In cultures that have more value of the feminine nature, the focus is on establishing long-lasting relationships, which facilitates in improving the societies life quality. On the other hand, masculine societies have several instances of differences that occur between gender roles, which are less fluid and often full of dramas. Such differs with the feminine based societies where there is equality of all gender roles. For some cultures, there is the taboo of sexuality often the masculine ones in addition to the existing gender generalizations. It is important for organizations to ensure that they advocate for more feminine cultures in their cross-cultural management, which is more incorporative as compared to the masculine cultures. Fonseca (2014), high versus low uncertainty avoidance reflects the level of uncertainty and ambiguity of a society. Members of a society often try their best to minimize their uncertainty levels by minimizing anxiety. Those individuals from various cultures exhibiting high levels of uncertainty avoidance tend to have more emotions. They try as much as possible to minimize the level of the emergence of unexpected instances and focus on ensuring that there are clearly established regulations and rules, which need immediate implementation for the attainment of success. Societies that exhibit uncertainty avoidance on the lower level tend to welcome and enjoy situations, which are not structured, as well as having minimal rules as much as possible. Individuals in such environments are more tolerant to change. It is important for organization exhibiting cross-cultural management to exhibit high levels of uncertainty avoidance where they are capable of incorporating rules and regulations. According to Martinelli & Taylor (2003), short term versus long-term orientation represents the society’s time horizon. The long-term communities place much on the unforeseen circumstances. They are so in need of pragmatic values that rewards them. They include saving and the capacity to adapt. Short-term based communities focus on present and past values. They include respecting ones traditions, and fulfillment of the required social obligations. It is important for organizations to orient themselves towards long-term orientation, which is capable of enabling them gain, more results and profits as opposed to short-term orientation. According to Steers, Sánchez, & Nardon (2010), monochromic time entails doing one thing at a time. It ensures that individuals assume careful planning and even scheduling, and it is an important aspect in various disciplines including management of time. Polychronic time, the interaction of individuals has more value in comparison of time while several things in material nature lack any attention to get the expected things done. Such responsibilities are done but always in their own time. According to Sadler (2009), leadership may be difficult to define, and the definition offered by various authors may be difficult to define. According to the author, the term is sometimes intended to convey the attribute of an individual. However, the best usage is employing it to denote to a social process that involves influence and persuasion. It involves interaction of individuals who are able to offer leadership and others who are able to act as followers. Hofstede (2003), each of the nations existing have a culture that influences them. Leaders using the Hofstede model deal with different nation’s culture by identifying what the individuals of that country prefer. It is important for such leaders to identify what a culture of the country in question requires. Considering that Hofstede theory has various cultural dimensions, such a leader ought to understand the cultural requirements of a country in relation to the five cultural dimensions. For instance, in relation to the masculinity versus the femininity concepts, the leader in question has to determine which concept works best in the country in question. One country may have a culture that dictates for a masculinity cultural concept where the main consideration is the competitiveness, power, and assertiveness nature of individual employees in the organizations in that country. Others may be more caring and quality of life oriented. Understanding which cultural dimension works best for the country will go a long way in enabling the leader to come up with the best leadership style for that country without going through cultural conflict. Going against the cultural beliefs of the country in question could even result into the leader not being accepted into the society or the companies they are managing to suffer from losses. McSweeney (2002), Hofstede conceptualize the notion of culture by treating it as either implicit, core, territorial unique, shared and systematically causal. The notion of culture has multiple inclusive definitions. Hotsefede treats cultural systems as being related but having dependent variables. Hofstede identifies that there exists a single, uniform and monopolistic organizational culture. He argues that there exists a difference between organization cultures and organizational cultures. National cultures are characterized by core values while organizational cultures are guided by shared perceptions that exist in their daily practices. On the other hand, Hofstede argues that occupational cultures depict an element of permanency, which have passed through the effects of former socialization levels. This is problematic because it will ascertain that members originating from different countries will have to attend the same courses. The best type of culture that is capable of working well for a business is the organizational culture since it is capable of incorporating a single and uniform culture and means in coming up with the set goals and objectives of the organization in question. Discussion Examples on individualism vs. collectivism There exist a relationship between management styles and cultural differences. In Chinese tradition, there are boundaries that between the self and others that are unclear (Bohannan 2010). As a result, they come together to solve challenges as opposed to personal goal effort. The tradition of Chinese is opposed to personal glorification and regards any individual who desires personal enhancement as a threat to collectivism. This is unlike the UK who believes in personal achievement of goals. Every individual in the UK has a role to play in achievement of the set goals. Individuals have to work hard on their own to prove that they are capable. Individualism affects decision in that the top managers can comfortably make decisions regarding the organization without incorporating the other employees in the organization. In collectivism, there is a harmonious process of decision making where the top management have to consider the decisions of other employees in decision-making. As a result, the organization is able to come up with effective decisions that affect all employees thus keeping them well-motivated (Pilhofer 2011). Power distance Members of high power distance such as Japan often accepts the existing status differences that exists in their countries (Pill 2009). Japan is a hierarchical society, and they are always conscious of their hierarchical positions in the society, and always acts according to the requirements set. As a result, their decision-making is slow since all decisions have to be confirmed by each hierarchical unit and by the top management in Tokyo. They believe that everyone is born equal, and no single person is responsible for making important decisions in the society. UK on the other hand has a lower power distance. They expect their power relations to be participatory, always democratic and the people involved must consult (Khairullah 2013). As a result, individuals feel that they have a right to participate in decision-makings and are never afraid to say it. As a result, the process of decision-making is faster. Masculinity vs. femininity Japan is one of the most masculine countries in the world (Kalbfleisch & Cody 2012). They are geared towards competition, achievement, and even success. Their level of success is driven by the definition of the winner or the best in any situation. As a result, employees are more motivated when competing against competitors. The process of decision-making is geared towards coming up with the best strategies to gain a competitive advantage. Management styles are also geared towards this achievement. US, on the other hand, is more concerned with the society’s dominant values, which includes demonstrating care to community members and enhancing the quality of life. Here, quality of life that individuals have is the best sign of underlying success and being unique from a crowd is not very admirable. The process of decision-making is geared towards individuals loving what they do. As a result, management has to identify the preferences of their employees before embarking on the process of decision-making. The reason is that feminine culture emphasizes more on the overall well-being of the employees compared to the bottom-line level of performance (Holden 2009). High versus low uncertainty avoidance China has a low uncertainty avoidance compared to Germany. They are more concerned with the truth and rules. Their adherence of rules and laws is often flexible to suit the actual situations facing them (Primecz, Romani, & Sackmann 2011). They are comfortable with ambiguity, adaptable and quite entrepreneurial. They are willing to adopt unstructured situations and ambiguity that favors risk taking. As a result, their decision-making is geared towards innovation and acceptance of various views. Thus, they are open to ideas from other employees in the organization. Germany, on the other hand has higher uncertainty avoidance. They prefer structure and predictability resulting in emergence of explicit rules and behavior guided by strict laws. Individual members from such cultures are afraid of taking risks thus their decision-making are quite unpredictable. They are afraid of coming up with new strategies, and acceptance of different views. Thus, individuals in the top of these organizations conduct their decision-making. Short-term vs. long-term orientation China embraces the long-term orientation, which is directed towards fostering for values that produce future rewards (Maude 2011). They concentrate a lot on the future. As a result, most of their decision-makings are concerned with future achievements of their organizations. They are so much concerned with future results such that the management ensures that organizations in such cultures save towards projects in future. UK, on the other hand is more concerned with encouraging virtues that relates to the past, present and respect of tradition in addition to fulfilling the social obligations set in the society. Such organizations embark on decision-making based on the past, the future achievements, and the obligations they have to fulfill any social obligations that is prevailing. Conclusion Organizations need to consider the issue of cultural difference of different countries they conduct businesses in to avoid cultural conflict (Adekola & Sergi, 2012). Cultural conflicts that may arise may lead to the organization in question undergoing losses since individuals in that area may fail to transact with them due to this. To understand the importance of cultural differences in organizations or institutions, it is important to research on the country beforehand. However, understanding the cultural dimensions of ET Hall and Hofstede’s dimensions of cultures is essential, but the widely used theory is that of the Hofstede’s theory, which incorporated five cultural dimensions. Management leaders should focus on determining the preference of a country’s cultural practices before deciding on what cultural dimension to incorporate to achieve the best results. The five cultural dimensions include long-term orientation, short-term orientation, collectivism, individualism, power distance, and masculinity vs. femininity. Recommendations i. It is important for organizations to conduct massive research on the culture of a country before conducting business in the country. As a result, they are able observe the culture of the country and avoid cultural shock. As a result, they are able to attract more customers and retain them. ii. It is important for the individual business individuals to develop strategies capable of safeguarding the goals and objectives of the organization in relation to the culture of the country in question. iii. It is also important for organization to ensure that their employees are well motivated in accordance with the culture of their country. In so doing, they are able to maximize on their profits. Bibliography Adekola, P. A., & Sergi, P. B. 2012. Global Business Management: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Business & Economics , 328. Bidgoli, H. 2010. Supply chain management. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Bohannan, P. 2010. How Culture Works. Chichester: Simon and Schuste. Fonseca, M. 2014. Portugal and Germany: Geert Hofstedes Five Cultural Dimensions. New York: GRIN Verlag. Hall, E. T. 2012. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Anchor Books. Hofstede, G. 2003. Cultures and organizations . London: Profile books. Hofstede, G. 2003. Cultures and organizations. London: Profile Books. Holden, N. 2009. Cross-cultural management : a knowledge management perspective. Harlow: Financial Times/Prentice Hal. Kalbfleisch, P. J., & Cody, M. J. 2012. Gender Power and Communication in Human Relationships. Language Arts & Disciplines , 384. Khairullah, D. H. 2013. Cultural Values and Decision-Making in China. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology , 1-12. Martinelli, S., & Taylor, M. 2003. Intercultural learning T-kit. Chichester : Strasbourg Council of Europe. Maude, B. 2011. Managing Cross-Cultural Communication: Principles and Practice. Business & Economics , 384. McSweeney, B. 2002. Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their consequences. Human Relations , 89-118. Paul, J. 2009. International business. New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd. Pilhofer, K. 2011. Cultural knowledge a critical perspective on the concept as a foundation . Greece: Verlag. Pill, S.J. 2009. Understanding the Intercultural Differences between Germans and the French in the Working Environment. Business and Economics , 1-88. Primecz, H., Romani, L., & Sackmann, S. 2011. Cross-cultural management in practice : culture and negotiated meanings. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Sadler, P. 2009. Leadership. London: Sterling, VA. Steers, R. M., Sánchez, C. J.-R., & Nardon, L. 2010. Management across cultures : challenges and strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vance, C. M. 2009. Managing a Global Workforce. New York: M.E Sharpe. Read More