Cross Cultural Awareness

Task 1

There are four cultural types or profiles namely village market (Anglo/Nordic), Family or tribe (Asian), Well-oiled machine (Germanic), and Traditional bureaucracy or ‘pyramid of people’ (Latin). Schneider and Barsoux (1997) provided the particular and general characteristics of these cultural profiles as such: Anglo/Nordic has decentralized decision-making, utilizes informal communication, uses generalist knowledge, and focuses on output or product control; Asian has centralized decision-making, paternalistic in nature, uses generalist knowledge, and focuses on social or relationships control; Germanic has decentralized decision-making, with constricted extent of control, uses specialist knowledge, and focuses on throughput or processes control; and Latin has centralized decision-making, utilizes top-down or systematic communication, uses knowledge obtained through personal relationships, and focuses on input or employees control. With the primary consideration that Chinese culture and work values is based on the Confucian dynamism (Jaw et al 2007) and uncertainty avoidance (Hoftstede 1980a; 1980b; 1993), it is said that the country’s cultural profile is similar to that of family or tribe (Asian) profile. In Hoftstede’s study, Chinese samples highly regard Confucian dynamism while no dimensions are found in uncertainty avoidance. The Confucian dynamism refers to value of thrift and perseverance and respect for tradition and protecting one’s ‘face’ (Hoftstede 1993). The Asian cultural profile is also inherent to the centralized decision-making, paternalistic leadership, generalist knowledge, and social or relationships control. According to earlier literatures (e.g. Montagu-Pollock 1991; Chen 1985; Tzeng 1985), the Chinese business environment is governed with human relations (Montagu-Pollock 1991), while Westerners are into development of theoretical and methodical models, the Chinese are into the extraction of the essential features of a chosen model and incorporate flexibility upon its application (Tzeng 1985, p. 4), and Chinese managers mainly adapt to specific changes in the working environment while Westerners mainly controls all aspects of the working environment (Chen 1985, p. 16). The main attribute of Chinese firms is the presence of family ties and networks or guanxi (El Kahal 2002, Chen 2001; Sommer et al 1996; Somers 1995). Most traditional Chinese companies are owned by founders and families, tend to be paternalistic, promotes values of high power distance and bureaucratic in control and centralized in decision-making and taking (Lok & Crawford 2004, p. 322-323). They usually trust more values gained through experience and intuition when decisions are implemented and top managers are mainly involved (Zhang et al 2002). Looking on social or relationships control, collectivism is embedded in Chinese culture (Lok & Crawford 2004, p. 323; Harrison et al 2000). In general, the managerial philosophies and practices of Chinese organisations differ substantially from Western counterparts (Chen & Lu 1998, p. 73).

For the case of UK, it is said that the cultural profile of the country is similar to that of traditional bureaucracy or ‘pyramid of people’ (Latin) profile. It is commonly characterized by centralized decision-making, top-down or systematic communication, knowledge bounded by personal relationships, and input or employees control. As among the Western countries, UK’s firm are owned by public shareholders and governed by a professional manager, complimenting and less bureaucratic in organizational structure, promotes individualism, decentralized decision-making and more empowering to their workers (Lo & Crawford 2004, p. 323). Personal competencies and merits are also unmistakable (El Kahal 2002; Chen 2001). A manager in UK plays specific formal roles in corporate organization and direction, excluding supervisory personnel, except for discussion of managerial training and development (Peterson, 1996). Today, UK managers are cultivating the right culture for entrepreneuralism (Tamkin 2007).

Looking on the characteristics of both cultural profiles, it is found out that there are some extents in which both countries are similar particularly on decision-making process and control (social and input). The similarities of Chinese and UK culture apparently minimize challenges in the management as it is still in its pioneering stages. The decision-making process will serve as the unifying agent because it does not extensively differ to the nature of both countries. They serve a number of factors from the micro to the macro organizational context and level, such as influential individuals who manage strategic thinking and decision-making or the collective beliefs and values of individuals that make up the ‘climate’ or ‘organizational culture’. In control processes, Chinese firms are into social while UK firms are employee-centred. Social relationship extends beyond employees as the management of people is still complementary and vice versa. With the centralized decision-making and emphasis on social and employee control, the opportunities of competitive advantage is not far at hand as beliefs (i.e. hierarchy, formal rules and procedures, specialized jobs and function) and primary cultural determinants (i.e. relationships between people with respect to power and status, management, uncertainty, and control) are handed out directly for the benefits of the organization. On the aspect of cultural processes involving policies and procedures, systems and controls, information and communication, and decision-making, the knowledge of culture is an elementary attribute that is directed towards competitive advantage. Thus, by having a concrete and extensive understanding of the concept of culture, it will definitely affect every functions and elements of the organization.

Task 2

Schneider (1989) argues that the different cultural assumptions on the organization’s environment and the nature of relationships result to different approaches in formulating strategy. The two specific models of strategy related to cultural assumptions and approaches are ADAPTING MODEL and CONTROLLING MODEL (Schneider 1989; Schneider & de Meyer 1991). The adapting model is characterized by the following: consensus-based decision-making, decentralized and informal information-gathering, more qualitative and subjective (intuitive) information, strategic direction and implementation is locally determined where many people are involved at all levels, guidelines rather than formal or tangible measures, and flexibility on the process of implementation. On the other hand, controlling model involves top-down decisions, centralized and formalized decision-making, information are quantitative and objective and gathered from external experts, numeric in measurement, and focused on task and achievement implementation or performance is linked to reward system. The cultural assumptions of the adapting model are: environment cannot be known; personal relationships and interactions are key elements; and strategic implementation centres on internal capabilities. Conversely, the cultural assumptions of the controlling model are: environment can be known; top managers make the best decisions; and time is linear and segmented. Schneider (1989) believes that the approach to strategy is dependent on the process in which a group of people recognize their acceptable relationship to the environment, specifically on how they attempt to control their environment or adapt to it. In reference to the two models of strategy formulation, it is claimed that the adapting model is most appropriate given the basic consideration that the nature of the Company is Chinese (Asian region). Because the adapting model, according to Schneider (1989), is based on assumptions about the environment and the organization, and more specifically with regard to perceptions of uncertainty and control over the environment, it is particularly appropriate to understanding strategic response of the Company. Given that it is still on its pioneering stages, the adapting model include some sort of statement on how to manage cultural diversity or even diversity in general as important issue in the business environment and operation. The adapting model mainly studies the potential changes that may occur during a particular point in time, thus, resulting to flexible repercussions or adaptive stages.

Task 3

Culture is considered to be a vague term, but everyone knows how and when to make sense of it because of various ways of understanding such like levels and methods of discovery. The three levels of culture are Artefacts and behaviour, Beliefs and values, and Assumptions. Meanwhile, the three levels of culture include Observation; Interviews and surveys; and Inference and interpretation.

The three levels of culture are said to be the key elements of culture as seen on its widely acceptable definitions (e.g. Schein 1992). Schein is recognized as among the most influential and significant leaders on organizational culture (Schulz 1995, p. 20; Alevesson 1993, p. 82). One of the important contributions of Schein was the identification of the levels of organizational culture, that is, artefacts and symbols; patterns of behaviour; behavioural norms; values; and fundamental assumptions. In Schein’s perspective, the fundamental assumptions represent the centre and most significant level of organizational culture. In terms of studying and uncovering culture within an organization, Sackmann (1990; 1991) states that the uncovering of culture in an organization requires cognitive or tacit components of culture (beliefs and assumptions) as these provide meaning to other component of culture such as behaviours and artefacts. In addition, Sackmann (1991) also suggested that the effective revelation of the cognitive components of culture requires the use of issue-focused and unstructured interview strategy that is based on phenomenological orientation. Cummings and Worley (2001) involve the sharing of learning within organization’s culture. Sharing of thoughts and experiences with others implies that organizational culture promotes a certain level of stability among the members of the organization. Organizational culture basically encompasses the values, beliefs and assumptions on what the organization is all about, how its workforce should behave and how it defines itself in relation to its external environment. It is the organization’s reality that shapes its activities wherein a culture is reflected in organization's philosophies, rules, norms, values, climate, symbols, heroes, and almost everything its member do (Oden 1997). For Kanungo (2006, p. 24), diverse values in organisational culture speak in a shared way by developing an association of different management practices through cross-cultural expression. Furthermore, values within the corporation are the main foundation of organizational culture since it serves as defining elements where symbols, practices, standards and other factors are derived. Values are internalized beliefs, which guide individual behaviour (Deal & Kennedy 1982). White (1998) and Hibbard (1998) focused on defining values as the core foundation of organizational culture while Hoftstede (2001, p. 396) affirmed values as essential factors or elements of corporate culture, to which other researches have shown more differences on practices rather than on their values. For this case, organizational values and practices were calculated by asking for the degree to which practices should be present in the organization. This is similar to the study of Wilderon and Van den Berg (1999) where results showed that organizations tend to differ more on practices rather than on values. In spite of the differences in views, findings refer to the contribution of increased interest of various businesses in integrating corporate culture within organizational operations.

In application, the Company may use interpretative approach, observation and interviewing, case study through interference, iterative process involving participants, and problem-solving and action-oriented mechanisms. For example, the in analyzing culture of UK, case study through interference and guided by observation and interviewing as well as interpretative approach is deemed essential. Prior to the planned commencement of the business, there must be a comprehensive feasibility study and supported by expert opinions from experienced or expert sources. The challenge is to put together these specifics, obtained from previous learning initiatives, into a compelling setting that exceeds particular organizational factors and improves the general knowledge of managers (or even employees) of what is/are involved in managing in diverse cultures. According to Harris and Moran (1997) and Garland and Farmer (2000), a manager can have much better chance of achieving this if he/she restricts him/herself to a comparatively intensive examination or case study of management in a few countries, instead of ostensibly or generally looking at management across a large number. The managers can actually do any of these methods of discovery granted that they have their underlying principles in using such.

Task 4

The ability of a business to stay in significant period of time in the industry where it belongs is one measure of its success (Newstrom 2002 p. 5; Mariotti 1999 p. 64). These could be achieved through outstanding management of people. The key functions of managing people and HRM are: attracting a quality workforce, developing a quality workforce, and maintaining a quality workforce (Sims 2002; Schermerhorn 2001). Specifically, HR professionals and managers basically deal with such areas as employee recruitment and selection, performance evaluation, compensation and benefits, professional development, safety and health, forecasting, and labour relations (Lipiec 2001).

Aside from the major factions of the Company (i.e. marketing, management, finance, etc), the areas to focus in the first six (6) months of operations are: HR functions namely recruitment and selection, compensation and benefits, and professional development (training. This is rooted on the belief that human labour force is the asset of every organization granted that they are managed properly. Managing labour resources is highly important as it determines organizational success or failure. Managing people successfully is one of the most crucial and difficult aspects of being a manager. It necessitates not only knowledge but more of skills and good leadership attitude. Initially, before looking into the HR functions, there is a need to review the managerial capabilities of the four (4) department managers. However, the challenge lies more in being a more effective and productive manager as one is able to perform well but such does not necessarily mean that one is good at people management. To be a successful HR manager, one should possess a broad and wide range of various skill and techniques which enhance the different interpersonal relationships and those which gives encouragement to people in reaching their full potentials and more importantly, achieve whatever individual goals they have. Within a diversified workforce, managing workplace diversity is also important. Cross (2000, p. 137) states it is one of the most successful strategies that deal with individuals with different characteristics who eventually create the team and compose the entire labour force. It also provides potential solutions and alternatives on issues related to human resources, internal communications, interpersonal relationships, conflict resolution, quality, productivity, and efficiency (Aronson 2002, p. 46; Cross 2000).

For the recruitment and selection, it should cater the needs of the organization and that staffing should require both the process of attracting and selecting prospective personnel or qualified, knowledgeable people with capabilities and competencies that work towards the objectives of the company and suited with the position at hand (Drucker 1992). It is perhaps the most vital function because it is the starting point in the whole HR process yet it extends beyond merely selecting the best but also maintaining long-term employer-employee commitment. For compensation and benefits, this is related to idea of motivation. A culturally diverse workforce has different motivations, and that managers should consider the difference and able to devise an appropriate remuneration package that will uphold efficiency among the members of the workforce. This is also related to professional development that according to Hornsby and Kuratko (2004), such training and development activities can help companies acquire a staff with the right combination of skills and motivations which a company needs to be competitive. Accordingly, the process includes three (3) different types of activities such as orienting the new employees; helping employees acquire new skills; and helping the employees strengthen existing skills.

On the case of UK beer industry, the best English approach is the idea of international HRM or management of people beyond international borders (Briscoe & Schuller 2004) and organizational commitment on performance (Rashid et al 2003). For example, China has become increasingly significant in international business decisions and “has become a focus of interest for Western organization and management researchers” (Shenkar & Von Glinow 1994, p. 57). The changes that have occurred in China on the previous years hold profound consequences for different groups including managers, management researchers and policy-makers at both government and company levels (Zhu 2005). There is a need for adapting model in formulating HRM strategy. For example on the case of recruitment and selection, the headquarters-based HR personnel have to set Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) policies that meet the legal requirements of both the home country and that of the host country. A posit recommendation is underlying to the idea of diversity that may work towards or against the organizational success. There should be clear HR policies paying extra attention to diversity as an advantage. Further, there should be a concrete structure of tasks among the employees. All in all, it is very fundamental that an international organization should be flexible in regulating their distinctive management styles and approaches to adhere with the differences and similarities of the employees, specifically those with culturally and internationally diverse nature of employees and working environment. For Yu Beer’s CEO, it is always indispensable to plan as it will facilitate orderly management functions, minimizes risks and threats, opens potential opportunities, and other beneficial effects.

Task 5

The key task and process strategies of creating and working within the context of a multicultural team are: team building; communication and its process; participation; conflict management; and performance evaluation. In building multicultural teams, the manager must be able to develop a shared strategy on how the team will work together. The utilization of team building programmes and activities is deemed uncomplicated yet effective through simple socialization exercises that results to cultural learning opportunities. The concept of teamwork is also credited to the affirmative effects on the psychological health and interests of organisation’s member (Carter & West 1999). Communication, on the other hand, serves a number of fundamental functions (Brown 2001) such as control, motivation, emotional expression, and information (Eckhouse 1994). It maintains values and relationships necessary to keep the system of the united organisation. Similarly, participation should be directed towards team dynamics and extends beyond organization’s success. Managers must be able to promote participation among employees through motivation and the likes. The case of conflict management is also inherent. Multicultural work settings are often challenged by conflict, thus managers should be able to implement the appropriate conflict resolutions strategies (e.g. effective communication). Lastly, performance evaluation must be rooted not only on individual basis but also on collective contributions of the members of multicultural team towards the achievement of organization’s objectives and overall success, productivity and competitive advantage.

References

Alvesson, M 1993, Cultural perspectives on organizations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Aronson, D 2002, “Managing the Diversity Revolution: Best Practices for 21st Century Business,” Civil Rights Journal, vol.6, no. 1, pp. 46+.

Briscoe, D & Schuller, R 2004, International Human Resource Management: Policies & Practices for the Global Enterprise, Routledge, New York.

Brown, AD 2001, “Organization studies and identity: Towards a research agenda,” Human Relations, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 113-121.

Carter AJ & West, MA 1999, “Sharing the burden: teamwork in health care settings,” in Firth-Cozens, J & Payne, J (eds.) Stress in health professionals: psychological and organizational causes and interventions, John Wiley, Chichester.

Chen, KC 1985, “The Philosophy and Art of Chinese Management,” Yu-Ching, Taipei, Taiwan, in Chen, W & Lu, RSY 1998, "A Chinese approach to quality transformation," International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 72-84.

Chen, M 2001, Asian Management Systems, Thomson, London.

Chen, W & Lu, RSY 1998, "A Chinese approach to quality transformation," International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 72-84.

Cross, EY 2000, Managing Diversity – The Courage to Lead, Quorum Books, Westport, CT.

Cummings, TG & Worley, CG 2001, Organization Development and Change, South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Deal, TE & Kennedy, A 1982, Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co, Reading, MA.

Drucker, P 1992, “The new society of organizations,” Harvard Business Review, September-October issue, pp. 95-104.

Eckhouse, B 1994, Competitive Communication, McGraw-Hill, Boston.

El Kahal, S 2001, Business in Asia Pacific, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Garland, J & Farmer, RN 2000, International Dimensions of Business Strategy and Policy, Kent Publishing, Boston, MA.

Harris, PR & Moran, RT 1997, Managing Cultural Differences, Gulf Publishing, Houston, TX.

Harrison, GL, McKinnon, JL, Wu, A, & Chow, C 2000, “Culture Influences on Adaptation to Fluid Workgroups and Teams”, Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 31, No.3, pp. 489-505.

Hibbard, J 1998, “Cultural breakthrough,” Information Week, 701 (September 21), pp. 44-55.

Hofstede, G 1980a, Cultural Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Value, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.

Hofstede, G 1980b, “Motivation, leadership and organization: do American theories apply abroad?” Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 42-63.

Hofstede, G 1993, “Cultural constraints in management theories,” Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 81-94.

Hofstede, G 2001, Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Hornsby, J & Kuratko, D 2005, Frontline PR: a Handbook for the Emerging Manager, Thompson, Crawfordsville, IN.

Jaw, B, Ling, Y, Wang, CY, Chang, W 2007, “The impact of culture on Chinese employees’ work values,” Personnel Review, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 763-780.

Kanungo, RP 2006, “Cross culture and business practice: are they coterminous or cross-verging?” Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 23-31.

Lipiec, J 2001, “Human Resources Management Perspective at the Turn of the Century,” Public Personnel Management, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 137.

Lok, P & Crawford, J 2004, “The effect of organizational culture and leadership style on job satisfaction and organisational commitment: A cross-national comparison,” Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 321-338

Mariotti, J 1999, “A company that plays together, stays together,” Industry Week, vol. 248, no. 6, pp. 63-70.

Montagu-Pollock, M 1991, “All the right connection”, Asian Business, January issue, pp. 20-4.

Newstrom, J 2002, “Making Work Fun: An Important Role for Managers,” SAM Advanced Management Journal, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 5.

Oden, HW 1997, Managing Corporate Culture, Innovation and Intrapreneurship, Quorum Books, Westport, CT/London.

Peterson, RB ed. 1993, Managers and National Culture: A Global Perspective, Quorum Books, Westport, CT.

Schein, EH 1992, Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.

Schermermon, JR Jr. 2001, Management, 6th ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY.

Schneider, SC 1989, “Strategy formulation: The impact of national culture', Organization Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 157-176.

Schneider, SC & Barsoux, JL 1997, Managing across cultures, Prentice Hall, London.

Schneider, SC & de Meyer, A 1991, “Interpreting and Responding to Strategic Issues: The Impact of National Culture,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, No. 4 (May, pp. 307-320.

Schultz, M 1995, On studying organizational cultures, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, Germany.

Shenkar, O & Von Glinow, MA 1994, “Paradoxes of organizational theory and

research: Using the case of China to illustrate national contingency,” Management Science, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 56-71.

Sims, RR 2002, Organizational Success through Effective Human Resources Management, Quorum Books, Westport, CT.

Somers, M 1995, “Organizational commitment, turnover and absenteeism: an examination of direct and indirect effects”, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 16, pp. 49-58.

Sommer, S, Bae, S, & Luthans, F 1996, “Organizational commitment across cultures: the impact of antecedents on Korean employees”, Human Relations, Vol. 49, No. 7, pp. 977-93.

Tamkin, P, 2007, “UK managers: is capability in the eye of the beholder?” Development and Learning in Organizations, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 20-22.

Tzeng, SC 1985, The Philosophy of Chinese Management, Lan-Jing Publishing, Taipei, Taiwan in Chen, W & Lu, RSY 1998, "A Chinese approach to quality transformation," International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 72-84.

White, J 1998, “Portrait of a winning corporate culture,” Benefits Canada, vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 13.

Wilderom, CPM & Van den Berg, PT 1999, Firm culture and leadership as firm performance indicators: A resource-based perspective (Discussion Paper No. 0003), Tilburg University, Centre for Economic Research, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

Zhang, L, Lee, MKO, Zhang, Z, & Banerjee P, 2002, “Critical Success Factors of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems Implementation Success in China”, Computer Society, IEEE. Retrieved November 23, 2007 from, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1174613

Zhu, CJ 2005, Human Resource Management in China: Past, Current, and Future HR Practices in the Industrial Sector, Routledge, London/New York.