Evaluation of a Journal Article
Critical Analysis of Theory about Intercultural Groups
Introduction
Management is one of the most important concept in every aspect, including work, school, and many others. This concept is essential, for it involves planning, organizing, leading, coordinating, and controlling, and these concepts are crucial in various aspects and in any business organization. However, despite the universal characteristics of management, it also entails and shows the differences of many business organizations, in terms of their approach in managing their own crisis and transactions. This is why, evaluation and assessment of the intercultural differences is relevant to compare how these management practices affect the growth and development of nations, for their success largely depends on their proper implementation and utilization of the concepts in relation to management.
This paper evaluates and analyzes the theory about intercultural groups, in relation to the article of , on Cultural Constraints in Management Theories. Analysis of the theory will be done in relation to the experiences and assessments done in the article. In addition, theories in management will also be examined in comparison with the different management strategies in different countries.
Part 1
Learning Logs
(Personal Experiences)
Part 2
Critical Assessment
Culture and Intercultural Management
In all countries, the concept of management exists, but its meaning differs largely from one country to another, and it takes considerable historical and cultural insight into local conditions to understand its processes, philosophies, and problems (1992). From this, it is best to first take note of the concept of culture and its management.
(1998) reports that the notion of culture expresses an essential element within the classic world, as the way in which a man should educate himself in order to be a successful and an excellent human being. In addition, it is the collective programming of the mind, which distinguishes one group or category of people from another, a construct, that means it is "not directly accessible to observation but inferable from verbal statements and other behaviors and useful in predicting still other observable and measurable verbal and nonverbal behavior (1992). It is important to note that cultures are different from one another, and one general theory or concept of management does not apply to all kinds of cultures. This is why, many business organizations belonging in different cultures adopt a various and different styles, which they use in their advantage. One culture is unique from the other, and so, its views and strategies regarding management are likewise unique from one another. This is why culture and intercultural management are important aspects to recognize.
Intercultural communication and management is an interdisciplinary human resources field, concerned with facilitating communication, management and effective interaction of personnel and customers across borders, and this concept becomes essential due to globalization, increased cross-border alliances, and e-commerce (2006). Moreover, it is a combination of knowledge, insights and skills, which are necessary for adequately dealing with national and regional cultures and differences between cultures, at the several management levels within and between organizations, and it gives form to the relationship between cultures, organization and management (1998). From this definition, it must be given importance the concept of intercultural management is an important aspect in terms of the overall management of a business organization. This is why the fact that cultural differences are present in societies, it is best if intercultural management will be approached based on five dimensions, which can be used to predict the outcome and operation of specific society or company.
Dimensions of Cultural Differences
(1992) explains five different dimensions to explain cultural differences, namely, Power Distance, Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty Avoidance, and Long-term versus Short-term Orientation.
Power Distance – This can be defined as the degree of inequality among people, where the population of a country considers as normal: from relatively equal to extremely equal (1992). Inequality refers to the presence of different cultures in the specific society, and power distance serves as the measure and basis of the presence of different cultures in a society.
Individualism – This second dimension refers to the degree to which people in a country prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups, and be further understood as the opposite of Collectivism (1992), which refers to a group of people having the same principles towards the same goals.
Masculinity – This third dimension is the opposite of Femininity, and refers to the degree to which tough values like assertiveness, performance, success, and competition, prevail over tender values like the quality of life, maintaining warm personal relationships, service, care for the weak, and solidarity (1992).
Uncertainty Avoidance – This the fourth dimension, and defined as the degree to which people in a country prefer structured situations, which refers to situations having clear rules (written or unwritten, imposed by tradition) as to how one should behave, over unstructured situations (1992).
Long-term versus Short-term Orientation – Long-term orientation refers to values oriented towards the future, such as saving and persistence, while short-term orientation refers to values oriented towards the past and present, such as respect for tradition and fulfilling social obligations (1992).
The following table shows the comparison of different countries in terms of their culture dimension scores. The scores will be used to evaluate their intercultural management.
Culture Dimension Scores for Ten Countries
PD = Power Distance; ID = Individualism; MA = Masculinity;
UA = Uncertainty Avoidance; LT = Long Term Orientation
H = top third, M = medium third, L = bottom third
(among 53 countries and regions for the first tour dimensions; among 23 countries for the fifth)
PD ID MA UA LT
USA
40 L
91 H
62 H
46 L
29 L
Germany Japan France
35 L 54 M 68 H
67 H 46 M 71 H
66 H 95 H 43 M
65M 92H 86 H
31 M 80 H 30*L
Netherlands
38 L
80 H
14 L
53 M
44 M
Hong Kong Indonesia
68 H 78 H
25 L 14 L
57 H 46 M
29 L 48 L
96 H 25*L
West Africa
77 H
20 L
46 M
54 M
16 L
Russia
95*H
50'M
4C*L
90*H
10*L
China
80'H
20*L
50*M
60*M
118H
(1992)
The results and the interpretation of the data shows that in comparison with other countries, the profile culture of the United States presents itself as below average in terms of power distance and uncertainty avoidance, while being highly individualistic, fairly masculine and short-term oriented (1992). On the other hand, the Germans exhibit a stronger uncertainty avoidance and less extreme individualism. The culture profile of the Japanese shows that they are different on all dimensions, for being least in terms of power distance. The French exhibit larger power distance and uncertainty avoidance, but are less individualistic and somewhat feminine, while the Dutch are similar to the culture profile of the Americans only on the first three dimensions, but scored extremely feminine and relatively long-term oriented. Hong Kong, and the other succeeding countries combine large power distance with weak uncertainty avoidance, collectivism, and are very long-term oriented (1992).
Comparative Management of Different Cultures
In relation to the concepts discussed and mentioned earlier, it is important that they will be related to the management style of the different countries and cultures, in comparison to the management and culture of the United States. In this part of the paper, the culture dimensions of each country will be assessed to examine its management and its success in terms of business strategy. This will also be in relation to the success of the country as a whole.
In terms of the profile culture of the United States, the data suggests that it is below average in power distance or the degree of inequality and uncertainty avoidance, highly individualistic, fairly masculine and short-term oriented. These traits enable the United States to become one of the most powerful nations in the world, for their type and strategy in terms of management suits them well. At present, the presence of a variety of cultures, or the degree of inequality in America is high compared to other countries, and compared to the data of in 1992. This is because at present, the economy of America serves as the basis for different international transactions, and at the same time, most of the advances in science, industrial, commercial, communications, and technological aspects occur in the United States. Compared to other countries, the American government gives importance and strong attention to the invention and innovation of much advancement. Due to these, almost all cultures are present in the United States, and the country serves as the “melting pot’ of all the cultures in the world, which invalidates the data of Hofstede. In addition, his data suggests that the United States has a below average score in terms of uncertainty avoidance, which is true in most cases, for at present, American citizens are more liberated compared to other citizens in other cultures. This data just proves that they are more likely to deviate from norms or traditions. The data also indicates that the U.S. society is more individualistic, which proves to be true and consistent for culturally speaking, Americans are more independent than citizens of other cultures, and they are more likely to express themselves willingly compared to other cultures, which also makes the society more masculine. However, due to the changes in society, the data of on the short-term orientation of the society of the United States is not anymore accurate because at present, they should be regarded as being more long-term oriented, for having lack of respect for tradition and fulfilling social obligations. These characteristics of the society enable the U.S. to become more aggressive in achieving their goals. Moreover, because cultural diversity is present in the American society, it is easier for the country to perform a variety of industrial, commercial and technological functions. The country has been able to recognize their need for manpower, and was able to fulfill them through the migration of peoples from other countries and cultures.
In contrast to the culture profile of the United States, is the culture profile of Germany, which indicates a stronger uncertainty avoidance and less extreme individualism. This shows that the citizens of the German society are more likely to stick to imposed traditions, and promote the concept of Collectivism. This justifies the findings and observations of (1992) that in Germany, the manager is not a cultural hero, as elements of the medieval guild system have survived in its historical continuity until the present day. Particularly, an effective apprenticeship system exists in management, which alternates practical work and classroom courses, and at the end of the apprenticeship; the worker receives a certificate, the Facharbeiter brief, which is recognized throughout Germany. About two thirds of the German worker population holds such a certificate and a corresponding occupational pride. In fact, quite a few German company presidents have worked their way up from the ranks through an apprenticeship (1992).
Moreover, due to a high incidence of individualism, the highly skilled and responsible German workers do not necessarily need a manager to “motivate" them, for they expect their boss or Meister to assign their tasks and to be the expert in resolving technical problems. Comparisons of similar German, British, and French organizations show the Germans as having the highest rate of personnel in productive roles and the lowest both in leadership and staff roles (1992). Due to this, and in comparison with the United States, business schools are not known in Germany, and native German management theories concentrate on formal systems. The inapplicability of American concepts of management was quite apparent in 1973 when the United States consulting firm of Booz, Allen and Hamilton, commissioned by the German Ministry of Economic Affairs, wrote a study of German management from an American viewpoint, which states that "Germans simply do not have a very strong concept of management", which has not changed ever since (1992). However, the Germans have a high tendency in promoting Collectivism, which allows them to stick to traditions even more and not deviate from the orders of a leader, which has been successfully exhibited during the rule of Adolf Hitler.
Furthermore, the culture profile of the Japanese exhibits the lowest score in terms of power distance, but the same traits with Germany. This goes to show that like Germany, the Japanese society also promotes Collectivism, and has low uncertainty avoidance. They attained a low score in power distance, which means that cultural diversity in Japan is less compared to the United States. This impenetrability of the Japanese society contributes to the fact that most of their implementations are based on traditions and beliefs, and are not influenced by other cultures. In addition, (1992) emphasizes that in terms of management, their management perspective are largely controlled by their peer group rather than by their manager, and the American type of manager is also missing. In the United States, the core of the enterprise is the managerial class, while in the Japanese is the permanent worker group, which includes workers who are tenured and who aspire at life-long employment. They are distinct from the non-permanent employees, who are mostly women and subcontracted teams led by gang bosses, to be laid off in slack periods, while university graduates first join the permanent worker group and subsequently fill various positions, moving from line to staff as the need occurs while paid according to seniority rather than position. Most take part in Japanese-style group consultation sessions for important decisions, which extend the decision-making period but guarantee fast implementation afterwards (1992).
As an observation, American theories of leadership are not appropriate for the Japanese group-controlled situation, for during the past two decades, the Japanese have developed their own "PM" theory of leadership, where P stands for performance and M for maintenance, which is less a concern for individual employees than for maintaining social stability. In view of the amazing success of the Japanese economy in the past thirty years, many Americans have sought for the secrets of Japanese management hoping to copy them. In essence, there are no secrets of Japanese management, however; it is even doubtful whether there is such a thing as management, in the American sense, in Japan at all. The secret is in Japanese society; and if any group in society should be singled out as carriers of the secret, it is the workers, not the managers (1992).
From the data of , the French exhibited a high score in terms of power distance and uncertainty avoidance, while a low score in terms of individualism, which also exhibits femininity. This data means that there is low incidence of inequality in France, which means that the French society has not yet been penetrated with different cultures and peoples. This is maybe due to the fact that not many individuals know how to speak French, and the expensive lifestyle in the country. A low score in terms of uncertainty avoidance indicates that the French society has the tendency to prefer unstructured situations, or the defiance of written, unwritten or imposed rules, which identifies the French society to be similar with the American society. However, the French society exhibits low individualism, which becomes contrary to their preference towards unstructured situations. This gives the impression that management in the French society exhibits both a traditional and a modern style of management. In addition, the concept of the manager in the French society as related to the United States also does not exist, and matrix organization never became popular. In France, the principle is the honor of each class in a society, which has always been and remains extremely stratified, in which superiors behave as superior beings and subordinates accept and expect this, conscious of their own lower level in the national hierarchy but also of the honor of their own class. The French do not think in terms of managers versus non-managers but in terms of cadres versus non-cadres, where one becomes cadre by attending the proper schools and one remains it forever; regardless of their actual task, cadres have the privileges of a higher social class, and it is very rare for a non-cadre to cross the ranks (1992).
In contrast to the French society, the Dutch society is more similar in the first three aspects of cultural profile to the American society, namely, power distance, individualism, and uncertainty avoidance, while scored extremely feminine and long-term oriented. This means that the Dutch society is more culturally diverse, more individualistic, and prefers unstructured situations. This goes to show that the Dutch society is more liberated and more open-minded, which enables them to adapt certain cultural beliefs and practices of the United States. However, on the other hand, the Dutch society is more feminine, being more in touched with its warm and caring side, compared to the masculine traits of the American society. It is also focused on its long-term goals, including saving and persistence, which contributes to the effective society and management of the Dutch. Particularly, in the Netherlands, the management principle is found to be a need for consensus among all parties, neither predetermined by a contractual relationship nor by class distinctions, but based on an open-ended exchange of views and a balancing of interests. Employees give more importance to freedom to adopt their own approach to the job, being consulted by their boss in his or her decisions, training opportunities, contributing to the success of their organization, fully using their skills and abilities, and helping others(1992). This list confirms the findings that a contractual employment relationship exists in the United States, based on earnings and career opportunities, against a consensual relationship in Holland. In terms of management theories, both motivation and leadership in Holland are different from what they are in the United States. Leadership in Holland presupposes modesty, as opposed to assertiveness in the United States. No U.S. leadership theory has room for that. Working in Holland is not a constant feast, however (1992). This goes to show that the Dutch society gives importance to the implementation of democracy, similar with the American society.
On the Eastern side, Hong Kong and other Asian countries exhibits a larger power distance, weak uncertainty avoidance, collectivism, and long-term orientation. The overseas Chinese countries include Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore. The Chinese play a very-important role in the economies of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand, where they form an ethnic minority. Overseas Chinese American enterprises lack almost all characteristics of modern management, as they tend to be small, cooperating for essential functions with other small organizations through networks based on personal relations (1992). They are family-owned, without the separation between ownership and management typical in the West, or even in ]apan and Korea, and normally focus on one product or market, with growth by opportunistic diversification; in this, they are extremely flexible. Decision-making is centralized in the hands of one dominant family member, but other family members may be given new ventures to try their skills on, are low profile and extremely cost-conscious, applying Confucian virtues of thrift and persistence, and size is kept small by the assumed lack of loyalty of non-family employees, who, if they are any good, will just wait and save until they can start their own family business (1992).
Furthermore, overseas Chinese prefer economic activities in which great gains can be made with little labor, like commodity trading and real estate, for they employ only few professional managers, except their sons and sometimes daughters who have been sent to prestigious business schools abroad, but who upon return continue to run the family business the Chinese way. The origin of this system is found in the history of Chinese society, in which there were no formal laws, only formal networks of powerful people guided by general principles of Confucian virtue (1992). The favors of the authorities could change daily, so nobody could be trusted except one's kinfolk of whom, fortunately, there used to be many, in an extended family structure. The overseas Chinese way of doing business is also very well adapted to their position in the countries in which they form ethnic minorities, often envied and threatened by ethnic violence (1992).
Most developing countries exhibit these characteristics, in comparison to the developed countries first discussed in the paper. Asian nations have a high cultural diversity, for one of the strategies of Asian nations is attracting foreign investors to increase its dollar reserves. High cultural diversity means that most Asian nations have a lenient law on immigration, allowing international cultures to settle. In addition, this is also a way for these nations to promote the tourism in the country to many other foreign nationals, and internationally as well. The next characteristic of Asian societies in general is that it has a weak uncertainty avoidance, which preserves and gives importance to the ancient traditions and beliefs based on the history of the nation. This somehow restricts their overall development, for they tend to disregard advancements and settle only on their traditions and maintain them. This slows their development, and makes them unpractical in solving problems and in relating to other nations to seek for help and support. However, despite these characteristics, Asian nations in general exhibit collectivism and long-term orientation. Collectivism unites the society and although the society suffers much due to the problems and crises being experienced by the society. Unity and harmony of the people helps the society come up with solutions and execute them. Long-term orientation include values such as saving and persistence, and these values are exactly being exhibited by Asian societies because these values are needed, for them to survive the harshness of reality, that their economy is dependent on the international economy. Savings are needed for a particular nation to pay its debts from other nations, while persistence and perseverance is also needed for them to able to come up with strategies and solutions to their problems. However, compared to the traits and culture profile of developed countries, it is evident that these traits are not so useful in terms of giving Asian nations the economic advantage. Somehow, open-mindedness and liberalism must be incorporated in management to be able to cope with changes and advancements at present. Nevertheless, some Asian countries at present are now able to adapt to the changes and advancements being implemented and used by many Western countries, and coping with these changes gave them their economic growth and advantage.
Conclusion
Although the term management has already been used in different parts of the world to refer to practices and theories in organizing, planning, coordinating, leading and controlling, the society at present refers to its use in accordance to only one source. However, in various aspects, the principles and practices in management are not said to be “universal”. In this context, universal means that the management principles and practices will apply to any society and company.
However, from the data and evidences showed in the paper, it can be deduced that the concept of management in the American culture and society is not applicable in all types of societies. Due to this, it is essential that one must take note of the cultural differences of each society and nation, for these differences are the key in evaluating and assessing the applicability and suitability of the management being implemented and used by the American society.
In this light, the data and the evidences have shown that some cultures are not too liberal and open-minded compared to the American society, and some societies are more likely to settle with their existing laws, traditions and beliefs. Due to this, some countries are more advanced and developed than others, and this is because some countries are more apt to implementing successful management strategies. From this, it is best to evaluate the tendency of these countries to adopt management strategies that will best suit their society.
Due to the fact that some societies are more inclined to focusing on the development of their science and technology, while some societies settle with their traditional practices and beliefs, these differences enable us to realize that the development and the improvement of a society not solely depends on the type and strategy of management they are able to implement, but also depends on the ability of a society to adhere to the changes happening around them. This shows that the development and improvement of a society depends on the choice of its management strategy and its leaders, who will have the ability and capacity to do so.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment