Global Business - Book Report/Review Example

Is Hofstede (Culture's Consequences) irrelevant in today's global world The five parameters which serve as basis for differentiating between Geert Hofstede cultural dimensions, no doubt present a framework that negates the justification of universal management theory. According to Hofstede (2006) "it is meaningfully possible to measure cultural differences between modern nations so as to analyse a discrete set of dimensions that suggest different answers to universal problems that exist among human societies" (Hofstede, 2006). But in a globalising world where major antecedents indicate a diffusion of cultural differences, technology enables the cultural variation to stand alone in a single row. In this paper we would analyse various perspectives to consider how Hofstede's cultural consequences are irrelevant by examining the five parameters in the light of contemporary trends in globalisation. Power Distance: Starting from the culture definition, it is true that culture means to society in context with what has worked in history and how the society has perceived concepts, ideologies, norms, values, and structured operating procedures (Vinken et al, 2004, p. 29). Such ideologies that has helped changing cultural trends or has emerged as trend setters vary according to class divisions, in fact it would be better to say that ideologies in depth are perceived in accordance with social classes. This means inequality among the people is responsible for understanding cultural management but this does not indicate that ideologies are practiced on the basis of inequality. According to Newman & Nollen (1996) "Power distance presents an opinion which people uphold that power and status are unequally distributed among social systems, therefore in organisations, power distance influences the amount of formal hierarchy, the degree of centralisation, and the amount of participation in decision-making" (Newman & Nollen, 1996). Hofstede's framework encourage less participation in managerial decision-making, since he believes in divided cultural management, but since employee participation is an important area of management, adapting high power distance cultures therefore it is obvious to be more participative, resulting in denial of Hofstede's theory. This is what happens in technological era of ICT and globalisation. Before exploring the above notion in depth, we take an example of a society heavily influenced by class differences. Such a society works collectively in cultural, social, economical and educational levels, however what differs between them is the extent to which they rejoice their lifestyle. Of course economic factor matters but does not change the values which they can afford to adopt. Similarly in a globalised world where technology impacts society, Hofstede's cultural dimensions claim 'power distance' to be utilised by two categories, 'small power distance' and 'big power distance'. This could be true if technology and ICT were limited to be acquired by big power distance, but since ICT is not limited to be acquired by a particular class or division, therefore 'power distance' has nothing to do with the role technology or ICT plays in a society. There are reasons for the contributions of ICT being inapplicable to the power distance factor. The changing nature of technology itself and others arising from transformations in society witnessed technological development as a good thing over the decades. It has brought prosperity, health and progress and has help in eradicating social differences among various class divisions in society resulting in shifting people's attitudes toward technology (Pool, 1997, p. 7). On the other hand the approach of 'social construction' explicitly deals with social reality of the web of relationships, institutions, and shared beliefs and meanings that exist in a group of people instead of physical reality and negates Hofstede's ideology. Unlike Hofstede, this approach sees knowledge not as something gleaned from an underlying physical reality but as the collective product of a society. Social constructionists speak not of objective facts based on differences but only of interpretations of the world, and they set out to explain how those interpretations arise that go along with the society (Pool, 1997, p. 12). Social constructionists believe in a collective society which despite of class divisions; make no attempt to judge the truth or falsity of socially constructed knowledge. Inglehart (1997) as a 'dimensionalist' despite of incorporating the issue of cultural change in his work has remained unable to provide justification on the influence of inequality among people upon boost in information technology (Vinken et al, 2004, p. 22). Research tells us that besides the practical school of thought which recognises the importance of culture, there are other factors that even in comparative management acknowledge the existence of management attitudes and practices. For example technology development in Nigeria is the result of cultural factors that collectively worked to promote information technology (Anakwe, 2000). The presence of computer technology, therefore, does not constitute the division of required component for our analysis; instead it highlights the significance of technology in helping society to relate to one another. However lacking access of communities to basic telecommunication services is another issue which needs to be addressed beyond demographic characteristics of race or class and geographical inequality of Internet access (Wood & Smith, 2005, p. 172). Individualism vs. collectivism: Many theorists believe that society has lost all the power to store culture. History has given us many philosophers like Plato who believed that the true self could not be defined by text and that the individuals must speak their minds directly to confront the problems of society so as to maintain their personal ideologies. Even today, we are surrounded by management issues designed to capture, compose, and alter our words and, by extension, ourselves (Wood, 2005, p. 6). Some theorists perceive our current situation as that of 'oversaturation', which our machines have begun to overwhelm us with too many choices. Management in this era sees personal testification to the depths that those historic events had on individuals as well as society and to the ability of the technology to facilitate human-to-human contact through it all. As the second metaphor of analysing cultural dimension, it is necessary to view to what extent people are related to and care each other. This clearly escorts us to examine the significance of relationship in determining universal management efficiency or inefficiency. What Hofstede believes as contradictory is the collective sense making of cultural cognitions that differ from individual ones in a sense that the former are commonly held by a group of people in a society, irrespective of the fact that members of the same cultural group may not be aware in their daily activities of what they hold in common (Sackmann, 1992). Individual or collective cultures provoke collective management techniques and practices. In the context of technology and ICT, such practices while deploying as understandable possess a dramatic effect on both individual as well as collective level thereby drawing towards the trend to which technology is changing the nature of our organisations. Critical mass theorists do not agree with Hofstede that collectivism should be divided, because it would be non-rational for actors to participate in a collective innovation in the absence of a sufficient number of participants (Beard, 1996, p. 70). Markus suggest that it is better for any management to contribute to universal participation in a technological mode; this can be increased by providing the resources needed to access the medium or by lowering the skill and effort requirements to use it. Oliver, unlike Hofstede names these resources 'positive incentives' and argue that they are effective for motivating small numbers of co-operators, particularly when nearly everyone must participate for group members to achieve high payoffs, and where any one's participation adds little to the payoff unless enough others cooperate, negative incentives are more effective and less costly for their users (Beard, 1996, p. 70). In this era where the need to improve quality interacts with increased globalisation by creating the possibility to attract foreign corporations, ICT impacts upon the role in running the schools in a developing country. The motivations for such a change are in fact not the cultural diversions, any poor country can benefit from close contact with developed world practices (Orozco & Hilliard, 2004, p. 74). One concern for globalisation effect on culture might be the downsides that this phenomenon could possess that foreign investors when seek short-term profits and that their interests, they might clash with the host country. On a broader perspective, culture does matter but relates to the technological improvements that globalisation has accelerated present opportunities for improving quality. Improved communications on a collective level, for example, can facilitate knowledge transfer between countries and between schools. In the context of ICT, policy makers utilise this opportunity to learn from experiences, and teachers can gather knowledge from others. Use of online teaching materials and lesson plans has alleviated the possibilities of cultural divisions, this can help ease teachers' workload. So many modes of teaching via audio and video, gathering knowledge via the Internet, and collective problem solving using online tools offer great potential for creating enthusiasm among both students and teachers. Technology eradicates cultural influences when likely to boost the quantity of education. Cultural parameters fades away when online teaching materials or videoconferencing facilities help increase access to education without diluting quality, reaching people who live far from the nearest school. Combining use of new technology with human interaction provides a solid grounding for participation in a globalised economy where there are no barriers to race or culture management. Gender: Globalisation is the best example of advancement where gender bias has never been an issue. Gender roles often transform when theorists see globalisation as positive measure in promoting economic development and intercultural exchanges. But since intercultural exchanges does not indicate that culture is transformed through globalisation, corrosive developments suggests that gender dominance is not an issue to contemplate upon in culture. Many theorists view globalisation as a threat to century-long traditions and religious identities, they are right in perceiving these social remittances to change cultural foundations such as gender relations, economic strategies at the household level, social ambitions and expectations. It might be because of this that Hofstede has visualised the unfairness of globalisation to become a threat to global integration itself. In this globalisation era, gender differences matter but are not culture oriented, therefore universal management can be applicable in scenario where family responsibilities at home play a role in explaining differences in academic outcomes between girls and boys. Research findings consistently suggest that, compared with brothers, immigrant girls have many more responsibilities at home but it is not culture oriented since male dominance prevails globally and while these factors may account for this gendered pattern of academic engagement, more research is required to unpack the source of this trend. Cultural dimension of citizenship is a traditional issue that provokes political and economic aspects but increasingly consider multiethnic societies to confront questions of difference that undergird social inequity. Technology and internet provide the basis for new forms of cultural harmony, rather than division as groups of people seek to deal with the transformations brought about by these dynamics. However that does indicate social disintegration but might be in the longer run, therefore the search for solidarity so as to restore or defend 'tradition' can escort us lead to the production of new forms of social disintegration at one and the same time (Apple, 2007). Risk Avoidance: No doubt there is not any prevalence of cultural consequences where there is an uncertainty in society, but it is not that risks are being ignored in this process of modern techno science. Globalisation has equipped risks to legitimise their claim to scarce resources to speed up its capacity for interventions and to respond more quickly to emergent risks. In doing so risks have been taken up by a form of technological culture which Hofstede mentions among the cultural imperatives to influence predominant 'ethical' imperative. Douglas and Wildavsky's (1982) when related risk with culture, they conceptualised risk in terms of social functioning. Social order regulation operates in a socio-political environment, in which the selection and definition of particular hazards as risks have immediate implications for the regulation of social order (Loon, 2002, p. 7). However the extent to which risk factor is considered among universal management entirely depends upon risk-taking behaviours of the society and risk perceptions that have grown dramatically into our insights (Bozeman & Kingsley, 1998). While giving priority to structured situations over unstructured solutions, or vice versa society enables technological culture to be adapted universally rather than emphasising upon a national culture, particularly in the case of Hofstede's globalisation perspective. Technological improvements on one hand disintegrate as modern-day wonders provoking a sense of uncertainty about what actually had been accomplished. Yet the globalisation phenomenon on the basis of technological achievement promises a more basic confidence to improve social existence, rather than disintegration in the name of culture (Fritzsche, 2007). While studying the effects of Hofstede's cultural dimensions on ethical decision-making, one cannot claim the implications to produce exact results in the case of globalisation because only the two dimensions 'uncertainty avoidance' and 'masculinity' give some results if analysed under ethical problems (Husted, 1999). Time orientation: Future oriented values depict long term or short term concerns like savings, traditional values and customs or fulfilling social obligations. Globalisation has invented technology and technology has minimised cultural values to the extent that over the years as technology has driven sophistication, cultural values have given birth to 'free culture' (Taylor, 2004) or online culture. One of the miracles of technology that has adopted time orientation in a free or online culture is 'outsourcing'. However the long term expectations from globalisation (Bielski, 2006) are never been time oriented, since they adopt a free culture. In a time oriented context, the workings of technology appear largely irrelevant to shifts in other expressive goals and activities especially the interpersonal ones. For example in a cultural spectrum as proposed by Hofstede, this may result largely from cultural continuities in general goals and values. Another example is that of broad accord on the importance of marriage and the family and friendship goals that we are stick to have had a long historical existence in Western European culture. It is perhaps not surprising as long as emphasis on work, acquisition, and saving for our generation is concerned; our educational institutions even now devote so little attention and study to leisure, the emotions, and self-expression that it is not possible to relate such culture towards any long term or short term growth. There is a conflict between technology culture and what Hofstede has proposed national or diversified culture, both cannot converge since both belongs to a separate set of values. Technology develops a culture of thinking in which one automatically gets engaged in challenges yet personally meaningful problems, whereas the culture Hofstede has developed gives a conceptual and cultural picture of worldly experiences (Lim et al, 2003). If indeed we agree with Hofstede that advances of technology largely determine the fate of society, then there is also a need to determine that technological modernity that provoke modern consciousness in our minds. Culture is never transformed, it remains within the boundaries people want to keep it, and therefore to transform culture is a total lie that confesses the truth about the socio-economic base with which it has now become identical. Cultural values and traditions never change and so is the universal management, therefore it would not be right to accept that cultural theories modify. However what Hofstede suggests is true in case we keep the technology and globalisation matters aloof from the cultural perspective. References Anakwe P. Uzoamaka, Igbaria Magid & Anandarajan Murugan, (2000) "Management Practices across Cultures: Role of Support in Technology Usage" Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 4, p. 653. Apple W. Michael, (2007) "Who Needs Teacher Education Gender, Technology and the Work of Home Schooling", Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(2), p. 111. Beard W. Jon, (1996) Impression Management and Information Technology: Quorum Books: Westport, CT. Bielski Lauren, (2006) "Article Title: Outsourcing Success: It's All in the Governance Making Deals Work Daily Takes a Long-Term View", ABA Banking Journal, 98(7), p. 38. Bozeman Barry & Kingsley Gordon, (1998) "Risk Culture in Public and Private Organizations" Public Administration Review, 58(2), p. 109. Fritzsche Peter, (2007) "Technology and the Culture of Modernity in Britain and Germany, 1890-1945", Journal of Social History, 40(3), p. 799. Hofstede Geert, (2006) "What Did GLOBE Really Measure Researchers' Minds versus Respondents' Minds". Journal of International Business Studies, 37: 6, p. 882. Husted W. Bryan, (1999) "Wealth, Culture and Corruption" Journal of International Business Studies, 30(2), p. 339. Lim Cher Ping, Teo Yiong Hwee, Wong Philip, Khine Myint Swe, Chai Ching Sing & Divaharan Shanti, (2003) "Creating a Conducive Learning Environment for the Effective Integration of ICT: Classroom Management Issues", Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 14(4), p. 405. Loon Joost Van, (2002) Risk and Technological Culture: Towards a Sociology of Virulence: Routledge: London. Newman L. Karen & Nollen D. Stanley, (1996) "Culture and Congruence: The Fit between Management Practices and National Culture", Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 4, p. 753. Orozco M. Marcelo & Hilliard Desiree Baolian, (2004) Globalization: Culture and Education in the New Millennium: University of California Press: Berkeley, CA. Pool Robert, (1997) Beyond Engineering: How Society Shapes Technology: Oxford University Press: New York. Sackmann A. Sonja, (1992) "Culture and Subcultures: An Analysis of Organizational Knowledge", Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(1), p. 140. Taylor Russ, (2004) "Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity", Federal Communications Law Journal, 57(1), p. 161. Vinken Henk, Soeters Joseph & Ester Peter, (2004) Comparing Cultures: Dimensions of Culture in a Comparative Perspective: Brill: Boston. Wood F. Andrew & Smith J. Matthew, (2005) Online Communication: Linking Technology, Identity, and Culture: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ. Read More