The Cultural Perspectives and Values of Russia and Germany - Assignment Example

Table of Contents 1.Introduction 2 2.Cultural Dimensions 3 2.1.Hofstede Model 3 2.2.Trompennar’s model 9 3.Communication 11 3.1.Communication Strategies 11 3.2.Language 13 4.Negotiation 14 5.Organizational Culture 17 Conclusion 19 References list 20 Appendix A: Hofstede’s comparison between Russia and Germany 24 1. Introduction Expatriates working in different parts of the world experience difficulties related to cultural differences. For instance, expatriates working in Russia and Germany have different cultural experiences. This report compares the cultural perspectives and values of Russia and Germany using some theories of cultural management such as Hofstede’s model and Trompennar’s model. According to the Hofstede’s model, Russia scored high power distance; hence showing that power is very distant in the society. Germany has a lower power distance score of 35% which means that the status quo can be challenged in Germany (The Hofstede Centre 2014). In terms of individualism, Russia scored low while Germany scored high. This means that Germany believes in self-actualization while Russia believes in friendship and cooperation with neighbors and relatives. Russia also scored low on masculinity while Germany scored high. In this case, Germany values performance while Russia is concerned with quality of life. The scores of Russia and Germany in terms of uncertainty avoidance were high; this indicates that both countries do not like ambiguous situations. The two countries also have a highly pragmatic mindset in which people believe that truth highly depends on context, time and situation. Lastly, the scores of the two countries in terms of indulgence were low, meaning that their cultures are restrained in nature. The Trompennar’s model is similar to the Hofstede’s mode;l in many ways. Universalism versus particularism dimension of the Trompennar’s model is similar to the Hofstede’s individualism-collectivism. Therefore, Russia scored high on this dimension while Germany scored low. The Trompennar’s dimensions of achievement-ascription, neutral-affective, and specific-diffuse are similar to the power distance dimension of Hofstede’s model. This means that Russia scored high in these dimensions while Germany scored low. In terms of Hall’s theory, Russia has been considered as a high-context culture while Germany is a low-context culture. Diversity in the workplace and organizational culture also affect expatriate’s work because people are likely to face problems of gender, marital status, conversations at the workplace, use of non-verbal communication in both Germany and Russia. Furthermore, expatriates should consider the negotiation styles of the two countries. This report therefore focuses on dimensions of culture, workplace diversity, communication and negotiation styles of the two countries. 2. Cultural Dimensions 2.1. Hofstede Model The Hofstede’s model provides six dimensions of culture: power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, pragmatism and indulgence. Different countries have different scores in terms of each Hofstede’s dimension of culture. In other words, people in different countries have different values and beliefs. These differences cause significant challenges to expatriates in their international assignments. 2.1.1. Power Distance Power distance is concerned with the fact that individuals in different the society cannot be equal. According to the Hofstede Centre (2014), power distance refers to the level in which members of the society with less power in organizations or institutions expect and accept that power is not distributed equally. Russia has a high score in terms of power distance. This indicates that power is very distant in the society. This is also demonstrated by the fact that Russia has one of the most centralized systems in which 2/3 of all investments are concentrated in Moscow (Bodin et al 2013, p.56). The great difference between the less powerful and the more powerful indicates that status symbols are treated with great importance in Russia. Behavior in the region should also represent status roles in various interactions in the society. For instance, interactions in business organizations should be top-down and provide clear roles for each task. On the other hand, the score of Germany on power distance is low. The country is characterized by a strongly decentralized system and mainly occupied by the middle class (The Hofstede Centre 2014). In organizations and institutions of Germany, co-determination rights are taken into account quite extensively. Leadership should be challenged by followers in order to demand for expertise and transformative leadership. 2.1.2. Individualism Individualism dimension is concerned with the interdependence among members of a society (Deininger 2014, p.132). In individualistic societies, the self-image of people is “I” while in collective societies the self-image of people is “We”. Members of an individual society also take care of themselves and their immediate families only. On the other hand, members of collectivist societies belong to groups in which members take care of each other in exchange for loyalty within the group. Germany has a high individualistic score. There are small families which are based on parent-child relationships instead of the extended family’s relationships (The Hofstede Centre 2014). The ideal of self-actualization is also highly regarded in Germany. Loyalty in the organizations, institutions and societies is earned through personal preferences, sense of duty and responsibility among people. A contract between the employer and the employee in a German firm determines the loyalty between the two parties, so that if one breaks the rules of the contract then loyalty is lost. Russia’s score on individualism is low. This is because Russia is highly concerned with group interactions. Friendship is also one of the unique cultural values of Russia. Russians usually say “We with friends” rather than “I and my friends”. This reflects the suggestion of the Holfstede Centre (2014) that individualism focuses on “I” while collectivism focuses on “We”. In this case, Russia is a collectivist society which mainly advocates for friendships. In Russia, friends, families and neighbors are important in dealing with challenges of everyday. Therefore, expatriates in Russia need to build relationships and friendship with people in order to deal with the challenges they face in their international assignments in the country. Expatriates may also prefer to take their families to Russia while in international assignments because Russians value families. 2.1.3. Masculinity Masculinity suggests that highly masculine societies tend to focus on achievement, competition and success while highly feminine societies focus on quality of life and caring for others in the society. Success in masculine societies is defined by winning or becoming the best in the field while in feminine societies it is defined by quality of life; standing out of the crowd is preferred in masculine societies but rejected in feminine societies. Furthermore, what motivates people in masculine societies is wanting to be the best while what motivates people in feminine societies is liking what you do (Hofstede Centre, 2014). Russia has a low score in terms of masculinity, meaning that the country is highly feminine. Russians understate their personal achievements, capacities or contributions when they are meeting with a stranger (The Hofstede Centre 2014). Therefore, an expatriate going to Russia should not underestimate the achievements of Russians while negotiating or communicating with them because they are likely to be higher achievers than what they say. Russians also talk modestly about themselves and live in modesty. Germany is a masculine society because it has a high score in terms of masculinity. This means that performance and achievement are highly valued in Germany. Germans usually want to be the best. At the age of ten, schools separate children in different classes depending on their achievements and performance (The Hofstede Centre 2014). German managers are also expected to be assertive and decisive. Classes are also demonstrated through cars, watches and technical devices. Expatriates in this country should therefore identify their achievements and try to fit into their best class where they can talk freely about their achievements. 2.1.4. Uncertainty Avoidance This dimension refers to the extent to which a society deals with the fact that they are likely to be faced with ambiguous or unknown situations in future (The Hofstede Centre 2014). Societies develop different beliefs and institutions to deal with uncertainties. Russians have a very high score on uncertainty avoidance (95%) which means that they are highly threatened by ambiguous situations (The Hofstede Centre 2014). In Russia, context and background information is highly needed for decision making. In front of strangers, Russians usually appear to be formal and distant. This formality is not only seen as a measure of uncertainty avoidance but also a sign of respect. In this case, expatriates deal with challenges involving Russians by preparing enough background information and approach issues formally and with good planning and control. In Germany, the score of uncertainty avoidance is 65% which means that Germans are threatened by ambiguous situations but not as highly as Russians. Germans use philosophical approach to ambiguous situations (The Hofstede Centre 2014). This is motivated by famous German philosophers Kant, Fichte and Hegel. According to these philosophers, deductive approaches are preferred to inductive approaches in relation to thinking, presentation and planning. Systematic overview of any undertaking should be provided before it is implemented. Details are also necessary in order to ensure that a topic or project is well thought out. In an expatriate situation, expatriates are expected to plan well and prepare details using deductive approaches in order to convince Germans and avoid problems when engaging with them. 2.1.5. Pragmatism This refers to how societies prioritize their past and their future goals (The Hofstede Centre 2014). Less pragmatic societies maintain their traditions and norms while considering changes in the society as being suspicious. More pragmatic societies engage in thrift and modern education to prepare for the future. Germany has a high score in terms of pragmatism, which means that the country is highly pragmatic – they believe that the truth depends in time, situation and context. They therefore change traditions regularly to adapt to changing conditions. This encourages them to increase their savings, investments and thriftiness. Germans usually persevere to achieve results. They are hardworking, thrifty and industrious. Russians are also highly pragmatic. Like the Germans, Russians work hard and persevere in order to achieve results so that they can adapt to changing conditions in future. In this case, expatriates in Germany and Russia should learn to be thrifty and persevere when they face challenges in order to achieve good results. 2.1.6. Indulgence Indulgence refers to the extent to which humans are able to control their impulses and desires (Harris et al 2004, p.456). This depends on how people are brought up since they were little children. Weak control is known as indulgence while strong control is known as restraint. Russian culture is usually characterized by a restrained culture because it has a low score on the dimension of indulgence. As a result of this restraint culture, Russian Societies have a high tendency of being cynics and pessimists. They also disregard leisure time and control their desires. Furthermore, Russian societies perceive that their actions are restrained by social norms. Similarly, Germany is characterized by restrained culture. They consider indulgence to be wrong. Expatriates in these two societies should therefore learn to restraint their desires and let their actions be restrained by social norms of those countries. 2.2. Trompennar’s model According to Trompennar, dimensions of culture arise from problems which need solutions (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turne, 2012). Each culture has its own ways of solving given problems. The dimensions of culture according to Trompennar include universalism versus Particularism, individualism versus communitarianism, neutral versus emotional, specific versus diffuse, achievement versus ascription, attitudes to time, and attitudes to environment. 2.2.1. Universalism versus Particularism This dimension is similar to the individualism dimension of Hofstede. Universalistic societies consider what is good and right while particularistic cultures consider obligations of relationships. Germany can be considered as a universalistic society which involves following good and right. The country is guided by rules and people respect the rights of others. In Germany people also work according to their roles and responsibilities in the society (Goldstein 2009, p.232). On the other hand, Russians have a particularistic culture in which friendship is highly considered as a way of building relationships. Obligations of people are also directed towards building relationships. 2.2.2. Neutral versus Emotional This dimension refers to the extent to which interactions are objective or emotional (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turne 2012, p.9). In Germany, interactions are objective and detached from emotions. Therefore, expatriates should be objective in their interactions with the Germans. On the other hand, Russian culture is emotional because business is considered as a human affair which is mainly achieved through relationships and interactions in the society. Interactions during Russian culture usually accept expression of emotions (Ruutu 2009, p.145). Therefore, Expatriates in Russia should learn how to handle emotions in order to conduct business successfully with the Russians. 2.2.3. Specific versus Diffuse In diffuse culture a person is included in a business relationship through personal contact while in specific culture a specific relationship is prescribed by a contract (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turne 2012, p.9). This is in line with the individualistic dimension of Hosftede. In Russia, diffuse culture is common because human contact and interactions are important in Russian business relationships. On the other hand, the German culture is a specific culture business relationships are defined by contracts which should be honoured by all parties involved. 2.2.4. Achievement versus Ascription According to the achievement cultures, people are judged according to their achievements. On the other hand, ascription societies require people to be judged by their personality, kinships and birth. Russian cultures are based on the ascription dimension because people are judged by their kinship, personalities and birth. People in Russia value relationships among families and friends; hence people are judged according to how they interact with family and friends (Saul & McKinzie 1997, p.76). German culture judges its people by their accomplishments and achievements. In this case, an expatriate is judged positively in Germany if he/she achieves high performance in his/her international assignment. On the other hand, an expatriate in Russia is judged positively if he/she has a good relationship and personality with other people. 2.2.5. Attitudes to time Russian and German cultures have the same attitudes to time. They both consider the future to be better than the past. In this case, people are judged by what they will achieve in future rather than what they have already achieved in the past (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turne 2012, p.10). However, time and money are very important in Russian culture while achievement and performance is important in German culture. Germans concentrate on achievements and performance, but Russians concentrate on the time when such achievements were made and how much money are made from such achievements. 2.2.6. Attitudes to Environment This is the last dimension of culture according to Trompennars. Some cultures consider the power of a person comes from within; factors affecting individuals reside within the individual (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turne 2012, p.10). Other cultures consider the world to be more powerful than the individual. The environment plays more role than the individual. Germans believe in the power from within while Russians believe in the influence of external environment. 3. Communication 3.1. Communication Strategies Communication strategies differ in different geographical and cultural backgrounds. They also differ in terms of organizational culture and type leadership in place. A good communication strategy allows for a good bonding and understanding among various members of the organization, and encourages a good passage of information from one management level to another (Fiol 1991, p.195). A good communication strategy also enhances effective communication of mission, vision and strategic objectives of organizations. A good communication across cultures takes other people’s norms, roles and values into consideration. It also requires the communicator to predict the behaviour and response of others accurately. Effective communication also requires a good tolerance for ambiguity (Hamilton 2013, p.23). This is difficult in Russia and Germany because they both have high levels of uncertainty avoidance. Furthermore, effective communication strategies entail managing and controlling one’s emotions (Matveev & Nelson 2004, p.260). This applies mainly in Germany where emotions are not included as part of business transactions. Russians may provoke emotions as a means of coercing opponents during negotiations. Germans also like showing empathy during communication. Germany is characterized by direct and participative communication. In Russia, organizations prefer top-down communication because power lies at the top of the management. Communication in Russia also depends on relationships among people, while in Germany it depends on functions, roles and responsibilities. Russians are always personal during communication. They build strong relationships in order to collect information needed for communication. Communication is also direct in Germany because it follows the rule of honest even if it hurts. Counterparts are also given a chance to give their opinions and learn from their mistakes (Hamilton 2013, p.35). Therefore, for an expatriate to overcome challenges of communication in Russia, he/she should learn to relate with others and build strong personal relationships. In Germany, the expatriate should focus on his/her roles and responsibilities in order to communicate effectively. 3.2. Language This is important in international assignments because it entails how people reach out to each other. One of the biggest challenges of expatriates in international assignments is usually language (Brandist 2014, p. 123). Without it, expatriates are not able to express themselves, interact with others, negotiate, or even give their opinions and views during discussions. Sometimes training is also offered in specific languages and if the expatriate does not understand such language, expatriate failure may occur. To overcome this, several universal languages are usually used; mainly English, Spanish and German. Furthermore, some people use translators to ensure that they pass the right message and allow as many people as possible to understand the messages passed across during international assignments. Russian people speak Russian language and English, while Germans speak German. Expatriates going to these countries should understand these languages in order to perform well in their international exercises. The use of language also reflects culture, values and beliefs. For instance, the Russian word for truth is “Pavda” and is usually used regularly, showing that Russians value truth (Bruner 2002, p.98). Furthermore, Russians commonly use the Russian word “Dusha” which means soul to express their inner feelings, emotions and thought. There are also some things that different countries consider as a taboo to be talked about. For example, World War II and questions about personal life are considered as conversation taboos in Germany. Travel abroad, soccer and hobbies can be talked about as frequently as possible. Understanding the terms that are taboo to be talked about in a given country is important for an expatriate so that he/she may not offend the other parties in the international exercise. 4. Negotiation Negotiation in international assignments of expatriates is highly affected by cultural differences including differences in behaviors, values, beliefs, language and attitudes of hosts (Krishna et al 2004, p.63). Negotiation in Russia requires individuals to show behaviors that reflect status and the role of status in the society (Metcalf 2007, p.165). An individual negotiates differently with someone down the rank than someone up the rank. Relationships are also important to obtain information for negotiations in Russia. Relationships in Russia are important in collection of information or getting introduced to people during negotiations. Relationships also make negotiations to be successful because people need to become personal, trustful and authentic before engaging in negotiations. When negotiating with Russians, it is also important to note that they talk modestly about themselves and live in modesty (Kivelson & Neuberger 2008, p.65). Therefore, expatriates in Russia should behave modestly when negotiating with them. The expatriate should not say something that will likely to be interpreted as self-exalting or pride. Furthermore, Russians do not accept dominant behaviour when it comes from peers (Roshwald 2001, p.89). Therefore, when an expatriate is negotiating with peers in Russia, he/she should avoid dominant behaviour and learn to come into level with peers so that they can understand each other. On the other hand, Germans like talking about their personal achievements and capabilities (Stenn 2013, p.201). Expatriates should therefore learn to read the status of Germans in order to talk about their achievements that will make them to be accepted in a certain status. When starting negotiations, preparation and planning is usually important so that it becomes successful (Cohen 2001, p.475). Negotiation in Russia and Germany should be well prepared, planned and controlled using sufficiently collected background information because the two countries avoid uncertainties. In Russia, uncertainties are avoided during negotiations using relationship building and detailed and well-prepared presentations. Germans deal with uncertainties during negotiations by using deductive approaches in presenting and planning for negotiations. German negotiations usually require systematic overview of the negotiation process (Festing & Knappert 2014, 340). Therefore, expatriates should prepare themselves well by obtaining enough information and planning well for their presentations in order to negotiate successfully in German and Russian companies or institutions. Negotiations are also highly determined by how people handle emotions during conversations (Greenleaf 2000, p.57). In German culture, interactions are objective and they are detached from emotions. In this case, negotiations in German context require people to become objectives in their conversations and decision making (Bergedorfer & Rödinger 2003, p.87). On the other hand, Russian culture is emotional in nature. Business is a human affair which allows expression of emotions. In this case, negotiation with Russians requires expatriates to learn how to handle emotions during negotiations so that they can express them and use them appropriately when required. There is also a significant aspect of meeting and greeting during negotiations across cultures. To win during a negotiation, one should create a good impression from the first time he/she meets the other party until they close the deal of negotiation. Therefore, expatriates in international assignments should learn how people greet each other and how they behave in meetings. In the German context, people shake hands with everyone when arriving and when leaving a business or social meeting. Furthermore, German culture prefers the use of the surname only without title when people are introducing themselves (Shingleton et al 1995, p.78). When shaking hands, Germans dislike shaking hands with one hand in the pocket. If these issues are considered adequately during negotiation meetings, they will create a good impression and the negotiation will be successful. Wall and Blum (1991, p.285) suggest that in negotiation the characteristics of negotiators are important factors in determining the success of the negotiation. In this case, a good way of greeting and addressing people in the German way are important in enhancing a successful negotiation process. In the Russian culture, meeting etiquette firm greetings with bone-crushing handshake which is accompanies with direct eye contact and relevant greeting for each time of day (Lewis 2000, p.43). Male friends may oat each other’s shoulders and hug, while female friends may kiss each other three times on the cheek. These meeting etiquettes create a good impression for Russian negotiations. If one does not do these, he/she is not trusted or respected by other Russians. Negotiations in Russian context are also considered as a slow process because Russians do not want to be rushed. Because Russians may express their emotions, they usually like lose their temper, walk out of meetings, and threaten to terminate relationships in order to force opponents to accept their position. Furthermore, Russians never accept compromises. They negotiate until they reach a concession. However, Russians believe in win-lose rather than win-win scenarios. Persuasion and threats also lead to productive bargaining during negotiation because they guide the negotiator’s behaviour (Wall and Blum 1991, p.285). Russian centralized system in which power resides at the top of the management may sometimes involve legitimate threats and strong demands from the top. This receives support from the juniors who respect the system. On the other hand, persuasion which applies to the German culture also enhances cooperation between the negotiator and the opponent. The use of power in negotiation also applies in the Russian centralized system, but in Germany it involves persuasion, participation and collaboration. 5. Organizational Culture There are various ways in which various cultures view the aspect of organizational culture. Understanding these views allows expatriates to work well with various organizations across the world. For instance, understanding how business meetings are held in a certain company allows expatriates to prepare well for such meetings. In organizational culture, cultural diversity at the workplace plays a crucial role in determining the success of shared values in the organization (Samovar et al 2009, p.321). Effective cross cultural management and training is needed to promote successful organizational culture. In Russia, building relationships is an important aspect of organizational cultures. However, building long lasting personal relationships is not necessary for organizations to do business with certain groups or individuals. For a successful cooperation and collaboration at the workplace, Russians encourage networks of people who know and trust each other. Therefore, strangers do not work well together at the workplace. The Russian word “Syyasi” which means connections are common in organizations and encourage the development of successful organizational cultures (Vinken et al 2004, p.55). It encourages having friends in high places in order to cut through the red tape. Patience is also an important aspect in business relationships and etiquette at the workplace. Furthermore, organizational cultures of Russian companies are characterized by sincerity which is required for building trust and trust is needed for building good relationships at the workplace (O'Brien & Wegren 2002, p.57). In meetings and workshops, Russians usually have some sessions of socializing and knowing each other in order to strengthen the organizational culture. In Germany, punctuality is part of corporate culture. People are required to attend business meetings and social meetings on time. If anyone his late, he/she should call to provide valid explanations (Tolz 2001, p.111). Expatriates should do so in Germany in order to avoid expatriate failure. German colleagues also determine the creditability of an international company only if its profiles are provided beforehand (Mead 2000, p.234). Moreover, Germans encourage contacts and networks as essential pillars of business success. Businesses should also respect ranks and meetings should not be organized for a lower-ranked employee to meet with a higher ranked employee. Organizational culture in Germany is also characterized by formal meetings which are used to enable people to know each other and evaluate each other to gain trust (Catana et al 2013, p.471). This is similar to Russian organizational culture. Privacy is also another key element of German’s corporate culture. Office doors are usually closed and if one wants to enter the office he/she should known the door first. An expatriate to Germany should therefore respect the privacy of Germans in order to work well with them and make the international assignment to be successful. Conclusion In conclusion, it is clear that Germany and Russia have some differences and some similarities in terms of culture. Differences are more than similarities. From the Hofstede’s and Trompenaar’s models, it is clear that Russia has a more collectivist approach to business while Germany has an individualistic approach to business. Russians value friendships and building relationships while Germans value individual roles and responsibilities, and relationships build by contracts. In terms of negotiations, Germans usually prefer objective and inductive approaches while Russians prefer the expression of emotions during negotiations. Persuasions are also common in Germany while threats are common in Russia, and in both cases bargaining is improved during negotiations. Language is also more important influence in Russia and less important in Germany. In terms of corporate culture, building relationships is important in Russia while privacy is valued in Germany. References list Bergedorfer GSJ & Rödinger, H 2003, Reinventing Europe: cultural dimensions of widening and deepening, Körber-Stiftung, Hamburg. Brandist, C 2014, Dimensions of hegemony: Language, culture and politics in revolutionary Russia, Brill, S.I. Bodin, PA, Hedlund, S & Namli, E 2013, Power and Legitimacy: Challenges from Russia, Moscow, Russia. Bruner, M L 2002, Strategies of remembrance: The rhetorical dimensions of national identity construction, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. Catana, D, Pučko, D & Krzykala-Schaefer, R 2013, “How future managers view societal culture: A comparison across seven CEE countries”, Journal for East European Management Studies, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 463-481. Cohen, R 2001, “Negotiating across cultures”, Turbulent Peace: the Challenges of Managing International Conflict, 469-481. Deininger, M 2014, Global pentecostalism: An inquiry into the cultural dimensions of globalization, Anchor Academic Publishing, Hamburg, Germany. Festing, M & Knappert, L 2014, “Country-Specific Profiles of Performance Management in China, Germany, and the United States – An Empirical Test”, Thunderbird International Business Review, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 331-351. Fiol, C. M. 1991. “Managing Culture as a Competitive Resource: An Identity-Based View of Sustainable Competitive Advantage.” Journal of Management. Vol. 17, no.1, pp.191- 211. Goldstein, CS 2009, Capturing the German eye: American visual propaganda in occupied Germany, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Greenleaf, RJ 2000, Negotiating across cultures, Princeton Training Press, Princeton, NJ. Hamilton, C 2013, Communicating for Results: A Guide for Business and the Professions, Cengage Learning, United States. Harris, PR, Moran, RT & Moran, SV 2004, Managing cultural differences, Elsevier/Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam. Kivelson, VA & Neuberger, J 2008, Picturing Russia: Explorations in visual culture, New Yale University Press, Haven, Conn. Krishna, S., Sahay, S., & Walsham, G. 2004. “Managing cross-cultural issues in global software outsourcing.” Communications of the ACM. Vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 62-66. Lewis, RD 2000, When cultures collide: Managing successfully across cultures, Nicholas Brealey, London. Matveev, AV & Nelson, P. E. 2004, “Cross cultural communication competence and multicultural team performance perceptions of American and Russian managers”, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management. Vol.4. no.2, pp. 253-270. Mead, R 2000, Cases and projects in international management, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford. Metcalf, E., L., Bird, A., Lituchy, R., T., Peterson, F., M. and Shankarmahesh, M. 2007, “Cultural Influences in Negotiations: A Four Country Comparative Analysis.” International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, Vol 7, no. 2, pp.147–168. O'Brien, D. J., & Wegren, SK 2002, Rural reform in post-Soviet Russia, Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington, D.C. Roshwald, A 2001, Ethnic nationalism and the fall of empires: Central Europe, Russia, and the Middle East, 1914-1923, Routledge, London. Ruutu, K 2009, Cultural industries in Russia: Northern Dimension Partnership on Culture, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen. Samovar, L, Porter, R, McDaniel, E 2009, Communication between Cultures, Cengage Learning, United States. Saul, NE & McKinzie, RD 1997, Russian-American dialogue on cultural relations, 1776-1914. University of Missouri Press, Columbia. Schneider, SC & Barsoux, JL, 2003, Managing across cultures, Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow. Shingleton, AB, Gibbon, MJ, & Mack, KS 1995, Dimensions of German unification: Economic, social, and legal analyses, Westview Press, Boulder, Colo. Soares, AM, Farhangmehr, M and Shoham, A 2007, “Hofstede's dimensions of culture in international marketing studies”, Journal of Business Research, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 277- 284. Stenn, TL 2013, The cultural and political intersection of fair trade and justice: Managing a global industry, Palgrave Macmillan, New York. The Hofstede Centre. 2014, Cultural Tools: Country Comparison. Accessed November 11, 2014 from http://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html. Tolz, V 2001, Russia, Arnold, London. Trompenaars, F. and Hampden-Turne, C. 2012, Riding The Waves Of Culture Understanding Diversity in Global Business.3rd edn, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, Boston, MA. Wall, J.A. and Blum, M.W. 1991, “Negotiations”, Journal of Management, vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 273-303. Vinken, H., Soeters, J., & Ester, P. (2004). Comparing cultures: Dimensions of culture in a comparative perspective. Leiden: Brill. Appendix A: Hofstede’s comparison between Russia and Germany Read More