Cultural Differences of the United States and Saudi Arabia - Essay Example

Cultural Differences of the of the Introduction Cultures form an integral part in human life, be it personal or professional relationship, organisational structure or international relationships. Various researches and studies have been conducted for studying international cultures. The most frequently used is Hofstede Cultural theory. It is a framework for understanding the cross cultural communication process for different nations. It is one of the most used and followed tool for analyzing cultural dimensions. It describes the various effects of a particular society’s culture and their effect on the members of the society. The theory has been widely used for a variety of applications such as, research, business, international management, negotiation techniques and cross-cultural management within global organizations (Adair, et al., 1998; Carnevale & Pruitt, 1992). By understanding the various dimensions of the Hofstede model, the study will be able to analyze the negotiation strategies followed by these cultures and how they can be enhanced for better performance of the negotiation process. The two different cultures taken for this study are United States and Saudi Arabia. Analysis Cultural characteristics of Saudi Arabia - The cultural characteristics of Saudi Arabia can be extensively explained through Hofstede Dimensions. Power Distance According to this dimension, people in societies are different. There is inequality among groups and individuals as well as in their attitude towards the culture. Power distance can be explained as the degree to which less influential or powerful members of organisations and institutions accept and expect unequal distribution of power. The score of Saudi Arabia is 95 symbolising that people have a high regard for hierarchical order, where everyone has a fixed spot and no further justification is required. Hierarchy in this culture is inherent, subordinates look forward to instructions and tasks and autocratic leadership is followed as well as praised. Individualism The dimension addresses the fundamental issue of interdependence and the degree to which societies are associated among themselves. Societies can be individualist or collectivist. In an individualist society, people are expected to take care by themselves and only their direct families (Schwartz, 1994). However, in a collectivist society, people are taken care by various groups in return for loyalty and support. The Hofstede score for Saudi Arabia is 25, which means that it is a collectivist society. There is a close and long-term commitment level followed by people and individuals for their family, extended relationship as well as the society. Here any offence against society is taken as shame and leads to loss of employee/employer relationship and other professional relationships. It has a high influence on factors such as, promotion and hiring decisions and organisational management. Femininity/masculinity This dimension describes the dominating culture of a society. A high masculine dimension indicates that society is driven by achievement, competition and success. This value system starts in schools and is continued in various organisational behaviours. A low feminine dimension means characteristics such as, care, support for each other, quality of life and understanding among individuals and groups. The fundamental difference is that masculinity motivated people to be best and femininity motivates them to like what they do. The score for Saudi Arabia is 60 meaning it is a masculine society. Here work and performance matters more and employees are expected to be assertive and decisive. Emphasis is given on competition, equity and performance (Brett, et al., 1998). The best method for resolving conflicts is by fighting. Uncertainty Avoidance Uncertainty avoidance measures the way a society handles future uncertainties and their attitude towards it. Uncertainty results in ambiguity and anxiety which is dealt differently by different cultures. The extent, to which a society feels threatened by these unknown situations, creates institutions and beliefs in order to avoid these issues are reflected in this score. The score of Saudi Arabia is 90, which explains that they have an affinity for avoiding risks and uncertainties. Saudi Arabia maintains rigid codes of behaviour and beliefs and is quite intolerant towards unorthodox ideas and behaviour. The need for organisational rules in emotions and time is highly valued. People exhibit characteristics such as, punctuality, precision, hard work and innovation and creativity is generally resisted. Security plays as an important factor in individual motivation (Marcus & Kitayama, 1991). Long Term Orientation Long Term Orientation can be related to the society’s hunt for virtue. It is characterised by the degree to which a group or society shows a practical and future-oriented outlook, rather than a conformist, conventional, historical and short-term view point. Though there is no score provided on long term orientation dimension, literature review on Saudi Arabian culture suggests that they are highly oriented towards long-term planning and goals. The emphasis is given on social order, strong respect for elders and preference is given to long-term goals, rather than short term results (Leung, 1997). Cultural characteristics of United Kingdom The cultural characteristics of United Kingdom can be extensively explained through Hofstede Dimensions. It will help in understanding and evaluating their diverse culture. Power Distance The power distance score of United Kingdom is 35, which indicates that it is a society where inequality among people and groups is not tolerated. It is also seen that PD index among higher class in much lower than work classes. There is a sense of justice and fair play driving a belief that individuals and groups should be treated as equal. Discrimination against race, caste and power is least in UK. Individualism UK has a score of 89 in individualism, which indicates a highly individualistic society. People in Britain are highly private and individualistic people. Right from schools, children are taught to find out their life purpose and are expected to be independent from a very early stage. Personal fulfilment is the only path to happiness. As a result, Britain is highly dominated by a “ME” culture and rampant consumerism. Femininity and Masculinity Britain scores 66 in this dimension, suggesting that it is a masculine society, highly driven and success-oriented. In order to understand British culture, it is very essential to read between the lines as there is an ambiguity in their traditional culture and the modern outlook followed by the current generation. People live for hard work and show ambition for performance and achievement. Uncertainty Avoidance United Kingdom scores low on uncertainty avoidance dimension, indicating that as a nation they are not risk averse and changes plans, as and when new knowledge and information comes to light. The uncertainty avoidance score is 35, which indicates that they are comfortable in uncertain and ambiguous situations and are not very detail-oriented in terms of planning. Rules and regulations are less. Even through the goals are set and clear cut, the process for achieving these goals are flexible to the emerging and changing environment. Creativity and innovation is highly preferred (Lewicki, Saunders & Minton, 1997). As a result, Britain is known for its creativity and innovation in various fields such as, marketing, advertising and financial engineering. Long Term Orientation The long term orientation score for United Kingdom is 25, which indicates that the society is short-term oriented. Though they have great respect for tradition and history, they also focus on easy and quick results. There is little focus on long-term horizon planning and most of the businesses are dependent on short-term results and quarterly goals. The organisational goals and objectives are also established in a similar manner and most of the capital is invested in generating revenues in present. Impact of cultural differences on the negotiation process Negotiation is a method of social interaction. It can be described as a process where two or more groups or parties attempt to resolve apparent incompatible goals (Carnevale & Pruitt, 1992). In order to understand the effect of culture on various negotiation processes, it is important to understand various critical components of negotiation which differ in different cultural practices. For instance, inter-cultural negotiation process can be hindered on factors such as, time, objective, style of negotiation, equality view, thinking model, coping strategies as well as pre-preparations for negotiations. Few of the above factors will be discussed in detail. Time period of negotiations are an influential element in inter-cultural negotiations, which varies greatly from west countries to east countries (Olekalns, Smith & Walsh, 1996). While British negotiators consider time as essentially precious and expect processes to finish within time, Arabian people are more inclined towards systematic and long-term view points as well as cyclic time view. British negotiators focus on speed and concentration, while Arabs do various things simultaneously. Thus, any delay in the negotiation process from the Arab counterpart will be taken as lack of efficiency and Arabs would judge UK’s lack of patience. For instance, being late for a meeting is an offence for UK negotiators and it shows that the Arabs are unintuitive as well as lazy, which might affect their business relationship (Ghamdi & Salem, 2010). Individualism and equality is another factor which varies widely between two cultures. On one hand, British culture is highly individualistic sticking to fairness and equality in business and expecting benefits. Also, monetary benefits are most important success factors in majority of British organizations. Saudi Arabia, being low on individualism, gives more emphasis on non-monetary benefits. This might create a major issue in international business decisions such as, expatriate management. British culture is highly profit-oriented and believes in instant gratification (Kim & Meyers, 2012). Compared to this, culture of Saudi Arabian organizations gives more emphasis on long-term profits and long-term relationship establishments. In international negotiation, this issue might create conflicts while establishing business contracts. While British negotiators would prefer short and quick establishments, their Arab counterparts would take it as disrespect and motivated deal, which in turn might affect the negotiation process (Pinkley & Northcraft, 1994). Another important cultural factor affecting the negotiation process of these two countries will be style of negotiation, which will be largely different because of their different culture. Their negotiating culture differs from parts to unity, from less to big, general or concrete terms. British negotiations are influenced by practical and analytical thinking and pay major attention to the logical arguments. However, Arab negotiators give more preference to integrity compared to concrete factors. For them, establishment of relationship forms an important component in any business as business itself is a more personal approach consisting of family values, pride, rather than just profit-making (Thompson, 1998). The negotiating structures of Arabs are more connected with cultures. Negotiating style also includes a number of participants in the process. A normal British team will consist of 3-5 individuals, while Arab negotiators usually come in groups of 10-15 or even more. This character can also be related to their collectivist nature, unlike the individualistic nature of British groups. This could create misunderstanding among the two cultures as the Arabs might take it as a lack of interest from the other, which might negatively affect the negotiation process (Weingart & Brett, 1998). Conclusion From the above study, it is clear that inter-cultural negotiation process becomes much more difficult with increasing distance between them. It was found that organizations and their styles in negotiation differ when we move from west to east. Most of the western culture is dominated by factors such as, quick results, profit-making motives and objectives of mutual benefit. Eastern culture is dominated by collectivism, long-term orientation. In order to avoid these cultural differences, negotiators as well as business partners should establish understanding about the basic cultural differences. For instance, before starting the negotiation process, a cross-cultural training program will be very helpful is avoiding few basic mistakes which can ruin the entire process. This will also enhance knowledge about the various cultural differences, acknowledging them as well as understanding them. It will be further helpful in establishing respectful behaviour among various businessmen towards people from other culture. Inter-cultural negotiations often end up in failure not because of differences in decisions, but due to misunderstandings created by cultural differences (Fisher, Ury & Patton, 1991). Understanding of the culture will be beneficial as unnecessary conflicts can be avoided and cooperation and mutual trust can be maintained. Thus, in order to establish harmony and proper communication in international negotiations, understanding of the cultural aspects is important. References Adair, W., Brett, J., Lempereur, A., Okumura, T., Tinsley, C. & Lytle, A. (1998). Culture and negotiation strategy. Evanston, IL: Dispute Resolution Research Center, Northwestern University. Brett, J.M., Adair, W., Lempereur, A., Okumura, T., Shikhirev, P. Tinsley, C. & Lytle, A. (1998). Culture and joint gains in negotiation. Negotiation Journal, 14, 55- 80. Carnevale, P. & Pruitt, D.G. (1992). Negotiation and mediation. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 531- 582. Fisher, R., Ury, W. & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin. Ghamdi, A. & Salem M. (2010). The Attitude of British Firms towards Saudi-British Business Negotiations: An Empirical Examination. International Journal of Management. 27(2), 226-234. Kim, J. & Meyers, R.A. (2012). Cultural Differences in Conflict Management Styles in East and West Organizations. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 29(5), 1404-1634. Leung, K. (1997). New perspectives on international industrial organizational psychology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M. & Minton, J.W. (1997). Essentials of negotiation. Chicago: Irwin. Marcus, H. & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253. Olekalns, M., Smith, P.L. & Walsh, T. (1996). The process of negotiating: Strategies, timing and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 68- 77. Pinkley, R. & Northcraft, G.B. (1994). Conflict frames of reference: Implications for dispute resolution processes and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 193-205. Schwartz, S.H. (1994). Individualism and collectivism. London: Sage. Thompson, L. (1998). The mind and heart of the negotiator. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Weingart, L.R. & Brett, J.M. (1998). Mixed motive orientations in negotiating groups: Convergence and reaching agreement. Evanston, IL: Dispute Resolution Research Center, Northwestern University. Read More