Cultural Profiling Tools for Global Business Leaders - Research Paper Example

Cultural profiling tools for global business leaders Culture profiling is an important tool which managers utilize for understanding the cultural characteristics existing within the organization. A number of cultural characteristics are seen to exist in an organization which mangers are required to understand while formulating different strategic actions. Cultural understanding facilitates managers to diagnose different cultural issues and promote greater cohesiveness. In the current paper, adequate efforts have been put forward to understand the profiling tools which managers use for understanding cultural characteristics existing within an organization. Leadership being an important part of an organizational culture is also included in the discussion section. Based on the culture profiling tools discussed in the current paper, few examples relating to how culture effects decision making process of leaders have been discussed. Table of Contents Abstract 2 1. Introduction 4 2. Literature review 4 2.1 Culture profiling tools 4 2.1.1 Hofestede’s five dimensions 5 2.1.2 Halls cultural theories 6 2.2 Leadership 7 3. Discussion 8 3.1 Training 8 3.2 Exercising leadership 9 3.3 Initiating change 9 4. Conclusion 10 5. Recommendation 10 Reference List 12 1. Introduction Culture profile can be described as the cluster of cultures which determine the characteristics of a firm. The motive of culture profiling is to present the culture of an organization from different perspectives. In the system of profiling, the various categories of culture existing with an organization are attributes which reflect the same are identified. An entity can be viewed upon like as an individual. Like every individual, a firm is also seen to possess a set of values and cultures which determine the manner in which the organization interacts with different stakeholders. The set of values present in an organizations culture profile determines the way in which interaction takes place between different organizational factors and the manner in which information gets transferred (Cameron and Quinn, 2011). Culture profiles get portrayed through such interactions. Culture profiles also refer to common set of beliefs and understanding which is shared by the members of an organization. As members of an organization continue to interact with each other on a regular basis, they become habituated with each other and develop their own ways and styles of interaction. Cultures are often developed in a manner such that it suits motives and functions performed by the organization. Apart from communication styles, culture existing within an organization gets reflected through dress codes, slogans, interiors and ceremonies held. Existence of a strong culture is essential to provide a strong identity (Søndergaard, 1994). Culture also facilitates motivating employees to perform better. It is essential that the culture existing within an organization gets transmitted from employee and from the present to the future generations. This facilitates keeping the values and the core beliefs of the organization alive for a long time. In the current paper, the different models which facilitate culture profiling have been discussed upon. The paper indentifies the importance of culture profiling and the significance of the same for leaders of an organization. The paper also briefly describes the concept of leadership, considering it to be an important part of an organizational culture (Schein, 2010). 2. Literature review 2.1 Culture profiling tools The objective of culture profiling is to represent the cultural dimensions and characteristics of an organization through different perspectives. The profiling tools help in perceiving the relevance of the different cultural qualities which exists within an organization and accordingly to develop understand regarding the values and thinking process of a particular organization. Culture profiling is a knowledge intensive process and can be applied to organizations, individuals, societies and groups. The profiling is done based on the theories laid out by eminent scholars of the past (Ogbonna and Harris, 2000). Culture profiling becomes especially important for organizations which operate in a number of different nations and therefore has a diverse workforce. The aim of culture profiling is to promote cultural understanding and thereby give effect to cooperation which is much needed in an international organization (Alvesson, 2012) Culture profiling also facilitates in understanding what influences the behaviour of employees within an organizational setting. In the current paper two techniques which managers often use for culture profiling have been analysed. 2.1.1 Hofestede’s five dimensions The cultural dimensions of Greet Hofestede are based on the specific cultures which exist within organization and are influenced by the cultural characteristics of the particular nation in which the organization functions. Hence national culture is an important element which impacts an organization (Shackleton and Ali, 1990). The five dimensions relating to organizational culture proposed by Greet Hofestede has been discussed as follows. Power distance- Organizations with high power distance experience a large amount of differences between subordinated and their superiors from the view point of salary, status and preferences. Managers are viewed as dictators and subordinates are expected to perform as they have been ordered. The opinions and viewpoints of subordinates are not given much of an importance. In organizations with lower power distance it is observed that interaction between superiors and subordinates are more frequent. Equality is widely accepted and desired in such communities (De Mooij, 2010). Individualism and collectivism- Organizations within which there exists cohesive groups are seen to promote the collectivism culture. Trust therefore plays an important role in upholding such a culture. The interests of the groups are given more preference rather than the interests of individuals alone. In firms where team effort is not given much importance and work is predominantly carried out individually without much interaction with others, the culture of individualism is seen to exist. Individualism culture promotes privacy and strong sense of freedom. Individual opinions are given prime importance over group opinions (Signorini, Wiesemes and Murphy, 2009). Masculinity and femininity- This dimension portrays the importance of gender roles within an organization. Masculine roles refers to competition, toughness, goal oriented behavior and assertiveness. Feminine roles are home orientation, tenderness, giving more importance to kindness and family values. In masculine cultures there is high level of formality and distinction. While in feminine culture based organizations, informal group behavior is seen to exist commonly (Merkin, 2006). Uncertainty avoidance- Organizations possessing high uncertainty avoidance are seen to have more number of formal rules and longer career commitments. In organizations with high uncertainty avoidance, there exists a higher degree of long term consciousness. Decisions are taken tactically so as to avoid risks. A high uncertainty avoidance culture also induces expressive behavior (Shi and Wang, 2011). Long term and short term orientation- Organizations which promote a long term culture is seen to focus upon their age old traditions, reward policies and capabilities of adaptation. Such organizations are seen to remain focused upon their long term goals. Short term oriented organizations are fast changing. The establishment of strict rule and regulations are low (Bochner, 1994). 2.1.2 Halls cultural theories Hall had explained the cultural theory from the view point of high and low contexts. He had stated that all cultures are related to each other in some way or the other. The relationship existing between different cultures gets represented through the manner in which they communicate. The high and low framework depicts how information gets transmitted. Context in this relation explains how much information is transmitted before effective communication actually takes place (Mommaas, 2004). The characteristics of high and low context cultures can be explained through the following table. Factor High context culture Low context culture Overtness in communication Existence of implicit, covert and metaphoric messages. Frequent usage of reading between the lines. Explicit and overt messages. Clear and simple forms of communication. Locus of control Control from inner sources Dependence on outer sources Failure acceptance Personal acceptance of failure Blaming others for failure Non verbal communication Very high Moderate to low. Expressiveness Reserved expressions Outward and visible Cohesiveness Distinction between groups and strong sense of family. Open group behavior and flexibility to change People bonding Strong ties amongst individuals. Fragile bonds and low loyalty. Commitment to relationship Long term relations are given more preferences. Relationships are given more importance than work. Lower commitment towards relationships. Work is given more importance than relationships. Time and process Open and flexibility of time. Process is considered to be more important than time. Time is well allocated and organized. Product is given greater importance than time. (Source: Johnson, Lenartowicz and Apud, 2006) Hall had also classified the existence of different culture on the basis of the manner in which they mange time. In this respect he had identified two important types of cultures namely monochronic and polychronic. Monochronic cultures emphasize upon doing one task at a time. Hence organizations following this type of culture are seen to allocate specific time for every activity. Polychronic culture gives emphasis on multitasking and therefore does not allocate specific time for every task (Søderberg and Holden, 2002). 2.2 Leadership Leadership is a vital part of an organizational culture. How leadership is exercised within an organization determines the manner in which instructions are given and subordinates are expected to behave. Leadership can be described as the phenomenon of guiding and influencing others. It is usually exercised for achieving a common goal through the concentrated efforts of a group. Tasks such as organizing, directing, mentoring, training and motivating are associated with a leader (Alavi, Kayworth and Leidner, 2006). The different types of leaders existing in the context of present day organizational culture are as follows: Laissez faire- control and directing activities are considerably low in laissez faire style of leadership. Managers do not exercise direct supervision and is preferred for managing employees who are highly experienced (Al-Alawi, Al-Marzooqi and Mohammed, 2007). Autocratic- In this type of leadership, managers impose their decisions and wills upon their subordinates. No importance is given to the opinions of subordinates. This type of leadership style is exercised only when employees have little or no knowledge of work. Creative and experienced employees often dislike such leadership style and revolt against the same. Participative- Such a leadership approach is also known as the democratic style. Opinion of team members is given high importance. This type of leadership style is often helpful at motivating employees and making them feel important (Henri, 2006). Transactional- Here, employees and managers set their performance targets through mutual agreements. On the basis of the performance of employees, managers are given the rights to punish or reward employees. Transformational- Here the communication between leaders and employees are high. Direct management involvement is considered essential for meeting the goals of the organization (Ravasi and Schultz, 2006). 3. Discussion In this section, the use of Hofstede’s five dimension model as a culture profiling toll has been discussed. The discussion has been carried out on the basis of a few examples which state how business decisions are effected through culture profiling. 3.1 Training Culture profiling techniques helps in understanding how training should be imparted to employees. In firms where collective behaviour is more prominent than individualism, then training is seen to be imparted in a group. However imparting group training is not suitable in cases where individualism is high. Organizations where the individualism culture is more prominent prefer to receive training individually. Organizations which follow the individualism culture prefer individual attention rather than group attention. Training also becomes a vital factor in organizations where the existence of high uncertainty avoidance is high. Through timely training and detailed guidance, it becomes possible to regulate the activities of employees ultimately leading towards lower uncertainty (White, Varadarajan and Dacin, 2003). 3.2 Exercising leadership In organizations where there exists a strong power distance, hierarchical structures are also present. Decisions are normally seen to be taken in an autocratic manner. Subordinates opinions are seen to be given lower preferences. Autocratic leadership styles are therefore seen to get developed more strongly in organizations with strong power distance. Since leadership is imposed from one level to other, exercising stronger leadership styles are more prominently visible in the upper levels of the organization than the lower levels. Also it is seen that exercising strong leadership is comparatively easier in masculine organizations than feminine. This is due to the feature that masculine organizations depict higher levels of competition. Exercising leadership in such a cultural scenario leads to motivating employees to become more competitive (Zheng, Yang and McLean, 2010). 3.3 Initiating change Decisions relating to change are the most crucial from the organizational management point of view. The manner, in which an organization reacts to change, depends a lot upon its prevalent cultures. Organizations in which there is a high level of uncertainty avoidance, it is seen that leaders are required to implement changes in advance so that risky situations can be avoided in the future (Jaskyte, 2004). Change implementation is also seen to remain easy for organizations in which the masculine culture is imbedded. Masculine organizations aspire to remain competitive in the market and hence adhere to changes so that competitiveness can easily be achieved. In organizations where power distance is high and there exists autocratic leadership due to hierarchal differentiation, implementation of change is easy. Managers are seen to impose change and subordinates have no option but to accept the same. In organizations where the power distance is low and subordinates are given freedom to voice their opinions, managers are required to implement changes in a more methodical manner. Managers must make subordinates understand the importance of change and encourage them to accept the same. Such communications do not exist in organizations where hierarchical differentiation is massive (Ostroff, Kinicki and Tamkins, 2003). 4. Conclusion From the above studies it can be concluded that culture plays a phenomenal role in determining leadership styles, implantation of decisions and other such management functions. Organizational culture may at times get automatically created from the formal rules and policies of functioning. However in many organizations, it is also seen that culture gets implemented specifically. Culture profiling is an important tool for managers to understand the characteristic cultures which exists within an organization and how the same affects its mode of functioning (Minkov and Hofstede, 2011). Organizational culture should be viewed upon as a minor phenomenon. They carry the core values and beliefs existing in the organization and accordingly guide the managers in their decision making process. Culture profiling is especially beneficial for understanding group behaviour and synchronizing the same with the objectives of the organization. Halls and Hofstede models of culture are the most commonly adopted tools of culture profiling which exists within an organization. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are seen to be inspired from national point of view. Hofstede was of the opinion that national cultures strongly influence the organizational cultures (Elron, 1998). Hall has explained cultural dissonance in the form of high and low end contexts. High culture contexts are mainly seen to exist in western nation and are considered to be more desirable for growth (Altaf, 2011). However implementing high context culture is difficult and requires the existence of superior knowledge and expertise so that implied messages can be understood precisely. Low context cultures are less complicated and easy to implement. 5. Recommendation Organizational cultures are required to be synonymous with the growth of the organization. Morden day organizational culture should promote flexibility as an important organizational culture. Economic conditions are seen to become explicitly unpredictable. Hence organizations are seen to frequently change. Introducing a culture of change facilitates the firm to remain competitive and take decisions easily. Making employees aware of the cultural attributes of an organization is also essential. Employees, especially new comers, must know the values and beliefs which are mutually prevalent and accordingly channelize their behaviour and actions. Culture exiting within an organization gets reflected in different ways such as communication, leadership style, decision making and planning. It can be stated as the manner in which a firm expresses itself to its employees and to external stakeholders. Organizational cultures differ widely due to the existence of differential functional motives. Therefore the needs and objectives of a business strongly influence the type of culture which it follows. While in many organizations restrictive freedom to employees is conducive of growth, in others it is observed that providing a high degree of independence is essential for the development of the organization. Managers must be able to effectively predict the level up to which power distance must be exercised considering the type of work and the nature of the employees. Creative employees do not prefer to be monitored all the time while functional jobs require frequent monitoring. Similarly, communication occurs in a more direct manner where hierarchy is not very rigid and this leads to the development of easy understanding between employees and superiors. Reference List Al-Alawi, A. I., Al-Marzooqi, N. Y. and Mohammed, Y. F., 2007. Organizational culture and knowledge sharing: critical success factors. Journal of knowledge management, 11(2), pp. 22-42. Alavi, M., Kayworth, T. R. and Leidner, D. E., 2006. An empirical examination of the influence of organizational culture on knowledge management practices. Journal of management information systems, 22(3), pp. 191-224. Altaf, A., 2011. The impact of organizational culture on organizational effectiveness: implication of Hofstede cultural model as organizational effectiveness model. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 6(1), pp. 161-174. Alvesson, M., 2012. Understanding organizational culture. London: Sage. Bochner, S., 1994. Cross-Cultural Differences in the self concept a test of Hofstedes individualism/collectivism distinction. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 25(2), pp. 273-283. Cameron, K. S. and Quinn, R. E., 2011. Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. De Mooij, M., 2010. The Hofstede model. International Journal of Advertising, 29(1), pp. 85-110. Elron, E., 1998. Top management teams within multinational corporations: Effects of cultural heterogeneity. The Leadership Quarterly, 8(4), pp. 393-412. Henri, J. F., 2006. Organizational culture and performance measurement systems. Accounting, organizations and society, 31(1), pp. 77-103. Jaskyte, K., 2004. Transformational leadership, organizational culture, and innovativeness in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 15(2), pp. 153-168. Johnson, J. P., Lenartowicz, T. and Apud, S., 2006. Cross-cultural competence in international business: Toward a definition and a model. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(4), pp. 525-543. Merkin, R. S., 2006. Uncertainty avoidance and facework: A test of the Hofstede model. International Journal of intercultural relations, 30(2), pp. 213-228. Minkov, M. and Hofstede, G., 2011. The evolution of Hofstedes doctrine. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 18(1), pp. 10-20. Mommaas, H., 2004. Cultural clusters and the post-industrial city: towards the remapping of urban cultural policy. Urban studies, 41(3), pp. 507-532. Ogbonna, E. and Harris, L. C., 2000. Leadership style, organizational culture and performance: empirical evidence from UK companies. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(4), pp. 766-788. Ostroff, C., Kinicki, A. J. and Tamkins, M. M., 2003. Organizational culture and climate. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Ravasi, D. and Schultz, M., 2006. Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of management journal, 49(3), pp. 433-458. Schein, E. H., 2010. Organizational culture and leadership. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Shackleton, V. J. and Ali, A. H., 1990. Work-related values of managers a test of the hofstede model. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 21(1), pp. 109-118. Shi, X. and Wang, J., 2011. Interpreting Hofstede Model and GLOBE Model: Which Way to Go for Cross-Cultural Research?. International journal of business and management, 6(5), p. 93. Signorini, P., Wiesemes, R. and Murphy, R., 2009. Developing alternative frameworks for exploring intercultural learning: a critique of Hofstedes cultural difference model. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(3), pp. 253-264. Søderberg, A. M. and Holden, N., 2002. Rethinking cross cultural management in a globalizing business world. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 2(1), pp. 103-121. Søndergaard, M., 1994. Research note: Hofstedes consequences: a study of reviews, citations and replications. Organization studies, 15(3), pp. 447-456. White, J. C., Varadarajan, P. R. and Dacin, P. A., 2003. Market situation interpretation and response: the role of cognitive style, organizational culture, and information use. Journal of Marketing, 67(3), pp. 63-79. Zheng, W., Yang, B. and McLean, G. N., 2010. Linking organizational culture, structure, strategy, and organizational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management. Journal of Business Research, 63(7), pp. 763-771. Read More