International Differences in Work-Related Values - Dissertation Example

International Differences in Work Related Values Question: According to the Equipos case “managers and facilitators...explained that their organizational culture was a mixture of the US... and the Mexican culture (Gomez 2003:8). Critically assess the assumptions that are made in this statement concerning the relationship between organizational and national culture’ Introduction Culture is a words used in many forms and with many different definitions. These definitions are usually just adaptations of the same general definitions that are commonly considered to define culture. The difference however arises when we talk about specific areas which are influenced by or formed by culture. The diversity of the meaning of this word is considered to be even greater than diversity of culture itself around the world. The different meanings of world culture are estimate to be around 164 (Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952) which gives a small hint of its diversity. As mentioned to really understand the meanings of word culture one must try to understand it in light of a specific area of study. To narrow down the focus of study, organizational culture must first be understood. Although this are of study has recently been formed, it has existed informally for thousands of years. For example in multi cultural Roman armies, a study of organizational culture could have improved both effectiveness and efficiency. Organizational culture in definition is a field of study which aims at explaining human interaction in light of the psychology, attitudes, experiences, beliefs and of an organization and the people working in an organization. The aim of this area of study is to understand organizational values. These organizational values are focused on individual behavior in assignment and pursue of organizational goals in an organization. Corporate culture is sometimes confused with organizational culture. Corporate culture can be taken as identity of an organization, in other words set of behaviors and attitudes with differentiate an organization form its counterparts. The speed with which employees walk during office hours, is an example of corporate culture. There are many different methods to understanding impacts and formation of organizational cultures. These different methods are supported by their respective theories. Another important study relevant to this case has been put forward by Charles Handy. In this theory culture has linked with organizational structure (Handy, 1985). The following different cultures in light of different organizational structures have thus been identified in this study: Power Culture This is usually more related to a functional structure where the decision making flows from top to bottom. The power is thus concentrated along with decision making in hands of a few individuals. Role Culture This culture is typical of a bureaucratic structure where people have predefined roles and designations and no room for learning and innovation exists. Task Culture This culture is found more in divisional structures where delegation of authority and power defines culture. Teams aim their performance at targets and high learning is achieved in an evolutionary change process. Person Culture In such organizations self centered individuals pursue individual goals and do not have any regard for organizational goals. There is a dominant belief supported by many different scholars such as Hofstede that national culture has a large contribution to organizational culture. A very important theory usually mentioned is the Collectivism vs. Individualism. This is further related to development of a power culture. For example Japanese cultures are more collectivist which makes it easy to implement management techniques aimed at organizational wellbeing. Hofstede's Framework for Assessing Culture Hofstede is the pioneer when it comes to assessing impact of national culture on organizational culture. The four dimensions presented below lay down a framework, around which impacts of national culture can be identified and isolated in organizational culture (Hofstede, 2001). Small vs. large power distance In countries of small power distances people expect to be consulted in decision making. This therefore leads to a more democratic style of leadership and culture. People in such national cultures refer to each others as equals and openly discuss issues and problems thus creating a fast feedback system. This in return directly affects organizational culture as discussed above. Similarly in countries with large power distances decision come more from top to bottom. The employees because of their breeding in a power distance culture are more compliant to decisions. Individualism vs. collectivism This theory revolves around the interaction and association of people with society in a national culture. Nations like Japan according to Hofstede display a strong collectivist approach with it comes behavior towards others, thus creating a strong sense of society. People in collectivist groups are defined by their individual personalities and try to pursue their individual visions. This individualism can create a Person culture (Handy, 1985) in an organization. Similarly collectivist cultures promote prioritizing the ‘group’ over ones personal interests. This would thus suggest that collectivist national cultures would promote a more organizational oriented thinking. Employees would be more concerned in such cultures for organization rather than personal evaluation. Masculinity vs. femininity The term masculinity or femininity as used here does not define the different human sexes or their behavior in culture. Masculine cultures as defined by Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are focused more on material possession such as money, power and wealth. This automatically promotes traits such as ambitiousness, competitiveness and assertiveness. Feminist cultures are usually more oriented towards quality of life rather than material pursuits. From an organizational perspective reward systems are directly affected. Moreover turnovers are high in masculine cultures because employees changes jobs to climb higher. Whereas feminine cultures look more towards long term careers and aim for long lasting commitment. Weak vs. strong uncertainty avoidance This ability to cope with the unknown is referred to uncertainty avoidance. The anxiety associated with the unknown is very high in some cultures. In such cultures people like to form long lasting partnerships and follow clearly defined paths. This is a very important dimension when it comes to understanding organizational culture. The risk taking ability of employees working in an organization is directly affected by level of uncertainty avoidance. More related to the case in point, learning capability is directly linked with uncertainty avoidance on an organizational level. Learning organizations usually change rapidly according to new experiences gained from the market etc. Low uncertainty avoidance makes it difficult for employees to thrive in such an environment of uncertainty. The theory of national culture dimension has received much criticism from different schools of thoughts. The most logical criticism has been on Hofstede’s assumption that a uniform culture exists in a nation. This even according to Hofstede is not true. A new dimension was introduced to the original work of Hofstede by Michael Harris Bond and his associate researchers. In the contemporary model it is regarded as an integral part of this model. Long vs. Short term orientation In some cultures the long term is paid more importance than the short term. These societies are more plans oriented and look for long term commitments. Therefore they are more concerned with actions that would affect their future rather than present. On the contrary in societies with short term orientations value actions and procedure which give fruit in the short run. These societies from a management perspective lack persistence and perseverance in their actions. Therefore in such societies reward systems which give long term advantages are useless e.g. stock options will not be effective in short term oriented societies. Critical Analysis Equipos is a plant located in Mexico owned by an American Multinational and operated as a subsidiary. The plant is technology intensive and uses the lasted technology to produce plastics. The works is a little above hundred and seventy (this includes both managers and workers). The plant changed its human resource and management polices after being taken over by its American partner. This was a rapid employee empowerment process. The main aim of this process was to create self managed work teams, described as Task Culture (Handy, 1985). These teams are totally run by the employees from within and are thus aimed at increasing efficiency by reducing decision making time and increasing effectiveness through a feedback system. The roles of managers are totally transformed through this process. The recent managers are automatically transformed into facilitators. The facilitators have administrative and guidance related roles. Power culture Mexican culture is more a power culture where employees do not ask or question decision (Gomez, 2004). Thus a more authoritarian management style was employed in most Mexican organizations. The reasons for this power culture can be attributed to a long history of bureaucratic organizations in Mexico. The low level of education is also a reason for this power culture. As the level of education is very low employees do not consider themselves enabled to make decisions or ask questions. Moreover there is a significant difference in education levels of managers and workforce. Therefore first of all managers consider their workforce incapable of making any useful contributions and the workforce are incapable of playing little more than a muscle role (French, 2007). Collectivism A different form of collectivism existed in Mexican organizations when it came to working in teams. People usually preferred working individually rather than in teams. This was because unlike Japanese collectivism culture, in Mexican collectivism culture only extended family was held close (Gomez, 2004). Therefore Mexicans preferred making individual decision when it came to work place but became collectivist on family issues. The need here was to give teams a sense of family for each other. Equipos channeled this collectivism which was playing a negative role into positive synergy. Joint Venture A very important aspect of management and culture at Equipos was the fact that it started as a joint venture (Gomez, 2004). This fact allowed the culture to be slowly understood and integrated. The top management was initially Mexican and they were well aware of national culture prevalent in Mexico. They guided and changed US programs in a format more friendly and compatible to implementation in Mexican culture. This over the years allowed a slow integration of both forms of culture. HR Practices The management of Equipos divided HR practices at Equipos into three segments (Gomez, 2004). The first set of practices was aimed at innovative techniques such as self managed work teams, training, structure etc. The second set looked at culture specific issues of host country and tried to integrate them with American requirements. The third set of practices translated the requirements of a US MNC into Mexican culture friendly language. Integration As the model shows in figure 1 state, a bridge was developed by HR practices of Equipos to enable a transition of national culture into organizational culture. The HR practices changed the cultural specific constraints to development of an organizational culture. Due to this a culture was developed with was both in line with national culture and fulfilled all requirements of the required organizational culture. This gives a very different and interesting view towards management and leadership. Although organizational goals are similar for a subsidiary and MNC, different routes can be taken to reach those goals. Similarly in this case although self managed work teams are same for MNC and Subsidiary different enactments have been adapted. Although this model shows that organizations with a different behavior can learn and adopt approaches to management aimed at learning, this does not mean that all organizations have this capacity. There are many organization level variables which could affect the learning potential in settings. The level of education is one such factor. Organizations where levels of employee education is low tend to show a lower learning potential as compared to organizations which have high levels of employees education. Moreover the stage of development or tenure of an organizational setting would be of considerable importance when it comes to change. Old organizations have a set cultural mindset and rigid principles. Changing these organizations or converting them into learning organizations is near impossible. Comparatively a new organization can be easily tamed into a set of principle. Conclusion As can be seen from the discussion provided above Equipos has developed a culture which is a mixture of both its national and local culture. Mexican’s employees are more oriented towards a culture of collectivism. This collectivism is however only limited to immediate family and friends. Self managed Teams are therefore not an ideal scenario for Mexicans employees. The management at Equipos has however integrated a sense of family to these teams therefore making them a much more successful venture, potentially even as compared to its mother company. Moreover a power culture has been successfully removed which was very dominant in Mexico. The low tolerance for ambiguity has also been dealt with through these self managed work teams which delegate authority and support employees to take bold decision. In the usual Mexican organization employees do not prefer designations in which a decision based role in needed. As mentioned this is because of a long history of task culture developed by bureaucratic organizations in Mexico. Another potential mix of both cultures can be observed when we look at masculinity and long term orientation. Most Mexican workers have short term orientation because this is their national culture. This orientation has resulted in most workers moving around and changing jobs. Therefore most jobs being created were usually for part time or temporary workers. A very high turnover rate therefore was dominant in this industry. This is exactly opposite to requirements of a learning organization (French, 2007). High turnover reduces chances of creating an environment where employees are building upon daily knowledge and bring CI (Kaizen) to the workplace. Equipos changed this short term orientation by long term orientation by proving high rewards and compensation. As a result employees became more interested in long lasting and persistent relationships. Moreover a culture of masculinity was automatically developed due to this short term orientation, which resulted as mentioned in high turnover. However when orientation was changed to long term a more stable feminist culture was developed which rendered a stable workforce, interested in quality of work place. Due to this shift actions of broadening job designation etc were effective. References Kroeber & Kluckhohn, (1952). Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions. Deal, T. & Kennedy, A. (1982). Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life. Harmondsworth. Penguin Books. Handy, C. (1985). Understanding Organizations. Harmondsworth. Penguin Books Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values. Beverly Hills, CA. Sage Publications Gomez, C. (2004). The influence of environmental, organizational, and HRM factors on employee behaviors in subsidiaries :A Mexican case study of organizational learning. Journal of World Business Bligh, M. (2006) "Surviving Post-merger ‘Culture Clash’: Can Cultural Leadership Lessen the Casualties?" Leadership, vol. 2 Kotter, J. (1992). Corporate Culture and Performance. Free Press French, R. (2007). Cross cultural management in work organizations. McGraw-Hill. ISBN: 9781843981497 Melissa, N. (2008). Managing Mexican workers: implications of Hofstede's cultural dimensions. Journal of International Business Research Read More