International Management - Essay Example

?Task The international business environment has been constantly pressuring workforce members to demonstrate high levels of professional expertise as well as recognition of cultural diversity (Matveev and Nelson 2004). Organizations that rely on working teams, which integrate culturally diverse members, have been increasing, thus the need to establish intercultural relationships and respond to the needs and expectations of every culture. Diversity in workforce members can lead to improved organizational performance and effectiveness (Pires, Stanton, and Ostenfeld 2006). Therefore, in order to function better with diverse colleagues, there is a crucial need for multicultural employees to be aware of the cultures that they are working with as well as have an appreciation for their values and beliefs, attitudes toward conflict, and personal experiences (Soderberg and Holden 2002). The increased reliance of international companies on a culturally diverse workforce should drive these organizations to improve their members’ understanding of how certain processes such as training or communication can positively contribute to the success of a multicultural labor force. Although ethnically diverse teams play a critical role in the success of companies due to the flexibility, receptiveness, and resource utilization that are expected of them (Marquardt and Horvath 2001), the management of cultural differences and conflict has become a challenge for many international organization. Diversity in culture can bring about misunderstanding, adverse relationships, and weak performance, thus the need to effectively manage geographic distances, facilitate control and coordination matters, establish strong communication, and maintain team consistency. Because of this crucial need, numerous studies, even early research such as that of Hofstede and Trompenaars, have been carried out to explain cultural variations in the working environment and the successful management of these differences among employees. Theories on Cultural Dimensions Through my experience as international director, I have learned about the essential components behind a successful expatriate assignment. Theories of cultural dimensions from well-known researchers such as Hofstede (1980) have been of good use in explaining why people are culturally different from each other. National culture plays a crucial part in understanding a workforce that is ethnically diverse as explained through Hofstede’s (1980) cultural dimensions including power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, and long term orientation. Power distance indicates the acceptance and expectation of the society, especially the less powerful individuals, that power can be unequally distributed, thus representing inequality. Anyone who has had experience in international studies can point out that all countries and societies have demonstrated inequality in wealth and power distribution, although some are more unjust than the others. Individualism refers to how people are integrated into groups; for instance, individualist societies tend to establish loose relationships among its members and each individual is expected to attend to himself and his family while collectivist ones are likely to stay committed to such relations and demonstrate unwavering loyalty to each other. Masculinity indicates how gender roles are distributed; men’s values significantly differ from those of the women such as in terms of assertiveness, competitiveness, compassion, and modesty. The index for uncertainty avoidance suggests how societies can tolerate and accept ambiguity, or whether or not they can find comfort in uncertain and unplanned situations. Unstructured circumstances are often different from the normal conditions and cultures that aim to avoid uncertainty place their efforts in minimizing the likelihood of ambiguous situations through the implementation of strict rules and regulations to ensure control over all. On the other hand, cultures that are accepting of uncertainty are more open to change and new ideas, are less emotional and more undemonstrative, and carry out as few policies as possible. Finally, long-term orientation is said to be associated with values; for example long term orientation has been linked to certain values such as thrift and determination while short term orientation has been attributed to having respect for one’s traditions and accomplishment of social obligations. The application of Hofstede’s (1980) cultural dimensions on the understanding of employees has served as a useful guide. It has given both high and low level workers with an idea of what they should be expecting from their colleagues and supervisors; moreover, it has also provided help in expatriate assignments as these dimensions can help expatriate workers gain knowledge about cultural differences prior to being assigned with tasks that require cultural awareness. However, I do not believe that this is appropriate for making conclusions about a certain country, culture, or society in general as not all individuals can fit into such assumptions. The data may not also be up-to-date as a culture of a country may gradually change over time, whether it is influenced by internal or external factors. Meanwhile, Trompenaars (1993) came up with their own set of cultural dimensions somewhat similar to those of Hofstede (1980) although some of these provide a different perspective. These included (1) universalism versus particularism which referred to the importance of either rules or relationships, (2) individualism versus collectivism that pointed towards the functioning of people in an individual or group manner, (3) neutral versus emotional, which indicates the display of emotions, (4) specific versus diffuse that refers to how people maintain their personal and professional lives, (5) achievement versus ascription, which describes how status is obtained, (6) sequential versus synchronic that indicates how societies view time, and (7) internal versus external, which refers to whether people are controlled by the environment or the other way around. To explain briefly, universalism revolves around the principle that certain beliefs and practices may be applied in all settings without having to undergo alterations; on the other hand, particularism points out that factors related to a particular situation should influence how these ideas and actions are to be used. Therefore, universalist cultures tend to strictly follow a set of contracts and policies while particularist cultures are more focused on establishing a sense of trust through relationships. Meanwhile, cultures that have a high level of individualism include members who are responsible for their own decisions and are acknowledged for their individual success, thus a focus on accountability and decision making at the individual level. In contrast, cultures that take on a collectivist approach focus more on the community before emphasizing the individual; thus, successful accomplishment of goals, decision making, and carrying out of responsibilities are often done through groups. Next, neutral cultures strongly believe in hiding their emotions especially in public or during business transactions, maintaining composure all the time. Affective cultures, contrastingly, allow individuals to openly express their emotions such as being able to smile often or exchange enthusiastic greetings. Cultures that are achievement-oriented believe that an individual’s status is the function and outcome of his or her performance and achievement while ascription-oriented ones associate status with what or who an individual is such as through his age, gender, or family connections. Time orientation has also been identified as an important cultural dimension. Cultures that take on a sequential approach are likely to carry out one activity at a time, place much importance on punctuality, and prefer to strictly follow plans. On the other hand, those that have a synchronous approach demonstrate less importance on schedules and are more likely to perform multiple activities simultaneously. Finally, people who belong to cultures that are inner-directed believe that they control the results of their actions, hence having total control over their environment, while those in outer-directed cultures do not perceive such control as an important priority. Instead, they “go with the flow” and let their actions and decisions pave their own path, suggesting that their environment is in full control. Trompenaars’ (1993) set of cultural dimensions, I believe, is more detailed than that of Hofstede (1980). Initially, their findings were targeted to address various predicaments in the business context. These do not only highlight the overall attitudes of people; rather, specific situations can be addressed such as what should be done in a single business meeting or how important it is to express emotions. Task 2 Leadership has been examined through various perspectives and researchers have been able to describe this concept using a number of theories in order to determine which form of leadership is the most effective for businesses as well as the necessary traits and characteristics that must be present among organizations (Cacioppe 1997). A common theme about such studies is that leadership actions and behaviors play a fundamental role in determining effectiveness among businesses (As-Sadeq and Khoury 2006). For instance, several of the earliest studies have suggested that leaders must be aware and involved with issues that are related to tasks and people. A number of researchers asserted that leadership must look into and act on the structuring of work as well consideration to organizational members such as respecting and being sensitive to subordinates (Klage 1999). Many other leadership theories have continued to focus on the importance of reliable leadership actions and behaviors while emphasizing the role of followers as well. Various leadership styles exist and while most employees prefer transformational leaders, many managers persist on utilizing other approaches, such as transactional leadership or a laissez faire style. Behaviors of such leaders can have varying and considerable effects on the capabilities of employees in being creative. The leadership factors which are used in the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) originally developed by Bass and Avolio (1989) based on the transformational leadership theory includes the laissez faire, transactional, and transformational styles of leadership as well as the outcomes of leadership. Laissez faire, known as non leadership, exhibits a behavior with which leaders avoid being involved important work-related issues, making decisions, and establishing strong relationships with the subordinates. Meanwhile, transactional leadership includes certain factors such as contingent rewards, as well as active and passive management by exception. Contingent reward is a form of exchange system that relies on bargaining with which the followers and their leader create an agreement to realize organizational goals while the leader provides rewards to the subordinates (Bass 1985). There is a need for leaders to clearly explain what is expected of these workers and offer recognition once objectives are accomplished. Active management by exception sets the standards for compliance and what characterizes ineffective performance; it may also make use of punishments when subordinates are not able to comply with such standards (Avolio and Bass 1990). This implies that this leadership style aims to monitor and correct any mistake or error made as often as possible. On the other hand, passive management by exception is applied by leaders who avoid and choose not to set, communicate, and clarify agreements and expectations that are to be accomplished by their followers. This form of leadership is unable to address all situations and problems in an effective manner as leaders who make use of this style will become involved only when certain problems come about (Savolainen 2000). Meanwhile, the factors that comprise transformational leadership generally lead to positive long-term effects on both leaders and followers, as noted by numerous studies. The first factor, which is idealized influence, refer to the charismatic elements which enable leaders to gain considerable trust and respect, as well as be considered as positive role models by their subordinates. Second factor is the inspirational motivation with which the behavior of leaders are able to significantly motivate their subordinates by integrating values, meaning, and challenge in their duties. The next factor, known as intellectual stimulation, allows leaders to stimulate the efforts of their followers in becoming creative, rational, and innovative when it comes to dealing with work situations. Finally, individualized consideration refers to the transformational leadership factor with which leaders establish strong relations with their subordinates by recognizing their needs and desires in order to result to greater potential. Finally, leadership outcomes identified in the MLQ includes three measurable factors, which include extra effort, effectiveness, and satisfaction (Bass and Avolio 1989). Extra effort demonstrates the leader’s ability to increase the desire of subordinates as well as their efforts that they place onto work while effectiveness demonstrates the ability of the leader to accomplish the organization’s goals and objectives as well as the followers’ work-related needs. Meanwhile, satisfaction shows how content and fulfilled the subordinates are, particularly in their leader’s actions and behaviors (Banerji and Krishnan 2000). Read More