Cross Cultural Communications and Leadership Management - Case Study Example

This explains the attitude of Hernandez when he tells Van West to take it slow, and that he is in control of the situation; he would be able to solve all the raised grievances. Managers in the Mexican settings use less participative style of management (Morris & Pavett, 1995). Judged from the actions of Hernandez; being out of the workplace as required. Stanford (1992) further argues that though American managers use participative management, Mexican managers are treated as figures of authorities, and Hernandez as a manager does not expect any control from Van west.

To deal with Hernandez, Van West has to consider these Mexican settings. However, Hernandez might have used the friendly link between them to act in this particular way. The first thing for Van West to do would be to call Hernandez, and outline his expectations, though he had earlier informed him concerning his management styles. This would help West in reminding Hernandez of his roles, and the expectations in the production Department. When this does not work, Van West has to involve his authority as being the overall manager of the subsidiary, and replace Hernandez with a more competent manager.

However, he must hold elaborate discussions with other departmental managers to support these strategic actions in streamlining the failing production department. Hofstede (1994), in his cross cultural theory and work related values critically examined how bosses behave, and interact with employees in an organization. Mexicans, according to this study have high scores in Power- Distance, Collectivism and Masculinity, and Uncertainty – Avoidance. Employees from a high power –Distance cultural background have a tendency to maintain professional distance away from their bosses.

Bosses are therefore the ultimate decision makers, setting goals in an organization according to the Mexican culture (Hofstede, 1994). Bosses and managers in Mexico retain their local managerial cultural style in being authoritative, and are viewed as father figures; meaning they are observed with due respect (Shimoni & Begmann, 2006). The ability to have authority in making decisions individually, and being less involved, or being less participatory in the daily factory operations makes these managers to be in less conflict with people on the factory floor.

This guarantees these managers both power and authority, with the ability to act on personal decisions without consulting. The management- employee relation in the Mexican culture is a rather fascinating relation, which brings out important family values in Mexican management styles, and working environment. Hofstede (1994) explains the collectivism nature of Mexican culture, which translates to a strong sense of team working, and the need for social harmony. There is need for team based work, and harmonized groups as compared to individualistic competitions.

Trompenaars (1994) further elaborates that Mexicans in being high on achievement dimension do not have preference in following any universal pattern rules. As managers are less participative, the relationship between employees and managers in Mexico is a vertical one, where managers are viewed as ‘fathers’ to make decisions for their subordinates, who do not participate in the decision making process. De Forest (1994), in his study in management culture in