Managing Across Cultures - Article Example

Managing Across Cultures Introduction Business is now no longer restricted by international boundaries as a tsunami of globalisation is sweeping across the industrial scenario of the entire world. Cultural distances (Shenkar, 2001) and differences across various countries and nationalities have now begun to assume serious implications as managers have to negotiate cultural divides in order to fulfil their objectives and achieve their targets. This necessitates a proper understanding of mutual values and perceptions by both the manager and the managed for smooth functioning of an enterprise. Malcolm Chapman, Hanna Gajewska-De Mattos, Jeremy Clegg and Peter Jennings Buckley (Chapman, Mattos, Clegg, & Buckley, 2008) are quite rightly of the view that differences that are understood are differences that can be bridged and negotiated. They put forward the novel concept that cultural differences per se are not absolute and are essentially relative depending on bilateral historical and political issues involving the two concerned nationalities. Historical interactions between two countries, more importantly, they way they are perceived and remembered by people of those two countries shape to a very great extent the cultural differences and cultural distance that develop between two nations. This approach, the authors claim is supplementary to the path breaking objective approach adopted by Gerard Hendrik Hofstede when he postulated five dimensions of culture of a country. (Hofstede, 1991) When these two approaches are used in conjunction with each other, managers are decidedly in better position to negotiate the cultural divide that at times frustrates even the best among the lot. Thus, according to the authors, mere repetition of index scores of cultural dimensions of a particular nation, as tabulated by Hofstede without considering the interactions between the two countries through the annals of history would surely not be sufficient for managers to successfully manage across national frontiers. It might be worthwhile to mention that the impact of Hofstede’s five dimensions that were further simplified into a single index of cultural distance (Kogut & Singh, 1988) have had a phenomenal impact on business literature that dealt with cross-cultural management. Thus the need for a subjective view that endorsed the bilateral approach in dealing with bridging of cultural divides is all the more essential to manage a multinational enterprise. The paper in brief The authors have analysed in detail the cultural differences between Germany and Poland and United Kingdom and Poland by investigating and researching the perceptions and opinion that people of these countries have about each other and how these opinions and perceptions get reflected in an industrial workplace backdrop. The authors have discussed the interactions these nations have had over centuries and have observed that depending upon the intensity and ferocity of such interactions; people of these countries have formed perceptions about national stereotypes. While discussing the concept of cultural distance, the authors observed that though both groups on either side of the divide accept that differences do exist between them, the depth of the chasm surely depended on the historical background of interactions between these two countries and such cultural distance did not depend on geographical distance between the two nations. As a case in point they have traced the often violent interactions between Poland and Germany and the way in which Germany have always held a superior and domineering position in its interactions with Poland. In contrast, however, United Kingdom had comparatively very benign interactions with Poland and had never had this country on its national, political and cultural radar. The authors observed that though Germany is a next door neighbour of Poland, still the cultural chasm between these two countries is far more pronounced than that between Poland and United Kingdom that are far apart geographically. This anomaly is further heightened when the authors compare Hofstede’s culture scores for Germany, UK and Poland and observe that Germany and UK have fairly similar scores. (Nasierowski & Mikula, 1998) If cultural distance as propounded by the Hofstede school of researchers was the only criteria, Poles would have viewed Germans and British almost in the same light and for that matter British and German perceptions about Poles would also have been fairly similar. Though there are some areas of commonality, these mutual perceptions are far too diverse to ignore. Theory and Literature The authors have dealt extensively with the concept of cultural distance as theorised by Hofstede School of researchers (Bakacsi, Sa´ndor, Andra´s, & Viktor, 2002) and have also observed the predominance of this concept in contemporary literature (Tihanyi, Griffith, & Russell, 2005). The authors have surely not been lagging in acknowledging earlier researchers who have realised and accepted the notion that any meaningful understanding of cultural distance and difference can only be based on ‘multi-layer, multi-facet, contextual, and systems views of culture’ (Leung, Bhagat, Buchan, Erez, & Gibson, 2005). The authors remark in passing about the subtle diversity between the two terms ‘cultural distance’ and ‘psychic distance’ that have been highlighted by some authors (Johanson & Vahlne, 1977) but do not subscribe to the sharp dichotomy between ‘culture’ and ‘individual’ that these authors seem to postulate. However, the authors readily accept the importance given by some authors on ‘perception’ as one of the basic inputs of forming notions about cultural stereotypes. (Sousa & Bradley, 2006) This, as admitted by the authors, is because ‘perceptions’ also form the basic foundation stone of the ethnographic study that has been conducted by them. The authors have surveyed all topics that are relevant to their paper and were not biased in any way in as much as they picked and chose only those theories that bolstered their line of argument. Their analysis and interpretation of the prevalent theories were also logical and they have not misinterpreted any theory to suit their purpose. They have relied on explanations that have been peer reviewed on numerous occasions. Research Approach The authors have considered managerial perceptions as the focal point of their research and as perception is essentially a qualitative concept it is only natural that they have adopted a qualitative and interpretive approach. Perceptions can best be gauged through loosely structured or, even non-structured interviews and can rarely be identified or analysed through quantitative, questionnaire based research. (Miles & Huberman, 1994) The authors did not prioritise the topics on which the interviewees needed to respond and allowed them to come forth with their own opinions and views in the manner and sequence thought most suitable by the interviewees. This is the approach that is generally adopted in social anthropology when research is conducted to isolate ‘native categories’. (Buckley & Chapman, 1997) The study was conducted in 12 different companies located in Poland, United Kingdom and Germany through 63 one-on-one interviews that began with interviews at general manager level with interviewees suggesting names of subsequent interviewees in an application of ‘snowballing’ technique. (Marschan, 1996) The authors resorted to mild provocation if they observed that the interviewee was not spontaneously forthcoming on issue of national and cultural identity but the provocation was only mild and never meant to elicit diatribes. Since the research involved three different nationalities with three different mother tongues, the issue of language employed during interviews assumed much significance. (Zalan & Lewis, 2004) In Poland all interviews were conducted in Polish while in UK and Germany they were conducted in English since all the Germans interviewed were fluent in English. Thus, the apprehension expressed by some authors that interviews conducted in a language other than mother tongue resulted in some lack of spontaneity among interviewees (Chapman, Clegg, & Gajewska-De Mattos, 2004) was taken care of. The interviews were thoroughly read several times to locate common themes and issues and were sorted and colour coded according to themes. Several features of Microsoft Word were utilised to sift through especially long data. The commonness of themes occurring naturally in the raw data correlated with nationality and extreme caution was exercised to ensure no bias creeps in the entire process at this stage. To ensure validity of collected data and to fulfil the requirements of triangulation in research methods, supplementary data in the form of ‘annual reports and leaflets of companies, press cuttings, internet sources, historical sources’ were also collected and collated to complement primary data which was further cross-tabulated with respect to characteristics of the respondents and types of the companies to lend further validity to the study. Research findings and conclusions The main finding and conclusion of the entire research process is that small or minor cultural differences when observed minutely through the lens of years of historically intense and often turbulent interactions might create a pronounced divergence and a chasm that might become rather difficult to bridge across. In comparison, large cultural differences many a time create a far more benign and often indifferent response if there is no history of intimate interaction between the two nations. Practical implications of this study Individuals who are actually involved in managing across cultures would gain substantially from this piece of research as for the first time the importance of historical interaction between two countries in shaping attitudes towards each other has been proved with theoretical rigour. This would help managers in better dealing with subordinates from another culture as they would be aware of the nature of stereotypes and preconceived biases the subordinates might be having in their minds about these foreign managers. The situation will become more manageable as subordinates will have different attitudes towards managers from different countries. An intelligent management will also attempt to match managers and their countries of appointment in such a manner that managers face least resistance in carrying out their duties. However, all that would be required to make such a correct match would be an unbiased and dispassionate study of the histories of the two countries – the country where the manger is coming from and the country where the manager will be deputed. Such a study surely would not require a high degree of academic rigour or expertise. References Bakacsi, G., Sa´ndor, T., Andra´s, K., & Viktor, I. (2002). Eastern European cluster: Tradition and transition. Journal of World Buisness 37 , 69-80. Buckley, P., & Chapman, M. (1997). The use of ‘native categories’ in management research. British Journal of Management 8(4) , 283-299. Chapman, M., Clegg, J., & Gajewska-De Mattos, H. (2004). Poles and Germans: An international business relationship. Human Relations 57(8) , 983-1015. Chapman, M., Mattos, H. G.-D., Clegg, J., & Buckley, P. J. (2008). Close neighbours and distant friends—perceptions of cultural distance. International Business Review 17 , 217–234. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organisations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies 8(1) , 23-32. Kogut, B., & Singh, H. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies 19(3) , 411-432. Leung, K., Bhagat, R., Buchan, N., Erez, M., & Gibson, C. (2005). Culture and international business: Recent advances and their implications for future research. Journal of International Business Studies 36 , 357-378. Marschan, R. (1996). New structural forms and inter-unit communication in multinationals. The case of Kone elevators. Helsinki: Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. An expanded sourcebook. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Nasierowski, W., & Mikula, B. (1998). Cultural dimensions of Polish managers: Hofstedes indices. Organisation Studies 19 (3) , 495-509. Shenkar, O. (2001). Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies 32(3) , 519-535. Sousa, C., & Bradley, F. (2006). Cultural distance and psychic distance: Two peas in a pod? Journal of International Marketing 14(1) , 49-70. Tihanyi, L., Griffith, D., & Russell, C. (2005). The effect of cultural distance on entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of International Business Studies 36 , 270-283. Zalan, T., & Lewis, G. (2004). Writing about methods in qualitative research: Towards a more transparent approach. In R. Marschan-Piekkari, & C. Welch (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business. Cheltenham, UK and Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Read More