Differences in Motivational Patterns of UK and Russian Employees - Research Paper Example

Differences in motivational patterns of UK and Russian employees 1. Introduction One of the most critical examination of the meaning and usages or applications of management in the modern employment world would appear to be synonymous with observational postulates formulated by Geert Hofstede. In most of analytical works by Hofstede, there is a clear and deliberate element of comparing various cultural environments with regard to employee motivation and commitment factors. In one of these similar works, there is a general comparison of cultural environments across the major world economic backgrounds to assess the impact of cultural orientation on employment (Hofstede, 1993). In a quick assessment, the author’s work can be said to feature comparative management in the various employment environments due to diversity issues that the cultural surroundings within which the employment exists. Interestingly, the basic observation is that management practices can be traced back from the United States and their dispersal from the US cultural environment can be transcribed on the various cultures across the world for comparison. Employee motivation is largely a factor of the actual working environment and effective vulture that the labour industry in a country is established on. Motivation at the workplace is a close manifestation of the growth prospects that the employees aspire to achieve, particularly within the constraints of the cultural practices facilitated by the general procedures and routines that the society has evolved to accommodate. However, within the larger picture of historical developments inspired by the social and economic times of the society, these practices are deemed to change (Hofstede, 1994). Political factors play a vital role in the evolution of the effective environment that the society can boast of in terms of economic system interpretation of employment and labour regulations. For instance, the liberal market in the UK and the US have a balance of every market including the labour market which introduces very potent forces of negotiation for the best employment experience hence motivation thereon. This is the cultural perspective that can also be expected in the Russian system which is perhaps influenced by the cultural and political forces that its economic orientation with communism features. 2. a) Literature Review Comparing the congruency in the United Kingdom as well as the Russian employment environment can best be approached by assessing the cultural standards depicted by the two societies. Using the postulates described by Hofstede (1993), diversity issues in the two environments is expected from the onset due to the economic cultures that these two economies have been established from a historical context. Similar sentiments are delivered in a paper prepared by the same author (Hofstede, 1994), to the effect that the diverse human resource management issues expected can be traced from major cultural experiences that different countries have. b) Research Questions From the realization of the impact made by a particular cultural background to the employment experience in a country, several research questions were formulated to assist in performing the appropriate research. Most importantly, the economic environment within which the employment experience is established in must be brought out to clearly address the most pressing missing research links. Alternatively, the basic orientation to international labour regulations as a standard of measure for the relevant employment experience issues must also be depicted in the research development. Using these insights to formulate the necessary research links, the following research objectives were used in the research to determine the differences in motivational patterns regarding employment in the UK and Russia. a) To determine the various motivational factors that are at play in the employment of persons in the UK and Russia b) To establish the level of play of financial benefits/rewards and bonuses in the motivation of individuals in the UK and Russia 3. Research design Research was conducted from the cultural perspective of employment within different settings offered by various countries. Perhaps the most important approach was from the realization that human resource management plays an important role in the definition of the employment setting that a country offers. Application of the basic management practices in the UK is closely similar to the American model due to the apparent liberal business culture that has evolved over the years in the two countries. Employment evolution in the UK as inspired by major occurrences in trade union movements in the history of the country can be said to be very strong factors shaping up the modern day employment experience in the UK just as it does in the USA (Hofstede, 1998). Cultural orientation of the two countries can be extrapolated to manifest the resemblance of employment relations in the two countries. However, some economic differences play a major role in the management at the helm of employees’ relations between different countries as well. Placing the Russian context in the equation introduces a different perspective that is quite different from the American experience. Using such an introductory perspective, the appropriate research to unravel the missing links was conducted using an analysis of the various socioeconomic and political features that each country has regarding employment. After the identification of the actual interactions that each of the above areas have with regard to employment and possible impact on motivation, the settings offered by both the UK and Russia were assessed to create a more specific approach. The research design emphasised on the importance of management insights for the employment experience issues for the appropriate theoretical explanation. In collecting data, the Likert scale was greatly employed as a measure of how respondents prioritized various motivational factors. From the design, data collection was then employed for the two countries’ settings. 4. Data Collection The main data collection involved two approaches that targeted the country system as well as the industry specific approach. The data used for this study was drawn from both primary and secondary sources. Secondary data from journals and books was used as the basis for the determination of the various factors that impact employee motivation as noted by previous researchers. Once the factors had been determined, primary data was collected through survey with personal questionnaires being issued to respondents. The respondents were informed in advance of the nature of the study and its objectives before they were engaged in the study. They were also assured of their rights to participate or refrain from participating in the survey at will without any consequences. Furthermore, they were assured that their personal information and identities would remain secret. The respondents were asked not to write their identities on the questionnaires so that they were assured of a high level of privacy. Data collection used general information existing on cultural environment depicted in the two countries. On the other hand, industry specific assessment was performed by involving a closed ended questionnaire interrogating employees in the two countries. The questionnaire is contained as Appendix 1 at the end of this paper. The respondents were drawn randomly from a supermarket in the capital of each of the two countries. Respondents were picked as they entered the supermarket, one respondent every top of the hour. The first respondent to enter the store at the moment or after the top of the hour was asked to participate in the survey. If the potential respondent declined, the second person to enter the next person to enter the supermarket was taken. A total of 20 respondents were used for the survey, 10 from each of the two countries as can be seen in the table of results as contained din appendix 2. Results From the Nation * financial rewards Crosstabulation Count finrew Total Least important Not important Average important very important Nation UK 1 3 3 2 1 10 Russia 0 4 2 8 6 20 Total 1 7 5 10 7 30 From the above cross tabulation, it is clear that 6 out of 10 Russians representing 60% of Russian residents placed most value in being motivated using financial rewards. Only 1 respondent from the UK expressly noted that financial rewards were very important in their motivation. Yet again, no Russian stated that financial motivation was least important against one UK resident who valued least financial rewards in their motivation. Nation * Bonus Crosstabulation Count Bonus Total not important average important very important Nation UK 4 3 2 1 10 Russia 2 4 6 8 20 Total 6 7 8 9 30 The above cross tabulation reveals that 8 out of 10 Russians representing 80% of Russians valued most bonuses in their motivation. Only one UK resident stated that they motivation very importantly came from bonuses. In fact 40% (4 out of 10) of UK respondents stated that bonuses least featured in the factors that motivated them against 20% of Russians making the same statement. Correlations Nation Bonus finrew Nation Pearson Correlation 1 .447(*) .377 Sig. (2-tailed) . .048 .102 N 20 20 20 Bonus Pearson Correlation .447(*) 1 .168 Sig. (2-tailed) .048 . .478 N 20 20 20 finrew Pearson Correlation .377 .168 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .102 .478 . N 20 20 20 * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). From the correlation analysis, it is revealed that there was a significant positive correlation between nationality and the two variables bonuses and financial rewards. While respondents from the UK also noted that they considered the two variables as factors leading to their motivation, the responses from Russian respondents quite a lot revealed the attachment that money had to do with motivation. Conclusion and Recommendations There are myriad of factors that lead to employee motivation as discovered by past researchers. Some of the main factors in this respect include financial rewards, bonuses, interest in the job, stability of the company/ job, fringe benefits, teamwork, possibility of promotion and recognition. A lot of value is placed by Russian residents on monetary or financial gain in seeking motivation. This is however not as much the case among UK residents. What this actually shows is that employers in Russia should place greater emphasis on bonuses and financial rewards to keep their employees motivated. UK residents are on the other hand are better motivated by factors placing greater emphasis on factors non-financial such as job security, job stability and interest in the job. While this study reveals an important aspect of motivation of residents in the two countries their priorities almost clearly being distinct, a lot still needs to be done to reveal how other factors impact motivation of employees. For example, a study should be conducted to establish the relationship between motivation and the management styles used in various companies. References Hofstede, G., (1993) “Cultural Constraints in Management Theories,” Academy of Management Executive, 7(1):81-94 Hofstede, G., (1994) “Cultural Constraints in Management Theories,” International Review of Strategic Management, 5:27-48 Hofstede, G., (1998) “Think Locally, Act Globally: Cultural Constraints in Personnel Management,” Management International Review, 7-26. Appendix 1 This questionnaire has been developed to compare and contrast differences in motivational patterns of UK and Russian employees. There is no need to state your name anywhere on this questionnaire due to it being confidential and anonymous. 1. Your gender: Male Female 2. Your age: 18-25 26-40 41-60 60+ 3. Your nationality: 1 UK 2 Russia 4. How many people work in your organisation: 1-10 11-100 101-1000 1000+ 5. Industry: Manufacturing; Tourism; Retail; Healthcare; Education; Financial Services; Fashion 6. Your wage per months: For Russia (Roubles): 1000-10000 10000-50000 50000-150000 15000+ For UK (Pounds): 100-1000 1000-3000 3000-5000 5000-15000 15000+ 7. Work experience: 1-2 years 3-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16 years+ 8. How important for you is financial reward? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important) 9. How important for you is interesting work? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important) 10. How important for you arefringe benefits? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important) 11. How important for you is company’s ethical stand? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important) 12. How important for you is financial teamwork? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important. 13. How important for you is prospects of being promoted? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important) 14. How important for you arebonuses available? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important) 15. How important for you is stability of your company? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important) 16. How important for you is recognition? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important) Appendix 2: Tabulation of results Gender Age nationality workers Industry wage Experience Financial reward interest fringebenefits ethics finteamwork Promotion Bonuses Stability recognition 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 2 5 2 3 2 5 3 2 1 1 1 2 4 2 4 2 1 3 3 2 3 4 4 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 5 3 2 4 2 4 4 5 2 2 4 2 1 1 1 3 2 2 4 3 3 5 3 4 3 1 3 1 3 2 3 1 4 4 5 5 4 4 4 2 4 2 1 2 3 1 2 2 3 2 3 4 5 3 5 3 5 2 2 2 2 3 4 2 4 1 2 2 4 2 2 1 3 2 4 2 3 4 1 5 4 5 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 3 1 4 5 1 2 3 5 2 4 4 4 2 3 4 1 2 2 4 6 4 3 5 4 3 5 3 3 2 4 5 2 1 1 3 7 3 1 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 5 1 2 1 1 4 5 2 2 3 4 5 4 2 2 3 4 2 1 1 2 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 3 4 4 4 3 3 1 2 2 1 6 3 3 4 3 1 4 5 3 5 3 4 1 3 1 4 7 4 2 1 2 3 5 4 5 4 2 3 2 3 1 3 6 4 2 2 5 4 3 3 4 2 4 2 2 4 1 2 4 2 5 3 3 3 4 4 3 5 2 4 2 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 3 4 3 3 3 4 5 5 1 2 2 2 1 3 1 4 4 4 2 4 2 3 3 3 1 4 1 1 3 1 3 5 5 5 1 5 1 2 4 2 Read More