Work Culture Management in Switzerland and Kazakhstan - Case Study Example

Work Culture Management in Switzerland And Kazakhstan Introduction: Studying the managerial challenges seen in intercultural teams and companies is interesting and always gives one a plethora of managerial and cultural aspects to record. While there has been a great deal of work done in studying cultural challenges for managers in Western and Eastern countries, there has never been a chance to find a solution wherein a homogenous plan could be used in all scenarios. At the core of such challenges is the diversity that one finds in each different cultural scenario. Managers have to study, understand and perform according to the cultures of the place, the company and the employee base, which increases the challenges of their work. In the present study, we will attempt to study and draw out the cultural aspects of employees working in Kazakhstan which represents Eastern culture and Switzerland which represents Western culture. I. Studying Kazakhs and Swiss Cultures For starters we need to note that Kazakhstan and Switzerland have worked out a good co-operative relationship in terms of business and economic growth ever since the last decade of the nineteenth century. Exporting chemicals, precision instruments and pharmaceutical products to Kazakhstan, Switzerland imports oil and natural gas from the Kazakhs (Cseh et al, 2004, 17). Switzerland actively provides man power and resources to the oil industry that flourishes in Kazakhstan and the Kazakh government takes pride in providing for the accommodation, security and growth of Swiss nationals residing in the country and working for their companies. While a lot of this co-operation is based on the massive success of the oil industry in Kazakhstan, the creation of teams which provide global performance to meet oil processing demands of the Western world is possible when team mangers and administration understand the right combination of cultures at workplace (Pulakos, 2002, 221) that will help create high performance amongst employees from these two cultural backgrounds. I.1 Work Culture in Kazakhstan The common people in Kazakhstan follow a hierarchal mode of social living, wherein elders, seniors and experienced people are shown respect and rules and regulations set up by elders are followed to the T. There is a homogenous cultural system wherein all members greet each other on streets and close friends hug each other in greeting. Thus, the overall atmosphere is that of respect and admiration, and every other emotion be it cheer, joy, sadness, productive intelligence or political thoughts are expressed following the accepted decorum of the society. Women are under-represented and therefore, women who come in from overseas find it difficult to adjust with Kazakh men at the workplace. However, through adept managerial efficiency, it becomes easy for the team to perform to the expectations of the company. Amongst the cultural domains that one normally finds at a workplace, the eight dimensions established by Browaeys and Price (2011) ascertains that managers are able to detect and decide future course of managerial action. The eight cultural dimensions when studied in the Kazakh context are as follows: Assertiveness: Following a hierarchal workplace theme, Kazakh offices have assertiveness coming from group heads while the subordinates follow orders. The level of expression of assertiveness is maximum at the top and minimum amongst lower employees (Perlman & Gleason, 2007, 1337). When teams are built using lower grade employees, clashes in opinion and observations tend to be rare when compared to teams created by using higher grade employees wherein expression tends to be loud and highly assertive. However, since by nature Kazakhs have a positively assertive nature, they tend to be highly productive even of operating in lower grades of employment. Institutional Collectiveness: Collectiveness is one of the few factors that is common to all aggregates of Kazakhs in any part of the world. Used to working in closed groups, Kazakhs usually have excellent performance records in terms of in-group collectiveness (Ang et al, 2007, 362). When operating with only members of the Kazakh culture, this in group collectiveness gets translated to institutional collectiveness and brings in high productivity. However, in terms of institutional collectiveness, when intercultural teams are created a lot of this homogeneity in thinking and commitment gets broken and therefore, institutional collectivism in lower when intercultural teams are created. Future Orientation: Kazakhs are highly future centric and are always open to long term prospects, plans and deals. The main reason behind this futuristic approach is the promise of long term dividends which the country has enjoyed owing to their oil and natural gas industries (Ardichvili & Gasparishvili, 2001, 236). As a result, Kazakhs are great to work with when long projects and assignments are concerned, many of which do not come with perks and rewards until closure of the project. Gender Egalitarianism: The Kazakh culture has fewer women in workplaces than men. Men usually take the main burden of work outside home and expect women to perform as sub-ordinates to them. The success of the society is attributed to the male domination of the culture. Therefore, to expect women at the workplace or see them perform well and out do men in offices is rare. Many foreigners who come to operate in Kazakh offices find this as an odd feature of a country that is doing so well economically. Humane Orientation: Kazakhs are strict adherers of law, rules, norms and decorum. A major chunk of humane orientation in the workplace therefore, comes from the inspiration that the seniors in the office provide. It is indeed shocking to see that undermining women, selective growth of employees and loud assertive domination, tends to diminish the humane orientation of members working in Kazakh offices. Owing to the herd mentality, Kazakh officials tend to follow plans and projects which promise success and profits to the company (Pulakos et al, 2000, 612). The maximum humane orientation one sees in the Kazakh culture is in the form of charitable donations made by companies and influential individuals in the society. The charitable causes are directed towards development of the society and uplifting of lower grades of society. However, since greeting and showing respect are expected decorums in offices and regular dealings, a humane outlook exists as a general tone in day to day dealings. However, this outlook has not helped improve the overall condition of under-represented classes of the society and therefore, is not much of a success in helping the society, although it helps in creating teams and groups which work with due respect amongst members. Performance Orientation: Kazakhs are performance oriented and although the systems are not as efficient as seen in the Western countries, people are granted appraisals when they are seen to perform well in the company. However, since conservatism does play a role in selection of these candidates (Drucker, 1995, 12), the performance of individual employees often is decided by the project/team he is operating in and the treatment that is being meted out to him by superiors and others in the office. Power Distance: Power is highly centered in Kazakh offices and most of the deciding power is in the hands of superiors in the company. As a result, the distance from power is appreciable and employees do not have easy access to the think tank of the company and are expected to perform in accordance to the decisions made by the heads. Uncertainty Avoidance: In the Kazakh culture, individuals have a tendency to avoid uncertainty and go for secure positions and plans. Owing to the oil abundance in the country, such adherence and planning has always been a success. However, the lack of a tendency to explore uncharted paths is fast changing n the society as the country has agreed to become a member of Switzerland’s vote constituency I international and European bodies of power. At the individual level however, people still are careful in taking unsure steps and leave the exploration for classes of society that cannot make it to the top through conventional ways (Jaeger, 1986, 181). I.2 Work Culture In Switzerland The Swiss culture is known for its aggressive and jolly marketing and participation in plans and projects created in successful ventures in the country or abroad. Swiss nationals are found in many countries wherein they make a reasonable contribution to the economy of the host country through their collectiveness, focus and participation (Dickson, Den Hartog & Mitchelson, 2003, 743). In Switzerland, the basic culture is open minded, as is the wont of Western countries. People are more akin to wearing their thoughts on their sleeves and maintain individual opinions which do not follow any dictates of seniority or centralized power. In workplaces, Swiss nationals have a very happy and enthusiastic participatory mode, which helps them achieve goals easily. Teams are usually highly productive owing to the decentralization of power and free flow of constructive ideas. The power of cultural dimensions as seen in their workplaces is as follows: Assertiveness: Swiss workers are highly assertive in their individual ways. They do not wait for a time or opportunity to voice their opinions and do not take even a second’s time to follow orders and put them into action (Yi & Gong, 2013, 1283). As a result, the speed of work done is highly productive and keeps the team in good stead in the long run. The fact that individual opinions are given equal respect and opportunity is the main propeller in the growing assertiveness of Swiss workers in the country and abroad. As a result, these employees perform productively even when they are placed in intercultural teams since they are looking for a chance to assert the working culture of the new team and start productively performing with its members. Institutional Collectiveness: In-group collectiveness of Swiss nationals, in Switzerland and abroad is high. However, their level of institutional collectiveness that they achieve in a company depends upon the system that is prevalent of the company. If a company uses a work culture devoid of bias and involves everyone in group activities and production, there tends to be better institutional collectiveness showcased by the employees of the company, than when the company uses a stringent work culture. However, generally speaking, Swiss members of a team show excellent collectiveness in foreign teams and tend to gel in well (Swissinfo, 2011, 1). Future Orientation: Switzerland has shown tremendous promise in futuristic projects and have achieved growth through diligent planning. In workplaces, people are very production oriented and if a small term plan can get better returns than a long term plan or project, Swiss workers use their efficiency to extract the best out of the small plan (Ergeneli et al, 2007, 716). In terms of future orientation, Swiss employees and management have been found to hold a neutral stand as they rely more on working efficiency and traits like punctuality and direct leadership. Gender Egalitarianism: Women are not underrepresented in the Swiss workplace but tend to be localized in services sections of companies (House et al, 2004, 132), while men are posted in all functionalities of the industry and also comprise major portion of the top management. Therefore, although reduced to a great extent, the gender egalitarianism exists in a different level of workplace discrimination in the Swiss society. Humane Orientation: The working of Swiss employees is disciplined and has a healthy work life balance wherein the humane orientation of individuals is right in place (Wieland, 2005, 89). The main crux of the social responsibility that companies need to fulfill is fulfilled by individuals working therein as they undertake active social service activities in weekends and on holidays, wherein direct service is provided to unfortunate sections of the society and individual workers develop a humane approach to other employees at the workplace and brush up their social and interpersonal skills. Performance Orientation: Swiss employees are highly motivated by performance oriented studies and surveys within a company’s framework (Ardichvili & Kuchinke, 2002, 111). They are trained and driven by performance analysis and therefore, meet all the parameters of superior performance in any country or company. Power Distance: Swiss companies work using direct leadership and do not hold high power centers. The leaders who provide the directives in workplace assume a modest and discreet tone while on and off work, and therefore, do not keep employees and subordinates away from power. This short distance from power brings out the best in employees and takes the most talented members of the workforce on top of the company hierarchy. Uncertainty Avoidance: Members of the Swiss culture do not shy away from challenges or avoid uncertainty since they do believe in short term success and in the rewards of exploring the unknown. Swiss employees are therefore, great at new ideas projects and challenges overseas. This is part of the reason why they are so successful in other countries and in multinational companies. II. Key intercultural management priorities in each culture When a company decides to operate in Switzerland or Kazakhstan or both, it will have to base its workforce on a combination of nationals from both lands. There are many scuch examples seen in Kazakhstan where massive oil corporations and industries have taken in Swiss employees and have provided for their accommodation. The employees travelling to Kazakhstan are required to actively participate in the new company and contribute to its growth. The growth of a sparsely populated country like Kazakhstan is solely attributed to its efficient planning, hierarchial power maintainance, and oil reserves. Switzerland on the other hand has grown on the basis of hard work, efficiency, and punctuality and discipline of individuals in the society, who have a very healthy work life balance and do not let stress or confusion at workplace affect their life at home. The same for Kazakhs is not true, although occasions for stress at workplace are rarely reported in Kazakh workplaces. The migration of Kazakh nationals to countries like Switzerland is minimal when compared to migration by Swiss nationals to other countries including Kazakhstan. Kazakhs are self sufficient and do not go out looking for better pastures because their hierarchal society convinces them of success reaching them where they are, and they have witnessed it over the past two decades. In spite of the conservatism seen in Kazakhstan, there are many occasions when employees of both the cultures have to intermingle in teams between or within companies. The main focus is to use talent from both the countries to enrich a company operating in both or one region. It is important to not here that the working efficiency and positive assertiveness shown by Swiss employees is a great addition to the conservative and decorum based work culture of Kazakhs. Therefore, whether the team is built in Switzerland or in Kazakhstan, companies can hope to earn rich profits by bringing together talent from both lands. The most important aspect of getting best performance from these teams is to create the right working atmosphere for everyone to be able to intermingle and have a productive experience. It must be noted that there are 22 Swiss companies registered in Kazakhstan and there are many Swiss nationals residing in Kazakhstan to help in the oil and natural gas industry. In short, the political and economic back-up required for success of such teams is possible in either of the two or both countries. While addressing human resource management challenges, many studies show that the company culture is a very important determiner of the success of intercultural teams. The performance and records of the team members is always governed by the collective team working ethic. Key factors that decide success of any multicultural team are as follows: Power Distance: The type of power localization in a company shows the level of independence that employees have in the company. Their expressiveness is more when they are close to power and less when they are away from power hubs of the company (Deresky, 2000, 45). When operating Kazakhstan, companies which have both Swiss and Kazakh nationals need to keep the power center flexible and possible elect a few members of the Swiss employee base to the power hub of the company. In this manner, the company will be able to build and draw the trust of Swiss employees. Oppositely, when companies are employing Kazakh nationals in their Swiss branches, they need to ensure that the direct leadership of the team ensures that Kazakh members are comfortable and well communicated regarding the power center of the company (Leung et al, 2005, 362). As is the wont in Swiss companies, the power is decentralized and this can be de-motivating or negative for employees from a Kazakh cultural background. Showing the distance from power they need and helping them understand the positive aspects of decentralization of power is the ideal way in which managers will be able to draw the best out of Kazakhs working in Swiss work cultures (Jaeger, 1986, 184). In both the cultures, the day to day dealings involve greetings and steady decorum which is an integral part of professional culture in both the countries. Therefore, clashes in terms of culture are usually low except for closeness to power. Uncertainty Avoidance: Any change in the company meets with mixed reaction from team-mates. Those who have a work culture that allows them to embrace changes, are not afraid to tread in unknown territories. While those who are more prone to avoiding uncertainty find changes disturbing. Identifying the culture of each member type in the team helps understand and predict their working efficiencies correctly within a single company’s framework. Kazakhs are usually resistant to change and believe in following long term plans that hold sufficient promise for the future. In between changes, treading new paths, exploring new opportunities and embarking on ambitious or short term projects are absent from their work culture and happen only rarely. Swiss nationals are open to these changes and therefore, managers need to introduce changes discreetly keeping in mind the preference of each community within the team. The ideal approach would be to show every change to have a long term profitable prospect for the company. Individualist or Collective Approach: Whether a company puts more emphasis on team work of the different sections of the company or on the individual performance of team members often decides to what extent people tend to contribute (Stahl et al, 2010, 699), interact and adjust within cross-cultural teams. In an intercultural scenario, where both Swiss and Kazakh employees are operating, laying emphasis on collectivism would be of highest benefit to the company since both cultures believe in following the leader. Also, team building is best done when members interact with each other and this is best achieved when emphasis is more on group performance (Hofstede, 1998, 18) than on individual performance. Gender Egalitarianism: Localization of women in a company often gives a different kind of authority and freedom to men in the company. Since both Kazakhs and Swiss employees are used to localization of women employees in a company, and expect women employees to be consigned to service sections or sub-ordinate sections of the company, it becomes important for managers to create teams where women have equal opportunity as men and are not required to cross the work allocations as seen in both the cultures. Since women are expected to adhere to service roles in such companies, a clever way to adjust to the gender localization and still bring in elements of gender equality would be to place women I leading positions with mostly men under them. With this approach, members of both cultures will get used to having women in key positions in the workplace owing to the merit shown by the person in charge (Iles et al, 1997, 100). This raises the bar for women employees who wish to excel and raises their respect in the eyes of male counterparts, bringing in equality, security and zero abuse. Since humane orientation is possible whenever team emphasis requires the members of the team to engage in socially responsible activities on behalf of the company, it becomes easy to ensure that the employees stay motivated in any branch of the company, whether it is located in Switzerland or Kazakhstan. Performance orientation is another important aspect of team building in cross-cultural scenarios. If foreign nationals are encouraged to grow on the basis of their performance and competition with local employees, individuals tend to perform very competitively and excel. However, if the same reward system is targeted towards group performance, the company benefits and enjoys long term impacts of using the approach. Technological adaptation (Straub, Kiel & Brenner, 1997, 9) is common in both countries and therefore, there will be no trouble in creating a homogenous team structure using similar technologies in both the countries. Conclusion: The present study analyses the different cultural domains of interest in managerial challenges at cross cultural team building. The two countries chosen in the study are Kazakhstan (East) and Switzerland (West). For companies operating in both the countries, using a work culture that has cleverly optimized power distance, performance orientation, gender egalitarianism, and collectivism, will be the best way t draw motivated performances from team members belonging to both cultures. References: 1. Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K. E. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. Journal of applied psychology, 85(4), 612. 2. Pulakos, E. D., Schmitt, N., Dorsey, D. W., Arad, S., Borman, W. C., & Hedge, J. W. (2002). Predicting adaptive performance: Further tests of a model of adaptability. Human performance, 15(4), 299-323. 3. Yi, Y., & Gong, T. (2013). Customer value co-creation behavior: Scale development and validation. Journal of Business Research, 66(9), 1279-1284. 4. Ardichvili, A., & Kuchinke, K. P. (2002). Leadership styles and cultural values among managers and subordinates: a comparative study of four countries of the former Soviet Union, Germany, and the US. Human Resource Development International, 5(1), 99-117. 5. Ardichvili, A., & Gasparishvili, A. (2001). Socio-cultural values, internal work culture and leadership styles in four post-communist countries Russia, Georgia, Kazakhstan and the Kyrgyz Republic. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 1(2), 227-242. 6. Dickson, M. W., Den Hartog, D. N., & Mitchelson, J. K. (2003). Research on leadership in a cross-cultural context: Making progress, and raising new questions. The leadership quarterly, 14(6), 729-768. 7. Ergeneli, A., Gohar, R., & Temirbekova, Z. (2007). Transformational leadership: Its relationship to culture value dimensions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(6), 703-724. 8. Cseh, M., Ardichvili, A., Gasparishvili, A., Krisztián, B., & Nemeskeri, Z. (2004). Organizational Culture and Socio‐cultural Values: Perceptions of Managers and Employees in Five Economies in Transition. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(2), 5-27. 9. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage publications. 10. Perlman, B. J., & Gleason, G. (2007). Cultural determinism versus administrative logic: Asian values and administrative reform in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Intl Journal of Public Administration, 30(12-14), 1327-1342. 11. Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, K. Y., Templer, K. J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N. A. (2007). Cultural intelligence: Its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation and task performance. Management and Organization Review, 3(3), 335-371. 12. Drucker, P. F. (1995). People and performance: The best of Peter Drucker on management. Routledge. 13. Wieland, J. (2005). Corporate governance, values management, and standards: a European perspective. Business & Society, 44(1), 74-93. 14. Jaeger, A. M. (1986). Organization development and national culture: Wheres the fit?. Academy of Management Review, 11(1), 178-190. 15. Straub, D., Keil, M., & Brenner, W. (1997). Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A three country study. Information & management, 33(1), 1-11. 16. Hofstede, G. (1998). Think locally, act globally: Cultural constraints in personnel management. In Management and International Review (pp. 7-26). Gabler Verlag. 17. Leung, K., Bhagat, R. S., Buchan, N. R., Erez, M., & Gibson, C. B. (2005). Culture and international business: Recent advances and their implications for future research. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(4), 357-378. 18. Deresky, H. (2000). International management: Managing across borders and cultures. Pearson Education India. 19. Iles, P., & Kaur Hayers, P. (1997). Managing diversity in transnational project teams: A tentative model and case study. Journal of managerial Psychology, 12(2), 95-117. 20. Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. (2010). Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of international business studies, 41(4), 690-709. 21. Browaeys, M. & Price, R. (2011) Understanding Cross-Cultural Management. Prentice Hall. Retrieved on 9th April, 2015 from: http://www.academia.edu/8169389/Understanding_Cross-Cultural_Management 22. Swissinfo (2011). Swiss Work Culture. Swissinfo.ch. Retreived on 9th April, 2015 from: http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-work-culture/29278494 Read More