Global Talent Management - Unilever - Case Study Example

Global Talent Management The multinational companies operate in a diverse culture that may conflictwith the company’s corporate culture that causes the management various cross-cultural challenges and problems. The document is based on a case study of Unilever Company, and it examines the cross-cultural challenges and issues the company encounters in its global operations. It evaluates various approaches the company uses to take advantage of the cultural diversity and mitigate the challenges. The quantitative study has examined the Western and Asia cultures and how they impact Unilever’s corporate culture. The conclusion has been drawn that by establishing in Eastern region Unilever applies different strategy to win market but it also face various challenges to cope with cultural diversity. The recommendation to the company is that they should take the time to understand different cultural values of the countries they operate and should promote entrepreneurial culture to achieve better performance. Introduction Globalization and technological advancement have enabled multinational companies (MNCs) to expand their operations to various parts of the globe. The transnational corporations have technical expertise, financial resources high credit rating by shareholders, trust and stable corporate culture that have facilitated their establishment and growth in multiple nations (Pauleen, 2007). Nevertheless, these corporations encounter myriad challenges in their cross-border activities because of the cross-cultural differences. In most cases the organizational leaders have assumed that in a globalized economy various nations have adopted common culture hence the stakeholders possess same values, attitudes and perceptions towards the company or the products and service (Pauleen, 2007, p.63). However, this is not the case hence organizational leaders require managerial strategies to overcome the challenges and exploit the available opportunities (Piepenburg, 2011). The purpose of this study is to examine how the cross-cultural issues and problems Unilever is facing as a global corporation and with direct operations in various countries. The study will also consider the benefits the company enjoys in different countries because of its corporate culture and how it impacts its performance. The study will provide recommendations and suggest an action plan to improve the business’s performance. The research involves quantitative approach based on the Unilever case study. Unilever is a hypothetical case the company its origin in the Western country, but operations is spread across all the continents. The analysis of the case is done using Hofstede cultural dimension that is considered effective for reflecting the challenges caused by cultural variations (Piepenburg, 2011). Although Unilever’s strong corporate culture has led to its efficient operations across world cultures, the company has faced various challenges and problems because of incompatibility of its corporate culture with international culture. Unilever: Case study Unilever is a transnational company with it headquarter in UK and operating in different continents. Western countries have a different culture from the rest of the world. The company’s mission is “to add Vitality to life. We meet everyday needs for nutrition, hygiene and personal care with brands that help people feel good, look good and get more out of life” (Unilever, 2014). The company is made unique by its vitality, and that is how it contributes to the society. Also, this acts as the fabric that links the organization with its exceptional way in which it carries out its operations across the globe (Appendix 2). Unilever’s mission is embedded in its mission that entails adding vitality to human lives through upholding highest standards of conduct towards the community, employees, environment and everyone they work or relate with (Unilever, 2015). The Unilever operates on the principles of honesty, transparency and integrity concerning its stakeholders. Unilever has its operations in over 100 countries across the globe hence it qualifies to be one of the culturally diversified organizations Unilever, 2015). It has subterranean roots in the native cultures that offer it solid relationship with the local community of consumers, suppliers and employees that in turn help them in transforming the society in line with its mission. Their main goal of focusing on establishing their roots in the native community is to achieve corporate status with native stakeholders (Appendix 2). Because of its enormous size and diversity Unilever gives significance to harmonization. All workers of Unilever are expected to pursue the interest of the company and forgo personal interests. Also, employees should refrain from abuse of power to achieve personal gain. Unilever’s Corporate Culture Organizational culture is determined by the interactions between various people within the organization (Unilever, 2014). It affects the organizational performance and its effectiveness in achieving its objectives. In other words, the way an organization treats its customers, shareholders, suppliers, workers, seniors, etc. is determined by its shared value and beliefs (Appendix 1). The organizational culture also affects the organizational decision-making process, communication process, behaviour and how it interprets and manages its environment (Daft et al., 2010). An organization is composed of different subcultures, but it is the dominant culture that influences the organization outlook hence is recognized as organizational culture. At the time of establishment, the top managers were from Europe and they influenced the decision-making process (Daft et al., 2010). However, with operations across the global the company has to make decisions under different culture thus resulting in various challenges and benefits. Since its establishment, Unilever has focused on promoting a culture of corporate social responsibility (Unilever, 2014). Their intention is to promote growth for its stakeholders including workers, customers, suppliers, the local community and local farmers around the world (Appendix 1). In order to achieve its goal of promoting vitality through sustainable development Unilever established “Unilever Sustainable Living Plan” that aims at improving quality of lives for billions of people around the world without contributing to adverse effects on the environment (Unilever, 2014). They have strategies for protecting the environment through energy saving and by ensuring about 90% of the papers used in their offices are obtained from recycled materials and sustainably certified forests. The organization is committed to promote healthy and safe conditions of workers at their workplace (Daft et al., 2010). Furthermore, the company supports employees skills and capabilities, maintains good work relationships through consultative and information exchange process to ensure effective communication. Unilever always tries to balance the gender equality in its workforce and management hence this does not contribute to cross-cultural challenges (Unilever, 2015). Half of its graduate recruits are ladies, and the company strives to ensure more women get to the managerial positions. Unilever has many formal regulations and procedures that ensure orderliness and smooth operation in the enterprise. Also, they attempt to promote flexibility through decentralization of some structures of decision-making. The company has a culture of promoting the quality of its workforce through training. They offer more than 7,600 training modules online across the globe. For example, more than 128,000 workers enrolled for various courses in Unilever Learning Academy2011 (Unilever, 2015). Unilever does not entertain the culture of risk-taking by individual employees (Unilever, 2015). It is a risk-avoidance and conservative organization since it does not appreciate the spirit of entrepreneurship. However, the company implements significant risks that require particular attention to the managerial group and support of the entire workforce as a measure to mitigate the risk. Unilever embraces a culture of innovations through the teamwork of like-minded people who share their ambitions, perceptions, objectives, passions and outlook through its Customer Relationship Management policy (Unilever, 2015). All workers have the responsibility to contribute to the success of the groups help turn visions into reality. Analysis Using Hofstede’s Model and Unilever’s Corporate Culture According to Piepenburg (2011), Hofstede’s culture model recognizes national cultures define the differences in that exist in families, workplaces and schools. He argues that managers and employees can be identified on four different dimensions including uncertainty avoidance, power distance, masculinity or femininity and individualism or collectivism. This study will utilize Hofstede’s dimension of culture to evaluate the challenges and problems facing Unilever Company in its global operations. Uncertainty Avoidance Hofstede observed that uncertainty avoidance referred to the extent to which individuals feels vulnerable when faced with uncertain circumstances (Piepenburg, 2011). It affects workers tolerance, loyalty, commitment and the duration of engagement with the employer. In bureaucratic nations such as Vietnam, workers feel threatened by uncertainty when making a decision because they have a high degree of risk avoidance (Piepenburg, 2011). The company experiences delays in decision-making and workers discard irrational thinking and behaviour. The organization may experience slow progress in performance because of reluctance to implement change. However, they pass decisions they are certain will yield positive outcome hence the come face low risk of irrational decisions. Unfortunately, Unilever employees in those countries lack creativity and personal responsibility in solving problems. Power distance This refers to the ability of some people in the organization to control or direct activities of others within the organization. The power distance between managers or supervisors and the subordinate employees determine the control that manager exercises over the workers (Piepenburg, 2011). Centralized organizations tend to have high-power distance while decentralized organizations have low-power distance. The operations of Unilever in some countries with a centralized form of government may appear smooth because the culture reflects that of the company (Unilever, 2015). In such a case, the workers can readily accept the decisions made by senior managers as is the case of Vietnam. It also creates a hierarchical form of relationship between top managers and subordinate workers. The company is likely to face issues of bureaucracy and corruption. However, in Western countries such as in Denmark decision making is not problematic because it is easy to bypass a superior when making decision (Pauleen, 2007). Therefore, the expatriate managers from Western countries encounter cross-cultural challenges in other countries such as Vietnam when it comes to decision-making because the approaches are antagonistic, and one method cannot apply in both countries. The managers in Vietnam are authoritarian and hardly involve employees in decision-making (Pauleen, 2007). Furthermore, some countries such as China and Vietnam their culture holds older people with high esteem because age is a symbol of wisdom whereas young people are not taken seriously. Therefore, in those countries workers must respect their elders regardless of their positions while they may not show any respect for the young but senior managers. Masculinity/femininity Hofstede observed that in a masculine community men are supposed to play tougher assertive and focus on success (Piepenburg, 2011). On the other hand, women are expected to be tender, modest and have concern for quality life. However, in a femininity society both men and women should be tender, modest and inclined to a better quality of life (Piepenburg, 2011). Managers are supposed to be tough and assertive in a masculine community while in a femininity society managers and employees are expected to behave the same. Countries such as the U.S. and the UK are masculine hence they expect issues to be solved by denying other chance or through battle to get the winner or the best man (Govindarajan, Natarajan & Senthilkumar, 2013). However, in Denmark, Sweden, and Netherland the culture is femininity hence conflict solution is obtained through negotiation or compromise. In some communists, culture men are given more respect than women. However, both women and foreigners in such countries are given respect for the position their beliefs and intellectual skills they possess (Pauleen, 2007). The Asian countries value harmonious coexistence and prefer the situation of win-win when solving disputes. Therefore, if a manager issues an adverse comment it can be perceived as disrespectful to others. However, a manager from Western culture may perceive the indirect approach of solving problems as ineffective because they are used to direct confrontations and disagreement in settling disputes (Pauleen, 2007). Therefore, companies with cross-border operations such as Unilever must understand different cultural values to ensure efficient business transactions. Also, they must learn different approaches to managing employees stress at work because different cultures use different methods to manage their stress. For example, in Asian countries people must learn to suppress their emotional feelings because expressing emotions depicts weakness (Govindarajan et al., 2013). However, in other cultures people express their discomfort and feelings openly, and this can ease the process of stress management. Individual/collectivism This dimension focuses on relationships between individuals in the community or workplace. In an individualist society individuals are expected to take care of their problems while in a collectivist society people are tightly-knit such that the problem of a person is perceived and solved as a group issue (Piepenburg, 2011). Organizations that embraces collectivism value success or failure as a communal issue while individualistic groups attribute success or failure to a particular person. For example, the Western culture is individualistic unlike in most of the Asian countries like China and Japan that values collectivism culture (Govindarajan et al., 2013). Therefore, in western countries Unilever workers are concerned with individual advancement and pursue individual goals. However, in countries with collectivism culture employees prefer teamwork and are interested in group performance rather than individual performance (Pauleen, 2007). They achieve individual fulfilment by working in groups as opposed to working individually. This is a challenge to Unilever Company with operations in the cross-cultural background. For example, if a manager from Western countries recognizes an individual for exemplary performance in collectivism countries it can cause embarrassment and affect that person and the business adversely (Pauleen, 2007). The managers must learn to appreciate groups for their performance and not individuals. Also, reprimanding an individual in such countries may encounter resentment and loss of workforce. Operating a business in Asian continent involves forming close ties with the employees and their families. Therefore, the Unilever managers possessing Western culture encounter challenges of recognizing employees collectively and taking concern for the welfare of their families which is the opposite of the Western culture. Conclusion The analysis of cross-cultural challenges and problems of Unilever Company using Hofstede model of cultural dimensions has established that the company encounters several issues because of cultural differences in various countries. Western culture embraces individualism while Asian culture advocates group approach of dealing with conflicts. Those managing Unilever firms in Asia must learn to associate with others and attribute success or failure to groups as opposed to Western culture that recognizes individual’s performance. In some countries, workers are used to the hierarchy of powers hence the company has to adopt power distance culture whereby senior managers possess absolute decision-making power while the employees must follow those decisions. In other countries particularly in asia, all workers must be involved in decision-making. Furthermore, various countries have different perceptions of men and women workers hence those that embrace masculinity prefer solving issues by engaging in discussion while those advocate for femininity prefer compromise. Finally, in some cultures such as in Asia workers avoid individual responsibilities hence they are risk averse while the Western Culture encourage the entrepreneurial behaviour of risk taking. Therefore, Unilever must encounter different strategies to enable them survive in different cultures. Recommendations The company should promote individual entrepreneurship the organization to take full advantage of the diversity of the workforce and improve innovation and performance. The company should also engage in comprehensive consultation with people from different countries to understand their culture and avoid conflict. This will enable them train their expatriates on how to relate the company’s corporate culture with that of the local community for effective performance. List of References Daft, R. L., Murphy, J. & Willmott, H., 2010, Organization Theory and Design Cengage Learning EMEA. Pp. 1-699. Govindarajan, M., Natarajan, S.  & Senthilkumar, V. S., 2013, Professional Ethics and Human Values, PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Pp. 1-144. Govindarajan, M., 2007, Marketing Management, (2nd Ed.). PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Pp.1- 332. Pauleen D. J. 2007, Cross-cultural Perspectives on Knowledge Management, Libraries Unlimited. Pp. 1-259. Piepenburg, K. 2011, Critical Analysis of Hofstede’s model of cultural dimensions: To what extent are his findings reliable, valid and applicable to organizations in the 21st century? GRIN Verlag. Pp.1-148. Unilever, 2014, Case Study Unilever: Towards a New Organization. Available at http://changellenge.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/CL-Unilever-Organizational-changes-in-INMARKO-ENG.pdf Unilever, 2015, Sustainable Living. Available at http://www.unilever.com/about/ Appendices Appendix 1 Improving Health  and Well-being By 2020, we will help more than a billion people take action to improve their health and well-being.READ MORE ABOUT OUR BIG GOAL Reducing Environmental  Impact By 2020, our goal is to halve the environmental footprint of the making and use of our products as we grow our business.*READ MORE ABOUT OUR BIG GOAL Enhancing  Livelihoods By 2020, we will enhance the livelihoods of millions of people as we grow our business. Source; (Unilever, 2015). Appendix 2. Source; (Unilever, 2015). Read More