Models of Cross-Cultural Comparative Analysis - Term Paper Example

Cross-Cultural Comparative Analysis: UK and Saudi Arabia Introduction On the background of modern process of globalization, borders between different cultures disappear. There is a modern tendency of multinational companies and transnational corporations’ creation. With regard to it, it is relevant to conduct researches, directed on the study of models of cross-cultural comparative analysis; to study similarities and differences of cultural, religious and moral nature. It is generally proven that cross-cultural models of comparative analysis are widely applicable in managerial sciences. Further on, we’ll refer to models developed by Trompennars and Hofstede. The former scientist considers culture from a pragmatic perspective. He claims that culture integrates such aspects of human activities as human ability to solve problems with regard to time constraints and external environment (Trompenaars, 1993). Another model of cross-cultural comparative analysis is worked out by Hofstede. This researcher is focused on an individual approach to managers’ decision making practices. He underlines that managerial behavior is developed under influence of different norms. These two models will be discussed in detail and applied to managerial practices of UK and Saudi Arabia. Countries of Western and Eastern civilizations were not chosen at random. Western and Eastern managerial practices are quite different though there are some similarities between them. In order to prove this suggestion, this research paper will present correlation of every aspect of managerial practice of the chosen country with models of cross-cultural comparative analysis developed by Trompenaars and Hofstede. . Managerial practices in Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia is a perfect example of dynamic development and advancing of managerial practices with regard to external and internal demands of the modern world. In accordance with management scientists and researchers, management in Saudi Arabia is “culturally-oriented” (Abbas, 1995). In order to achieve success in the process of integration of western and eastern managerial practices, it is necessary to take into account the fact that each country should accept and adapt innovation introduced by another country. Thus changes are inevitable and should be made by every state that wants to act successfully in the global environment. The country of our choice, Saudi Arabia, has a lot of cultural peculiarities and a lot of cultural issues have not been covered in different studies yet. Thus business partners have to study cultural background of this country in order to avoid fatal mistakes. Religious beliefs and morality are influential factors in business of Saudi Arabians. The following tendencies of modern managerial practices in Saudi Arabia are: a strong striving for economic independence; ideas about political pluralism etc. These factors should be taken into account by potential business partners of Saudi Arabia. Next to newly introduced tendencies, managerial practices of Saudi Arabia are exposed to medieval influence. Thus, patience and loyalty and great courage are visible for foreign partners. Therefore, management is of more conservative nature in Saudi Arabia. Respect and patience are two primary concerns for Saudi Arabians. The same is expected from potential business partners (Abbas, 1995). Another important principle is the principle of seniority. In their daily lives and in business, Saudis respect elder people. Thus line managers are obedient to senior managers. For successful business conduct with Saudis, business partners should be aware of their strict delegation of authorities (Negandhi, 1983). Line managers and employees work in compliance with the decision taken by senior managers. At this point, potential foreign business partners can bring in some novelties and develop team spirit among Saudis thus contributing to a successful cooperation. Another peculiarity of business conduct in this country is low risk strategy (Khadra, 1990). This tendency has also a strong historical background. Thus foreign business partners should memorize that every stage of decision making should be properly considered and no facile decision would occur. Managers of Saudi Arabia are focused on punctuality. That’s why deadlines and time of meetings is never missed by them. An individual approach to every business partner is reflected in Saudis tradition to meet in person with their business partners. Consequently, managerial practices of Saudi Arabia have a lot of peculiarities. Managerial practices in UK UK managerial practices reflect generally accepted principles of management of the Western civilization. Conservative spirit of managerial practices is a strong preventive factor for potential development of managers. An individual performance of line managers has a lot of obstacles. Supposedly, British companies do not perfectly realize that there is a strong need of investment in managerial practices and extending horizons of their managers (Studlar, 1996; Cassis, 1995). Foreign business partners should be ware of the decision making process in UK (Gomesa, Liddleb, Gomes, 2010, p. 54). It is a wide-spread tendency that decision making would occur on different levels of UK management hierarchy (UK management). There is also an evident tendency of readiness to changes in UK companies (Cassis, 1995). Managers apply flexible strategies in their practices and have a wide acceptance of risk and change. Though there is no strong tendency of innovations and changes adaptation in Britain, if the latter are necessary for future success, then managerial practices may be transformed in accordance with them (Studlar, 1996). Conservative nature of managerial practices in UK is partially caused by a strong consideration about punctuality (Koontz, 1998). Foreign business partners should be aware of the fact that if a deadline is violated, then UK Company would have a negative attitude to their potential business partner. Comparison and contrasting of managerial practices in UK and Saudi Arabia: Hofstede’s model Hofstede developed the following criteria for making cross-cultural comparative analysis. Power Distance Index (PDI) considers power distribution in an organization; Individualism (IDV) which is focused on individualist or collectivist human interrelation in groups; the Masculinity index (MAS) describes how gender roles are distributed; Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) is focused on country’s/organization’s attitude to uncertainty and ambiguity; Long-Term Orientation (LTO) dimension indicates goal-orientation of the chosen country (Hofstede, 2001). In accordance with this model, PDI shows that principle of superiority and direct delegation of authorities is essential in Saudi Arabia, while UK managers have a right to take part in decision making and not simply be subordinate (Hofstede, 1991; 2001). IDV indicates tendency to individualism in Saudi Arabia and collectivism in UK. MAS in Saudi Arabia underline prevalence of male active social roles over feminine. UK is more focused on equal distribution of gender roles (Negandhi, 1983, p. 18). UAI witnesses that Saudi Arabia has low level of risk taking, unlike UK, which is ready to changes and risk. LTO shows that Saudi Arabia has short-term goals and UK has long-term goals. This tendency can be explained in the following way: Saudi Arabia is a low risk-taking country, that’s why goals set by this country are short term goals (Saudi Arabia). The fact that UK has long-term goals can be explained by the fact that this country doesn’t mind risk taking therefore managers are more focused on long-term goals (Gomesa et al, 2010). Comparison and contrasting of managerial practices in UK and Saudi Arabia: Trompenaar’s model Trompenaar’s model is based on pragmatic view on culture. He defines the following assessment criteria: he compares and contrasts triggers involved in decision making (universalist or particular triggers; neutral or emotional triggers and others) (Trompenaars, 1993). Moreover, Trompenaars develops criteria assessing relationship establishment in an organization. Inner-directed or outer directed triggers, specific or diffuse triggers. Moreover, Trompenaars is focused on development of decision making strategies, such as analyzing or integrating strategies (Gomesa et al, 2010). Trompenaars discusses status of an organization either achieved or ascribed and authority delegation, either equality or hierarchy. As it was already mentioned, Saudi Arabia, has a lot of cultural peculiarities and many of them have not been covered in different studies yet. Attitudes to time and environment as two determinant factors are also developed by Trompenaars (1993). With regard to these criteria, Saudi Arabia has particular triggers of business conduct and involves neutral approach in decision making and is more inner-directed than UK. UK has a neutral approach to decision making as well, but is more outer-directed and tries to follow modern tendencies of the international market and society. Diffuse relationship is ascribed to Saudi Arabia, unlike specific relationship which is relevant to UK (UK Management). Problem solving is analyzing in Saudi Arabia and integrating in UK. Achieved status is a concept more relevant to UK culture, when there is a chance of individual’s contribution to managerial practices and ascribed status is more relevant to Saudi Arabia, where a principle of seniority is very important. Authority delegation is based on strong hierarchy in Saudi Arabia and is based on principles of equality in UK (Briscoe, 2004; Rodrigues, 1998). Attitudes to time are both relevant in the UK and Saudi Arabia. Conclusion On the background of modern process of globalization, the borders between different states become easy to cross. As a result many multinational companies and transnational corporations’ appear all over the world. Today many organizations face serious difficulties working in new global conditions as they have to alter their working principles in order to meet global requirements and be able to work successfully in multicultural conditions (Koontz, 1980). Managerial practices in UK and Saudi Arabia have a lot of similarities and differences Though these countries are from Western and Eastern worlds and cultural diversities have an evident impact in managerial practices of these two countries, there is a different strategy of management development, which is influenced by internal and external factors (Briscoe, 2004). In the given paper the two models was discussed in detail and applied to managerial practices of UK and Saudi Arabia. In accordance with models of cross-cultural comparative analysis developed by Hofstede and Trompenaars, it was interesting to discuss cross-cultural differences between these two countries and their influence exerted on managerial practices of these countries. Hofstede’s model gives more brief cross-cultural analysis of chosen countries, while Trompenaar’s model is focused on comparing/contrasting of cultural similarities/differences. Common points derived from these two models are the following: UK is more flexible, individually-oriented, but managerial practices of UK have conservative nature (Gomesa et al, 2010). At the same time, UK is open to changes and innovations. Managerial practices of Saudi Arabia have conservative nature and are not so much open to changes and innovations. This represents difficulty for foreign partners and for the country itself (Briscoe, 2004). The main concern of Saudi Arabia is a principle of seniority. Strong principles of authorities delegation is another peculiarity of Saudi Arabia in comparison with the UK. Both of these two countries keep the term. The levels of risk taking are low in Saudi Arabia and are higher in UK. All these cross-cultural peculiarities should be properly studied by foreign business partners in order to reach success in the process of cooperation with British and Saudis managers. Models developed by Hofstede and Trompenaars are helpful tools in conducting a cross-cultural analysis of managerial practices in Saudi Arabia and UK. Works cited 1. Abbas J. Ali., 1995. Cultural Discontinuity and Arab Management Thought. International Studies of Management & Organization, 25 (3), p. Publication Year: 1995. Page Number: 7+. 2. Briscoe, D., 2004. International Human Resource Management: Policy and Practice for the Global Enterprise. New York: Routledge. 3. Cassis, Y., 1995. Management and Business in Britain and France: The Age of the Corporate Economy. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 4. Hofstede, G., 1991. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind: Intercultural Cooperation and its Importance for Survival. New York: McGraw Hill. 5. Hofstede, G., 2001. Culture’s Consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. 6. Hofstede, G., 2009. What are the practical applications for Geert Hofstedes research on cultural differences? [Online] Available at: http://www.geert-hofstede.com/[Accessed 29 November 2010]. 7. Gomesa, R., Liddleb, J., Gomes, L. de Oliveira., 2010. Cross-Cultural Analysis of Stakeholder Identification in Municipal Districts. A comparison of Brazil and England. Public Management Review 12 (1), pp. 53-75. 8. Koontz, H. et al., 1980. Management. New York: McGraw-Hill. 9. Negandhi, A., 1983. Cross-Cultural Management Research: Trends and Future Directions. Journal of International Business Studies, 14, pp.17-28. 10. Rodrigues, C., 1998. International management: A cultural approach. Minneapolis: West Publishing. 11. Saudi Arabia management. [Online] Available at: http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/intercultural/management/saudiarabia.html [Accessed 5 April 2010]. 12. Schein, Edgar, 1992. The Learning Leader as Culture Manager. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 13. Studlar, D., 1996. Great Britain: Decline or Renewal? Westview Press, 1996. 14. Trompenaars, F. 1993. Riding the waves of culture. London. 15. UK Management Development Lags behind Europe. 2004. Management Service 48 (7), p. 9+. Read More