Upload
basharat-anayat
View
65
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE VERSUS OTHER CULTURAL
Introduction
This essay has three main aims: to understand the idea of cultural intelligence, to
examine the cultural management theories and to analyze cultural approaches in
tourism industry and how relevant his cultural dimensions are to hospitality and
tourism managers in 2011. The term “culture intelligence”, there are several
definitions of culture intelligence. According to Kreitner, R and
Kinicki,A(2010),“Cultural intelligence(CQ) is the ability to accurately interpret
ambiguous cross-cultural situations, and is an important skill in today’s diverse
workplace”. Liver.D.(2010) claims that, “Cultural intelligence(CQ) is a meta-
framework rooted in rigorous, academic research ”.In other words, culture
intelligence is the ability which allows people to cope effectively and creatively with
diverse cultural aspects of environment. Moreover, culture intelligence enable us to
understand cultural difference through knowledge and mindfulness and give us the
skills to interact appropriately across cultures.
Cultural Intelligence is the ability to link and benefit from the cultural complexity of
1
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
people with different countries, work areas, family backgrounds, personalities and
organizational cultures. As a global manager recent days must have ability to cope
with people who are from different backgrounds. In other words, being flexible and
skilled enough to adapt the culture situation and learn how to deal with others from
the various cultures. Furthermore, there are three elements of culture intelligence;
each element is related with the others. First, the global manager must have
Knowledge of culture, it means knowing what culture is, what culture difference, and
how to affect behavior, it’s the first stage of develop culture intelligence. By
understanding our culture we can make some similarities and comparisons with other
cultures. Second, the global manager must practice mindfulness, in cross culture
interactions, mindfulness means simultaneously. it’s the mediating step that helps us
to understand knowledge to skills. It means being aware of cross culture situations
and using empathy. Third, the global manager must develop behavioral skills. It
means behavior chosen from an appropriate ways to encounter for national,
international and multinational business. The following paragraph will look at the
other culture approaches.
2
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
Analysis cross cultural complexities for national, international and
multinational business
Cross –cultural can be defined “as the global management, which studies the behavior
of people in organizations around the world and trains people to work in organizations
with employee and client populations from several cultures.(Burke,1983)”.
Analysis of problems and weakness of multinational business has shown that the first
important factor is culture. It takes more for a company to be successful overseas than
a quality product and high marketing standards. As we know, there is a human factor
that must be considered. Indeed, everyone is a culture product of his or her cultural
background. Culture influences our actions and effects the way that we look at things.
According to Ted,T (2007), founder of Prime Opus Partners and former president and
chief operating officer of Wyndham International, looking at things differently is the
first and most important step to take. Teng states, “If you can approach cross cultural
businesses that way it will help you to be much more open than if you just judge
things based on what you know from the past. By looking at things being different, it
will allow you to listen a lot better.”Moreover, Sherman et al. (1995)clams that
“culture is an integrated phenomenon and by recognizing and accommodating taboos,
3
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
rituals, attitudes toward time, social stratification, kinship systems and many other
components, modern managers will pave the way toward greater harmony and
achievement in the country in which an multinational business operates.”The growth
in cross-cultural encounters increases the opportunities for intercultural
understanding. Managers and researchers have increasingly the importance of culture
in organization environment. Therefore, we discuss about what are the cross culture
complexities encounters national, international and multinational businesses?
Hofstede (1980) points the measure of cultural values is one of the most widely used
among international management.
This study examined the validity and reliability of Hofstede’s cultural measure from
an ethnically diverse sample in a business context. Hofstede found that the national
culture could explain more of the difference. Hofstede (1980) found that, “managers
and employees vary on four primary dimensions: individualism/collectivism, power
distance, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity ” represent the measure of cross
cultural complexity in a business management context.
Description for each of Hofstede's Dimensions listed below
Power a Distance Index (PDI) extent to which power is distributes unequally
between people in the country's society. A High Power Distance ranking
4
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
indicates that inequalities of power and wealth have been allowed to grow within
the society. For instance, in High Power Distance countries, such as Japan,
employees are too afraid to express their doubts and disagreements with their
autocratic and paternalistic bosses. A Low Power Distance ranking indicates the
society de-emphasizes the differences between citizen's power and wealth. In
these societies equality and opportunity for everyone is full of pressure. For
instance, USA are a very centralized organization, subordinates expect to be told
what to do from their superiors because they consider each other as unequal.
Individualism/collectivism focuses on the degree individualism look after them
as individuals;collectivism is like a strong group or extended families. A High
Individualism ranking indicates that individuality and individual rights are
paramount within the society. Individuals in these societies may tend to for a
larger number of looser relationships. For instance, self-determination
characterizes such individualistic cultures as in USA, in business they try to gain
5
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
more interests for business not for building a good relationship. A Low
Individualism ranking societies of a more collectivist nature with close
relationship between individuals. These cultures reinforce extended families and
strong groups where everyone takes responsibility for fellow members of their
group. For instance, in Asia countries, such as China, harmony and respect
within a company is very important and should always be maintained and
confrontation should be avoided.
Masculinity/femininity focuses on the extent to which the materialism people are
more interested in things than concerning for relationships of people, others and
the quality of life. A High Masculinity ranking indicates the country experiences
a high degree of gender role differentiation. In these cultures, males dominate a
significant portion of the society and power structure, with females being
controlled by male domination. For instance, Japanese people expect woman stay
at home to take care of family without working outside. In workplaces
6
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
employees emphasize their work to a great extent. A Low Masculinity ranking
indicates the country has a low level of differentiation and discrimination
between genders. In these cultures, females are treated equally to males in all
aspects of the society. Feminine cultures consider quality of life and helping
others to be very important. Working is basically to earn money which is
necessary for living. In business as well as in private life they strive for
consensus and develop sympathy for people who are in trouble.
Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) focuses on the level of tolerance for
uncertainty and ambiguity within the society, such as: ambiguous situation.
A High Uncertainty Avoidance ranking indicates the country has a low tolerance
for uncertainty and ambiguity. This creates a society that establishes laws, rules,
regulations, and controls in order to reduce the amount of uncertainty. For
instance, Japan, Greece, it’s common for working as a life time employment .
A Low Uncertainty Avoidance ranking indicates the country has less concern
7
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
about ambiguity and uncertainty and has more tolerance for a variety of
opinions. For instance, USA, Hong Kong, they concern about the power distance
of business and uncertainty avoidance.
Thus, Hofstede’s(1980,1990) analysis covers multinational firms but he was not
interested in the relationship between culture and performance. Thus an analysis of
national firms in this important area will be interesting. It is also interesting how and
whether multinational firms can transmit their organizational culture to a different
nation with what consequences on their performances.
Critical analysis of Hofstede's cultural dimensions
National cultures can be described according to the analysis of Geert Hofstede. These
ideas were first based on a large research project into national culture differences
across subsidiaries of a multinational corporation (IBM) in 64 countries. Subsequent
studies by others covered students in 23 countries, elites in 19 countries, commercial
8
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
airline pilots in 23 countries, up-market consumers in 15 countries, and civil service
managers in 14 countries. Together these studies identified and validated four
independent dimensions of national culture differences, with a fifth dimension added
later. If you follow the links below you will find a map of the world for each cultural
dimension, which enables you to quickly see how similar or different countries or
regions are.
Initially, he uncovered four dimensions:
Power Distance Index (PDI),
Individualism (IDV),
Masculinity (MAS), and
Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI).
Recently, he added a fifth dimension, Long-Term Orientation (LTO).Moreover, a fifth
dimension explanation is followed by a chart created with raw data from Geert
Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions.
LTO refers to the degree to which the society upholds traditional values. High or
low dimensions predispose countries to resist or accept change. High LTO - In a
high LTO workplace, the society is entrenched in traditions of yore, which often
9
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
means that long term commitments and hard work as a plan for future rewards
outweigh the need for rapid change. Low LTO - In a low LTO workplace,
meaning the society has a Short-Term Orientation, represents "respect for
tradition, fulfilling social obligations a society change can occur faster since long
term traditions do not impede them.
The drawbacks of applying the Hofstede Model
The Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimensions can be of great use when it comes to
analyzing a country’s culture. However, it does have certain disadvantages.
Firstly, there are people of various cultures living in different countries. the averages
of a country do not make up to individuals of that particular country. Even though this
model of cultural dimensions has proven mostly corrected when applied to the general
10
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
population as a whole, one must be knew that not all individuals or even regions who
can fit into the general population.
Secondly, how accurate is the data? The data which this model makes use of is
collected using questionnaires. Questionnaires have their own limitations and hence
the data cannot be considered accurate. Not only that, but in some cultures the context
of the question asked is as important as its content. Especially in group-oriented
cultures, individuals might tend to answer questions as if they were addressed to the
group he/she belongs to. While on the other hand in the United States, which is an
individualistic culture, the answers will most likely be answered and perceived
through the eyes of that individual.
Lastly, is that how can one be sure that the data being used is up to date? How much
does the culture of a country change over time, either by internal or external
influences? Cultures sometimes do change due to certain influences. Due to this, it
cannot be certain that the data is up to date or not.
The contributions of the Hofstede Model
Hofstede is one of the most significant contributors to the body of the knowledge on
culture and workplace difference. At IBM, Hofstede's job involved research and
11
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
analysis on how culture affects the work place. He had access to a large database of
employees from over 70 countries. He started examining the 40 largest countries and
uncovered four dimensions that separate cultures. Later, the scope expanded to 50
countries and three regions. In 2001, he combined data from other researchers to
expand the reach to a full 74 countries.
Applying Hofstede’s Culture Measures in Tourism Research
Hofstede’s (1980, 2001) five cultural dimensions have been applied to the study of
tourist behaviors. The measure of culture is the focus of this study. Hofstede’s (1980,
2001) five cross-cultural dimensions have been broadly applied in the literature as key
variables in tourism research (Crotts and Pizam 2003; Funk and Bruun2007; Litvin,
Crotts, and Hefner 2004; Kozak, Crotts, andLaw 2007; Reisinger and Mavondo 2006;
Reisinger andTurner 2003). These studies are aimed at understanding how culture is
patterns in tourists’ preferences and behaviors, and their results provide guidance to
marketers faced with the dilemma of whether it is appropriate to standardize or tailor
the tourism product and its promotional mix (You et al. 2000). According to Girlando,
Anderson, and Zerillo (2004),“Sound inquiry demands we strive to comprehend, test,
and analyze Hofstede’s paradigm. Either blind acceptance or premature dismissal of
12
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
his work would serve no lasting purpose”.
From a research of tourists from eight countries who completed Hofstede’s original
instruments, the results indicates little differences between Hofstede’s 2001 national
cultural measures with the present study’s data. More details illustrates below table.
This finding provides strong support for Hofstede’s dimensions as a measure of
central tendencies of visitors from different nations. Second, graphically contrasting
respondents’ values along the five cultural dimensions reveals that the between-nation
differences are relatively small when compared to the within-nation variability,
indicating that subcultures do exist. This analysis also identifies international regions
that cluster closely together, demonstrating that national cultural differences do not
end at national borders.
Table 2. Evaluations of Eight Countries on Hofstede’s (2001) Five Value Dimensions
Country Power
distance
Uncertainty
Avoidance
Individualism
Collectivism
Masculinity
Femininity
Long-Term
Orientation
Australia 3.35 (3.33) 3.37 (3.23) 3.66 (3.68) 3.83 (3.68) 2.06 (2.07)
Greece 3.36 (3.35) 3.43 (3.29) 3.67 (3.72) 4.00 (3.81) 2.15 (2.15)
United Kingdom 3.40 (3.41) 3.20 (3.09) 3.86 (3.91) 3.90 (3.76) 2.20 (2.19)
United States 3.36 (3.36) 3.59 (3.39) 3.71 (3.72) 3.72 (3.59) 2.12 (2.12)
China 3.61 (3.57) 3.58 (3.40) 3.67 (3.64) 3.64 (3.51) 2.85 (2.80)
Indonesia 3.75 (3.70) 3.31 (3.28) 3.75 (3.69) 3.76 (3.69) 3.15 (3.05)
Malaysia 3.60 (3.67) 3.52 (3.40) 3.69 (3.65) 3.81 (3.70) 2.79 (2.79)
13
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
Singapore 3.59 (3.59) 3.45 (3.37) 3.65 (3.65) 3.85 (3.86) 2.50 (2.44)
Analyze concepts of cultural impact in management practices
With the globalization and international linkages have been a part of history for
today’s society, cross-culture communication is indispensable to open up new
environment, and allow us to look for new geographic locations and cultures. And
given that it can now be as easy to communicate with people remotely as it is to talk
face-to-face, cross-cultural communication is increasingly the new form in which we
live today. As a result, cultural differences are everywhere. What can be difficult,
however, understands how to communicate effectively with individuals who speak
another language. The cultures between the East and the West are totally different by
a rather large scale. It means not only the thinking ways differently, but how people
behave in daily life is also not the same. We will discuss the causes for cultural
differences and then some of the typical examples to describe the cultural difference
between east and west, and finally, ways to adapt to different cultures.
Leadership
14
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an
objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and
coherent. This definition is similar to Northouse's (2007, p3) definition — Leadership
is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a
common goal.
Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership knowledge and skills. This
is called Process Leadership (Jago, 1982). However, we know that we have traits that
can influence our actions. This is called Trait Leadership (Jago, 1982), in that it was
once common to believe that leaders were born rather than made. These two
leadership types are shown in the chart below (Northouse, 2007, p5):
In a number of ways, Middle Eastern management styles differ from those in the
United States. Table below provides a comparison of six key characteristics that come
from research conducted by M. K. Badawy, which combines Middle Eastern, and
U.S. assumptions and approaches.
Management Dimension Middle Eastern Management Western Management
Leadership Highly authoritarian tone, rigid instructions.
Too many management directives.
Less emphasis on leader’s personality,
considerable weight on leader’s style
15
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
and performance.
Organizational structures Highly bureaucratic, over centralized, with
power and authority at the top. Vague
relationships. Ambiguous and unpredictable
organization environments.
Less bureaucratic, more delegation of
authority. Relatively decentralized
structure.
Decision making Ad hoc planning, decisions made at the
highest level of management.
Unwillingness to take high risk inherent in
decision making.
Sophisticated planning techniques,
modern tools of decision making,
elaborate management information
systems.
Performance evaluation and
control
Informal control mechanisms, routine
checks on performance. Lack of vigorous
performance evaluation systems.
Fairly advanced control systems
focusing on cost reduction and
organizational effectiveness.
Personnel policies Heavy reliance on personal contacts and
getting individuals from the “right social
origin” to fill major positions.
Sound personnel management
policies. Candidates’ qualifications
are usually the basis for selection
decisions.
Communication The tone depends on the communicants.
Social position, power, and family
Stress usually on equality and a
minimization of difference. People
16
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
influence are ever-present factors. Chain of
command must be followed rigidly. People
relate to each other tightly and specifically.
Friendships are intense and binding.
relate to each other loosely and
generally. Friendships not intense and
binding.
Motivation
Motivation is a psychological process through which unsatisfied wants or needs lead
to drives that are aimed at goals or incentives.(Lutans and Doh,2008) People differ in
wants or needs. The theories of motivation, in part, aim to explain the reason behind
these wants and needs. Most theories are based on the needs of the person and the
idea that satisfying this need is important before the person can focus on other needs
(Borgatti, 2001).There are a lot of theories, such as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs,
Theory X and Theory Y, Hertzberg’s Motivation and Hygiene Theory, and
Expectancy and Contingency Theories. In this part, we choose The Herzberg's
Motivators and Hygiene Factors to discuss, it will be indicated that the concept is
culturally specific, it offers a useful way to apply work motivational internationally.
Moreover, Herzberg’s findings revealed that certain characteristics of a job are
17
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
consistently related to job satisfaction, while different factors are associated with job
dissatisfaction. These are:
Factors for Satisfaction Factors for Dissatisfaction
Achievement Company Policies
Recognition Supervision
The work itself
Relationship with Supervisor
and Peers
Responsibility Work conditions
Advancement Salary
Growth Status
Security
The conclusion he drew is that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are not
opposites.
The opposite of Satisfaction is No Satisfaction.
The opposite of Dissatisfaction is No Dissatisfaction.
18
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
The relationship between motivation and job satisfaction is not complex. The problem
is that many employers look at the hygiene factors as ways to motivate when in fact,
beyond the very short term, they do very little to motivate.
Perhaps managers like to use this approach because they think people are more
financially motivated or just take less effort to raise pay than it does to reevaluate
company policy for maximum satisfaction. When you're seeking to motivate people,
at first get rid of the things that are annoying them about the company and the
workplace. Make sure they're treated fairly, and with respect, no matter where are
they from.
Cross cultural Negotiator
Culture and negotiation style can take it is recognizable and understandable, or may
be just as because in the opposite direction from what we are accustomed to. The
evaluate difference to accepting a new style of business environment is to understand
that the world is a dynamic place, with each continent holding its own civilities and
business practices according to its culture complexities. For instance, Time
Orientations. Two different orientations to time exist across the world: monchronic
and polychronic. Negotiators from monochronic cultures tend to focuse on one thing
19
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
at a time. Such as, United States, Germany, Switzerland, and Scandinavia. Japanese
people also tend toward this end of the time continuum. Negotiators
from polychronic cultures tend to do many things at one time and the involvement of
many people. The time it takes to complete an interaction is flexible, and more
important than any schedule. This situation is most common in Mediterranean and
Latin cultures including France, Italy, Greece, and Mexico, some Eastern and African
cultures.
Conclusion
Culture is a social mechanism that shapes and guides people's thoughts values and
beliefs and ultimately controls their behavior. It is 'the collective programming of the
mind which distinguishes the members of one human group from another, the
interactive aggregate of common characteristics that influence a human group's
response to the environment. (Hofstede 1980). The numerous studies indicated in
various industries in the tourism industry (Cross Cultural Hospitality Management
1997) showed that when it comes to people's behaviour in organizations, culture
counts. Thus when trying to import managerial practices such as leadership styles,
negotiation patterns and motivation techniques from one country to another, problems
20
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
arise. As a global managers in business will always encounter cross cultures
difference for national, international and multinational business. Therefore, how to
interact effectively across cultures might be an important issue and a requirement in
today’s global environment. Once we learn how to work in them can be a lot of fun.
21
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
References
Kreitner,R,and Kinicki,A.(2010) Organisational Behaviour,9th Edition.Mc Graw Hall
International.p.100
Livermore,D.(2010)Leading with Cultural Intelligence-the mew secret to
success.1stEdition,Amacom,American Management Association.
David C,T,and Kerr,I (2005) Culture Intelligence: People Skills for Global Business
1stEdition,Berret-Koehler Publishers Inc
Burke, W (1983), Special issue on organizational culture. Organizational Dynamics,
autumn.
Cornell University's e-clips (2008) Cross Cultural Business Challenges
http://cornell-eclips.blogspot.com/2008/03/cross-cultural-business-challenges.html
05/03/2008
22
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
Sherman,A.,Bohlander,G.andSnell,S.(1995),Managing Human Resources.
Southwestern Publishing,Cincinnati,OH.
Luthans.F and Doh.J,(2008)International Management,Culture,Stratage,and
Behaviour.6th Edition.McGraw Hall.p.104-110
Itim international (2009) Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions http://www.geert-
hofstede.com/index.shtml
Crotts, J., and A. Pizam ( 2003). The Effect of National Culture on Consumers’
Evaluation of Travel Services .Tourism, Culture and Communications, 4 (1): 17-28.
Funk, D., and T. Bruun ( 2007). The Role of Socio-psychological and Culture-
Education Motives in Marketing to International Sports Tourists: A Cross-Cultural
Perspective . Tourism Management, 28 (3): 806-19.
Litvin, S., J. Crotts, and F. Hefner ( 2004). Cross Cultural Tourism Behavior: A
Replication and Extension Involving Hofstede’s Uncertainty Avoidance Dimension.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 6 (1): 29-37
23
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
Kozak, M., J. Crotts, and R. Law ( 2007). The Impact of the Perception of Risk on
International Travelers. International Journal of Tourism Research, 9 (4): 233-42.
Reisinger, Y., and F. Mavondo ( 2006). Cultural Consequences on Traveler Risk
Perceptions and Safety. Tourism Analysis, 11 (4): 265-84.
Reisinger, Y., and L. Turner ( 2003). Cross Cultural Behavior in Tourism: Concepts
and Analysis . Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann .
Yvette Reisinger and John C. Crotts (2009) Applying Hofstede's National Culture
Measures in Tourism Research: Illuminating Issues of Divergence and Convergence
June 2009. http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/49/2/153,p.154-164
Girlando, A., C. Anderson, and J. Zerillo ( 2004). An Examination of Hofstede’s
Paradigm of National Culture and Its Malleability: Italy and the U.S. Thirty Years
Later. Journal of Transnational Management, 10 (1): 23-35.
David C,T,and Kerr,I (2005) Culture Intelligence: People Skills for Global Business
1stEdition,Berret-Koehler Publishers Inc p.122-141
24
ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’
Northouse, G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice.Third Edition Thousand Oak,
London, New Delhe, Sage Publications, Inc.
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management
Science, 28(3), 315-336.
Gwendolyn C (2008).Theories of Motivation April 15, 2008
http://socyberty.com/psychology/theories-of-motivation/
NetMBA (2010) Frederick Herzberg. 2 Factor Hygiene and Motivation Theory
http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/herzberg/
Cross-Cultural Hospitality Management (1997) special issue of International Journal
of Hospitality Management 16(2).
25