Managing Across Cultures - National Culture and Organizational Culture - Coursework Example

Managing Across Cultures: National Culture and Organizational Culture Student Name Institution Course Date Managing Across Cultures: National Culture and Organizational Culture Introduction Culture is the collective programming of individual minds that distinguishes members of one group from another. According to Hofstede, (2004 p.322) national culture refers to the set of beliefs, customs, behaviors and norms that exist within the population of a particular nation. This culture distinguishes the international practices of one company from another in relation to management; in accordance with the operation environment of that company. In his research Hofstede goes further to describe national culture in the perspective of the six dimensions that represent independent state affairs preferences of one country; that distinguishes it from other countries. Organizational culture, on the other hand, refers to the behaviors and values of members of an organization; that contributes to the meaningful social and psychological environment within that particular organization. In view of managing across cultures, national culture and organizational culture present extensive challenges to managers working across borders; because culture is never constant. The dynamism and constant changing quality aspect of culture have made studying management across cultures and how the same applies to individuals pursuing management careers all more worthy (Cotic & Bavec, 2013 p.40). This study discusses the concept of managing across cultures in the context of national culture and organizational culture and the relevance of the same; to individuals pursuing careers in management across cultures. Hofstede Culture Dimension Theory National culture has shown great impact on major business operation in the global environment; ranging from the structure of an organization to the overall performance. Based on Hofstede’s dimensions theory on culture, he creates models that explains issues relating to the cultural differences; especial national organizational culture on a global perspective. Hofstede based his study on fifty countries to represent the differences in national cultures across the globe and according to the power distance model; he asserts how people perceive social inequality and embrace the same across cultures differently. He goes further to explain that high power distance children are usually raised to respect their elders; therefore having such employees in an organization will mean that the organizational culture will be more centralized. The employees will tend to have a culture that expects them to be instructed on what to do. On the other hand, a low power distance culture portrays less desirability for equality; as employees prefer to lead, take part in decision-making and get consulted as democratic leaders. Since power and equality are very crucial aspects in any society a manager needs to note that some people are unequal to others in any organization as well as that some cultures are unequal than others. In countries with low power distance, inequalities between people tend to become low too resulting to consultative management style as small power distance encourages more communication between a manager and his subordinates. However, in the countries with high power distance, there is more dependence on the boss; leading to an authoritarian leadership style. Therefore it is right to say that the power distance aspect in national culture affects organizational culture; hence impacting on how a manager will work across cultures both positively and negatively (Hofstede, 1997 p. 22). Shifting to the individualism versus collectivism model Hofstede paints a cultural picture where people prefer belonging to a loosely knit society where they place the utmost importance on self-recognition and autonomy. Collectivism opposes individualism in the sense that it stresses more on interdependent social units such as family which influences employees’ culture to work as a team and in collective cohesion. Individualism on the other hand affects the organizational culture in relation to team work for effective performance since employees are used to a culture that requires them to work independently and on challenging work in order to attain self-actualization (Hofstede, 1997 p.23). This dimension is the only one that has revealed worldwide shifts in that the relationship between cultural individualism and economic wealth influences organizational culture. For instance, wealthier countries tend to become more individualistic than the developing countries, but there wealth does not make their culture similar to that of the western countries. Therefore an increase or decrease in wealth reduces but does not eliminate national cultural differences across countries. Therefore it is clear that Hofstede used this model to explain the conflicting cultural differences that influence organizational culture; hence pose a challenge for managers working across cultures. Organizational values in organizational and national cultures According to research studies done in the past organizational culture is a different phenomenon entirely compared to national culture. Research illustrates that national culture usually goes up to the level of basic values, whereas organizational culture differs a little from it because of the superficial level of practices (Cray & Mallory, 1998 p. 22). However, management literature conflicts the above statement by continuously conflating both organizational and national cultures. Organizational and national culture only focuses on the secondary values and belief but does not differentiate the values and cultural background of individual managers; because this element might also influence their levels of management. From another perspective, facilitating organizational change requires that a manager be able to identify sub-cultures within an organization. This way a manager operating across cultures can then decide whether to adopt the existing organizational culture or attempt change it (Konrad, 2003 p.220). Efforts involved in managing and changing organizational cultures have proven more complex concerning cases of multiple national cultures, for example, when dealing with multinational companies. Therefore, the foundational task for managers working across cultures lies in differentiating the organizational leadership styles, structures, motivation patterns and development interventions; that relate to management and culture. In short no manager is right in doing things their way; because no two individuals can understand and manage across culture in a similar manner. This statement implies that also individual values, beliefs and norms of different managers also matter in determining efficiency in managing across cultures (Konrad, 2003 p.224). Additionally, organizational culture it is entirely different from national culture because it reflects the norms, values and approved behaviors of different members of an organization. Before any manager understands the priorities that associate with decision-making and managing across cultures, one has first to comprehend the organizational strategy, cultures, subcultures and structure of a particular organization. Therefore, it is right to say that the correlation between organizational strategy, structure and culture provides a set of rules and guidelines; that assist managers across borders to understand and negotiate between organizational and national cultures (Gulev, 2009 p. 264) Based on the divergence and convergence cultural aspect, studies have shown that arguments exist regarding the stable nature of national culture. From one point of view globalization drivers such as technology, communication, consumerism and increased wealth have homogenized national culture. On another hand, a majority of people think the similarity in beliefs and values of people has stabilized the same. Managers working across borders need to distinguish between these two arguments; hence the argument regarding people’s origin still stands. This argument is because this element carries significant weight in determining cultural divergence or convergence (Tayeb, 1988 p.60). The aspect of cultural management in decision-making is one of the contentious issues that continue to pose challenges in managing across cultures. This issue results from managers misunderstanding the cultural backgrounds pertaining to companies and nations during the decision-making process. As a result, managers working across cultures tend to infringe on the rights of their subordinates when encouraging or allowing them participate in the decision-making process (Mead & Andrews, 2009 p. 41). Intercultural communication is also another area that presents problems for the cross-cultural management practice; because for a manager to become highly literate in one language they also have to remain highly literate culturally (Lewis, 2000 p.550). Retaining equilibrium between these two variables has proven difficult because it is not easy to learn different languages, become fluent and literate in the same and maintain high cultural literacy at the same time. One of the variables always weighs down on the other making the managers work across diverging cultures a rather difficult assignment. For example, it is easy to learn and speak French but it is extremely hard to find a French speaking person who knows how to get along in a French-dominated cultural environment (Peterson, 1993 p.34). Summarily from this topic we learn that verbal language is not all there is to intercultural communication. Instead, global managers need to know what to look out for and what references’ frameworks guide the communication process when managing across cultures In view of negotiating across cultures, managers working across cultures need to consider both the benefits and challenges that relate to being multilingual; for the sake of business negotiations. Global negotiations require more than just the understanding of a nation’s culture or the organizational culture; because more than often it is unreasonable to speak another language other than that of the negotiating party (Steers, et al.2013 p.264). Therefore, the underlying issue becomes breaking language barrier problems as well as meeting the new challenges that come with working with interpreters. In order for managers working across cultures to work effectively, they need to understand and recruit interpreters who have a skill set that meets the demands of both national and organizational culture. For instance, the National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters (NAATI) advocates the use of a qualified translator in such cases. Despite the existence of such a possibility, the feasibility of utilizing a translator who can speak different languages fluently has proven futile; leaving managers still faced with the challenge of negotiation translations (Stahl, 1995 p.72). Reflecting on the different perspectives of culture it is clear that both organizational and national culture manifest themselves in layers. Organizational culture manifest itself in several layers that include symbols, values and beliefs with symbols beings the leading outermost layer. In other words, it is easy for members of an organization to mimic other people’s symbols, rituals, and heroic acts. Therefore studying the practices of an organization can easily educate a learner on the existent organizational culture. The other question that a learner pursuing a career in managing across cultures can consider is how to determine the values that different individuals usually have; deeply rooted in their culture since birth. The answer is that, asking someone of their values and getting an accurate answer is rather difficult. However, since values make the core part of most cultures; observing what values the culture mirrors would help answer that question. When studying and trying to correlate management across cultures we also need to consider that just as culture is dynamic and constantly to change, so does value. Therefore, a manager ought to look at the two elements side by side or one mirroring the other. Symbols also change and disappear. Therefore, one generation’s symbol can become quite incomprehensible to another and symbols are easily copied from one cultural group or organization to another. Another consideration reflects on managing across cultures when dealing global organizations. A learner has to consider that the design and structure of an organization can also influence the managerial skills and behavior of a manager working across cultures. Therefore, we can conclude that a manager can adjust their desired skills based on the organizational structure that directly influences organizational culture or sometimes based on organizational options; such as goals and strategies. Learners’ Application This topic has provided an in-depth into the global context of management across cultures and the challenges that manager’s face. Therefore, there is no doubt that a majority of transnational and multinational businesses thrive through the effective harmonization of both national culture and organizational culture. At the same time understanding this concept implies that as the pressures of the complex cultural environment pile up, there also the need for managers to work with utmost ambiguity. This topic is extremely relevant and important for a learner pursuing a career in being a manager across cultures because it highlights the mosaic quality of the ideas that relate to stereotyping and cultural relativism. Since different cultures relate differently to different organizations and nations, the first things manager notices about the culture of an organization he intends to manage may come out as shocking. This topic describes how this reaction can influence a manager’s actions. Additionally, if one does not notice the obvious aspects of objective culture, they may end up stereotyping their employees; as well as assuming the impacts of cultural relativism in management. In view of stereotyping in managing across cultures, this topic teaches learners that a manager may sometimes be afraid to point out the cultural-based differences that affect or influence organizational operations. They hold back because of the fear of stereotyping or being labeled as such thinkers. This is one of the challenges that an individual pursuing a career in management across cultures should become aware of in order to relate with balancing of cultural differences versus cultural relativism (Hofstede 2004, p. 365). This topic also develops the learners’ critical and independent thinking. They would have to apply the same skills later in their career; when deciding between respecting people’s values and understanding how to relate to different cultures. From a learner’s point of view, we learn that a manager’s responsibility involving cultural considerations not only focuses on individual cultural differences; but also the cultural and work norms that influence operations and management. This knowledge provides a learner with the capacity to ask informed questions and deduce conclusions from working hypotheses; once they become managers across cultures. Having such knowledge a learner can then prioritize and work on crucial hypotheses first; as to what is required of a manager in interacting with other members who might have different and opposing values, beliefs and norms. Conclusion Organizations vary in shapes, sizes, and forms. Some adapt, others resist while some find their individual creative solutions for dealing with local pressures. Such steps influence the organizational cultural aspect. Hence, managers need to understand the type of organizations they work with, the solutions that deal with such cultural diversities and the implications of those solutions. In other words, organizations and nations can independently put pressures on managers; thereby redefining what is expected of them during management across cultures. This study has successfully discussed the concept of managing across cultures in the context of national culture and organizational culture and the relevance of the same; to individuals pursuing careers in management across cultures. List of References Cray, D., & Mallory, G 1998, Making sense of managing culture. International Thomson Business Press, London. Cotic, A., & Bavec, C 2013, Some empirical insights into cultural differences and management practices: the case of Denmark and Slovenia. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal. 2, 31-42. Gulev, R. E 2009, Are national and organizational cultures isomorfic?: Evidence from a four country comparative study. Managing Global Transitions. 7, 259-279. Hofstede, G. (1997) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, London: McGraw-Hill; 20-25 Hofstede, G. H. 2004. Culture's consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, Calif, Sage Publications.108-370. Konrad, E. 2003. Exploring the facts of organizational culture. Facet Theory. 217-225. Lewis, R. D. 2000. When cultures collide managing successfully across cultures. London, Nicholas Brealey. Accessed Apr 30, 2015 from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=53963. Mead, R., & Andrews, T. G. 2009. International management: culture and beyond. Chichester, England, John Wiley & Sons.33-42 Peterson, R. B. 1993. Managers and national culture: a global perspective. Westport, Conn, Quorum Books. 28-52 Stahl, M. J. 1995. Management: total quality in a global environment. Cambridge, Mass, Blackwell Business.68-80 Steers, R.M., Nardon, L., Sanchez-Runde, C.J., 2013, Management Across Cultures. Developing global competencies, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK - 264 Tayeb, M. H. 1988. Organizations and national culture: a comparative analysis. London, Sage Publications;.60 Read More