Managing Across Culutre

Managing Across Cultures

Introduction :

In today’s global economy, working with people from different cultures is becoming the norm.  Although this brings many rewards it also introduces challenges for both workers and management alike.  All managers know that motivating their staff is the key to a successful business. To do this, they must understand what drives their staff.  But what if their staff seem to think and behave in unexpected ways? This can happen when people from very different cultures work together.  Organisations are beginning to realise the importance of training their managers to become inter-culturally competent in order to ensure their staff continue to be motivated and productive.

The Findings:

1. How culture influences working styles :

Culture can be similar or quite different across countries , and the main challenge for the Multinational  companies is how they can recognized and effectively manage the similarities and differences.  Hofested was one of the researchers who examine the subparts or dimensions of the culture in order to help  Managers understand how and why people from different nations behave as they do. The Power Distance  (illustrated in Table AI ) shows  that  this cultural dimension is low and narrow in Israel and Denmark for instance , and broadest in China and Venezuela for instance. Cultures with narrow power distance will be generally characterized by decentralization and having flatter organizations pyramids  with fewer supervisory level s . Managers in such culture are likely found to dictate the way their subordinate should behave , they believe that their subordinate are incompetent  and not prefer to  be consulted  . “ In China , differences in power are signalled by when people come to a meeting , the joiner person may arrive up to 30 or more before the agreed time. This early arrival indicates respect , an arrival after the senior person has entered would be interpreted as disrespect” (” (Mead & Andrews, 2010 , P.38).

By contrast , Organizations in the high power distance countries  have a tendency to be high level of centralization and having tall  organizational structure with more supervisors personnel . Flynn and Saladin (2006 cited in Alessandra Vecchi &Louis Brennan, 2009, p.156) argue that the higher commitment of higher power distance countries to action programs could be explained by the fact that workers do not possess the effective tools for effective process management because the of high degree of centralization .

Countries with high Masculinity index such as Italy , Germany  (illustrated in Table AI ) place  a great importance  on earnings  , Achievements and challenges .  In contrast , in the more feminine Countries , Norway for instance,  tend to place great importance on Cooperation and relationships.  Kyoon Yoo  (2005; cited in Alessandra Vecchi &Louis Brennan, 2009, p.156). see that masculine countries focusing more in the internal operation and feminine countries displaying more a customer focus .

Like the effect of other cultural dimensions  , Countries like US & Australia  are famous of having an Individualism culture , where  the individual is expected to achieve for him/her self and satisfy his/her own needs and the decisions of individual are valued above the group decisions. In the collectivist countries such as China & Venezuela , the group interest prevail over individual interest.  Pagell , Lagrson &  Flynn  and Saladin (cited in Alessandra Vecchi &Louis Brennan, 2009, p.156) see that the higher commitment and less myopic approach of collectivist countries to action programs could be explained by the fact that strategic planning is very consistent with collectivism .