1. Examining Cultural Differences Examining Cultural Differences Seminar 3 Bus 476 – Intercultural Management Wendy R. Carroll, PhD.

2. Outline Theories relating to culture Hofstede’s Dimensions Critique

3. Culture Variety of theoretical frameworks for culture found in the literature such as: –Hofstede’s global dimensions model (1993), –Kets de Vrie’s five dysfunctional type model (1986) and –Cameron and Quinn’s competing values framework (2006) Kets de Vrie’s and Cameron and Quinn both relate to diagnosing organizational cultures Hofstede’s model relates to national cultural diagnostics

4. Hofstede’s Model In the early 1980s, Hofstede (Hofstede 1983) created a model of national cultural dimensions which was tested across international boundaries. The model examines and empirically tests the differences between cultures in various countries around the world. Hofstede’s original work has been expanded by the GLOBE team to nine dimensions

5. Hofstede Dimensions Assertiveness - The extent to which society encourages people to be tough, confrontational, assertive and competitive versus modest and tender. Future orientation - The extent to which society encourages and rewards future-orientated behaviors such as planning, investing in the future and delaying gratification. Gender differentiation –The extent to which a society maximizes gender role differences. Performance orientation -The extent to which a society encourages and rewards group members for performance improvements and excellence. Humane orientation - The extent to which a society encourages and rewards individuals for being fair, altruistic, generous, caring and kind to other people. Source: M. Javidan and R. J. House, “Cultural Acumen for the Global Manager: Lessons from Project GLOBE,” Organizational Dynamics, Spring 2001, pp. 289-305. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

6. GLOBE - Hofestede Dimensions Individualism versus collectivism –Individualism: the extent to which an individual values independence and personal uniqueness. –Collectivism: the extent to which people value duty to groups to which they belong and to group harmony. In-group collectivism - The extent to which members of a society take pride in membership in small groups such as their family, friends and organizations. Power distance - The extent to which people accept unequal distribution of power in society. Uncertainty avoidance -The degree to which people tolerate ambiguity or feel threatened by ambiguity and uncertainty. Source: M. Javidan and R. J. House, “Cultural Acumen for the Global Manager: Lessons from Project GLOBE,” Organizational Dynamics, Spring 2001, pp. 289-305. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

7. An example of Power Distance The degree that people accept an unequal distribution of power in society Japan Netherlands Canada Russia High Power Distance (Accept & Value unequal distribution of power) China Low Power Distance (Expect relatively equal sharing of power) Participative Management Styles preferred Accept orders from superiors willingly Source: McShane, Canadian Organizational Behaviour, 2007

8. An Example of Uncertainty Avoidance High U. A. (Employees value structured situations) Low U. A. ( Employees value less structure and rules) Japan France Canada China More creative environments with indirect and direct communications Rules driven with direct communication Source: McShane, Canadian Organizational Behaviour, 2007 The degree that people tolerate ambiguity (low) or feel threatened by ambiguity and uncertainty (high uncertainty avoidance).

9. Mini-Case An IT company is currently working on a $125M project to be implemented in another country. The implementation must be done within 18 months and it requires employees from two separate countries to work together in order to successfully complete the project. 1.Select two countries. 2.Using Hofestede’s dimensions, examine the differences between these two countries. 3.Analyze the differences between the two and highlight the most substantial differences. 4.What considerations should International Managers think about when bringing employees from these two countries together on this project?

10. Article Review Review of the four articles assigned as readings. What does the article highlight? What are the limitations to this concept or theory? What can practitioners do with this from an international management perspective?

11. Critique Strengths Provides a tool to diagnose culture. Helps managers understand the differences between national cultures when dealing with international business. Guides HR professionals in the development of practices and organizational change. Weaknesses There is an underlying assumption that all members of society are the same. This may hold true in some countries but a recent studies have shown: 13 distinct groups in Canada Differences in long vs. short term in US, Chile, Australia By taking an approach to assign values to an entire society we are engaging in a form of Stereotyping.

12. Other Approaches to National Culture See Clipper presentation

13. Seminar #3 Article #1: Introduction: Geert Hofstede’s Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values Key Concepts Culture matters. Most of us are deeply embedded in culture in the ways in which we think, feel and act. Culture impacts many aspects of our life, such as our health, politics, economics, organizational structure, motivation patterns and leadership. When those who work together explore each other’s cultural, organizational and occupational assumptions, values and beliefs, deeper discussions can take place, greater quality work can be accomplished and a higher level of satisfaction can be achieved. Limitations It is hard for people to surface their own cultural assumptions about the field that they are studying or practicing. Contributions Hofstede’s contributions, in particular his cultural dimensions of individualism-collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity-femininity, often serve as the foundation for managers and organizations to succeed in the global marketplace. The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness research project benefited from Hofstede’s work in its attempt to develop a universally applicable theory of leadership.

14. Seminar: [# 3] Article [# 4]: Beyond Hofstede and Globe: Improving the quality of cross-cultural research. Key Concepts What is the central point to this article? The central point to this article is that cross- cultural research does go beyond Hofstede and Globe. There are 10 common assumptions on how research is conducted and how cultural difference is found. Hofstede’s influence is undeniable, but he is not the only person conducting studies on this topic, therefore scholars should have a bigger lens in which to view cross-cultural research. Limitations What are some of the problems with these concepts? This article has a lot of information regarding Hofstede and his studies, but was intended for IB (International Business) scholars and may be difficult to see the point by times. Contributions What use can this information be to global leaders and managers? Hopefully global leaders and managers have a clear sense of what it is they are looking for when researching and won’t fall under the Hofstede spell. In this article alone, there are plenty of other notable researchers and studies found.