Management is an art; it involves proactive decision-making and problem-solving skills. Good managers build healthy interpersonal relationships in the business environment. Unlike domestic businesses, international trade involves operations across the globe and interactions with different cultures are inevitable. Developing a good understanding of cultural diversity is essential to the success of multinational companies. Culture influences a person's behavior and way of thinking which impacts his/her career as well as personal accomplishments. Socialists have researched and developed theories that aid managers in understanding cultural diversities. Geert Hofstede is an organizational sociologist who comes from Dutch; he developed a theory that asserts that, due to cultural differences, existing management methods cannot be termed globally valid. Hofstede management theory targeted companies dealing with international commerce as well as local firms that utilize culturally diverse workforce. Greet therefore presented five dimensions in his theory, for the efficient management of people from different cultures. Other sociologists too tackled the challenge of cultural diversity; Shalom Schwartz developed a seven-level learning dimension, Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner too developed a model that identified cultural diversities. This report is going to lay an emphasis on Hofstede’s model and its suitability in the successful management of a cross-culture workforce as well as highlight critiques on the design.
Introduction
Managing effectively across international boundaries is a critical success factor in global business (Bloodgood, 2010, pp. 85-104). Global complexity has predictable patterns that vary across cultures and impacts an organization (Adler, 2008, pp. 30-40). Understanding cultural differences prevents misunderstanding and enhances problem-solving with teams when things go wrong or turn unexpected.
Culture contributes to interpersonal connections at work. It is a natural trend to uptake the behavioral norms of the society one has been brought up. It becomes very comfortable to work with one's original homeland because one can conduct themselves within the standard parameters without much effort, thought of any adjustment (Hofstede, 2002, p. 34). However, on migration into foreign culture things are different, and the fear of political offense is high. Understanding a foreign culture is important especially in global business because it reduces chances of making mistakes a well as boosts one's confidence while working in a new country. The integration of globalization the world’s economies makes it essential to develop sensitivity on the operations of other cultures (Bloodgood, 2010, pp. 85-104). Professor Greet conducted a comprehensive research on the influence of culture to the workforce.
Literature review
According to Greet, culture is the collection of programmed minds that distinguishes a group of people from the rest. There are dimensions of culture in the workforce that Greet Hofstede, Gert Jan Hofstede, Michael Minkov and their teams developed through extensive research.
These perspectives are as follows;
Power Distance Index(high versus low) Those that display high PDI are those that recognize a leader’s status and are answerable to a leader. High PDI is common in centralized organizations, firms with complex hierarchies and those with vast differences in compensation and authority between the leaders and the subordinates. Others may depict low PDI; this is commonly in flatter organizations where supervisors and the junior staff are considered almost equal. Assignments in these firms, as well as decisions, involve all those who are affected by the changes (Hofstede, 2002 p. 34).
Individualism versus collectivism (IDV)
IDV explains the relations individuals have with others in the society; these ties may be strong or otherwise (Trompenaars, 1998, pp. 103-106). A high IDV is an indicator of weak interpersonal relationships among those considered part of the core family and those who are not. In this case, people are unlikely to be concerned about the actions of others, hence, show no responsibility to the outcomes. In collectivism, loyalty with a group is evident, and in exchange, the group which they belong to will defend their interests. People show concern for the well-being of others even in a large group.
The characteristics of the high IDV is that people need freedom, respect privacy, enjoy challenges and expect rewards for individual efforts and accomplishments. Additionally, people do not mix their careers with their social lives. At work, people are encouraged to air their views and express their ideas. Whereas companies that depict low IDV are those that people work for intrinsic rewards, they maintain harmony and emphasize in the mastery of skills (Vliet, 2015, pp. 33-40).
Masculinity versus Femininity(MAS)
MAS is the distribution of roles in regards to gender. In masculine societies, people are required to act emphatically. In feminine societies, both gender roles are alike; the virtue of modesty and good relationships with supervisors is appreciated. In feminine cultures, the focus of management is through discussion, negotiation, and compromise (Trompenaars, 1998, pp. 103-106).
In great MAS communities, egos, pride, money, and achievement are important. They are aware of differentiated gender roles. Targets motivate people, and the aim is either to show the group or individual performance which makes working for long hours culture. Low MAS societies appreciate the relationship, and success achieved through collaboration and input from all levels. They focus on the quality of life, therefore, strike a balance between work-life.
Uncertainty avoidance index (UAI)
This dimension describes the different abilities of people to cope with anxiety. Societies that depict high UAI, have a majority of individuals trying to make life as predictable and as controllable as possible, hence tend to have faith in their God. In workplaces, the employees, as well as employers, tend to make the firm and structured decisions (Smith, 1995, pp. 377-400). As a business person targeting to operate in this culture, it would be important to clear and concise goals with defined parameters so as to thrive. It would be an excellent idea to encourage the employees to engage in dialogue, and it is important to be aware that gestures are part of the conversation. People that score low UAI are open, inclusive, and open to change or innovation with a little sense of urgency and an inclination to open-ended learning. People are respectful and less showy of authority or competence in skills.
Pragmatic versus normative (PRA)
This can also be termed as lasting placement. It refers to the extent people attempt to elucidate the incomprehensible and is associated to religiosity, in addition to, nationalism. Pragmatic people are modest, virtuous, and emphasize on responsibilities (Hofstede, 2010, pp. 66-87). They are willing to compromise and talk less about themselves. On the contrary, the normative people have strong convictions, sell themselves to be taken seriously, and do not undermine any of their potentials. Flattery empowers them. There is cultural tendency to value perseverance, preparation and saving or traditions, existing obligation as related to Confucian thinking.
Indulgence versus Restraint (IVR)
Countries with high tolerance focus on personal happiness tend to be optimistic, and there is freedom of speech. They emphasize on flexible work-life balance, appreciate feedback and mentorships. Societies with a high restraint are pessimistic, more controlled and with a rigid behavior. Additionally, they are professional in formal sessions while they express a lot of negative feeling concerning the world when they meet with each other informally (Smith, 1995, pp. 377-400).
CRITIQUES ON HOFSTEDE’S MODEL
Hofstede's depiction of cultural differences got challenged by Holden (2002,p. 34) argues that the data used by Hofstede was gathered approximately thirty years ago and therefore applying to the world that existed but is no longer in existence. He further argues that the political world and the work values have undergone changes. In the political environment, there has been dynamism since the end of cold war and decreased in communism. Companies across the globe emphasize on cooperation, sharing o knowledge and encourage localization (Holden, 2002, p. 34).
McSweeney claims that Hofstede's work relies on flawed assumptions, that in his research, he would assume a small location represented an entire nation. He argues that this assumption based on a truly national culture that is not the case. McSweeney further argues that the basis of analysis used by Hofstede is not convincing enough since he used questions, people would have quickly answered in groups as they often work as a team, this resulted in illusion findings. The results would have been significant if all individuals within the same country were the same (McSweeney, 2002, pp. 13-20). The research conducted by a single company meaning it represented the middle-class people and there could reflect different tenancies if people from all walks of life suppose the poor and the very rich included in the participation. The questionnaires also might have contained restrictive answers which would not be wide ranging enough to infer deep cultural differences. There could be underlying immeasurable values that would be weightier than the measurable ones distorting the national culture research conclusion.
After the publication of IBM data, Hofstede acknowledged cultural differences within the same organization which brings the attention that organizations do no simply have a single culture instead it may consist many cultures.
OTHER MODELS ON CULTURAL DIVERSITY
Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner identified dimensions of cultural diversity. Just as Adler (2008, pp. 30-40), Trompenaars and Hampden found out that persons from different cultures contrast in explicit and foreseeable ways. Every culture has a set of rules, values, and belief that they hold, that influences the behavior of people, relations and their way of thinking (Trompenaars, 1998, pp. 103-106; Vliet, 2015). According to them what distinguished people falls under the dimensions mentioned below.
Universalism versus particularism (rules versus relationships)
In universalism, people perceive laws, rules, and obligations as paramount. To them, rules come before relationships. They often keep promises to the latter and are very consistent hence excel in routine. While working with people from such a cultural background, it would be important to help them understand how their values and beliefs are in tweeted with their work. For the manager and supervisor, it would be important to give clear instructions and procedures to the subordinates.
Particularism people believe situations and relationships dictate rules (Vliet, 2015, pp. 33-40). Their response, therefore, varies with different situations and the people involved.They prefer the liberty to make decisions as opposed to imposed standards. For great work relations wth those who fall under the particle, artist category, it would be advisable to respect the needs of one's friends and be flexible in decision making.
Individualism versus communitarianism (the individual versus the group)