How globalization has undermined some of the assumptions of comparative analysis of culture

Author: Iloka Benneth Chiemelie

Published: 12/12/2013

From a general view, globalization is all about how cultures grow into each other interns of the measured inter-dependence of cultures across national boundaries, the coexistence amongst people from difference cultures and the divergence of different cultural values. On that ground, it is clearly important that managers of MNCs need to accept the fact that cultural differences exist amongst different markets irrespective of how comparative these cultures seem to be.

A number of models have been developed in the past, laying down suggestions that can be used to define and review the ‘patterns of group behaviour’ (Mead & Andrews, 2009). They are very important to international management and managers as it provides them with the ability of interpreting typical behaviour in routine activities from any given cultural group. Basically, comparative models are such models developed for the purpose of comparing one culture against another and the underlining notion presented by this model is that some cultures are similar to other with respect to patterns of behaviour (Mead & Andrews, 2009).  In any case, a number of studies have appeared to rebuff this view, stating that people are still different irrespective of how similar their cultures might seem to be (Gordon and DiTomaso, 1992; Schein, 1992; Schwartz and Davis, 1981).

For instance, Schein, presented a comparison of different cultures based on the state of being and approaches that people adopt towards certain factors by using either positive or negative, individualistic or elective and their relationship with nature and other people they come in contact with (Schein, 1991). Findings form the study showed that even people from different ethnic groups in the same country exhibit different cultural values and attitude towards trade. On that same account, much difference was noticed between people from different countries. As such, manager must accept that cultures are different and different management approaches are needed for different cultures in order for the business to excel. This can be demonstrated with example below.

Hofstede (1980, 2001) proposed a framework for measuring national cultures as: individualism vs communism, masculinity vs femininity, power distance, uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation.

Individualism vs Communism – This is the degree at which people want to be alone or in group with friends and families (Hofstdede, 1980). In an individualistic culture (UK), people value privacy as they want to fully be in control of themselves and activities surrounding them without any external pressure. This is different from communist culture (Japan) where the “two heads makes a better heir” case applies as people are encouraged to be in a group, sharing ideas, experiences and achievements together.

Masculinity vs femininity – Hofstede (1980) viewed masculine cultures (USA) as being profit oriented and value high achievement. Competition is high in these countries as people want to prove that they are the best. Products are marketed and positioned to represent social status with high value. On the other hand, feminine cultures (Sweden) are more focused on nurturing the environment and finding a way to create space for coexistence. People don’t like recognition for work done and competition is usually fair.

Power distance – this is the degree to which power is distributed, valued and respected in a society. In a high power distance society (Malaysia) top managers are highly respected and their decisions are considered final. The whole workforce is meant to operate at the mercy of the management’s directions. In countries with low power distance (Canada), decisions are based on consultation with employees and the system is open to criticism. (Hofstede, 2001).

Uncertainty avoidance - this is the degree at which people are willing to take risk and find new ways of doing the same thing. Countries that are high  in uncertainty avoidance (Russia) are more likely to be innovative as they will always take more risk and find new ways of making tasks easier and better (Hofstdede, 1980)..

Long-term orientation - it is described as similar to the Chinese Confucian believe is linked to customer relationship management (Hofstdede, 1980). Countries that are high in long-term orientation such as China are adopt a relationship based approach to businesses in which they value establishing long-term relation for business sustainability. Countries that are low in long-term orientation such as the USA are more transaction based and opportunistic (Hofstdede, 1980).

From the above demonstrations, it has been demonstrated globalization has underpinned some of the comparative approaches to culture because no matter how comparative a given culture might seem to be, differences exist even down to the minute levels. As such, it will be concluded that MNCs and managers should accept these differences and tailor their business operations (products and services) to meet the individual needs of these cultures.

References

Gordon, G.G. and DiTomaso, N. (1992), “Predicting corporate performance from organizational culture”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 783-98.

Hofstede, G. (1980), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.

Hofstede, G. (2001), Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Mead, R., & Andrews, T. G. (2009). International Management: Culture and Beyond (4th ed.). Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

Schein, E.H. (1992), Organizational Culture and Leadership, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Schwartz, H. and Davis, S.M. (1981), “Matching corporate culture and business strategy”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 30-8.