Page 89 - Fundamentals of Management Myths Debunked (2017)_Flat

88 Part 1 • Introduction
All countries have different values, morals, customs, political and economic systems, and
laws, all of which can affect how a business is managed. For instance, in the United States,
laws guard against employers taking action against employees solely on the basis of their age.
Similar laws can’t be found in all other countries. Thus, managers must be aware of a coun-
try’s laws when doing business there.
The most important and challenging differences for managers to understand, however,
are those related to a country’s social context or culture. For example, status is perceived
differently in different countries. In France, status is often the result of factors important
to the organization, such as seniority, education, and the like. In the United States, status is
more a function of what individuals have accomplished personally. Managers need to under-
stand societal issues (such as status) that might affect business operations in another country
and recognize that organizational success can come from a variety of managerial practices.
Fortunately, managers have help in this regard by turning to the research that is being done on
the differences in cultural environments.

HofsteDe’s frAmework. Geert Hofstede’s framework is one of the most widely ref-
erenced approaches for analyzing cultural variations. His work has had a major impact on
what we know about cultural differences among countries and is highlighted in our “From
the Past to the Present” box.

GLoBe fINDINGs. Although Hofstede’s work has provided the basic framework for
differentiating among national cultures, most of the data are over 30 years old. Another
more recent research program, called Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior
Effectiveness (GLOBE), is an ongoing cross-cultural investigation of leadership and national
culture. Using data from more than 17,000 managers in 62 societies around the world, the
GLOBE research team (led by Robert House) has identified nine dimensions on which
12
national cultures differ. For each of these dimensions, we have indicated which countries
rated high, which rated moderate, and which rated low.
• Assertiveness. The extent to which a society encourages people to be tough, confronta-
tional, assertive, and competitive versus modest and tender. (High: Spain, United States,
and Greece. Moderate: Egypt, Ireland, and Philippines. Low: Sweden, New Zealand, and
Switzerland.)
• Future orientation. The extent to which a society encourages and rewards future-oriented
behavior such as planning, investing in the future, and delaying gratification. (High: Denmark,
Canada, and Netherlands. Moderate: Slovenia, Egypt, and Ireland. Low: Russia, Argentina,
and Poland.)
• Gender differentiation. The extent to which a society maximizes gender role differences.
(High: South Korea, Egypt, and Morocco. Moderate: Italy, Brazil, and Argentina. Low:
Sweden, Denmark, and Slovenia.)
• Uncertainty avoidance. As defined in Hofstede’s landmark research, the GLOBE team
defined this term as a society’s reliance on social norms and procedures to alleviate the
unpredictability of future events. (High: Austria, Denmark, and Germany. Moderate: Israel,
United States, and Mexico. Low: Russia, Hungary, and Bolivia.)
• Power distance. As in the original research, the GLOBE team defined this as the degree to
which members of a society expect power to be unequally shared. (High: Russia, Spain,
and Thailand. Moderate: England, France, and Brazil. Low: Denmark, Netherlands, and
South Africa.)
• Individualism/collectivism. Again, this term was defined similarly to the original research
as the degree to which individuals are encouraged by societal institutions to be integrated
into groups within organizations and society. A low score is synonymous with collectivism.
(High: Greece, Hungary, and Germany. Moderate: Hong Kong, United States, and Egypt.
GLOBE Low: Denmark, Singapore, and Japan.)
The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior • In-group collectivism. In contrast to focusing on societal institutions, this dimension
Effectiveness research program, a program that encompasses the extent to which members of a society take pride in membership in small
studies cross-cultural leadership behaviors
groups such as their family and circle of close friends and the organizations in which they