Cultural profiling by Salomé Correia

(Extract of the academic report on cross-cultural management)

on Cross-Cultural Management

MBA Leadership in a Changing Context (HRMM058) June 27th, 2015

By: SalomĂŠ Correia . maria.correia14@northampton.ac.uk Word count: 3198

HRMM058 Report

June 27, 2015

1. Cultural Profiling In general, the values that distinguish countries in terms of culture can be grouped into categories or intercultural dimensions as proposed by Hall (1976), Hofstede (2001), Thrompenars (2012), and others (Schneider et al., 2014). Company’s HRD will consider these three authors’ frameworks as they have given the most thorough coverage of the topic. The chart below (Figure 1) graphically depicts the German, Chinese, Indian and Spanish cultural profiling. It helps us to realise the similarities and differences between the four cultures. Though, for not every dimension applies equally strong to every country (Hofstede, 2011) it is important to avoid ecological fallacy and stereotypes (Gesteland, 2012; Thomas, 2008; Loughborough University, 2014).

Germany

China

Trompenaars (2012)

Indulgence vs Restraint (p.282)

Long-Term Orientation (p.255)

Uncertainty Avoidance (p.192)

Masculinity (p.141)

Individualism (p.96)

Power distance (p.57)

Neutrally vs Affectively Oriented (p.88)

Individualism vs Communitarianism (p.66)

Universalism vs particularism (p.46)

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

India Spain Hofstede (2010)

Source: Hofstede et al. (2010); Trompenaars (2012); and The Hofstede Centre (2015)

Figure 1: The German, Chinese, Indian, and Spanish cultural profiling

1.1. Low-Context and High-Context Hall (1976) categorised cultures according to their ways of communicating: • •

Salomé Correia

Low-context (LC): a lot of information is contained in explicit codes, whether by written or spoken words High-context (HC): little information is in the code and the message is highly dependent upon the physical context (Hall, 1976; Zwikael, 2005; MacLachlan, 2010).

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHAMPTON

HRMM058 Report

June 27, 2015

LC corresponds to a monochronic culture (comfortable with doing one thing a time), and HC with a polychronic culture (easily interrupted and time is considered in a more fluid sense) (Hall, 1976). These are main cultural dimensions for studying communication strategies (Zhu, 2006). For example, with the Chinese and Indians (low-context cultures), the bank has to be able to understand implicit messages through between-the-lines interpretation and nonverbal cues (e.g. body language, silences) (Gesteland, 2012). Also, Germans might expect considerable detailed information whereas Indians and Chinese tend to use their intuition to make decisions. On the other hand, the first, view the wording of contract as paramount while the latter tend to adapt it because personal bonds and informal agreements are viewed more binding than formal contracts (Ardichvili et al., 2010). Asians rely more on face-to-face interpersonal relationship (Moran et al., 2011) than on the written mode, thus, meetings and visits to the branches should be more frequent in Shanghai and Mumbai’s branches than in Germany (Zhu, 2006; Chung et al., 2011). In the same way, e-mails have not the same impact as phone calls in both cultures, especially in important and urgent issues (Browaeys and Price, 2011). Similarly, it is useful to bear in mind that different attitude towards time affect the way that people expect how the meetings will run. For instance, while the Spanish will put a social “tête-à-tête” ahead of starting a meeting on time, the Germans prefer to go straight to the point in order to avoid “wasting time” (Deresky, 2011) (See Appendix 5).

1.2. Proxemics Proxemics is the term coined by Hall (1969) to refer to the social distance that can be used to isolate people from each other. He argued that people perceive the world in different ways leading to dissimilar definitions of what constitutes different interpersonal relations (p.164). On the other hand, proxemics influence how possible is to continue to work in the presence of other people, speak close to them and look in their eyes, with no disrespect (Hall, 1969; Thomas, 2008; Moran et al., 2011). For example, “Germans sense their own space as an extension of the ego” (Hall, 1969, p.134), consequently, they might feel more comfortable interacting or working at a larger distance than Indian and Spanish people which have a different notion of personal space (Joosse et al., [n.d.]; Deresky, 2011) (See Appendix 6).

Salomé Correia

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHAMPTON

HRMM058 Report

June 27, 2015

1.3. Trompenaars’ Cultural Dimensions Connecting viewpoints between diverse groups, Trompenaars and HampdenTurner (2012) developed a seven cultural dimensions model (Trompenaars, 2013): •

•

Universalism versus Particularism – People from universalistic cultures (e.g. Germany) focus more on rules, and are more precise when defining contracts. Particularistic cultures focus on the relationships, and contracts can be adjusted to satisfy new requirements (e.g. China and India) Individualism versus Communitarianism – Emphasis in individual interests (e.g. Germany) vs keeping face in relations to the group (e.g. China and India) Neutral versus Affective – People from neutral cultures control their feelings and admire self-possessed conducts (e.g. China, India and Germany). Affective cultures openly express their feelings and admire gesturing, smiling and animated expressions (e.g. Spain) Specific versus Diffuse – Keep work and personal life separate (e.g. Germany) vs mixing the functional and the personal (e.g. China, India and Spain) Achievement versus Ascription Orientated – Employees are judged on what they have accomplished (e.g. Germany) vs status is awarded based on age, gender, kinship, connections and school (e.g. China and India) Internal versus External Control – People believe that they can control their environment to achieve goals vs environment controls them and, therefore, they are more willing to concede in order to avoid conflict Sequential-Time versus Synchronic-Time – Same as Hall’s dimensions monochronic and polychromic.

As an example, while a German appreciates direct feedback and praises individual performance, Chinese and Indian employees may prefer indirect ways of feedback, “such as through the withdrawal of a normal favour or verbally via a mutually trusted intermediary” (Anbari et al., 2009, p.7). Appendix 7 summarizes each one of Trompenaars’ cultural profiles and suggests strategies to manage people with these values.

1.4. Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions The comprehensive study by Hofstede (2001) reinforces that cultural awareness is important for international organizations since differences in national culture have impact on business conduct, communication and decision making (Anbari

Salomé Correia

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHAMPTON

HRMM058 Report

June 27, 2015

et al., 2009; Hofstede et al., 2010; Seaver, 2010; Chung et al., 2011; Tu et al., 2011). Hofstede’s framework ranked countries in accordance to six dimensions: • •

•

• •

Power distance – The degree to which people accept social hierarchies (Zhu, 2006; Chung et al., 2011; Hofstede, 2011) Individualism versus Collectivism – The degree to which people live in a rather loose or tight extended social framework (Hofstede, 2011; Ronald et al., 2014) Uncertainty avoidance – The extent to which people feel threatened by uncertain situations and have built systems to prevent from such situations (Seaver, 2010; Chung et al., 2011) Masculinity versus Femininity – “What motivates people: wanting to be the best – Masculine, or liking what you do – Feminine” (The Hofstede Centre, 2015a) Long-term versus Short-term orientation – The focus for people's efforts: the future, or the present and past (Hofstede, 2011) Indulgence versus Restraint – Gratification versus control of basic human desires related to enjoy life (Hofstede, 2011)

Figure 2 illustrates the differences on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions in Germany, China, India and Spain. Appendix 8 presents a detailed framework with the Hofstede’s 6-D within these four countries.

Hofstede 6-D Model Spain

Germany

India 83 87

80 77 67 57

China

66 66

65 56

44 40

24 26

Power distance Individualism (p.57) (p.96)

Masculinity (p.141)

Uncertainty Avoidance (p.192)

Long-Term Orientation (p.255)

Indulgence vs Restraint (p.282)

Adapted from: Hofstede et al. (2010) and The Hofstede Centre (2015a, 2015b, 2015c)

Figure 2: Hofstede’s 6-D Model in Spain, Germany, China, and India

Differences on power distance, individualism/collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance are seen as the more relevant, and underlies significant differences between European and Asian business practices.

Salomé Correia

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHAMPTON

HRMM058 Report

June 27, 2015

1.4.1. Power Distance and Individualism/ Collectivism In India and China, people respect seniority and prefer stronger leadership (high power distance). So, when expatriating or recruiting internationally, it is important to consider who to be hired in terms of age, qualifications, and relationships (Sparrow and Budhwar, 1997; Cooke and Saini, 2012; Gutierrez et al., 2012; Schneider et al., 2014). Furthermore, in these collective cultures, the concept of the jan pehchan (who you know) and the guanxi (the special relationship between two people) respectively, are critical in the process of developing bonds with colleagues and customers (Zhu, 2006; Rodrigues, 2009; Ardichvili et al., 2012; Hoeks, 2014). Consequently, company’s HR department should promote social gatherings to improve communication and relationships (Chung et al., 2011; Tu et al., 2011). However, this strategy should not be applied in Germany where people are more individualistic (Schneider et al., 2014), and strictly separates the public and private spheres (Ardichvili et al., 2010).

1.4.2. Uncertainty Avoidance In Germany and Spain (high uncertainty avoidance) people try to avoid all ambiguous circumstances by rules, regulations, and structure (Seaver, 2010; Ronald et al., 2014). By contrast, in China and India they are more risk tolerant and rely less on written rules. HRM implications could be related to training opportunities, compensation and rewards, and career development (Schneider et al., 2014).

2. The Four Countries’ Cultural Dimensions Theoretically, similarities between Chinese and Indian cultures are strong, while the German appears to be sharply different from both Spanish and Asian cultures. For this reason, tailored HRM strategies and improvement on communication are essential. Table 1 summarises the already mentioned cultural dimensions within the four countries in this project.

Salomé Correia

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHAMPTON

HRMM058 Report

June 27, 2015

Dimension

Language Attitudes Towards Time Space

Hall (1969, 1976)