4 Week Masters' Program Cybercrime Class

Zgette

Chapter213.ppt

Home >Computer Science homework help >4 Week Masters' Program Cybercrime Class

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

To recognize the pervasive and ever-evolving impact of culture on human resource practices, strategy formation, conflict management, and leadership.
To review three prominent efforts to create culture maps by clustering countries according to their differences on sets of bi-polar dimensions of cultural values.
To consider how business interactions and negotiations are impacted by cultural differences in work-related attitudes and perceptions about people, events, and time.
To become sensitive to the need for managers to help others and their organizations move beyond the “sophisticated stereotyping” that comes with the limitations of culture frameworks.

Learning Goals for this Chapter

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Grasping Culture: Influential Frameworks

The Development of and Need for Culture Frameworks
Hofstede’s Seminal Effort:
Clustering Countries by Cultural Values

Individualism–collectivism

Masculinity–femininity

Power distance

Uncertainty avoidance

Long-term versus short-term orientation

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Table 2.1 Countries and Regions in Hofstede’s Culture Maps

ARA Arab countries
(Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates)

ARG Argentina

AUL Australia

AUT Austria

BEL Belgium

BRA Brazil

CAN Canada

CHL Chile

COL Colombia

COS Costa Rica

DEN Denmark

EAF East Africa (Kenya,
Ethiopia, Zambia)

EQA Ecuador

FIN Finland

FRA France

GBR Great Britain

GER Germany

GRE Greece

GUA Guatemala

HOK Hong Kong

IDO Indonesia

IND India

IRA Iran

IRE Ireland

ISR Israel

ITA Italy

JAM Jamaica

JPN Japan

KOR South Korea

MAL Malaysia

MEX Mexico

NET Netherlands

NOR Norway

NZL New Zealand

PAK Pakistan

PAN Panama

PER Peru

PHI Philippines

POR Portugal

SAF South Africa

SAL Salvador

SIN Singapore

SPA Spain

SWE Sweden

SWI Switzerland

TAI Taiwan

THA Thailand

TUR Turkey

URU Uruguay

USA United States

VEN Venezuela

WAF West Africa (Nigeria, Ghana, Sierra Leone

YUG Former Yugoslavia

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Figure 2.1 Mapping Individualism–Collectivism and Power Distance

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Figure 2.2 Mapping Uncertainty Avoidance and Masculinity–Femininity

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Figure 2.3 Mapping Power Distance and Uncertainty Avoidance

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Figure 2.4 Long-Term or Short-Term Orientation for Selected Nations

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

Limitations of Hofstede’s Framework

Many countries are absent or underrepresented.
Differences between countries within a specific cluster or quadrant are ignored.
Subcultural differences within nations are not accounted for.

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

Trompenaars’s Cultural Dimensions

Outer- versus inner-directed environmental view
Universalism versus particularism
Neutral versus emotional
Specific versus diffuse

Compartmentalization of life and work roles versus undifferentiated of life and work roles

Achievement (personal performance) versus ascription (social status)

Individualism versus communitarianism (focus on self versus focus on status in group)

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) Project

The GLOBE Cultural Framework

Conducted a world-wide survey of managers that identified nine different cultural dimensions that were then used to classify countries on the dimensions

Assessed cross-cultural perspectives on leadership

Six of the nine GLOBE dimensions appear to overlap with dimensions in Hofstede’s framework.

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Table 2.2 GLOBE Cultural Dimensions

Uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede)

Power distance (Hofstede)

Collectivism I, societal (Hofstede)

Collectivism II, in-group—the degree to which people are loyal and close to families or organizations

Gender egalitarianism—does society minimize gender role difference and promote gender equality? (Hofstede’s masculinity—femininity dimension)

Future orientation (Hofstede’s long-term orientation)

Assertiveness—are people generally assertive in their relations with others?

Performance orientation—degree to which society encourages and provides rewards for performance and excellence

Humane orientation—does society encourage and reward for being fair, altruistic, generous, caring, and kind to others?

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Table 2.2 GLOBE Cultural Dimensions (cont’d)

Dimension and Definition	Countries Ranked High	Countries Ranked Low
1. Uncertainty avoidance	Switzerland, Sweden, Singapore	Guatemala, Hungary, Russia
2. Power distance	Morocco, Nigeria, El Salvador	Denmark, Netherlands, Israel
3. Collectivism I, societal	Sweden, South Korea, Japan	Argentina, Germany, Hungary
4. Collectivism II, in-group	Philippines, Iran, India	New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark
5. Gender egalitarianism	Russia, Poland, Denmark	Egypt, Kuwait, South Korea
6. Future orientation (Hofstede’s long-term orientation)	Singapore, Switzerland, Netherlands	Poland, Argentina, Russia
7. Assertiveness	Albania, Germany, Hong Kong	Switzerland, New Zealand, Sweden
8. Performance orientation	Switzerland, Singapore, Hong Kong	Russia, Venezuela, Greece
9. Humane orientation	Philippines, Ireland, Thailand	Germany, Singapore, Greece

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Table 2.2 GLOBE Cultural Dimensions

Dimension and Definition	Countries Ranked High	Countries Ranked Low
1. Uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede)	Switzerland, Sweden, Singapore	Guatemala, Hungary, Russia
2. Power distance (Hofstede)	Morocco, Nigeria, El Salvador	Denmark, Netherlands, Israel
3. Collectivism I, societal (Hofstede)	Sweden, South Korea, Japan	Argentina, Germany, Hungary
4. Collectivism II, in-group—the degree to which people are loyal and close to families or organizations	Philippines, Iran, India	New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark
5. Gender egalitarianism—does society minimize gender role difference and promote gender equality? (Hofstede’s masculinity—femininity dimension)	Russia, Poland, Denmark	Egypt, Kuwait, South Korea
6. Future orientation (Hofstede’s long-term orientation)	Singapore, Switzerland, Netherlands	Poland, Argentina, Russia
7. Assertiveness—are people generally assertive in their relations with others?	Albania, Germany, Hong Kong	Switzerland, New Zealand, Sweden
8. Performance orientation—degree to which society encourages and provides rewards for performance and excellence	Switzerland, Singapore, Hong Kong	Russia, Venezuela, Greece
9. Humane orientation—does society encourage and reward for being fair, altruistic, generous, caring, and kind to others?	Philippines, Ireland, Thailand	Germany, Singapore, Greece

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

Looking Ahead:
The Future of the GLOBE–Hofstede Debate

Criticisms of the GLOBE Project

Key concepts are defined differently than those from Hofstede’s original research.

GLOBE does not go much beyond Hofstede in advancing learning about culture.

GLOBE model has had much less competitive success in gaining acceptance for its ideas by managers in the marketplace.

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

Manifestations of Culture in the Workplace

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

2–*

Specific Cultural Influences

Corporate strategies and HR practices

Knowledge transfer during acquisitions

Rates of entrepreneurship

©Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2013

Manifestations of Culture in the Workplace

How Culture Shapes Work-Related Perceptions

People—focus on other person’s attributes that are consistent with local cultural tendencies.

Events—can create social obligations.

People and events—create contextual circumstances that affect the application of principles in some societies.

Time—is an inflexible commodity in some societies and a fluid circumstance in others.

2–*

Table 2.3 Eye of the Beholder: Time across Countries

Note: Numbers refer to the ranking of each country on a time measure (1 = top ranking).

Country	Bank Clock Accuracy	Walking Speed	Post Office Speed
Japan	1	1	1
United States	2	3	2
United Kingdom	4	2	3
Italy	5	4	6
Taiwan	3	5	4
Indonesia	6	6	5

Classifying Countries by Time Orientation

Monochronic Orientation

Schedules tend to be exact

Time is a commodity measured precisely—with economic terminology used in expressing its value

Characterizes the concept of time in the United States and some European nations

Polychronic Orientation

Schedules have a fluid perspective

Time does not have an economic perspective

Time use reflects “unscheduled” and “irregular” events or changes as how life happens

2–*

Table 2.4 Differences between Monochronic and Polychronic
Time Orientations

Monochronic Time	Polychronic Time
Does one thing at a time	Does many things at once
Task oriented	People oriented
Comfortable with short-term relations	Needs longer-term relations
Sticks to plans	Often changes plans
More internally focused	More externally focused

Culture and Key Work Attitudes

Job satisfaction and culture

Japanese employees

American employees

Job level effects

Employee engagement

Organizational commitment and culture

American workers versus Japanese and Korean workers

Work commitment versus organizational commitment)

Culture and perspectives on leadership

2–*

Culture and Perspectives on Leadership

Differing Views of a Leader’s Role

U.S.: motivate others to achieve firm goals by successfully influencing people.

Europe: solve technical challenges and distribute work rather than motivate people.

Asian: project authority and expertise by having ready answers for subordinates to provide a feeling of comfort and stability.

Sources of Leaders in Different Cultures

Merit and personal effort

Social class/status, personal and family relationships

2–*

Culture and Perspectives on Leadership:
Universal Leadership Attributes?

Intelligence
Self-confidence
Decisive
Ability to articulate a vision
Empowering others
Getting results

2–*

Combating Stereotypes and
Making Better Sense of Culture

Engage with other cultures
to test any “sophisticated stereotypes.”
Find help from cultural mentors.
Carefully analyze information that appears inconsistent with your cultural stereotypes.
Develop mental maps that will improve your effectiveness.

Select people with cognitive complexity for international positions.
Stress in-country training
for people working abroad.
Evaluate cultural expertise among personnel already
in foreign countries.

2–*

Table 2.5 Comparing U.S. and Thai Business Values

Thai Culture	U.S. Culture
Buddhist values of giving more than taking, resisting material attachments	Need for achievement and material reward are signs of success
Desire to have trust in business relations built through traditional social networks over time	Need for rules, regulatory procedures, and laws
Desire for face-to-face business contact, based on trusted relationships	Need to use the increased productivity of e-commerce via the Internet and public displays of data/ performance
Need to take care of employees, avoid layoffs, and protect investors from taking a “haircut” (thereby losing face)	Accelerate restructuring and cost cutting as needed
Be humble and very considerate of others’ feelings	Not inconsiderate of others, but should stand out, speak up, and be yourself
A strong sense of hierarchy in government and business alike (knowing one’s place)	Less position-driven respect accorded to those in power