Case Study- Cross Culture

From Dr John Jones, subject lecturer

Due 17 May 2014

TASK 3 - Mid Trimester assignment (30% of total for the subject)

Attached in MOODLE is a cross cultural management case study, “Dilip Roy at Itsun Heavy Industries India Pvt Ltd”

You are required to analyse the case study, to answer questions 1 to 5, as set out below.

The due date is 17 May 2014. I have not set word limits but well thought out answers will gain better marks.

This is to be sent to me through MOODLE as a WORD document, ARIAL, 10 or 12 pt.

NOTES

A. There are some useful articles on the Internet that will help in answering the questions. However, direct cutting and pasting from those articles without accompanying explanations and references is not acceptable. You must use your own words in all the answers.

B. The Hofstede Centre website has been updated in some respects to reflect the fact that the Hofstede dimensions are now SIX.

1) Power Distance (PDI)

2) Individualism versus Collectivism (IDV)

3) Masculinity versus Femininity (MAS)

4) Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI)

5) Pragmatic versus Normative (PRA) – formerly Long-Term Orientation (LTO)

6) Indulgence versus Restraint (IND).

However, some displays show only five. For this case study, using the Hofstede Centre website, students should use FIVE dimensions.

1) Power Distance (PDI)

2) Individualism versus Collectivism (IDV)

3) Masculinity versus Femininity (MAS)

4) Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI)

5) Long-Term Orientation (LTO)

A fifth dimension was added in 1991 based on research by Michael Harris Bond, supported by Hofstede, who conducted an additional international study among students with a survey instrument that was developed together with Chinese professors. That dimension, based on Confucian thinking, was called Long-Term Orientation (LTO) and was applied to 23 countries.

In 2010, research by Michael Minkov generated two dimensions using recent World Values Survey data from representative samples of national populations.  One was a new dimension, and the second was more or less a replication of the fifth dimension.   The number of country scores for the fifth dimension could now be extended to 93. On one hand, the fifth dimension of Bond and of Minkow correlate strongly, yet the constructs are not fully identical. The country scores used on this site are the scores of Minkov’s research. We refer to this fifth dimension as Pragmatic versus Normative (PRA).

In the 2010 edition of Cultures and Organizations, a sixth dimension was added, based on Michael Minkov's analysis of the World Values Survey data for 93 countries. This new dimension is Indulgence versus Restraint (IND).

Analysis of cross cultural management case study

“Dilip Roy at Itsun Heavy Industries India Pvt Ltd

TOTAL ASSIGNMENT MARKS = 51 (this counts as 30% of final subject marks)

Q1. (5 marks) Identify five persons (people) named in the case study.

Q2. (5 marks) Use the HOFSTEDE FIVE DIMENSIONS OF CULTURE and THE HOFSTEDE CENTRE website to answer this part.

On Google, type in “Hofstede Centre” – “countries” – then select the countries you choose,

FIRST list the FIVE persons you have selected.

SECOND Say (from the Hofstede study) with which country the person would be most readily be identified.

Q3. (15 marks) Use the HOFSTEDE FIVE DIMENSIONS OF CULTURE and THE HOFSTEDE CENTRE website to answer this part.

FIRST select any ONE person from your list

SECOND Give your opinion (use your own words) saying if that person matches or

does not match the characteristics given by Hofstede for the country they come from.

Explain why you believe this.

Q4. (20 marks) Use these principles taken from Max Weber’s model of ‘bureaucracy’ to answer this part.

1.Formal hierarchical structure for management.

2.Management by rules - clear, written rules and procedures.

3.Organisation by functional specialty (jobs clearly defined).

4.Formal communication channels.

5.Employment based on specific / technical qualifications.

FIRST select ONE organisations from the case study.

SECOND explain how, in your opinion, giving examples, the organisation does or does not appear

to meet the principles stated above.

It may be that this cannot be identified, in which case you must say why you think so.

Formal hierarchical structure

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Management by rules - clear, written rules and procedures

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Organisation by functional specialty (jobs clearly defined)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Formal communication channels

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Employment based on specific / technical qualifications

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Q5. (6 marks) Communication.

Identify from the case study, two examples each of the following elements. It may be that an example covers more than one element, in which case you should say so.

TASK 3 CCMgt 28 April 2014 TASK 3 Mid Trimester case study Page 1 of 5