Upload
ahl054000
View
2.413
Download
5
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Case Presentation of managers views and attitudes from different countries. REF:Andre Laurent
Citation preview
“THE CULTURAL DIVERSITY OF WESTERN CONCEPTIONS OF MANAGEMENT”
BY ANDRÉ LAURENT
Norm Grunsfeld
Marco Lei
Austin Lee
Erin Wright
Angelo Zuazo
Background
Laurent noticed:
French managers had a difficult time contemplating alternative management styles
In particular, matrix organizational structures directly opposed their view of “single chain of command” structure
“Each manager has his own management theory… that in some way guide his potential behavior in organizations”
The Study
The purpose was not to simply analyze the structure of individual opinions, but to compare how individuals from the same country seem to share a similar managerial ideology.
Method of Research A questionnaire consisting of 56 statements to be rated on a
5 point agree/disagreement scale.
60 upper-mid-level managers attending INSEAD executive development program; 40 French, 20 European
Between 1977 – 1979: Several more studies were conducted at various INSEAD executive development programs
The Presentation Study:
10 Western countries; 9 European, 1 United States 817 Respondents of varied function, education, age, industry Common element: upper-mid-level management
The Findings
The statistics analysis found 4 Clusters
Organizations as:
Political systemsAuthority systemsRole formalization systemsHierarchical-relationship systems
Organizations as Political systems
Some managers see the organization as a political system and this have a profound effect in the organizational behavior of the company
Insight into the extent to which managers from different countries tend to interpret their organizational experience in power terms
Organizations as Authority systems
Different nationalities have a different perception concerning authority and how this is a huge factor in their day to day behavior
Organizations as Role formalization systems
Focuses on the relative importance of defining and specifying the functions and roles of organizational members
Organizations as Hierarchical-relationship systems
Differences in management attitudes toward organizational relationships
How some countries believe that the managers should have all the answers and that bypassing is no more than subordination.
Political Systems
France, Italy Highly political Low org. structure
Danish, British Less political More org. structure
Authority Systems
Belgium, Italy, France Hierarchy = AuthorityAuthority regulates relationships
U.S., Switzerland, Germany Organizations ≠ Authority SystemsAuthority regulates tasks, functions
Role-Formalization Systems
Sweden, U.S., Netherlands Low need for “detailed job descriptions, well-defined functions, and precisely defined roles”
Hierarchical-Relationship Systems
Sweden, N. Europe, U.S. More likely to bypass authority in time of needRecognize boss may not have all the answers
Italy, Latin Countries Less open to matrix structures
Contemporary Relevance of the Study
The quotes correlate from those of the United States in Laurent’s study.
Interview Questions: (US participants)
Do you think it is a good strategy to boast your authority around employees so they know you are the top boss?
When employees continually causes a small to medium problem that does not affect other employees, how is it best to address the problem?
Personal example
Dr. Dee Ellington:
“Forcing your authority, making it well known that you are the boss is a bad idea.”
“One on one. Discuss problems, express opinions, no third parties.”
“Managers need to be more hands on, not micromanaging, but more hands on caring more about the employees.”
Dr. Marilyn Kaplan:
Personal example: “Having a strategic vision is most important for managers to be successful with employees.”
Dr. Laurie Ziegler:
“One of the most important things managers misconceive is that all employees are the same. America is a low content country; other countries are the exact opposite.”
Findings in the QuestionnaireSupport Laurent’s findings (USA)
Organizations are not authority systems
Low need for detailed job descriptions, well defined functions, and precisely defined roles
Most likely to bypass authority in time of need
Contemporary Relevance of the Study
German and US managers seem to report a more rational and instrumental view of authority that regulates interaction among tasks and functions.
“Leadership styles and cultural values among managers and subordinates: a comparative study of four countries of the former Soviet Union, Germany, and the US” by Alexander Ardichvili and K. Peter Kuchinke, 1999
Conclusion
Cultural differences in respect to management styles and notions about the role of managers cannot be ignored
When directing any employee at the corporation with a different background, it must be explained in terms of their cultural perceptions.
Conclusion
Without connecting the firm’s managing style to the cultural perceptions of individual managers within the organization, it will be difficult to effectively reach the collective goals of the organization.
Conclusion
Insight on employees and realizing that not everyone is the same and the world is becoming global is another aspect of the new-faced manager
Weaknesses of the article
The composition of questions themselves and their aims to isolate specific information
The origin of the author as it relates to the countries being evaluated
The number of countries evaluated by the questionnaire and
The group size and aspect constraints
Strengths of the article Studies such as the MNC-A study and
the MNC-B continue to show continuity in results.
“People from the same culture will act upon similar and familiar assumptions about situations, people, and things in their everyday lives”.
Trompenaars, F. (1994). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business. London: The Economist Books (page 3).
Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrJTf97Ev8o