Disclaimer - CPI · Web viewMorin (1984) classifies this concept as a « misnomer, a word that seems stable, solid, yet is just a trap, hollow, soporific, undermining, duplicitous,

INTERNATIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP A report to identify the body of theoretical knowledge and recent developments in research, which support the

acquisition of the competences necessary to an international entrepreneur.

September 2008

This publication is produced with subsidy from the European Commission´s Education and culture DG. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.’

ColophonINTERNATIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP A report to identify the body of theoretical knowledge and recent developments in research, which support the acquisition of the competences necessary to an international entrepreneur.

The theoretical research is carried out by:Fiona Bibby, consultant in intercultural competence development, and Franck Brulhart, professor at Aix-en –Provence university, for the AGEFA PME, within the framework of the INTENT project

The theoretical research is part of the desk research described as “workpackage 2” within the European Project "INTENT" supported under the Leonardo da Vinci "Transfer of Innovation" programme 2007 - 2013 of the European Commission.

While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this document, the publisher and the author assume no responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages resulting from the use of information contained in this document or from the use of programs and source code that may accompany it. In no event shall the publisher and the author be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damage caused or alleged to have been caused directly or indirectly by this document.

September 2008, Brussels

Special thanks to:All the experts and project partners who contributed to the theoretical research.

All the strategic partners of the INTENT project for their support and commitment.

3 of 33

Publishing organisation:Kenniscentrum Handel, NL

Managing editor & design:P. van den Bosch, EVTA (BE)

Technical editors:F. Bibby (FR), F. Brulhart (FR)

Coordinator:P. Mare, KC Handel (NL)

Production:European Vocational Training Association (BE)

Table of ContentsColophon...........................................................................................................................3

Introduction...................................................................................................6

1 Understanding the concept of International Entrepreneurship..............71.1 Definition and the characterisation of the entrepreneurial process.......................71.1.1 Entrepreneurship: Setting up a business or exploiting opportunities?.................................71.1.2 Entrepreneurship, innovation and creating value.................................................................81.2 Definition and characterization : the entrepreneur................................................91.2.1 Some received ideas about entrepreneurs...........................................................................91.2.2 The principal representations of entrepreneurs....................................................................91.3 « Focus » on the International Entrepreneur.......................................................101.3.1 Entrepreneurship and international development..............................................................101.3.2 What is the profile of an international entrepreneur ?........................................................111.4 Bibliography........................................................................................................12

2 Characteristics of the concept of culture............................................132.1 The origins of the concept of culture and the anthropological approach.............132.1.1 An anthropological approach to culture: Universalism.......................................................132.1.2 An anthropological approach to culture: Particularism.......................................................142.1.3 An anthropological approach to culture: Culture and personality......................................142.1.4 An anthropological approach to culture: Structural analysis..............................................152.2 Culture and sociology : the introduction of the individual and the group into the process of reflection.............................................................................................................

162.2.1 Cultures and sub cultures...................................................................................................162.2.2 Culture and the transmission of culture..............................................................................162.2.3 Culture and the individual...................................................................................................172.3 The various approaches to culture in Management Sciences..............................182.3.1 The different levels of analysis of culture...........................................................................182.3.2 The different ways of studying culture...............................................................................192.3.3 Towards a pragmatic approach to culture..........................................................................192.4 Bibliography........................................................................................................21

3 Understanding the diversity of national cultures................................223.1 Globalisation does not equal a homogenisation of cultures.................................223.1.1 The phenomenon of globalisation: shrinking cultural differences......................................223.1.2 The persistence of cultural diversity and perceivable creolisation.....................................233.1.3 The awareness and flexibility that cultural diversity demands...........................................253.2 Analysis of cultural diversity and the characterisation of national cultural differences 263.2.1 The founding contribution of Hofstede...............................................................................263.2.2 Hall and the importance of communication.......................................................................283.2.3 Trompenaars or pragmatic synthesis.................................................................................303.3 Practical interpretation of the characterisation of national cultures: « working with the X » 333.4 Bibliography........................................................................................................34

4 of 33

IntroductionThis study was carried out by AGEFA-PME as part of work package 2 of the Intent project.A theoretical research report was carried out by Fiona Bibby, consultant in intercultural competence development, and Franck Brulhart, professor at Aix-en –Provence university, for the AGEFA PME, within the framework of the INTENT project.

This report aims to identify the body of theoretical knowledge and recent developments in research, which support the acquisition of the competences necessary to an international entrepreneur.

It was decided to keep the framework of the study within the objective of creating a training programme and module for initial vocational education and training. Partners decided at the kick off meeting the limits of the research to be carried out in each country. From this debate, a structure for the research was approved by the project partners.

The objectives of the theoretical research: To identify the sources and body of knowledge supporting the competences and skills

(soft) required in training and developing young people to adopt an entrepreneurial mindset in order to improve performance when working internationally;

To serve as a work base to identify, check and improve on the sources chosen by an analysis in each partner country of the state of the art in this area;

To identify the knowledge, skills and competences found in the literature to be used alongside those found in the company research questionnaires and study of existing training, which will provide a starting point for the development of a vocational profile for the training unit.

5 of 33

1 Understanding the concept of International Entrepreneurship

1.1 Definition and the characterisation of the entrepreneurial process

Entrepreneurship is a complex phenomenon that has, since it was first studied at the beginning of the 80’s, been broadly and variously interpreted. This makes the task of proposing a simple, homogenous definition a difficult one (Saporta and Verstraete, 2000). To what economic reality does the concept of entrepreneurship relate? What is the profile of the average entrepreneur? What problems are encountered in the practice of entrepreneurship? What are the characteristics specific to international entrepreneurs? Defining the notions of entrepreneurship and entrepreneur is fundamental before we can proceed to focus on the international dimension of entrepreneurship.

1.1.1 Entrepreneurship: Setting up a business or exploiting opportunities?

Specialist literature on entrepreneurship is a relatively recent phenomenon. It would appear, however, that over the past fifteen years, two major schools of thought have emerged that provide a framework for this area of research (Fayolle, 2004; Julien and Marchesnay, 1996).

The first school of thought sees entrepreneurship as the process of setting up a company or starting a new organisation. This view of entrepreneurship is rooted in the economic difficulties of the 1975. Indeed, between 1925 and 1975, economic growth depended on the growth of large companies that benefited from various advantages associated with their size of (economies of scale, economies of scope, economies of size, etc.). During this period, the priority was to strengthen these big groups (Julien and Marchesnay, 1996). With the economic crisis, the focus shifted towards the setting up of new businesses, which created new opportunities for those who had lost their jobs and met the needs generated by a mass consumer society. From this perspective, entrepreneurship concerns the study of how these new entities come into being and the activities that enable an individual to start a new business (Fayolle, 2004). The focus here, in entrepreneurship, is on « organisational emergence », in other words, on the process that leads up to the creation of a new organisation (Gartner, 1990; Bouchiki, 1993, Fayolle, 2004).

The second school of thought is rooted in the notion of entrepreneurial opportunity (Fayolle, 2004). Here, entrepreneurship is defined as the study of the process that leads to the discovery, evaluation and exploitation of new opportunities. This school of thought also concerns the study of the individuals and the circumstances involved at the start of the entrepreneurial process and the study of the impact of the exploitation of this opportunity (Venkatraman, 1997). Here, entrepreneurship is seen as the identification and exploitation of opportunities. The focus is no longer on « organisational emergence » but rather, more generally, on the emergence of a new activity, which does not necessarily have to be associated with the creation of a new entity or new company

6 of 33

Nowadays, driving international entrepreneurship (particularly for European businessmen) by increasing international mobility and creating or developing international activities, must surely constitute an imperative. There are, however, many factors curbing this mobility, with cultural barriers constituting the most significant obstacle. It would therefore seem useful to explore the area of the management of intercultural interaction. To do this we must first define the notions of entrepreneurship and culture, then analyse and understand cultural diversity on an international scale, before going on to propose courses of action that will allow us to accommodate this diversity.

(Fayolle, 2004). This notion coincides with the notion of entrepreneurship as an « entrepreneurial spirit » or « entrepreneurial initiative ». Entrepreneurial spirit may be defined as the aptitude of an individual or social group to take risks investing in an « enterprise » as an « adventure » (Julien and Marchesnay, 1996). This « adventure » is the grasping of an opportunity that concerns something new, creative, value-adding, using and combining various resources.

1.1.2 Entrepreneurship, innovation and creating value

With this latter definition of entrepreneurship, which seems to us to be the one most suited to the purpose of our study, grasping an opportunity leads to a process of the creation of value through the starting of a new activities or, more generally, through the implementation of a new project. For Schumpeter (1935) this opportunity may take the form of the launch of a new product, as a new market opens up… The creation of value and innovation (in the generally accepted meaning of the term) are therefore at the centre of the phenomenon of entrepreneurship. In 1935, Schumpeter linked the phenomenon of innovation to the social actor that is the entrepreneur, while at the same time specifying that this definition should not be restricted to the entrepreneur as a founder of a company. Innovation, according to Le petit Robert, consists in introducing something new, as yet unknown, in a certain format. Innovation, then, concerns all types of novelty and so accordingly may be applied to any area of economic or social life. Castagnos (1994) spoke of innovation in a more economic context, linking it to the notion of the creation of value. For him, the term innovation denotes any intentional change achieved by an economic agent, with this change being acknowledged from the moment it generates an increase in income or a reduction in costs, i.e. a creation of value. From this perspective, innovation is taking the initiative, it is a change, a project, the creation or seizing of an opportunity, showing an entrepreneurial dynamic and aimed at creating wealth.

In this regard, the notions of uncertainty and risk would appear to have strong ties with entrepreneurship. An entrepreneur does, in fact, face uncertainty, where uncertainty is defined as all the events that could potentially happen, the probability of which cannot be quantified. (Julien and Marchesnay, 1996). The paradox lies in the fact that entrepreneurs suffer this uncertainty when they innovate, but they themselves also generate uncertainty. Indeed when an entrepreneur innovates, he exposes himself to market sanction and so faces significant uncertainty and considerable risk, but that entrepreneur also creates uncertainty, by contributing to destabilising that market, in the launch of his project.

1.2 Definition and characterization : the entrepreneur

The entrepreneurial process is driven by an entrepreneur who is defined as an individual possessing entrepreneurial spirit. There are many received ideas about the profile of the « entrepreneur », and although the many studies performed on this subject have failed to identify the characterising traits of entrepreneurs, several schools of thought have tried to establish a « standard profile » (Fayolle, 2004) or, by default, propose « types » of entrepreneur.

1.2.1 Some received ideas about entrepreneurs

The first received idea about entrepreneurs concerns their « innate » intuition. The entrepreneur would be someone gifted from birth with particular instinctive abilities that make him skilled at seizing opportunities and who possesses the appropriate « vision » that makes their success likely. This view of the born-entrepreneur actually has more to do with myth than with reality (Fayolle, 2004). Indeed, an individual’s personal qualities would count for little without the knowledge and skills acquired and accumulated over the course of years, either through schooling or experience. Another of the traditional depictions used to identify entrepreneurs concerns their taste for gambling and risk-taking: entrepreneurs are seen as players. Of course, as we have already emphasized, uncertainty and risk are factors inherent to the environment and activities of the

7 of 33

entrepreneur. Indeed, evaluating risks so as to better manage or control them is the business of the entrepreneur. Aside from the myth of the born-entrepreneur and the myth of the gambler, entrepreneurs are also often perceived as being motivated by a desire for power and money. Contrary to this received idea, and whichever country you look at, their motivations appear more profound, with the lure of money taking rather a secondary place (Fayolle, 2004). Among the basic motivations, we could cite the need to achieve, the need for recognition, the desire to rise to challenges, the need for self-esteem, etc.… Finally, one of the most widespread ideas about entrepreneurs is that they are young, energetic people. Although dynamism and energy are indisputably important assets when it comes to running ambitious projects, age does not present an insurmountable barrier (Fayolle, 2004).

1.2.2 The principal representations of entrepreneurs

Several schools of thought have put forward their vision of the entrepreneur. For some, the most significant characteristic of the entrepreneur is his specific psychological profile. Among the characteristics mentioned in the numerous studies carried out on this subject (McLelland, 1961; Brockhaus, 1980), we could cite flexibility, determination, tolerance of ambiguity and uncertainty, self-confidence, long-term commitment, moderated risk-taking and optimism. For others, the principal characteristics of entrepreneurs concern their creativity and their capacity to innovate (Schumpeter, 1935; Drucker, 1985). It should be noted that although this school of thought sets innovation at the centre of the entrepreneurial process, it uses this term in a very broad sense and is not referring purely to groundbreaking innovations. Stevenson and Jarillo (1990) who broadly support this school of thought, supplement this description by proposing five behaviours specific to the entrepreneur: a very short reaction time to opportunities, the progressive and sequential investment of resources, a desire to seize new business opportunities, recourse to informal network structures and the flexible use of resources.

Besides these approaches, aimed at compiling a portrait of a « typical » entrepreneur, other contributions have been made that specifically emphasize the diversity of possible profiles of the entrepreneur, proposing typologies (Fayolle, 2004). Probably the oldest is by Schumpeter (1935) who distinguishes four « structural » types of entrepreneurs (including the company founder): the manufacturer-trader, the captain of industry, the salaried director and the company founder. More recently, the typology of Lorrain and Dussault (1988) put forward two profiles: the artisan entrepreneur and the opportunistic entrepreneur. The artisan entrepreneur has limited formal education but strong technical skills; work is his principle focus of interest, and he tends to take a paternalistic attitude; he wants to control everything and refuses to share power. The profile of the opportunistic entrepreneur is almost the complete opposite: he has a higher level of education and plenty of business experience; he is management-orientated and his attitude is not paternalistic; he is ready to cede part of his control and independence to ensure the growth of his business. Lastly, Julien and Marchesnay (1988) distinguish two profiles of entrepreneur: PIG (Perpetuity, Independence of Capital, Growth) and the GAP (Growth, Autonomy, Perpetuity). Here we can identify the artisan and opportunistic entrepreneurs, since the « PIG » prioritise control and independence, at the expense of growth if need be, while the « GAP » prioritise seizing opportunities, risk-taking and growth, even if this sometimes requires some sacrifice of autonomy.

1.3 « Focus » on the International Entrepreneur

Having characterised the notions of entrepreneurship and entrepreneur, we must now shift the focus to the analysis on the concept of international entrepreneurship in order to demonstrate firstly, the indisputable entrepreneurial dimension of international development and, secondly, to deal with the specific attributes of the international entrepreneur.

1.3.1 Entrepreneurship and international development

8 of 33

The international development of a company may take a wide variety of forms. This notion may be used to describe the introduction of a strategy for research into market shares and the potential areas for the expansion of an existing activity at local level (strategy for the specialisation and development of international business) or the launch of a new business on foreign territory (international diversification strategy). Likewise, the structures and modalities used to implement this international development may vary widely from one case to the next: using a front company, an agent, setting up a subsidiary, taking over a foreign company and making it a subsidiary, etc. These various methods (Lemaire, 1997) may also be linked to stages in the development of the international expansion strategy (stage 1: predominantly national activities in the first phase of the international expansion, with recourse to national or regional structures; stage 2: multi-local activities with recourse to international structures; stage 3: trans-national activities with recourse to multinational structures). Lastly, there are two ways of looking at how the product of service is marketed internationally: adaptation at local-level and a multinational strategy or the standardisation of the offer on a worldwide scale and a global strategy.

However, regardless of the chosen policy, marketing strategy, type of entity set up and the specific form the international expansion takes, it is possible to view this international development as an entrepreneurial activity (Hinkelman, 1999). Indeed, these international development activities are characterised by a high degree of risk and uncertainty and involve change and innovation within the organisation, albeit not systematically « radical » or « groundbreaking ». These operations are rooted, moreover, in a desire to seize a business opportunity with the aim of creating value. In this regard, whether the entity concerned is a « first mover » expanding for the first time into a new zone, or a company that has decided to expand its international structure using first an agent and then a wholly owned subsidiary, we are certainly looking at an entrepreneurial process.

1.3.2 What is the profile of an international entrepreneur ?

The next issue we must deal with concerns the characteristics that are specific to international entrepreneurship, defined as the identification and exploitation of opportunities for the development of business at international level. Must an international entrepreneur have any particular profile, specific qualities on top of the skills accorded to entrepreneurs in general? For Hinkelman (1999), the answer is yes. In addition to the qualities that generally define entrepreneurs (self-confidence, determination, the ability to make decisions, to learn, man-management talent, communication skills, the ability to innovate, subtlety, perspicacity, perfectionism, etc.) the entrepreneur must have three special characteristics: the capacity for empathy, patience and above all cultural tolerance. Hinkelman (1999) specifically insists on this third dimension that is central in view of the cultural diversity existing on a worldwide scale. The capacity for empathy will allow the entrepreneur to gain an awareness of the cultural differences of the people he deals with, and the cultural tolerance will allow him to adapt his behaviour and attitude so as to avoid upsetting the people with whom he comes into contact and ensure that he does not infringe their conscious or subconscious cultural norms, thereby preventing inappropriate or misguided behaviours.

9 of 33

1.4 Bibliography

BOUCHIKHI H. (1993), A constructivist framework for understanding entrepreneurship performance, Organization Studies, Vol. 14 N°4BROCKHAUS R.H. (1981), Risk taking propensity of entrepreneurs, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23 N°3.CASTAGNOS J.C. (1994), Comprendre l’innovation pour repenser l’emploi, [Understanding innovation to rethink employment] GrenobleDRUCKER P. (1985), Entrepreneurs, ParisFAYOLLE A (2004), Entrepreneurship: learning how to start a business, ParisFAYOLLE A. (2005), Introduction to entrepreneurship, ParisGARTNER W.B. (1990), What are we talking about when we talk about entrepreneurship? Journal of Business Venturing, Vol.5, N°1HINKELMAN E. (1999), A short course in international entrepreneurship trade, CAJULIEN P.A., MARCHESNAY M. (1988), La petite entreprise, Paris [Small Businesses]JULIEN P.A., MARCHESNAY M. (1996), Entrepreneurship, ParisLEMAIRE J.P. (1997), International Business Development, ParisLORRAIN J. & DUSSAULT L. (1988), Les entrepreneurs artisans et opportunistes, Revue Internationale PME, Vol.1, N°2 [Artisan and Opportunistic Entrepreneurs] McCLELLAND D.C. (1961), The achieving society, NJSAPORTA B., VERSTRAETE T. (2000), Réflexions sur l’enseignement de l’entrepreneuriat, Gestion 2000 [Reflections on teaching entrepreneurship, Management 2000]SCHUMPETER J. (1935), The theory of economic evolution, Paris STEVENSON H.H., JARILLO J.C. (1990), A paradigm of entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial management, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11VENKATRAMAN S. (1997) Advances in entrepreneurship, firm, emergence and growth, Vol. 3 (KATZ & BROCKHOUS Eds)

10 of 33

2 Characteristics of the concept of cultureIt is risky, presumptuous even, to set out to characterise the notion of culture, or even to

propose a definition of this concept; evidence of this lies in the particularly high number of definitions already in existence (nearly 164 different definitions listed by Kroeber and Kluckhohn in 1952). Morin (1984) classifies this concept as a « misnomer, a word that seems stable, solid, yet is just a trap, hollow, soporific, undermining, duplicitous, treacherous (…) ». Culture stands at the crossroads of several scientific domains: sociology, anthropology, psychology, the management sciences… It is this multiple character that gives it its wealth but also its complexity.

Here we will cover in turn the anthropological and sociological view of culture, before going on to analyse how culture is perceived in management sciences and administration before proposing a practical definition of the concept.

2.1 The origins of the concept of culture and the anthropological approach

2.1.1 An anthropological approach to culture: Universalism

Before making any attempt to define the concept of culture, it would be interesting to take a look at the etymological origin of the term « culture ». The word comes from the Latin cultura, which refers to the cultivation of land or cattle. The figurative sense first appeared in the 18th century; the dictionary of the Académie Francaise gives us « the sum of knowledge accumulated and passed on by humanity, considered as a whole, over the course of its history ». This definition takes its inspiration from the Philosophy of Light which saw culture as a distinguishing characteristic of the human race (Cuche, 2004); the word culture, then, is associated with ideas of progress, education, reason: from this perspective, progress is born out of instruction, in other words, out of culture. Here we should note the proximity between the term culture, which evokes individual progress, and the term civilization, which concerns collective progress.

This view of culture is rooted in a universalist conception: culture is first and foremost the « culture of humanity ». It is this point of view, combined with the evolutionist approach, that brings us to the idea of a scale of stages in the evolution of culture and that of an « ideal » culture towards which civilizations are moving. In support of this, the definition proposed by Tylor (1871) according to which, culture or civilisation is « that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society ». Here, culture is the expression of the whole of the social life of mankind (Cuche, 2004).

2.1.2 An anthropological approach to culture: Particularism

Pitted against this universalist understanding of the term, the particularist conception of culture is rooted in the German notion of Kultur which originated at the start of the 19th

century. With this approach, a distinction is drawn between civilization, defined by material progress linked to economic development and culture, defined as the expression of the more profound soul of a people (Cuche, 2004). Culture, then, designates a set of characteristics specific to a community. Developing this particularist conception, the

11 of 33


fundamental difference between groups of human beings is cultural in nature, rather than racial (Boas, 1940). The notion of culture would then appear to be the most appropriate for rendering account of human diversity; Boas, moreover, prefers the term « cultures » to « culture ». For him, there is no natural difference between peoples but only differences of culture, acquired rather than innate. In this regard, Boas (1940) develops an inductive field method that draws on the observation of characteristics traits that, once consolidated, will serve for the determination of culture. For him, every culture is unique, specific, (Cuche, 2004); every culture represents a unique whole, a specific set, and is equipped with its own particular style that comes through in the language, beliefs, customs, art and behaviour of the individuals.

2.1.3 An anthropological approach to culture: Culture and personality

Following on from the work of Boas is the « culture and personality » school of thought. In fact, American anthropology is absorbed in a constant effort to interpret the cultural differences between groups of human beings (Cuche, 2004). From this viewpoint, the objective is to understand how culture conditions individuals, how it makes them act and what behaviours it provokes, with one postulate: each culture determines a style of behaviour common to all of the individuals belonging to a given society or group. The issue dealt with by these authors is discovering how individuals (who start out identical) end up acquiring different types of personality, characteristics of specific groups. The explanation of this phenomenon may be divided into two phases: on the one hand different cultures are defined by a type, a style a « pattern » in other words a global schema (acknowledging that there is a limited number of styles set along the length of a cultural arc (Mead, 1963)); while on the other hand, it is through a process of education, cultural transmission and socialisation that individuals receive and assimilate this schema, this style of culture (Mead, 1963). The individual personality cannot be explained by biological attributes (linked to nature) but rather by the cultural model specific to a given society that determines the education of the child (Cuche, 2004). It is by this process of enculturation that education (by transmitting culture) allows the adult personality to adapt to the existing cultural schema. So, accordingly, culture interprets nature and transforms it.

These authors of the « culture and personality » school of thought acknowledge the plurality of individual psychologies but simply consider that each culture prioritises a type of personality which becomes the « normal » type, the basic personality structure (Linton, 1945; Livolsi, 2001). This basic personality structure comprises points common to all the members of a group and it is determined directly by the culture (Linton, 1945). This basic personality structure therefore constitutes the cultural foundations of the personality. Linton also introduces the notion of transmission into this approach to culture, defining it as « the configuration of a learned behaviour and the results of behaviours whose component elements are shared and transmitted by the members of a particular society ». However, Linton adds two nuances to his analysis: firstly he stresses the fact that several cultural styles (or types of basic personality) can coexist in one society due, in particular, to the presence of several value systems in many cultures. Moreover, he notes the potential of each individual to « deviate » from the « normal » cultural type, either as a result of their status in the society or as a result of their particular personality or psychology. These factors explain not only the uniqueness of individuals who constantly create or innovate in the way they live or assimilate their culture, but also the progressive evolution of cultures under the influence of these individual variations.

2.1.4 An anthropological approach to culture: Structural analysis

With structural analysis, Levi-Strauss (1955) picks up on the contributions of the American anthropologists. He adheres to the idea of global cultural schemas or patterns existing in limited number, which he views as a set of symbolic systems that include language, matrimonial rules, economic relations, the arts, science, religion, etc. He also puts forward the idea that these cultural schemas exist in individuals on a subconscious level.

12 of 33

However, Levi-Strauss aimed to go beyond the particularist vision of culture, stating that these various cultural schema are the result of particular, unique combination of universal factors, invariant elements. According to him, all the customs of a people form systems that are the result of a combination of all real or possible customs. So, according to Levi-Strauss there is a shared source of humanity on which societies draw to form their own culture. His objective, then, is to define, index and analyse the invariant elements of culture, which are always the same, from one culture to the next. In fact, Levi-Strauss sought to discover the cultural universals (Cuche, 2004), the universal rules that make life in a society possible. He gives the example of the incest taboo, common to all civilisations, which enables social exchange. Levi-Strauss uses the metaphor of a card game to explain his thoughts. The cards represent the invariants, the cultural schemas represent the deal and the game, interpreted differently by the individuals, symbolised by the players. The objective of the structural thought process, then, is to identify the existing cards and the rules of the game (Cuche, 2004).

13 of 33

2.2 Culture and sociology : the introduction of the individual and the group

into the process of reflection

2.2.1 Cultures and sub cultures

The interest of sociologists in culture dates back to the 30’s and 40’s: American researchers were, at the time, studying urban communities with the primary motivation of defining American culture as a whole. Very swiftly, however, these studies proved to demonstrate cultural diversity rather than cultural unity. This research saw the emergence of the notion of subculture in reference to the subdivisions of a national culture linked to particular groups (Livolsi, 2001). In this regard, and due to the heterogeneous character of contemporary cultures, each social group shares specific traits, common to a particular subculture (Cuche, 2004). Even if individuals share common cultural traits linked to the global culture of the society in which they are evolving, they present specific characteristics according to their association to subgroups. The subculture therefore constitutes a variant of the global culture.

Sociologists from the Palo Alto school opposed this idea, subsequently inverting the theory, asserting that the culture of a group is not a secondary variation of global culture, but rather a prerequisite for this global culture. In fact, this approach defines culture as an inter-individual communication system (Cuche, 2004): culture only exists through the play of interactions (verbal and non-verbal) between individuals. From this perspective, the origins of the cultural construction lie, firstly, in local interactions between individuals, in other words, within the group culture; then subsequently, after there has been confrontation with individuals from other group cultures, the « global » culture emerges. The « global culture » is therefore born at a later stage, as a result of interactions between social groups and their specific cultures. Culture does not exist outside of the individuals belonging to the different groups that make up society; culture does not pre-exist for them, but rather it is constructed through their interaction.

2.2.2 Culture and the transmission of culture

Sociology, developing an interest in the issue of the transmission and perpetuation of culture, following the anthropologists of the « culture and personality » school, brought the concept of socialisation into its analysis. The socialisation process concerns the assimilation of the modes of thought and action specific to a given society and the transmission of social and cultural norms. This socialisation process is, in fact, at the root of the identification of the individual with a social group and his belonging to that group. According to Parsons (1955), this socialisation takes place in childhood and adolescence, simultaneously within the family and at school (as a result of peer confrontation). Cuche (2004) nevertheless emphasizes the limitations of this theory of socialisation, seen as a « breaking-in » process. Other theories dispute this idea, stressing the « continuous » nature of the socialisation process which is not limited to the period of childhood or adolescence but rather continues for the whole of the individual’s life, on the basis of the stimuli they are exposed to. Berger and Luckmann (1966) supplement the notion of « primary socialisation » (relating to childhood) with the notion of « secondary socialisation » which continues for the individual’s whole life (these authors note, for example, professional socialisation) that can either consolidate the primary socialisation or initiate a reform of it. In support of this phenomenon of the formation and evolution of culture, we could cite Morin (1984): « culture is a system that links personal existential experience with formed collective knowledge ».

2.2.3 Culture and the individual

The issue of the transmission of culture raises the question of the autonomy of the individual in their culture. There are two opposing theories in sociology: the theory of « the agent » and the theory of « the individual actor ».

14 of 33

In the case of the former, the social environment imposes severe restrictions on the individual who cannot go against the demands of that environment (Livolsi, 2001). This view refutes the possibility that individuals can potentially distance themselves from the culture of the group to which they belong. This relates, for example, to the notion of habitus introduced by Bourdieu (1980). According to Bourdieu, habitus is adopted through a series of conditionings specific to a social group or class. Bourdieu’s habitus functions as « the materialisation of the collective memory » and explains why the members of a given class usually act in the same way (Cuche, 2004). Although Bourdieu does acknowledge the possibility of individuals pre-empting or forming strategies, for him these strategies are guided by subconscious schemas of perception and action; and the schemas that guide the action of individuals are the result of the socialisation and education process (« primitive experiences »). Bourdieu does acknowledge the diversity of personal styles within a given social group, but interprets them as structural variants that reveal the « singularity of the position within the class ».In the case of the latter, the individual is considered as an actor with autonomy within the group. This autonomy allows the individual to construct and implement individual strategies. This « cultural autonomy » is born out of the socialisation process existing in modern societies characterised by their complexity and heterogeneity (Camilleri and Vinsonneau, 1996; Livolsi, 2001). In fact, although in traditional societies, socialisation is pointillist, in other words, the individual’s initial socialisation is consolidated as he circulates among homogeneous subgroups; in modern society, on the contrary, where subgroups are characterised by heterogeneous and disparate cultures, the circulation of individuals results in socialising sequences that are themselves disparate. There is therefore a detachment of the individual who develops his own culture according to his preference and experience.

Lastly, we may turn our attention to the stance taken by Giddens (1984) who synthesized these two approaches, affirming the existence of an iterative process through which the culture of the group influences individuals by means of the phenomenon of socialisation, but also the emergence of a group culture that is the product of interaction between individuals. In this regard, culture is born out of the interplay of interactions between individuals, but these interactions cannot be disconnected from the environmental context in which they occur: human action is contextual, in other words, it can only be conceived in a specific place in time and space. Culture, then, is defined both by the nature of the inter-individual actions and by the context in the setting in which these interactions take place, which influences the nature of the interactions.

2.3 The various approaches to culture in Management Sciences

The research we have covered in the preceding sections (1 and 2) introduces several levels of interpretation of the notion of culture. Anthropologists are interested primarily in human societies on the basis of ethnographic surveys in which groups of people are studied. Sociologists supplement this societal dimension with the group as a research level and unit of analysis. This interpretation allows the inclusion of the notions of subcultures. Finally, some analyse culture at the level of the individual, in terms of how individuals develop their culture on the basis of their experiences which constitute socialisation sequences. Following the lead of research led in other social science disciplines, management science also distinguishes several levels of interpretation of culture.

2.3.1 The different levels of analysis of culture

There are several typologies that consider different levels of analysis of culture (Livolsi, 2001). These typologies generally distinguish four different levels of analysis: national culture (which concerns the society as a whole: country, nation) is the first level of analysis, usually referred to as the « macro » level (Smircich, 1983, Bosche, 1993; Schmidt, 1994). Sectorial culture (which concerns the culture of a particular activity sector, type of technology or professional specialisation) is the second, or « meso » level (Schmidt, 1994). The third level (or « micro » level) relates, for some, to the culture of an organisation or a group of individuals brought together within one structure (Schmidt,

15 of 33

1994) and for others, to the culture of an individual (Bosche, 1993). In the case where the « micro » level designates the culture of a sub-group linked to an organisation, some authors introduce an « anthropo » level, in order to account for the culture of the individuals (Schmidt, 1994).

These typologies may be supplemented with the inclusion, within the macro level, of larger culture sets than countries, as Hofstede (1980) did by proposing the existence of six major culture sets or six major culture types: Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Latin, Arab and Asian. Likewise, on the macro level, it is sometimes necessary to consider regional cultures, and there are many studies on the cultural specificity of a given region (Fackeldey, 1996). With the aim of further expanding on these typologies, Hoftede (1991) puts forward the idea that there are 6 levels of analysis of culture: a national level, pertaining to the country, or countries in the case of immigrants, a level corresponding to the belonging to a regional and/or ethnic and/or religious and/or linguistic group, on the basis that many countries are comprised of different regions, ethnicities, religions and languages, a level corresponding to one of the two sexes, masculine or feminine, a level pertaining to the generation, (grand-parents, parents, children), a level corresponding to social origin, level of education and profession, and a level linked to the organisation or company in which those who work are socialised.

2.3.2 The different ways of studying culture

There are several distinguishable ways in which culture can be studied, on the basis of the acknowledgement of different levels of analysis of culture (Livolsi, 2001): these are the areas of international management, intercultural management and comparative management. In simplified terms, international management concerns the research of organisational and management approaches that are universally applicable, primarily meeting the needs of worldwide multinationals. Intercultural management concerns the circumstances in which a universal approach is more appropriate than a specific approach and vice versa. This is an approach that supplements the previous one, concerning businesses facing situations where they will come into contact with partners from other cultures. Finally, comparative management attempts to identify the elements that are really common and those that are specific to cultures.Given the objective of our research into the management of intercultural situations, here we will prioritise the intercultural management and comparative management approaches, although in some cases the three perspectives are complementary. They in fact allow us to achieve one of the basic objectives of our research: knowing how others see the world or how they act before knowing if, and how, we are going to interact with them (Williamson, 1986).

2.3.3 Towards a pragmatic approach to culture

Although it is difficult to define the concept of culture in practice, we can however confirm, in the light of the different stages of our analysis of the concept of culture, that culture does have a significant impact on behaviour, independently of the level of analysis of the culture retained. For this reason it is useful to define culture with consideration of the process through which it influences behaviour. To do this, we will use the Adler model (1986) shown below:

16 of 33

As Adler shows, culture is the bearer of norms that represent values in the collective subconscious (1). These values concern the individual’s relationship with himself (citizen, person, employee, etc.) and with his environment (space, time, country, otherness, business, etc.). These values affect the individual’s attitudes, compelling them to act or react (in other words, behave) in a certain way, in a given situation1 (2) and (3). A change in individual or collective behaviour can influence the surrounding culture, and so the process begins again (4). It should be noted that this process is absolutely general and may be applied equally to the individual in his country (national culture) or in his region or in his company (subculture). In this regard, culture can be understood as the symbolic organisation of a group, a set of values that upholds the vision the group has of itself (and its relations with other groups), as well as its attitudes and behaviours.

Culture may be studied either on the basis of the process of which it is a result or that it causes, or equally on the basis of its content and constituent elements. To do this, it is useful to take up the iceberg analogy proposed by Usunier and Prime (2004), which attempts to characterise the principal components of culture. From this perspective, culture is simultaneously constituted by explicit and implicit elements, conscious and subconscious elements. Accordingly, culture is made up of explicit elements (languages, habits and traditions, know-how, collective modes of organisation, etc.) but also more implicit elements (norms, values, mental states, symbols, myths, beliefs, etc.).

1 An attitude is a construct that expresses values and disposes a person to act or react in a certain way to something (Adler, 1986)

17 of 33

CULTURE

ATTITUDES

VALUESBEHAVIOUR

(4)

(3) (2)

(1)

2.4 Bibliography

ADLER N.J. (1986), International dimensions of organizational behavior, BostonALLAIRE Y., FIRSIROTSU M.E. (1984), Theories of organizational culture, Organization studies, vol. 5 n°3BERGER P. LUCKMANN T. (1986), The Social Construction of Reality, ParisBOAS F (1940), Race Language and culture, New YorkBOURDIEU P. (1980), Practical Reason, ParisCAMILLERI C., VINSONNEAU G. (1996), Psychology and Culture: concepts and methods, ParisCUCHE D. (2004), The Concept of Culture in the Social Sciences, La découverte, ParisFACKELDEY E. (1996), Le management interculturel de la PME: contribution à une étude comparée en Europe, Thèse de Doctorat, Montpellier I [Intercultural Management of the SME: contribution to a compared study in Europe, Doctoral Thesis]HOFSTEDE G. (1980), Culture’s consequences and international differences in work related values HOFSTEDE G. (1991), Cultures and organizations ,NYKROEBER A., KLUCKHOHN C. (1952), Culture, Papers of the Peabody Museum, vol. 47, N° 1.LEVI-STRAUSS C. (1955), Sad Tropics, ParisLINTON R. (1986), The cultural background of personality, ParisLIVOLSI L. (2001), L’influence des éléments contextuels, organisationnels et culturels dans une structuration des fonctions de l’entreprise, [The influence of contextual, organisation and cultural elements in the structuring of company functions, Doctoral Thesis] Aix-Marseille II. MEAD M. (1963), Moeurs et sexualité en Océanie, Paris [Mores and sexuality in Oceania]MORIN E. (1984), Sociologiy, Fayard, ParisPARSONS T. (1955), Éléments pour une sociologie de l’action, Paris, [Elements for a sociology of action]SCHMIDT G. (1994), Le management comparé: tentative de bilan critique des études empiriques [Comparative management: an attempt at a critical evaluation of empirical studies] 5th conference of the AGRHTYLOR E.B. (1876), Primitive Civilization, ParisWILLIAMSON O.E. (1986), The economic institution of capitalism, NYUSUNIER C. and PRIME N. (2004), International Marketing.

18 of 33

3 Understanding the diversity of national cultures

3.1 Globalisation does not equal a homogenisation of cultures

3.1.1 The phenomenon of globalisation: shrinking cultural differences

For many observers, although the phenomenon of globalisation first appeared in the 50’s, it was not until the 80’s that it really took root. Very broadly speaking, the term globalisation refers to both the process by which political, economic, cultural and social phenomena take on a planetary dimension, and to the results of that process (Mattelard, 2007). The globalisation movement is the result of various factors: once could cite, for example, advances in means of transport and information technologies, the will of countries to reduce the regulatory and tariff barriers that potentially restrict trade, the development, from the 90’s onwards, of worldwide media such as the Internet, etc. The consequences of this phenomenon of globalisation are of course economic, but also social and cultural. Globalisation also has an impact on behaviours, values and cultures. In the business world, activities are conceived and organised on an international level; a company’s products and services are designed, produced and commercialised on a global market. Operating trans-nationally, these companies become global firms (Ohmae, 1990). At consumer level, we are observing an increasing uniformity of patterns of buying and consuming (Levitt, 1983). One could also highlight the trend towards a cultural convergence, dominated by ideals of mass consumption and the market economy. Although it may lead to new rifts, the phenomenon of globalisation is continuing to bring us closer together (Dupriez, 2000). To characterise this trend, we could us the famous quotation by Claude Levi-Strauss (1955): « Mankind has opted for monoculture; it is in the process of creating a mass civilization, as beetroot is grown in the mass. Henceforth, man's daily bill of fare will consist only of this one item ». One cannot fail to note that nowadays this monoculture is dominated by the US cultural model. The media constructs and puts out, on a worldwide basis, universal cultural references. This has led some to comment on a phenomenon of the « cultural convergence of consumers», of the « californisation of needs », an emerging MacWorld or perhaps « coca-colonization » (Hannerz, 1992). From a juxtaposition of self-contained cultural zones, the world is moving progressively towards greater proximity among its inhabitants. Some speak of a « global village » (McLuhan and Fiore, 1969). Despite the fact that we travel, sometimes long distances, we may feel quite at home when we get there: in Cairo, the Egyptian barman speaks to us in English, the McDonalds in Moscow serves the same Big Macs as in Marseilles. We can spend a week in London eating exclusively in Italian restaurants. En route to Sydney, we pick up the reply to an email we sent the previous day to one of our colleagues in Singapore, and at that very moment our sister, comfortably installed in a taxi in Istanbul, sends us a text message on our Blackberry, reminding us that we are due to meet up the following weekend in Toulouse to celebrate the birthday of our grandmother who prefers sushi to cassoulet (Hameau, 2007).

So can we conclude that the world is progressing towards a global culture, a universal culture? Of course, exchanges and interactions do now take place in an international setting; the generalisation of some consumer habits can be observed: televisions series,

19 of 33


audiovisual productions, music … (Dupriez, 2000). Yet, this impression of a worldwide cultural convergence does not withstand a closer inspection of behaviours and attitudes across the world. On the contrary, it is quite clear that diversity and heterogeneity exist side by side in what some have called the « global village »; this « village » is also blatantly characterised by social and economic fractures and strong cultural specificities.

3.1.2 The persistence of cultural diversity and perceivable creolisation

The explosion of new communications does not necessary equal a convergence of attitudes and beliefs: thus, while the West celebrates the proliferation of global media that it sees as a sign of global integration, in other parts of the world it is perceived as something wrongfully akin to western imperialism (Dupriez, 2000).

If the world were a village with 1000 inhabitants, it would be made up of 584 Asians, 124 Africans, 95 Europeans and 84 South Americans. In the village 165 people would speak Mandarin, 86 would speak English, 83 would speak Hindi or Urdu, 65 Spanish, 58 Russian and 37 Arabic. But this list only covers half of the inhabitants. Among the other half, more than 200 other languages would be spoken. In this village, 329 habitants would be Christian, 178 would be Muslims, 60 would be Buddhists. One third of the inhabitants of this global village would be children, and just 60 of them would reach the age of 60. Of the 1000 inhabitants of the village, 200 would receive 75% of the revenues, while 200 others would only get 2%. Finally, only 70 inhabitants would have one or more cars. This example of the global village is clearly simplistic, but it does serve to highlight the heterogeneity of numerous components of culture at international level. According to K. Wiredu (2004), cultural differences do in fact exist in many different areas: language, world vision, religion, philosophy, sciences, technology, aesthetics and customs. These elements are also interconnected in various sub-sets; thus, for example, language contains basic aspects of a world vision that is related to a philosophy or a religion or perhaps certain behaviours. Equilbey (2004) also notes these « differentiation factors » (religion, family, history, ideology, climate, etc.) which he considers constitute further evidence of international cultural diversity.

20 of 33

A series of photographs by Peter Menzel illustrates this international cultural diversity perfectly.

German family – Food from around the world – Peter Wenzel (extract)

Peruvian family – Food from around the world – Peter Wenzel (extract)

In fact, there is little common ground between the German, Peruvian, Mexican and American families who are the subject of this series of photographs…They have different customs and traditions, different languages, different habitats, different foods, different incomes. And underlying these explicit elements are more implicit elements (which cannot be seen in the photos but which exist all the same): the values, the cognitive processes, the myths, the beliefs and the symbolism. Further elements that bear witness to the diversity of cultures.

21 of 33

http://www.voyage.youvox.fr/IMG/jpg/15.jpg

http://www.voyage.youvox.fr/IMG/jpg/10.jpg

Finally, the undoubtedly real trend of the globalisation of culture will not necessarily lead to a homogenisation, but rather to a blending, a miscegenation, a hybridization or creolisation (Hannerz, 1992). Today’s world is paradoxical: simultaneously global and tribal. Indeed, the globalisation trend reinforces the need for a specific identity, to belong to a group or have a clearly defined frame of reference. Contemporary identity is the product of association to multiple groups (Dupriez, 2000). Local cultures change and blend with the universal references of mass culture. The example of the success of Brazilian soap operas throughout the world is particularly revealing of this cultural melting pot. Global culture is capable of forming separate elements and facts into a cohesive whole that can be reintegrated into life and actions: culture is fractal, it is inherently complex (De Rosnay, 2000).

3.1.3 The awareness and flexibility that cultural diversity demands

The emerging idea is that, faced with this cultural heterogeneity, and since social interaction is underpinned by specific cultural models, we must adapt our behaviour and attitude, in order to avoid upsetting or infringing the cultural norms, whether conscious or subconscious, of the person with whom we are interacting (E Hall, 1990). The universalist logic underlying the greater part of the managerial reality needs to be changed (Dupriez, 2000). Originally developed in the US, this universalist logic was broadly assimilated by the countries of western Europe, then by South America and Asia. Ignoring or misreading cultural diversity, however, can lead to management errors, creating opposition and generating misunderstandings (D’Iribarne, 1998): from failed attempts at the integration of staff in the context of a merger, to the loss of existing clientele that finds the standardised presentation of a product unacceptable, even where the product itself has remained changed (Dupriez, 2000). So, the challenge becomes one of managing cultural diversity. This intercultural approach is not straightforward: it requires firstly an understanding and acknowledgement of the existence of other cultures, the integration of the values underlying these cultures and then these cultural specifities that have been identified must be reconciled with the global imperatives (Dupriez, 2000).

It is from this perspective that several studies have sought to identify the cultural models specific to countries or regional zones. The idea behind this research is that culture governs behaviour, reactions, attitudes and emotions. In this regard, culture serves as a collective programming of the human mind, or in other words, a collective mental programme. For this reason, faced with the need to trade and to interact with individuals from other cultures, it is vital to know these cultures better and to identify similarities and differences.

22 of 33

3.2 Analysis of cultural diversity and the characterisation of national cultural

differences

Several major authors have set out the bases of this desire to analyse international cultural diversity. Successive account must be taken of the contributions of Hofstede, Hall, and Trompenaars.

3.2.1 The founding contribution of Hofstede

Gert Hofstede is recognised for his groundbreaking work on the origins of cultural differences and for his approach in seeking to identify the cultural models specific to countries and to regional zones. In fact, Hofstede endeavoured to discover the deeper psychological currents underlying these differences. To do this, in the 60’s and 70’s he ran an intensive statistical study aimed at interviewing (in 2 waves) more than 10, 000 employees of IBM spread over 5 continents and more than 50 countries (Hofstede, 1980). The objective was to identify the national cultural differences and establish their impact on the behaviour of the individuals and on the functioning of the companies. The results of this study made it possible to identify 4 dimensions (Hofstede, 1980; Chevrier, 2003; Kennedy, 2003; Walliser, 2002) which have subsequently been supplemented by a fifth (Hofstede, 1991). These dimensions are independent of each other, and aim to characterise national cultures or cultures of large regional zones.

The first dimension concerns the notion of power distance: the power distance is defined as « the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions accept and expect that power is distributed unequally ». This dimension refers to the acceptance of power differences in society or in a company. Countries with a high power distance index are more at ease with major disparities in power levels than those characterised by a low power distance index. So, for example, according to the results of Hofstede (1980), cultures with a high power distance index (such as France and Romania) are characterised by the great importance placed on status, rank, functions and titles, in difference to countries such as the Netherlands and Denmark, which have cultures with a lower power distance index.

The second dimension concerns the degree of individualism or collectivism: this is the degree to which a society encourages individual action and effort rather than collective effort. Cultures with a high degree of individualism (such as for example the USA) are characterised by labour relations founded more on the research of a particular interest compatible with the objectives of the organisation whereas in cultures with a high degree of collectivism (Japan, for example), the emphasis is more on mutual trust and general interest. Hofstede also extended his reasoning to take in the influence of the principle religions on individualism as compared to the collective orientation; he noted that Protestants show a predilection for individualism, in contrast to Catholics.

The third dimension concerns uncertainty avoidance: this deals with how people deal with the feeling of being threatened, their tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity. Feeling at ease in a situation of uncertainty reveals a culture with a low uncertainty avoidance index whereas feeling threatened in the same situations denotes a culture with a high uncertainty avoidance index. This dimension does in fact define the way in which the members of a society deal with risk and feel a need to control that risk and the uncertainty it generates. An example of a country that favours minimal risk and a high degree of control is France, in comparison with Denmark, which more easily accepts uncertainty. It is for this reason that insurance has a more important role in French society than it does in Danish society.The fourth dimension proposed by Hofstede (1980) is the masculinity of the society: in this regard the author compares « masculine » cultures, which tend to have high expectations in so far as concerns the expression of masculine and feminine roles in society, and feminine cultures which display more fluidity. Additionally, the degree of « masculinity » denotes the importance accorded to so-called « masculine » values, such

23 of 33

as, for example, the fact of « having a career », the desire for wealth or possessions, in comparison to the so-called « feminine » values: tolerance, quality of life, concern for others, etc. Countries with a more feminine culture (such as for example the Netherlands) emphasize quality of life and social cohesion whereas countries with a more masculine orientation (the USA for example) place the accent more on financial success and performance.

Finally, the fifth dimension added by Hofstede in 1991 deals with short-term orientation (USA) versus long-term orientation (Japan). The below table illustrates the approach developed by Hofstede by showing the « scores » obtained in his studies by individuals of different nationalities, for each of the 5 dimensions described above. A high score indicates, for example a high power distance index (PDI), a high degree of individualism (IDV), a high uncertainty avoidance index (UAI), a high degree of « masculine » values (MAS) or a high long-term orientation (LTO).

PDI IDV UAI MAS LTO

DENMARK 18 74 23 16 45

FRANCE 68 71 86 43 39

JAPAN 54 46 92 95 80NETHERLANDS 38 80 53 14 35

ROMANIA 90 91 30 42

USA 40 91 46 62 29Adapted according to Hofstede (1980; 1991)

This analysis can also be used to construct some cultural profiles by country. For example, it can be seen that the USA is characterised by a low power distance index, a high propensity towards individualism, a low degree of formalism and a pioneering and entrepreneurial spirit. (Chevrier, 2003).Moreover, on the basis of his results, and the principle dimensions, Hofstede (1980) went on to draw up 6 major regional zones, grouping the countries of the study into more general categories (see below graphic).

24 of 33

It should also be noted that, more recently, the GLOBE study, led by 170 researchers, in some sixty countries over 10 years (Javenan and Dickson, 1999) comprehensively confirmed Hofstede’s work, obtaining similar results in terms of structure, although the scores of the various countries and some classifications have evolved.

3.2.2 Hall and the importance of communication

The other model that must be considered is that of Edward Hall (1990). This defines culture as being essentially a system for the generation, output and processing of information, i.e. an exchange and communication system (Chevrier, 2003). Culture, seen as a set of behavioural rules acquired during the socialisation process, therefore determines the way in which individuals perceive their environment and use verbal and non-verbal expression.

Hall’s objective, then, is to supply the tools necessary to decipher the messages of another culture. To do this he proposes 3 hidden dimensions of messages: space, time and context (Chevrier, 2003).According to Hall (1990), every culture rests on an implicit conception of time: he contrasts monochronic time and polychronic time. In the monochronic system, time is a linear flux, it is compartmentalised; individuals prefer to devote themselves to one job at a time and timeliness is respected. Time is a quantifiable, tangible piece of data that can be lost or gained and can be cut into scheduled work sequences. In a polychronic system, time is a less specific piece of data. The accent is on the harmony of exchange rather than compliance with any pre-established agenda. People do many things at once, are not bothered by distractions and prioritise human relationships over deadlines. Meetings can be cancelled or deferred according to the course of events, and project can fluctuate

25 of 33

permanently. The below graphic illustrates these differences, taking the example of France and Germany.

FRANCE GERMANYA primarily polychronic systemPeople: do many things at once are easily distracted go from one task to another easily see time commitments as non-

binding targets that can be reviewed prioritise commitments to people work in harder but less consistently

A primarily monochronic system People: do one thing at a time concentrate on the job at hand think about when things must be

achieved put the job first and prioritise

deadlines are methodical, working at a

regular, consistent speed.According to Walliser, 2002

For Hall, the second hidden dimension of messages that reveals aspects of national culture pertains to space and more specifically to physical interpersonal distance (cultural proxemics). For Hall, in the same way as for time, our relationship to space is a cultural acquisition (Chevrier, 2003) and physical interpersonal distance is used to communicate. Accordingly, how interpersonal distance is defined in an interaction depends on the cultural context. Around every individual there is a bubble of invisible space to which access is prohibited or restricted, the size of which depends on the nature of the relationship and also on the culture. So, for example, less physical distance between two speakers could be perceived as comfortable for a Mexican while his German partner will find it embarrassing or inappropriate, interpreting it as an invasion of their personal space.

Finally, Hall draws a distinction between cultures with a high context and those with a low context. In high context cultures, words are less important than context. The individual relies more on informal, subjective, non-verbal, sometimes vague communication. In a low context culture, on the contrary, information is objective, formal and written. A confrontation between people from cultures with different contexts can cause frequent misunderstandings. Accordingly, for example, people from high context cultures may be perceived as being insincere, complicated and unreliable while those from low context cultures may come over as brusque or harsh. So, in Switzerland, the culture is characterised by low context and a predilection for explicit messages whereas in Italy, a high context and more informal communication (implicit message) are favoured (see below diagram).

26 of 33

According to E.T. Hall (2003)

3.2.3 Trompenaars or pragmatic synthesis

Fons Trompenaars supplemented and enriched the work of Hofstede and Hall, particularly with his analysis of cultural differences through seven characteristic dimensions: universalism versus particularism, sequential time versus synchronic time, internal versus external control, achievement versus ascription, neutral versus affective, specific versus diffuse and individualism versus collectivisme. In the aim of improving management practices at international level (Trompenaars and Wooliams, 2003; Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars, 2004) the author takes a clear pragmatic stance, determinedly orientated toward business relations in a multicultural environment.

The author distinguishes universalist cultures and particularist cultures (Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars, 2004). In universalist cultures (United States, Switzerland, Canada, etc.), the general laws and rules governing behaviour constitute a major source of moral reference. Following the rules is an imperative, and the search for the « best » solution allowing problems to be dealt with fairly and honestly is preferred, even if it impacts on the interests of loved ones. More « particularist » cultures (France, Brazil, Poland, etc.) are ones in which « particular » circumstances are more important than the rules, where personal relationships (friends and family) count for more than abstract rules, where the response to a situation may vary according to the circumstances and the individuals involved. To test this dual vision, Trompenaars (2004) surveyed 65,000 individuals from 100 difference countries, presenting them with projective scenarios and asking them how they would react in a situation such as the following: « You’re a passenger in a car driven by one of your close friends. This friend hits a pedestrian while driving at 50 km/h in a 30km/h zone. His lawyer tells you that if you testify for him, saying he was only driving at 30 km/h, he won’t be in any serious trouble ». The results show highly divergent situations. In Switzerland for example, 97% of those interviewed said their friend had no right to expect their help in such a situation and that they would not be prepared to testify; this rate falls to 87% in Germany, 68 in Japan and 32% in Venezuela.

Trompenars and Wooliams (2003) also contrast individualist and communitarian cultures. This second dimension concerns how individuals are linked to each other and reveals the conflict that exists between what each of us wants (as an individual) and the interests of the group to which we belong. In individualist societies, people prioritise individual freedom whereas in communitarian societies, the good and the interests of the group are seen as the priority. To identify their orientation in terms of individualism or communitarianism, Trompenaars (2003) asked those taking part in his study to choose

27 of 33

SwitzerlandGermany

DenmarkUnited states

Great BritainFrance

Italy Latin America

Middle EastSub-Saharan Africa

ChinaJapan

explicit implicit

HighIMPLICIT Style of

communication

EXPLICIT Style of

communication Types of message preferred

Low

Recourse to context

between two statements intended to improve their quality of life. According to the first statement, it is clear that if you obtain the maximum possible degree of freedom and if you make the absolute most of all opportunities to develop personally, you’re quality of life will improve. According to the second statement, if individuals always concern themselves with the well-being of other members of society, then the quality of life of all will be improved, although individual freedom will be reduced. Here, again, the results showed highly divergent situations. In fact, 89% of participants choose the first statement in Israel, with this figure being 53% in Germany, 39% in Japan and 30% in Egypt.

Trompenaars and Wooliams (2003) also deal with the topic of the perception of time through two « dilemmas »: short-term versus long-term orientation, (the relative importance given to the past, present and future) and sequential versus synchronic time (if our vision of time is sequential, we live it as a series of successive events; if our vision is synchronic, the past, present and future will be inter-related in such a way that ideas about the future and memories from the past will combine to form the present). To determine the temporal orientation of individuals and countries, Trompenaars (2003) asked participants to define the temporal horizon (in seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, etc.) of the present, past and future in the form of the following questions: My past began….ago. It ended….ago; My present started….ago and ends in….; My future will start in….and end in…. His results show that the Swedes and the Finns are the most « long-termist » while the Africans and the South Americans are the most « short termist ». The sequential versus synchronic contract proposed by Trompenaars and Wooliams (2003) takes up and expands Hall’s monochronic – polychronic typology citing, for example, the case of the telling synchronic approach of Italian culture, where individuals are used to organising their life in a space comprised of several parallel and synchronous lines (talking on the phone, organising their diary, drinking a coffee, holding simultaneous conversations, etc.). Also cited is the case of Switzerland where the inhabitants reputedly respect queues, planning and pre-established organisation rigorously.

The fourth dimension concerns the contrast between internal and external control. This dimension deals with two different visions of the bonds between man and nature, the relationship between the individual and his environment. Trompenaars (2004) distinguishes between societies dominated by an « organic » vision of nature and societies that are influenced by a « mechanical » vision of nature. An individual with a « mechanical » vision of nature can master and control nature, and in the broader sense, his environment (internal control) whereas with an « organic » vision of nature the individual believes that it is the environment that controls him, rather than the other way round (external control). Transferring this vision to the business world, Trompenaars (2004) asked the group participating in his study to choose between two statements: a) What happens to me is my own doing and corresponds to the consequences of my actions and b) Sometimes I feel that I do not have enough control over the events that happen in my life. The results show highly contrasting situations in Western « internal control» type societies and Eastern more « external control » type societies. In fact, 86% of Norwegians and 76% of French people chose the phrase « What happens to me is my own doing and corresponds to the consequences of my actions », in China the figure was only 37%.

The fifth dimension by Trompenaars (2004) concerns the distinction between achievement and ascription. According to the author, some cultures accord higher status to individuals on the basis of their actions, their behaviour or their performance (achievement) whereas in other cultures or societies, status depends on age, social class, education, gender, etc. (ascription). Achievement refers to « doing » (what you do) while ascription refers to the person (who a person is). In order to identify this difference in the countries included in the study, Trompenaars et Wooliams (2003) asked the participants from the various countries to say how far they agreed with the following statement: « The most important thing in life is to act as really suits you, even if you don’t get things done ». The percentage of support for this statement « acts as really suits you » corresponds to a culture orientated towards achieved status. For example, the results show that the USA has a very high rate of support of this statement (76%) whereas this figure in Japan is very law (26%).

28 of 33

The sixth dimension proposed by Trompenaars et Wooliams (2003) concerns the contrast between « affective » cultures and « neutral » cultures, in other words, between societies in which individuals reveal and demonstrate their emotions and those in which displays of emotions are controlled. The author asked the participants in the survey to state how far they agreed with the following statement: « In my society, it is considered unprofessional to express emotions overtly ». Once again, the country variable is the most significant, demonstrating the very clear differences between behaviours in the expression of emotions. For example, 74% of Japanese participants agreed with the statement, compared to 48% of the Danes, 30% of the French and just 15% of Kuwaitis.

Finally, the fourth dimension proposed by Trompenaars and Wooliams (2003) concerns the personal involvement of individuals in their inter-personal relationships, specifically in the business context. The author deals with the topic of the possible interpenetration between the business worlds (and the relationships corresponding to them) and personal worlds (and the relationships corresponding to them). He draws a distinction between the cultures in which these business and personal worlds are separate (low personal involvement) and those cultures in which these worlds are combined. Trompenaars gave the participants in this study a situation, asking them to choose between two attitudes: your boss asks you to help him repaint his house over the weekend: a) I don’t have to paint the house if I don’t feel like it; the relationship I have with my boss is specific to the workplace b) I have to do it, my financial life depends on my boss; my relationship with my boss goes further than the simple context of the office. Extreme variations were observed between the different countries surveyed. 91% of Danes would not help their boss, while this figure in China is 32%.

3.3 Practical interpretation of the characterisation of national cultures:

« working with the X »

On the basis of these various studies, much has been published to help businessmen or executives to overcome cultural barriers. These works generally focus on « increasing intercultural awareness » (Trompenaars, 2003), in other words, the acceptance of the relativity of management behaviours and practices. This increased awareness will enable greater tolerance and openness towards other cultural environments, by showing for example that something that would be unacceptable in a French context may be legitimate in another culture. This greater awareness of relativity goes hand in hand with learning more about the culture concerned and the differences between their culture and the target culture.

These works generally approach the issue in four topics. The first topic concerns the principal economic, political, geographical, social, historical and demographic aspects of the country concerned. The principal stereotypes are also covered and listed. The second topic most commonly concerns the working environment: decision-making, behaviour in the workplace, personal relationships and their place, degrees of formality, time management, what happens in meetings and negotiation methods. The third topic covered is usually social and personal relationships: lifestyle, food, appropriate behaviour at a lunch, a dinner, sports, shopping, markets etc. Finally, these books list practical information: mail, useful telephone numbers, advice, translation of common phrases useful in daily life, etc.

There are two types of books to be distinguished in this category: general works on « good practice » in several countries or zones (Sadik-Roznyai and Pinon, 2004; Lawrence, 2004), and works focusing on one country in particular (Grzeskowiak, 2005; Herrington, 2004; Rosenthal, 2003; Engel, 2004; Gioseffi, 2003; Engel, 2005; Selmer, 2004; Joseph, 2005).

That said, some studies have shown that although this type of approach to the intercultural issue can indeed improve knowledge of communication methods and behaviours, it is less effective at improving capacities for analysis and conflict resolution

29 of 33

skills. Moreover, these determinist visions are sometimes dangerous in that they encourage the formation of behavioural stereotypes that can differ significantly from the behaviour of a specific individual (Chevrier, 2003).

30 of 33

3.4 Bibliography

CHEVRIER S., Le management interculturel (2003) [Intercultural Management]D’IRIBARNE Ph. (1998), Culture et mondialisation: gérer par delà les frontières [Culture and Globalisation: managing across borders] ParisDUPRIEZ P. (2000), La résistance culturelle. Fondements, applications et implications du management interculturel, [Cultural Resistance. The Foundations, applications and implications of intercultural Management] BrusselsENGEL D. (2004), Passport Japan: Your Pocket Guide to Japanese Business, Customs and EtiquetteENGEL D. (2005), Passport U.S.A.: Your Pocket Guide to North American Business, Customs and EtiquetteEQUILBEY N. (2004) Le management interculturel, [Intercultural Management] ParisGIOSEFFI C. (2003), Passport Italy: Your Pocket Guide to Italian Business, Customs & EtiquetteGRZESKOWIAK A. (2005), Passport Hong Kong: Your Pocket Guide to Hong Kong Business, Customs and EtiquetteHALL E.T. and HALL M.R., Guide du comportement dans les affaires internationales [Guide to behaviour in international business] (2003) HALL E.T., The Dance of Life (1984)HAMEAU P., L’Art de la Stratégie [The Art of Strategy], Les Echos.fr (2007)HAMPDEN-TURNER C., TROMPENAARS F., Au-delà du choc des cultures (Beyond the Culture Shock) (2004)HANNERZ U., Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organization of Meaning (1992) HERRINGTON E (2004), Passport Brazil: Your Pocket Guide to Brazilian Business, Customs & EtiquetteHOFSTEDE G. (1991), Cultures and organizations, NYHOFSTEDE G., Culture’s consequences and international differences in work related values (1980)Houston India Herald, 9 October1998JAVIDAN, M., DICKSON, M. and Associates (1999), “Cultural Influences on Leadership and Organizations: Project GLOBE'. In V. Arnold (ed.), Advances in Global Leadership, Stamford, CT.JOSEPH N (2005), Passport France: Your Pocket Guide to French Business, Customs and EtiquetteKENNEDY C. (2003), Toutes les théories du management, [All Management Theories] ParisLAWRENCE P. (2004), Managing in Western Europe, NYLEVI-STRAUSS C., Sad Tropics (1955)LEVITT T. (1983), The globalization of markets, Harvard Business Review, n°61MATTELARD A., Encyclopaedia Universalis (2007)MCLUHAN M.and FIORE Q., War and Peace in the Global Village (1969)MEIER O., Intercultural Management (2004)OHMAE K. (1990), The borderless world: power and strategy in the interlinked economy, LondonROSENTHAL D. (2003), Passport Israel: Your Pocket Guide to Israeli Business, Customs, and EtiquetteROSNAY DE J. (2000), The Symbiotic Man, ParisSADIK-ROZNYAI O. and PINON A. (2004), Passeport du manager pour l’Europe [A Manager’s Passport to Europe] ParisSELMER J. (2004), International Management in China: Crosscultural IssuesTROMPENAARS F. WOOLIAMS P., Business across cultures (2003)TROMPENAARS F., L’entreprise multiculturelle [Multicultural Business] (2003)USUNIER C. and PRIME N., International Marketing (2004)WALLISER B. (2002), International Marketing, e-thèqueWIREDU K. (2004), Reflections on Cultural Diversity, Diogène, Vol. 1 n° 205.

31 of 33

32 of 33

33 of 33

Documents

Disclaimer - CPI · Web viewMorin (1984) classifies this concept as a « misnomer, a word that seems stable, solid, yet is just a trap, hollow, soporific, undermining, duplicitous,