cdpm coursework (zeb)

7/31/2019 CDPM Coursework (Zeb)

1/10

CDPM ID:

Introduction

Culture is considered to be one of the unique aspects of human behavior. Therefore, when

exploring the culture in different society it should be taken into account of how history and religion

impact on shaping the society. In the past, many famous people have studied how society is built in

various geographical spaces and identified theories based on which the culture differentiates. Hong

Wu (1991) defines the culture as a complex system or order which is emerging among a group of

people who have common values and attitudes, and other social elements, such as rules, customs,

and traditions. In order to find evidence whether culture has strong relations with individual or

group behavior several theories has been explained how culture influence role of management in

business organizations. Most popular theories are suggested by Hofstedes (1980) and further

developed by Tropenaars (1997), Hall and Kluckhon and Strodbeck, combination of which are

discussed and explored its practical evidence in Italys culture as well as Uzbek culture.

What is Culture

People have different attitudes, beliefs and behavior living in various societies. Those differences

will differentiate their values put on difference in way of doing things and especially in workplace.

Thus, culture is the collective of those people in a particular society who share common values and

beliefs which they believe is right. Culture is said to have three characteristics; (1) it is learned

from other members in a group over time, (2) it is interrelated which means that each part of the

culture is deeply connected to the other, and (3) it is shared among the members of a group and

passed on to an individual from the other members of the group (Hollensen, 2004 cited in Dohler

Lisa, 2006). However, there is an argument about culture saying whether it is inherited from

history or learned over long period of time from diverse environment. Hofstede and Bond (1988)

defines the culture as "the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members ofone category of people from those of another" (cited in David A. Ralston et al, 1997). This is true,

of course, because people are different from national level to individual characters. At a national

level, individuals will follow and conform the set of beliefs and behavior that is appropriate for or

within the society. However, their individual culture such as values on likes and dislikes, the

degree of responsibility and commitment to certain tasks are also major influence in workplace.

Culture according to Hollensen (2004) is said to have four layers; national culture,

business/industry culture, company culture, and individual behaviour (cited in Dohler Lisa et al,

2006). Even though business culture, company culture and individual culture has its own cultural

roots they are largely affected by the nations culture due to historical heritage and religion

-1-


2/10

CDPM ID:

influences. In fact, religion, history, and education are factors that have been identified as

important in defining a culture (Ronen and Shenkar 1985 cited in David A. Ralston et al, 1997).

Section A

Swartz (1994) recognizes culture which he calls hierarchy and egalitarianism (cited in Bharat and

Steers, 1999). In hierarchical societies, there is the unequal distribution of power, roles, and

resources are legitimate (ibid). Individuals are socialized to comply with obligations and roles

according to their hierarchical position in society and are sanctioned if they do not (ibid). In

contrast, in egalitarian cultures, individuals are seen as moral equals and are socialized to

internalize a commitment to voluntary cooperation with others and to be concerned with others

welfare (Bharat and Steers, 1999). According to Schwartz (1994) research, China, Thailand, and

Turkey are hierarchical cultures, while Denmark, Italy, and Norway are egalitarian cultures.

Italian people view themselves as egalitarian people whose culture is based on democratic

principles of respect and interdependence (Everyculture.com, 2010). Italian like people for

themselves and not for what they do for a living their professional accomplishments or how much

money they earn (ibid). Due to the egalitarian culture, Italian people tend to have simple tastes and

are not prone to display or excessive showiness of their wealth. In terms of personality, Italianpeople pride themselves on being honest and sincere in their personal relationships. The

interpersonal communication of the Italian people is direct and frank. Greetings are casual, with a

firm handshake, direct eye contact, and a smile (ibid). Moreover, due to egalitarian culture, Italian

people often introduce they often introduce themselves with their first name only which makes

them to be more informal and causal.

According to Hofstede (1980), Italy scores low on power distance, high on individualism, low on

masculinity and low on uncertainty avoidance (Isaksson Emilie, 2006). From this perspective, it

can be said that employees in Italy are dependent to managers to some degree, but relations

between them is consultative rather than strict demanding. A Italian employee can express

disagreement to managers point of view because emotional distance between them is low. In

addition, Italian organizations are decentralized and individuals are given responsibilities.

Managers values individual performance rather than groups and individuals put more value on

organizational goal achievements which also give them a freedom of performance in their own

way. There is a few needs for laws and regulations in organizations and Italian managers do not

expect specific instructions in daily business activities. Italy is also considered as a feministic

-2-


3/10

CDPM ID:

country where there is an equal gender role in society in decision making and task performance

(ibid).

In terms of cultural etiquette in the country, Italian people invite the friends or relatives for the

social activities verbally (not in written form). However, they expect and value punctuality in both

business and social situations (Facts and Statistics, 2010). One of the important cultural etiquette

of Italian people is that they prefer to separate their business and personal lives. So, this indicates

that during the work, personal issues will not be discussed or vice versa. Moreover, the most

important cultural attributes of business etiquette of Italian are that they would be informal in

making negotiations, value individual interests and use direct communications (ibid).

According to Lane Italian people are hospitable but they are not that very sociable (Isaksson

Emilie, 2006). Their attitude towards migration into the Italy is rather negative. For example, they

want foreign tourists to come and rent their holiday houses on the coast and fjord, but to buy them

should not be permitted (ibid). They always want to have time to themselves and they do not prefer

to have visitors. In terms of gender equality in Italian society, there is an observed evidence of

positive results. Italian females are advanced to senior level positions in many organizations (ibid).

Moreover, Italian people value more independence and self-sufficiency. Being indebted by

borrowing or receiving favors makes people uncomfortable (Isaksson Emilie, 2006). Personal

space is respected, and so individuals stand well apart from each other when conversing (ibid).

Section B

Both Hofstede (1984), Hall (1976) and Trompenaars (1997) researches provide studies and

analysis of cultural differences in various countries which will help multi-national companies to

operate effectively in the foreign cultural environment. Hofstede provides studies of cultural

difference at a national level while Trompenaars studies is more focused on cultural differences at

organizational level.

Hofstede (1984)

-3-


4/10

CDPM ID:

The power of national cultures can also be understood by examining seminal research conducted

by Geert Hofstede (1984). Hofstede conducted research on IBM employees in 40 countries and

discovered that cultural values strongly influenced relationships both within and between

organizational divisions (Oded and Luo, 2005). Hofstede (1980) survey revealed four underlying

dimension of culture: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, masculinity and long

term orientation (cited in Lane Kelly et al, 1987). He believes that those dimensions various from

one society to other. The measurement will be based on putting those aspects on continuum and

analyses the degree of each of the aspects (high vs low, strong vs weak etc) for the respective

society.

Power Distance Index

The first index, power distance, analyzes the nations cultural differences between power andwealth (Hofstede, 2010). If the index is high then it implies that a nation has inequality in power

and wealth. In organizational settings, the level of power distance is related to the degree of

centralization, authoritative and autocratic leadership within the organization (Dohler Lisa, 2006).

According to this dimension, Italy is scored moderate on this index indicating that Italian decision

making is centralized (Oded and Luo, 2005). In terms of organizations, Italian companies has

flatter organization pyramids where there is less hierarchy and bureaucracy in the organizations

Uncertainty Avoidance Index

The second index suggested by Hofstede (1984) is uncertainty avoidance indexwhich indicates

how tolerant for uncertainty and ambiguity the individuals in a society are (Isaksson Emilie, 2006).

This index analyzes how the society handles the fact that the future is unknown and always will be.

A country which ranks high in uncertainty avoidance shows that this country has a low tolerance

and the government creates a society with many laws, rules, and regulations in order to reduce the

amount of uncertainty. On the contrary, low ranking on uncertainty avoidance has a higher

tolerance and the society is less rule-oriented, more open to changes and takes on more risks

(Isaksson Emilie, 2006). Italy scored high on uncertainty avoidance index indicating that there are

lots of written rules and people in this culture have less willingness to take risks in order to dealing

the ambiguity. Moreover, Italian people prefer structured activities and rules in the organization in

their daily activities (Oded and Luo, 2005).

Individualism vs Collectivism Index

Individualism, the third index, is related to how society values individuality, collectivity and

interpersonal relations (Hofstede, 1984). In individualistic culture, people are seen as having

-4-


5/10

CDPM ID:

separate goals and interests (Lane Kelly, 1987). The importance of individual benefits is focused

and therefore, companys goals should coincide employees goals as much as possible. However,

collectivistic culture common goals and interests are shared within a group of people in a society

(ibid). In collectivistic culture strong sense of group belongingness exists and group success is

valued higher than individual success. Italian culture tends to be individualistic-oriented where

organization is more impersonal (Hofstede, 1984). Moreover, Italian people defend their own-self-

interest both personally and professionally. In organizations, the performance and different human

resource practices encourage individual initiatives.

Masculinity Index

Masculinity index concerns how the gender roles are perceived and divided in particular society. In

masculine society family role is dependent on gender (Isaksson Emilie, 2006). In masculinesocieties, often male has more power to make decisions. However, in feminine societies the male

and female roles are equal which is less dependent on gender and there is an equal participation

and influence of genders in decision making (Hofstede, 1984). Italy scored high on masculinity

index indicating that in this society gender roles are maximized which encourages the male

performance in different levels of the organization and social life. Moreover, in Italy more men

participate in more qualified jobs than woman (Oded and Luo, 2005).

Long-term orientation Index

This dimensions is added by Hofstede (1984) for the original four dimensions. This dimension is

originally called Confucian Dynamism because of anchoring in the Confucian value system

(Oded and Luo, 2005). Long-term orientation index represents such values as thrift, persistence,

and traditional respect of social obligations (ibid). According to this culture dimension, Italy

scored low on this index (33% cited by Oded and Luo, 2005). This indicates that Italian people

tend to value traditions and social obligations which are more past or present-oriented culture.

Fons Trompenaars (1997)

-5-


6/10

CDPM ID:

In addition to Hofstedes cultural dimension, Trompenars (1997) developed several cultural

parameters with an aim of explaining how cultural differences influence the process of

management (cited in Isaksson Emilie, 2006). These parameters are: universalism versus

particularism, individualism versus communitarianism, neutral versus emotional, specific versus

diffuse, achievement versus ascription. Several of thoses parameters share characteristics with

dimensions suggested by Hofstede (1980), but they are more developed and focus on relations

between people.

Universalism versus particularism

Universalism versus particularism, as Trompenars (1997) suggests, concerns about how rules in

organization is valued and respected. In universalistic culture rules and values are highly respected

by everyone while in particularistic culture rules are not considered as an absolute (ibid).According to the Trompenaars analysis, Italy scored high on this index (93%) which indicates that

circumstances and relationships of people influence judgments of what is good or true. This may

also indicate that Italian society is built upon universalistic culture where rules are more important

than relationships. In majority cases of business relations, legal contracts will be made and seen as

trustworthiness.

Specific versus diffuse

Specific versus diffuse parameter is related to the extent how people in different culture allow

entering their public or private space. People living in specific culture they allow people to enter

the public space but difficult to reach the private space which is reserved for close friends

(Isaksson Emilie, 2006). However, in diffuse culture the public space is rather small but when

successfully entered it can be a path towards a private space. Moreover, in specific cultures,

individuals are direct, clear, blunt, and to the point while examining the facts (Oded and Luo,

2005). Italy scored high on this culture index (91%) which makes the culture high specific

(Trompenaars and Woollians, 2005).

Achievement versus ascription

The most important parameter of Trompenars (1997) which directly related to organizational

management is that the achievement versus ascription parameter which determine factors how

peoples status are viewed and appreciated. In achievement oriented culture peoples status are

based on the achievement and personal skills while in ascription oriented culture people status are

dependent on family background, gender preferences and age advantages. Italy scored moderate

-6-


7/10

CDPM ID:

(54%) on this culture index indicating that people emphasize attainment of position and influence

through a demonstration of expertise (Trompenaars and Woollians, 2005).

Edward T. Hall ( 1976)

Hall (1976) argues that cultures vary in terms of how contextual information is viewed and

interpreted. The context of a situation is crucial to communication, often heavily influencing not

only what is said and how it is said, but more important, how the information is perceived (David

Ralston, 1997). Hall (1976) also states that some cultures rely more heavily on context in their

perceptions and interactions with others. In high context cultures, such as China, Korea, Japan,

France, Greece and many Arab countries, what is unsaid but understood carries more weight than

what is actually written down or said (ibid). Hall (1976) argues that many cross-cultural problemscan be understood by examining differences in how context is viewed. Leaders would be well

advised to consider context in their interactions with those from a culture with a different context

(ibid).

Based on the theories, Hall (1976) developed high-context and low-context cultural framework.

According to this framework, Italy is considered as low-context culture. In low context cultures,

such as the American, Scandinavian, German, and Swiss, the focus is on the specifics of what is

written or said, and trust is gained through legal agreements (Hall, 1976). In addition, trust is relied

upon during negotiations and agreements, and personal relations are often a central part of the

interaction (ibid).

Section C

According to the analyzed cultural dimensions it can be compared to Uzbekistan in order to

understand the influence if Italian company opens its branch in Uzbekistan. So, according to the

Hofstedes power distance index, Italy is scored low on this index indicating that Italian decision

making is less centralized. In contrast, Uzbek organizational tend to be more hierarchical which is

highly affected by the Soviet Regime and Taylorism concept. This may arouse conflict between

Italian manager and Uzbek subordinate. Because Italian manager expects more frank and direct

communication, he/she believes that Uzbek subordinate can show his/her feelings overtly and there

would be more informal communication. However, Uzbek subordinate tends to be introvert. Thus,

there will be difficulties in building relationships.

-7-


8/10

CDPM ID:

Moreover, Italy scored low on Hofstedes uncertainty avoidance index indicating that there are

few written rules and people in this culture have more willingness to take risks in order to dealing

the ambiguity. In terms of Italian manager and Uzbek subordinate, Italian manager expects more

ambition and activities to be able to make a risk in dealing with the ambiguity. In contrast, Uzbek

subordinate expects more rules and structured planning.

Italy scored low on masculinity index indicating that in this society gender roles are minimized

which encourages the female performance in different levels of the organization and social life. In

terms of female Italian manager and Uzbek subordinate, Uzbek subordinate believes that females

are less stricter than males and they can not operate the company so successfully as a man does.

However, female Italian manager expects equal participation of gender in the organization in everydepartments. Italian manager also believes that female also has the opportunity to take senior level

positions and rewards are based on the employee performances.

Based on the Trompenaars cultural dimensions, Italian culture is considered as specific where

individuals are direct, clear, blunt, and to the point while examining the facts. However, Uzbek

people tend to be more indirect and diffuse culture where public space of individuals is rather

small but when successfully entered it can be a path towards a private space. In terms of Italian

manager and Uzbek subordinate, the Uzbek subordinate is not punctual and direct as Italian

manager would expect. In fact, the conflict arises due to cultural differences in communication.

Italy scored moderate (54%) on achievement index of Trompenaars culture framework indicating

that people emphasize attainment of position and influence through a demonstration of expertise

(Trompenaars and Woollians, 2005). However, Uzbek people tend to be ascription oriented where

people respect people because of his/her age, work experience or inherited status rather than

achievements and good performance. When Italian manager establishes the company, he/she

should consider those factors in order to establish proper compensation and reward systems.

Conclusion

-8-


9/10

CDPM ID:

In conclusion, it can be said that culture is a commonly shared beliefs and attitudes which are

transmitted through historical heritage or longer time and resistance to external influences.

Therefore, it makes it unique and complex. Cultural differences in society can be described best in

multinational companies but in domestic organizations it is considered as normal and appropriate.

Conflict in culture arises when two different individual values collides. It should be considered

how nations culture as important in workplace where individuals have different values on the

fulfillment of tasks. Therefore, societys influence on business activities is huge.

References

-9-


10/10

CDPM ID:

1. David A. Ralston et al, 1997, The Impact of National Culture and Economic Ideology on

Managerial Work Values: A Study of the United States, Russia, Japan, and ChinaJournal

of International Business Studies, Vol. 28, No. 1. (1st Qtr., 1997), pp. 177-207 JSTOR

online journals [online] Available from: http://www.jstor.org/~ [Accessed 11/11/11]

2. Dohler Lisa, 2006, Establishing in Malaysia Jonkoping International Business School,

JSTOR online journals [online] Available from: http://www.uppsatser.se/sok.php?

sok_fritext=+hofst ede+management [Accessed 11/11/11]3. Herciu Mihaela, 2006, The influence of culture on the economic freedom and the

international business [online] Available from: http:// mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/ 1686/

[Accessed 11/11/11]

4. Isaksson Emilie, 2006, How is the Italian manager percieved in an international

perspective Kristianstad University, Department of Business Studies, [online] Available

from: http://www.uppsatser.se/sok.php?sok_fritext=+hofstede+management [Accessed

11/11/11]

5. Lane Kelly, 1987, Assessing effects of cultue on Managerial attitudes: A Three-culture

model Journal of International Business Studies, Vol 18, No.2 pp 17-31, JSTOR online

journals [online] Available from: http://www.jstor.org/~ [Accessed 11/11/11]

6. Hong Wu, 1991 A Cross-Cultural Study of Work-Related Attitudes and Values DoctoralDissertation, Trondheim, NTH-Trykk,

7. Oded Shenkar and Yadong Luo, 2005 The Cultural Environment International Business,

Ch. 6, pp 138-181

8. Hofstede Geert, 2010 Cultural Dimensions [online] Available from: http://www.geert-

hofstede.com/hofstede_germany.shtml) [Accessed 11/11/11]

9. Fons Trompenaars and Peter Woolliams, 2005 Managing Across Cultures: The quest for

a new leadership paradigm Culture for Business, Vol 5, No. 3 pp 12-16

10. Trompenaars, F. and Hampden-Turner, C., 1997 Riding the Waves of Culture London:

Brealey

11. Hofstede Geerts, 1984 Cultural dimensions in management and planning Webber

Edition, Scott, Foresman and Company Chapter 11: Organizational behavior and the

practice of management, pp 410-422,

12. Hall Edward T., 1976 Beyond Culture New York Doubleday; TBS Buritanika.

13. Bhagat and Steers, 1999 Culture, Organizations, and Work Cambridge University Press

14. Everyculture.com. 2010 Italian Culture [online] Available from:

http://www.everyculture.com/No-Sa/Italy.html [Accessed 11/11/11]

15. Facts and statistics, 2010 [online] Available from:

http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/resources/global-etiquette/Italy-country-profile.html

[Accessed 11/11/11]

-10-
http://www.jstor.org/~http://www.uppsatser.se/sok.php?sok_fritext=+hofst%20ede+managementhttp://www.uppsatser.se/sok.php?sok_fritext=+hofst%20ede+managementhttp://www.uppsatser.se/sok.php?sok_fritext=+hofstede+managementhttp://www.jstor.org/~http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_germany.shtmlhttp://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_germany.shtmlhttp://www.everyculture.com/No-Sa/Norway.htmlhttp://www.kwintessential.co.uk/resources/global-etiquette/sweden-country-profile.htmlhttp://www.jstor.org/~http://www.uppsatser.se/sok.php?sok_fritext=+hofst%20ede+managementhttp://www.uppsatser.se/sok.php?sok_fritext=+hofst%20ede+managementhttp://www.uppsatser.se/sok.php?sok_fritext=+hofstede+managementhttp://www.jstor.org/~http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_germany.shtmlhttp://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_germany.shtmlhttp://www.everyculture.com/No-Sa/Norway.htmlhttp://www.kwintessential.co.uk/resources/global-etiquette/sweden-country-profile.html

cdpm coursework (zeb)

Documents