Introduction:
Organizational culture has played a formidable role in the promotion of organizational sustainability and the promotion of the international marketplace. The different dimensions of national culture are also becoming important for managers in the present times owing to the formidable significance of international business and the requirement of cultural adaptability to sustain business activities in foreign market environments. The requirement of a comprehensive evaluation of the explicit dimensions of the concept of culture, norms, and values and the cultural assumptions of management are necessary for international business managers as they could not cope with the conflicts in international market environments (Alghasi, 2016).
However, Hofstede presented a model of national culture depicting distinct aspects that characterize the culture of a particular country. The model proved to be an explicit advantage as it was able to present distinct variables for the categorization of cultural aspects and therefore facilitated cognizable inferences towards the specific dimensions of management culture. However, the ambiguities which are perceived in the scores on Hofstede’s dimensions and the actual practices in the national culture require a critical assessment of Hofstede’s model of national culture which has been illustrated in the following essay. As per Ardichvili, et al, the references to the works of Osland and Bird about cultural paradoxes could also provide an appropriate explanation of scenarios where national cultures having a low tolerance for uncertainty depict behavioral characteristics of flexibility and negligence (Ardichvili, et al., 2013).
The case of Japanese companies including ambiguous clauses in their contracts is a deviation from the observed dimension of high uncertainty avoidance in the national culture of Japan. On the contrary, American organizations which have been associated with measurements of a higher tolerance for uncertainty avoidance according to Hofstede’s dimensions of national culture.
Therefore a critical apprehension based on theoretical models about the determinants and dimensions of culture, business culture disparities among the Eastern and Western countries, cultural dilemmas, the interrelationship between culture and management styles, culture and strategy as well as future implications of culture on the management of transnational trade (Bochner, 2013).
Determinants of culture:
Culture has been explicitly defined as the shared values, norms, beliefs, attitudes, and ways of thinking concerning organizational functions. Culture can be considered as the formidable initiative for the determination of our perception of self and the perspective which is adopted by us to perceive the world. Artifacts and attitudes could be observed in the practical workplace behavior and explicit depiction of attitudes by employees (Chanlat, Davel & Dupuis, 2013).
The norms and values refer to the precedents set by the organization for basic operations of the enterprise while every organizational culture is characterized by a unique set of policies. As per Asian, Kanungo & Mendonca, the basic assumptions are also accounted as a primary layer of organizational culture which varies according to the basic assumption that can be associated with ambiguities about explanation and description. The development of culture could be associated with the culture and nation, organizational culture, professional culture, culture and management, corporate culture, and national culture contexts (Aycan, Kanungo & Mendonca, 2014).
The development of organizational culture has to be associated with notable implications for the evaluation of national culture since the operational aspects would involve the domestic workforce and the complexities that could arise from the disparities between the organizational culture and national culture. The variation of culture in an organization on various contextual levels is associated with the probability of confusion. Management styles and cultures of an organization have also been found to be interrelated entities in the various literature sources and research studies (Conway, 2017).
Despite the ambiguities about the varying aspects of culture and its impact on organizations, the evaluation of cultural dimensions through Hofstede’s model, demographic research, and external environment analysis has provided substantial opportunities for international business managers to weigh their options in the foreign market (De Mooij, 2013).
The global business space has been expanding over the years and the development of the global economy must led to the sporadic growth of developing economies despite the detrimental impact rendered by economic downturns such as the global financial crisis. The interaction of workforces of varying nationalities is an evident outcome of the increasing prominence of international business expansion.
As per Dolva, Susomrith & Standing, 2016, Communication and language are profoundly observed as the crucial components required for addressing the ability of multinational enterprises to execute international business activities alongside enforcing a formidable reputation in global operations (Dolva, Susomrith & Standing, 2016, December). Therefore conception of culture has also been identified as a notable requirement for international business managers since deterministic attitudes towards the evaluation of culture can be considered formidable sources of conflicts due to the outcomes of underestimation of other forms of identity and reinforcement of prejudices. Hofstede’s work in the domain of cross-cultural organizational studies has been widely accepted in the domain of business.
The development of five cultural dimensions from his work was associated with the depiction of uncertainty avoidance, power distance, long-term orientation, masculinity, and individualism in a nation’s culture (Greenfield & Cocking, 2014). The profound success of the framework presented by Hofstede could be observed in its ability to reduce cultural complexities into quantifiable dimensions which can be applied in distinct intercultural exchanges. However, a reflection of the critiques of Hofstede’s dimensions has also pointed out the negligence of crucial factors such as cultural paradoxes, stereotypes, and polarization. The radical nature of the critiques of Hofstede’s framework indicates outright rejection of the model while certain critiques are directed towards corrections and refining of the model. The criticisms are also reflective of the necessity to reduce dependence on the framework for all international business initiatives (Kerkech, 2016).
The concepts of Hofstede’s model have been ascertained as a set of assumptions that have been taken for granted thereby reflecting on the problematic nature of the model. Unquestioned use of the model while rejecting the concerns for other models such as Hall’s high context and low context evaluation of culture and the classifications of universalism and particularism depicted by Trompenaars model could lead to unwanted fallacies. The requirement of formal emphasis on complex concepts of intercultural communication and culture serves as a profound implication for varying the perspectives and approaches for viewing culture on the organization, national, corporate, and management levels. Acquiring a comprehensive impression of the critical reviews of Hofstede’s models wherein in-built Western bias has been observed in the works of Osland and Bird.
According to Kinloch & Metge, the critique is directed towards the assumption of the basic rationale suggesting the influence of Western perspective on the determination of the individual dimensions. The critical work of Osland and Bird also referred references to a wide assortment of methodological issues particularly involving polarization of cultural dimensions, limited reference to the evaluation of practice, and the complexity of underlying components of individual dimensions (Kinloch & Metge, 2014). The foremost concern raised in the critical review is reflective of references to the uncritical use of Hofstede’s model that can be addressed through a review of academic research and publications about the favorable alternatives that can be used for supporting cultural dimensions frameworks.
The particular references to the cultural paradoxes can help in describing the observed instances of disparity from the observed dimensions of national culture. It is also essential to observe that the cultural paradoxes refer to the belief of people are not always indicative of the alignment with the learning from the culture. The expectations from the perspective of bipolarity could be indicative of ignorance towards the components that do not align with the broader picture and could be used to illustrate them as the prominent deviations that could be used for describing the rules.
The critical reflection presented in the context of cultural dimensions also reflects on the alternatives from the proving of rules. The implications of cultural paradoxes are prominently included to remove the ambiguities arising from differentiation and overcoming stereotypes (Lamb, 2013). The explanation of cultural paradoxes from six distinct aspects reflects on the probabilities of the tendency of the observers for confusing groups values and individual values, unresolved cultural issues, role differences, value trumping, real values as compared to espoused values, and bipolar patterns.
The routine references to cultural dimensions are meant for directions in particular situations and contexts while paradoxes could be a reminder of the dynamic, complex, contextual, and relational content of culture (Milfont & Fischer, 2015). The ignorance of paradoxes has been illustrated as a potential highlight in the context of insufficiencies in the sophistication of stereotyping and determination of plausible approaches to cultural paradoxes. The oversimplified stereotyping has led to concerns for Western dichotomous thinking in which the proposed idea of value trumping wherein certain values are prioritized over others in specific scenarios depicts the explanation of the paradoxes (Minkov & Hofstede, 2014).
The case of Japanese contracts which are characterized by ambiguous clauses despite the observation of necessary implications towards higher uncertainty avoidance in Japan can be understood based on high context culture where minimal attention is paid to contract details. The high context of cultural communication in Japan could be perceived as a viable measure of the high uncertainty avoidance in the country. The discussion of the paradoxes reveals concerning the case of Japanese vagueness in the contracts that the high context communication norms are intended for developing the significance of trust and relationships which can be considered to be more reliable than the resolution of confusion that could proliferate from the detailed paperwork involved in contracts (Moore, 2016).
The higher uncertainty avoidance aspect in national culture is indicative of the tendency among individuals to acquire an impression of the mental structures that could depreciate anxiety resulting from the ambiguities which are reduced by the high uncertainty avoidance. The profound characteristics in a culture with high uncertainty avoidance would be directed towards absolute belief in rituals, traditional social relationships, conservation of hierarchical status, and the institution of remedial frameworks for contingency scenarios and tradition as well as superstition. Furthermore, it has been argued profoundly that the cultures where ambiguity is highly perceived are generally indicative of the picaresque sense of disrespect for authorities and the lack of identification of people with their interests and the community interests (Paramita, 2014).
The cultural paradox also refers to the breaking of rules in low uncertainty avoidance cultures that can be validated based on improvement in other cultural value dimensions. The response of rule-breaking behavior is observed in the favorable aspects noticed in the distinct explanations of distinct cultural settings and references to variable value dimensions. The reflection on this paradox requires the perception of uncertainty avoidance as a measure of intolerance for ambiguity.
Theories for promoting cross-cultural adaptability:
The distinct theories which can be presented concerning international business for work motivation are intended to obtain substantial adaptability to the cultural environments in foreign markets. The examination of Maslow’s need hierarchy theory in the context of determining the cultural precedents required for addressing international business objectives. Scientific management theories, human relations approach content theories, and process theories.
Maslow’s hierarchy is a profound theoretical reference that could be implied to the distinct needs of physiological, safety, social, self-esteem, and self-actualization needs which have to be accomplished differently in succession. Physiological needs are associated with the basic needs of an individual employee such as food, sleep, sex, and water alongside impinging formidable emphasis on pleasant working conditions, cafeteria, and payment as the generic factors included in the need hierarchy (Ranker, Huang & McLeod, 2015). Safety in the context of Maslow’s need hierarchy is associated with the implications of stability, protection, security, and stability referring primarily to job security and company benefits.
The social needs analysis is reflective of affection, love, and belongingness while emphasizing friendly supervision, professional networks, and cohesive teamwork. Esteem is also considered a vital inclusion in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs that is characterized by self-esteem, prestige, self-respect, and status implications which could be observed in the promotion of social recognition, job title, feedback about job performance, and status description of the job.
The final need level which is identified in Maslow’s hierarchy is reflective of self-actualization which is characterized by advancement, growth, and creativity and is reflected in organizational factors such as challenging job objectives, accomplishments in the professional domain, organizational improvement, and creative opportunities accessible in the profession (Schmitz & Weber, 2014).
There is a profound indication in literature towards the critical examination of the hierarchy of needs and drive specific outcomes that characterize the proliferation of concerns that people are not particularly directed towards the satisfaction of needs at a higher level only through professional means. The motivating factors could not be always considered the same for every scenario while certain outcomes or rewards could be able to address more than one need.
The references to the varying indicators of motivation among the workforce in an international business environment could also help reduce the impact rendered by cultural disparities on strategic organizational performance. Economic rewards are associated with the extrinsic motivation that could be reflected in terms of fringe benefits, security in terms of instrumental orientation, payment, and pension rights (Stapanian & Madenjian, 2013).
The indications of theoretical references to the intrinsic motivation of individuals largely dependent on the particular behavioral traits that have been associated with the inherent traits of individuals are associated with profound inclinations toward the definitions of power, politics, and conflict. Power could be specifically defined from the perspective of the exertion of authority that could be observed in the workplace as well as the power bases. Politics can be apprehended in the context of the workplace and the tactical blunders with the application of tactics.
Power in the workplace can be defined from the generic perspective of ability referring to the competence of others in performing actions that could have been otherwise not possible by the individuals.
The foremost implications that could be associated with definitions of power in the workplace are also indicative of the competencies to drive performance from the desired objectives by providing a guideline that would dictate the approach for conducting business as it is meant to be. Critical references to power distance have been highlighted in the cultural dimensions while the comprehensive evaluation of the bases of power including formal and personal factors can be assumed as reasonable indicators of the negligence that could be perceived in following a universal deterministic approach to intercultural analysis.
The formal base of power is largely associated with the distinct categories of reward power, coercive power, and legitimate power whereas personal bases of power can be perceived as a referent and expert power.
Coercive power can be observed as a vital inclusion in the basis of power which also includes the direction toward fear of punishment, anticipation of rewards, and power associated with status and position. Personal bases of power could be associated with expert power that can be derived from the knowledge possessed by an individual regarding a specific domain of business operations. The referent power can be defined as the authority acquired from trust and respect among team members that would subsequently lead to long-term adherence to values and direction toward sustainability (Taylor, 2014).
Cultural insufficiencies could be formidably observed in the case of office politics that reflect on activities within the organizational framework that are also needed for acquisition, development, and utilization of power as well as other sources to accomplish preferable outcomes in a particular situation associated with uncertainty and disagreement related to the choices made by the employees.
The tactics used in the political scenario of office could also be reflective of the underlying implications associated with ingratiation otherwise referred to as persuasion, the formation of coalition and networks, impression management, information management, and pursuit of line responsibility. These tactics are implemented according to the behavioral traits and circumstantial consequences noted in different organizations the consistent reflection on political blunders commitment in the organization could be observed from the perspective of upstaging the boss, the challenging attitude towards top management, and the conventional set of shared beliefs, violation of the chain of command and losing the cool temperament (Vahdat & Abdolahi, 2014). Whenever a conflict is observed in the cultural dimensions and the actual indicators of culture, the process can be largely dependent on the perception of another individual or group by a person as a concerning element (Aycan, Kanungo & Mendonca, 2014).
The involvement of varying differences between the parties which obtain opposition or interference among the parties can be associated with conflict. The sources of conflict that can be noticed profoundly in the organizational environment reflect the values, economic, interpersonal, power, environmental, structural factors, personal behavior and communication factors, and organizational factors.
International business managers could obtain critical inferences from the theories associated with the resolution of conflicts reflecting on the necessity for competing, collaborating, compromise, accommodation, and avoidance. These distinct routes for the resolution of cross-cultural conflicts can be a promising alternative for determining an approach from a cooperative as well as an assertive approach (Warner, 2014).
The varying indications that could be drawn from the cultural paradoxes described in the case of Japan’s vagueness in contracts as an indicator of its deviation from high uncertainty avoidance have been illustrated in the report. It is also necessary to observe that the concerns of bias towards Western countries can be associated with the formulation of distinct national cultural dimensions.
The critical reflection allows a considerable impression of the possible factors that can explain the prominent disparities depicted by the national culture evaluations and the observed practices (Yaghoubi-Farani, Mohammadi & Movahedi, 2015).
The consideration of different cultural paradoxes and their subjective evaluation allows the institution of reliable frameworks that can help international business managers to understand the reasons for certain aberrations in practices as compared to theoretical findings (Yayla-Kullu, et al., 2015). The factor of questionable nature of the instruments used to formulate Hofstede’s dimensions of national culture can be estimated as profound influences on the applicability of the theory in all international and intercultural exchanges.
Conclusion:
The essay evaluated Hofstede’s model of national culture from a critical perspective to derive the explanation for the actions of Japanese corporations that are directed towards integrating ambiguous clauses in their contracts despite having high uncertainty avoidance index.
The impact of national cultures on organizational performance is imperative and also has an indirect consequence on the quality of the services, design, and delivery. The conflicts in the management could be reflected in the failure of product performance thereby leading to concerns for the sustainability of transnational multicultural exchanges in business.
References
Alghasi, S. (2016). Paradoxes of cultural recognition: perspectives from Northern Europe. Routledge.
Ardichvili, A., Jondle Ph.D., D., Wiley Ph.D., J., Cornacchione Ph.D., E., Li Ph.D., J., & Thakadipuram Ed D, T. (2013). Building ethical business cultures: BRIC by BRIC. The European Business Review.
Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., & Mendonca, M. (2014). Organizations and management in a cross-cultural context. Sage.
Bochner, S. (Ed.). (2013). Cultures in contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction (Vol. 1). Elsevier.
Chanlat, J. F., Davel, E., & Dupuis, J. P. (2013). Cross-cultural management: culture and management across the world. Routledge.
Conway, K. (2017). Little Mosque on the Prairie and the Paradoxes of Cultural Translation. University of Toronto Press.
De Mooij, M. (2013). Global marketing and advertising: Understanding cultural paradoxes. Sage Publications.
Dolva, G., Susomrith, P., & Standing, C. (2016, December). Greening Business Cultures. In ECU Business Doctoral and Emerging Scholars Colloquium 2016 (p. 95).
Greenfield, P. M., & Cocking, R. R. (2014). Cross-cultural roots of minority child development. Psychology Press.
Kerkech, R. (2016). Moroccan Women’s Cultural Rights: A Psycho-social Perspective on Cultural Paradoxes. In Women’s Movements in Post-“Arab Spring” North Africa (pp. 267-282). Palgrave Macmillan US.
Kinloch, P., & Metge, J. (2014). Talking past each other: Problems of cross-cultural communication. Victoria University Press.
Lamb, M. E. (2013). The father’s role: Cross-cultural perspectives. Routledge.
Milfont, T. L., & Fischer, R. (2015). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of psychological research, 3(1), 111-130.
Minkov, M., & Hofstede, G. (2014). A replication of Hofstede’s uncertainty avoidance dimension across nationally representative samples from Europe. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 14(2), 161-171.
Moore, F. (2016). Transnational business cultures: Life and work in a multinational corporation. Routledge.
Paramita, W. (2014). Global Marketing And Advertising Understanding Cultural Paradoxes. Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 29(1), 89-91.
Ranker, G., Huang, D., & McLeod, M. (2015). Navigating US and Chinese business cultures using global mindset leadership. Leader to Leader, 2015(75), 23-30.
Schmitz, L., & Weber, W. (2014). Are Hofstede’s dimensions valid? A test for measurement invariance of uncertainty avoidance. interculture journal: Online-Zeitschrift für interkulturelle Studien, 13(22), 11-26.
Stapanian, M. A., & Madenjian, C. P. (2013). Introduction to a special section: ecology, culture, and management of burbot. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 142(6), 1659-1661.
Taylor, S. D. (2014). Scholars and practitioners were once commonly linked. African culture. to a distinctive. African capitalism., at odds with genuine capitalism and the demands of modern business. Yet contemporary African business cultures reveal that a capitalist ethos has been taken (No. UNU-WIDER Research Paper WP2014/054).
Vahdat, S., & Abdolahi, F. (2014). Morality and Cultural Paradoxes in Teaching English to Iranian Students. Special Edition of 2014, 88, 636.
Warner, M. (2014). Culture and management in Asia. Routledge.
Yaghoubi-Farani, A., Mohammadi, I. M., & Movahedi, R. (2015). The Role of Organizational Culture and Management Behavior in Organizational Innovation: A Case Study of the Agricultural Extension Organization (AEO) in Iran. In Public Administration and Policy in the Middle East (pp. 163-171). Springer New York.
Yayla-Kullu, H. M., Tansitpong, P., Gnanlet, A., McDermott, C. M., & Durgee, J. F. (2015). Impact of national culture on airline operations. Operations Management Research, 8(3-4), 101-117.
