I have combined intensive integrate theory with practical applications. For example, illustrate theory and arguments with one or more published case studies, including my own experience. The assignment include a comprehensive analysis that deals with practices, problems and issues in cross-cultural management, and recommendations “conclusions” to be able to come up in a high level of information required to facilitate the preparation of this essay.
I also presented some Discuss of the ways in which the MBI model could be applied in managing cross-cultural encounters. Refer to Kluckhorn and Strodbeck’s Cultural Orientation Framework
g
I would like to thank the University of Wollongong and Dr. Michael Willemyns for giving me the opportunity to work on such a challenging activity
Table of Contents
1- Letter of Transmittal
2- Introduction
3- Kluckhohn and Strodtbecks’s Framework
3-1 Relation to Nature
3-2 Relationship Among People
3-3 Activity Orientation
3-4 Basic Nature of Human Beings
3-5 Time Orientation
3-6 Orientation to Space
4- The MBI Model
4-1 Mapping: Understand the Differences
4-2 Bridging: Communicate across the Differences
4-3 Integrating: Manage the Differences
5- Applying the MBI model
6- Conclusion
7- References
Introduction
Diversity at work is on the rise. More and more we meet teams consisting of people with different professional backgrounds and different nationalities. Mergers, alliances and networks bring together companies and institutions with different organizational cultures and ways of working. In the global economy even the smallest firms have contact with the far corners of the world. All of these instances represent a cross-cultural encounter.
The MBI model (Mapping, Bridging, Integrating), a three-component process, simply and clearly shows that understanding and a willingness to communicate from a neutral position can “bridge differences” and lead to positive decision-making.
With the increase in global activities of both domestic and multinational companies, managers need a good understanding of culture. People's cultural backgrounds influence their assumptions about how work and interactions with other people should proceed. Culture's influence, although profound, often goes unseen. This results in deep and difficult conflicts, but also in untapped potential. In this issue of Perspectives for Managers I ll explain how to understanding management behavior across cultures
3- Kluckhohn and Strodtbecks’s Framework
Each culture has its own general beliefs and values which are given to people in their early childhood. We are unable to have an influence on them rather these beliefs and values guide us through our entire life (1). These basic values consists of six orientations which all societies have in common.
Four Cross-Cultural in International Management
Four types of situations require that managers understand their own culture and how it differs from others (see Figure 1).
In each of these situations, decisions must be made and implemented across cultural boundaries
Cultural Orientations
The best way to understand and predict how one culture is different from another is with a framework that compares them on important dimensions. The Cultural Orientations Framework identifies six basic issues that all groups must address and resolve in order to function effectively. The six issues are 1) relationship to the environment, 2) relations among people, 3) mode of activity, 4) human nature, 5) time and 6) space. Groups of people deal with these issues in different ways, and the combinations provide the patterns of cultural systems. Maps of culture can then be built by identifying the combinations. In the rest of this issue, I outline the dimensions and provide examples of their impact.
1. Relation to Nature “environment”
The issue “relation to nature“ shows the following variations: subjugation to nature, harmony with nature or mastery over nature. The relation to nature could also be applied onto management activities like goal setting or budgeting. The manager in a mastery-oriented culture is likely to state rather specific, high level goals than a manager in a harmony-dominated culture. The goal setting in an harmony-dominated culture would rather be very moderated and contingent. Goal setting in a subjugation variation is rather qualified and hesitant.
In subjugation cultures like Islam, people have a strong belief that the environment or a supernatural being determines the ultimate outcomes for people or events (in Arabic this is expressed as “Insh'allah” or “God-willing”). People may not believe that this force controls every detail of human life, but do believe that it directs the patterns and major events within which all people act out their lives.(2)
Differences in Relation to the Environment affect which projects and goals are prioritized, and what causes are attributed to problems – unexpected negative results – that arise (see Figure 2).
2. Relations among People
The following variations have been found out: individualism, group (collectivism) and hierarchical orientation. An hierarchical relationship pays attention on vertical differentiation, the communication is rather authority based. Within an individualistic orientation communication is multiple and open, and the organizational structure is informal and flexible. Differences can also be found in the reward system as they are individually and authority based in an individualistic orientation communication. Characteristics regarding group orientation are an organizational structure with horizontal differentiation, communication is heavy emphasized within groups and teamwork is routine. The managerial implications of this include the commonly described group decisions making. It also includes the less frequently mentioned respect given to a superior, who is invariably an older, experienced manager with all that implies for practice and skill in managing groups.
as example In collective cultures, such as those in Latin America, members of a group look after each other,In individualistic cultures, like Australia, people are responsible mainly for themselves and their immediate families, in hierarchical cultures, like India, those at the top of the hierarchy have both responsibility for and authority over those below.
Figure 3 shows how a culture's orientation to Relationships among People is associated with preferences for leadership and teams.
3 Activity Orientation
In a doing-orientated culture you are nothing if your are not doing something. (4)People are more likely to consider work as a central focus of their lives. A being-oriented culture puts rather emphasis on thinking than on doing. The main characteristic of a being-dominated management culture is an emotional decision-making. A feeling based reward system and information and measurement systems are rather characteristics of a being-dominated management. As example of being culture, is Latin cultures, doing approach, such as Canadian or United States ,Thinking cultures, such as German or French, Figure 4 shows how Mode of Activity influences organizational behavior.
4. Basic Nature of Human Beings
This value involves how we think about the fundamental nature of human beings. Do we see people good or bad? This evil/good view is reflected by religious traditions . Human nature, they believe, is completely determined by the environment and events of each person's life. Many modern Western cultures fall into this category. In these cultures, there is a strong focus on training and socialization, and rehabilitation or re-training of people who have behaved badly. In some cultures it is assumed that we begin life basically good. Islam believes this. In these cultures, people tend to trust others until evidence is provided that they cannot be trusted, and they inflict harsh punishments on those who go against their nature and harm others. In other cultures it is assumed that we begin life basically bad and we must always guard against this tendency to give in to our evil nature.
Figure 5 illustrates how differences in Nature of Humans can be seen in organizations.
5. Time Orientation
A culture could be past, present or future oriented. This orientation does not only imply the way how to think about time but also how people respond to a new challenge or event. (5)The past orientation is dominated by the extension of past behavior or an historically determined reward system. Short-term planning and currently contracted reward systems are characteristics of a present oriented culture. Some culture notion of time is complex. And others think time is linear, as progressing systematically from the past into the future. This conception of time is called monochronic , on other hand , polychronic cultures, people think of time as plentiful and flexible. People naturally engage in several activities at once, and see time and activities as moving fluidly back and forth.
The impact of different cultures' views of time is shown in Figure 6.
6 - Orientation to Space
A private orientation shows rather a one-to-one communication & implies ownership of space by specific individuals or groups, without informal sharing. the distance between people is larger compared with public orientation where communication is wide open. Distances appear to be physically very close. The impact of different cultures' views of space is shown in Figure 7. (3)
4- The MBI Model
The MBI model is a three-component process, which adopts three principles and creates a means to bridge differences in multicultural teams. The three components are mapping, bridging and integrating (MBI)
Figure 8: The MBI Model of Managing Differences
4-1 Mapping: Understand the Differences
The first component of the MBI model is describing and understanding differences among (multinational) team members and the impact of the differences on team objectives in measurable ways.
This component involves three aspects:
1. Selecting which characteristics are to be mapped.
2. Describing members’ characteristics.
3. Identifying the impact of these characteristics.
4-2 Bridging: Communicate across the Differences
The second component of the MBI model is communicating effectively across the differences to bring people and ideas together. The main objective of bridging is to prevent miscommunication and there are three aspects to building a strong bridge:
1. Preparing involves motivating people to communicate and building confidence in them to overcome problems. Both motivation and confidence are very important for bridging.
2. Decentering requires team members to incorporate their understanding of differences in the communication process by changing their own behaviour and thinking in order to accommodate the culture of the people with whom they are working.
3. Recentering is the final aspect of bridging where team members develop a new basis for interaction. (7).
4-3 Integrating: Manage the Differences
The third component of the MBI model ensures team members leverage their differences and come up with good decisions. There are three aspects to integrating, each of which requires good mapping and bridging:
1. Managing participation means ensuring all members are given equal opportunity to participate by accommodating different norms of participation resulting from cultural differences.
2. Resolving disagreement or conflict means that conflicts are addressed before they become dysfunctional.
3. Building on ideas is the final aspect of integrating. By seeing individual ideas as the starting point for discussion and letting go of idea ownership. However, it is very important to avoided and the quality of the decision gets priority in decision-making.
5- Applying the MBI model
Chinese and US Technologies example
Mapping :
These technologies are particularly well-suited to understand the differences between Chinese and US cultures in Tables 1 and 2
Bridging :
for bridging the differences between Chinese and US cultures, as summarized in Tables 1 and 2. In particular, the technologies offer:
• Lower costs of communication—especially important when the distance is great
• Improved communication through
• Written documents—giving greater clarity of intent and purpose and "leveling the playing field" for the Chinese, who are better at written communication
• Traceability—since most communications are documented—thus putting a greater responsibility on the one initiating the communication
• Asynchronous communication—useful when there are 12 time zones of separation between the US and China—and this has the added advantage of giving the Chinese time to think and to respond appropriately
• Structured/Semi-structured workflow helps synchronize differences in procedures and methodologies, thus helping to manage expectations.
Integrate :
Chinese and US work together to reach solutions and manage the differences ,both sides utilize the professional expertise & communicate in the Business language using English ,have cross cultural collaboration see table 2
Table 1. Societal and Institutional Differences Between China and US
SOCIETAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ASPECT CHINA US
Government : Economy In transition from a planned economy to a market economy market economy
Government : Legal System In transition from "Rule by the Governor" to "Rule of Law" Rule of Law
Government: Fundamental Beliefs and Motivation Serve the people; principally public ownership Personal success forms the basis of social progress; private ownership
Ethnic Culture centered around "relationships"
"reclusive," each minding his/her own business (especially with "strangers" and people outside of the relationship network) centered around "individuals"
"Messianic;" let’s "save the world"
Source of Trust Trust those around you; don’t "lose face" and credibility by failing to live up to written or oral agreements Trust the contract; don’t get into legal hassles by not fulfilling the agreement
Business culture Quiet and reserved; clumsy communicators Outspoken; eloquent; effective communicators
Negotiation Style group decision; final say by the "boss" more individual authority and distributed decision making
Dealing with business counterparts Indirect; courteous; takes things personally; long memory for both favors and humiliations Direct; more matter-of-factly; memory for conflict superceded by business objective
Language Ability [Chinese dealing in English] conversation/speech: weak
written: slightly better
reading: good (if there is no time pressure) Strong (English)
Almost negligible Chinese language capabilities; except where ethnic Chinese intermediaries are involved
Ability to make Immediate Response weak strong
Table 2. Significant Value Differences Between China and US
Aspects CHINA US
Interpersonal "relationship" comes first "economics" comes first
on "humility" "humility" viewed as a virtue "humility" is a sign of weakness; there is every reason for the abled to be proud
Time Horizon accountable by the generation (~30 years) accountable by the quarter (~3 months)
What commands respect respect for seniority, wisdom, ability respect for success, achievement, wealth
on "family" children learns to respect the elder, love the young and rely on the "extended family" children should learn to be independent
on "the strong" and "the weak" it is not righteous to bully it is an honor to win; business is all a competition; it is only natural that the weak is preyed on by the strong
Discipline (in following procedures and schedules) strong depends on the individual
Tolerance of Diversity / Openness to alternative (possibly opposing) ideas Openly - very receptive; but actually, less so More open
Shame or Humiliation long memory; need and urge to exonerate tends to be superceded by business priorities
Priorities mixed: business, individual, factional, nationalistic and political almost strictly business
6- Conclusion
The MBI model is robust. It is applicable for different kinds of diversity, beyond cultural differences. The MBI model transcends cultures. It is applicable independent of the particular cultural mix of the members of a team. It has been applied across countries ,The MBI model transcends hierarchy & space. It is applicable in work teams cross-functional project teams. The MBI model transcends industries and organizations & It is applicable in the private and public sectors.
7- References
1. Lane, H.W., Distefano, J.J., and Maznevski, M.L. (2000) International Management Behavior, 4th Edition, Blackwell Publishers, Massachusetts, USA.
2. Gannon, M. J. & Newman, K.L. (2002) The Blackwell Handbook of Cross Cultural Management, Oxford, Malden, MA Blackwell Business.
3. DiStefano, J. J. and Ekelund, B. Z. 2002, The MBI Model of Managing Differences Effectively, in Heritage & Management: Identity as a Competitive Tool, J. M. Fladmark (ed.), Donhead Publishing, Edinburgh.
4. Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Segall, Y. M. and Dasen, P. 1992, Cross-cultural Psychology: Research and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
5. Thomas, D. C. (2002) Essentials of International Management: A Cross Cultural Perspective, Thousand Oaks, Calif. Sage.
6. Trompenaars, Fons, and Hampden-Turner, Charles (1998). Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Cultural Diversity in Business, McGraw Hill, New York
7. DiStefano, J. J. 2003, Managing with Teams Globally, Orchestrating Winning Performance, IMD International Institute for Management Development.
Ehab Ahmed Abusabha
