»organizational culture«

Altogether, my interview partner summarizes, are German companies appreciated for their accuracy and precision in planning and construction. They often believe that only a German company will put the project through in the limited time given. He claimed that in some towns even some streets are named after his company. This appraisal keeps them from delegating expatriates among subsidiaries. A client assigns a German company because he expects German experts.

At the same time Germans are seen to be smart asses that know everything better and know how to do everything better. They live on their procedures and check-lists and they cannot talk about anything else than business. They are the small talk losers because after two minutes they get serious and talk business again.



And of course you are invited to comment on other things typical for Germans, especially regarding the work aspect...

Strategic Global Human Resources Management in the Twenty-First Century
by Michael Harvey and Nancy K. Napier

[p.42] The authors start off that in a globalized economy the only advantage businesses have is "the uniqueness of their human resources and their system of managing human resources". They understand an effective global organization to be a "repository (Behälter, Fundgrube) of skills, competencies, routines, and dynamic capabilities that are managed by multicultural management teams in a manner difficult for global rivals to replicate". [p.43] Therefore global managers are needed who "possess a complex amalgamation (Vermischung) of technical, functional, cultural, social, and political skills to successfully navigate the intricacies (Feinheiten) of the new global manager responsibilities".

[p.44] Outlining how companies start doing business abroad, they define a little evolution.
[p.45] At first businesses simply check out their potential in the host country. In this phase they completely rely on their home-grown staff. Expatriates hold the key positions and all of the parent organization's structures and processes are transferred unmodified. The advantages of this "exportive or ethnocentric orientation" are obvious. The parent organization remains in full control and promising managers gain international experience.
When the host organization appears to bear enough potential, companies shift to a more "adaptive or polycentric orientation". Host country nationals are employed to manage the business abroad. Human resource management is based on local policies, philosophies, and personnel. All in all the branch office receives more responsibility. Harvey and Napier note that in many countries organizations will directly have to rely on host country nationals. Especially in developing countries this is a popular approach since there are simply not enough expatriates who would give up the comfort of their home.
While the reliance on local staff makes it difficult to implement the corporate culture, it allows the company to more deeply set roots in the foreign country. While at the same time it offers the host country to establish competencies of training and work.
[p.46] In the third step a "integrative or regiocentric orientation" is established. Ideally staff is exchanged mutually between the headquarter and the subsidiaries and staff is employed on both sides regardless of nationality (even third country nationals are being employed). In this system the best of both sides is used to the company's success.

[p.47] Thus there are different kinds of global managers: the expatriate, the local national, and the inpatriate managers.

The Expatriate
So far sending expatriates is the common business option for companies working abroad. They posses advanced technical as well as business skills, are experienced and hold a broad, informal knowledge in working within the parent organization. While it is their task to establish their company in the foreign country, they often fail to manage and to adjust to the given cultural setting. Even though this fact is well known it still remains difficult to select promising expatriates. [p.48] Research (as I already introduced) nowadays focuses on predictive character traits, mostly focusing on the Big Five (though introduced already, here a short-form):

1. extroversion: ability to assert oneself and to gain acceptance through social relationships.
2. agreeableness: ability to form reciprocal social alliances and thus to build social capital within the organization; acting as a team player
3. conscientiousness (Pflichtbewußtsein): being trustworthy, supportive, and diligent
4. emotional stability: ability to cope with stress on a professional as well as on a private level
5. openness and intellect: ability to complete an assignment as supposed and apply changes where needed

Though the authors do not support research on predicting expatriate success based on singling out certain character traits they introduce multiple screening devices. [p.49] The Ashridge Management Research Center, for example characterize expatriates by their
"(1) strategic awareness and support,
(2) adaptability in [p.50] new/novel environmental situations,
(3) sensitivity and openness to other cultures and social mores,
(4) language capabilities, and
(5) interpersonal communication skills."
Other sources call expatriates to posses the so-called soft skills such as "global awareness, international strategy, cultural empathy, international or cross-cultural team building, international negotiation skills, ethical understanding of conducting business in foreign countries, and self-efficacy."

Altogether they pin down expatriate's failure to be caused by problems to adjust to the organization and/or the culture and due to family-related issues. They warn of a lack of cross-cultural training and a lack of support by the organization itself to transfer and to adjust. The authors caution against damaging relationships and therefore business opportunities in the long run, and against damaging the expatriate's career.

Local Nationals
The advantages of hiring local nationals in emerging markets are obvious: They possess a "tacit knowledge of cultural, social, and economic characteristics". [p.51] Thus they have a lead on handling local institutions. They can rely on a professional and personal network - which expatriates would still have to establish. Different to expatriates who are only on short-term assignments they are also more likely to guarantee stability and do not need any adjustment time. In that regard they are also less expensive since the company does not need to pay extra for housing and incentives.
Additionally, the authors suggest that local nationals might be especially highly motivated because of extra benefits, compensation, and the prestige working for an international company. Presumingly receiving more acceptance throughout staff then foreigners, they could also function as a role model. Especially in developing countries the authors expect to find a larger pool of applicants in the host country than expatriates. They even suggest to find staff that is perfectly qualified but simply does not meet the local market needs - e.g. women. (But actually I think that that contradicts their assumptions of a higher acceptance of local nationals - it sure offers new chances to the affected potential employees but putting them in lead positions might need some extra effort to establish their role.)
As disadvantages Harvey and Napier name questionable loyalty. They also mention difficulties to first find and then retain qualified staff with experience. They assume potential qualified staff to be mostly integrated in family owned businesses or in the government. They also warn that different cultures might stick to different hierarchies: the most qualified might not necessarily be accepted in the designated role when normally, for example, the oldest person holds the lead position. It might also be difficult to impose Western business practices and policies on the subsidiary.
Altogether it seems as if multinational companies are afraid to take the challenges and even more important they are reluctant to give away control.

Inpatriate Managers
Inpatriate managers are host country nationals who are referred "back" to the headquarter. Harvey and Napier understand them to be "linking-pins". [p.52] As expatriated host nationals they possess a deep social knowledge about their home country, they have their existing networks, they know the culturally "right" way of handling staff and partners. Going abroad they are getting attached to the businesses corporate culture and thus gain credibility and trust. They broaden their skills by taking an external view on the local business, getting "a keen sense of the dynamics". Having grown up with a different education, different training and different work experiences they can enrich the company to a "pluralistic strategic orientation". Thus inpatriate managers can function as "boundary spanners between the domestic and foreign operations of a company".

Harvey and Napier see inpatriate managers to be the future of global business.


in: Gerald R. Ferris, M.Ronald Buckley, Donald B. Fedo.: Human Resources Management - Perspectives, Context, Functions, and Outcomes. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002. 4th edition

[p.23]
Hofstede defines culture to be a mere concept which is useful to anticipate reactions and behaviors. It is a construct which reveals itself in speech and behavior but cannot be observed directly.

[p.26]
Hofstede takes the metaphor of a forest to describe culture. Just like the different plants and animals in a forest the individuals of a culture can be very different from each other. "National cultures differ primarily in the fundamental, invisible values held by a majority of their members, acquired in early childhood."
Hofstede furthermore differentiates into organizational cultures. "Organizational cultures are a much more superficial phenomenon residing mainly in the visible practices of the organization, acquired by socialization of the new members who join the company."

In both quotes, I'd like to take out the the ways of how culture in both cases is acquired. It seems a little too rigid to limit cultural learning to childhood. And to assume workers to start at a young age in one company and stay there for long-term employment seems rather old-fashioned.
Nevertheless I think it to be important to think of cultures in different fields. And it is certainly true that not two companies work the same way. The question is how a company which operates in two different cultures transfers its image/culture. Which influence does the particular culture have.
The process of cultural adaption is well known from cases in advertisement: Coca-Cola adresses its customers in India quite different than those in the States. But which philosophies are celebrated within organizations?
This reminded me that I still wanted to organize some self-image brochures portraying the same company in different countries

Geert Hofstede: Cultural Constraints in Management Theories
in: D.C.Thomas: Readings and Cases in International Management; Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2003.

[p.20]
Holland on the other side - following d'Iribarne is driven by the "need for consensus among all parties". Consensus is reached without regard towards contractional relationships or class membership. The ideal is an "open-ended exchange of views and balancing of interests".
Further research (Hofstede et al.) among American and Dutch business students on their expectations on the ideal job, showed the Dutch students to strive for:

• freedom to adopt their own approach,
• being consulted by their boss in his/her decisions,
• training opportunities,
• contributing to the success of their organization,
• fully using their skills and abilities, and
• helping others.

[p.21]
Hofstede sees the roots for this careful balancing of interests in the Dutch history: As the first republic in Western Europe (1609-1810), the Netherlands had to handle a multi-party system.

The down-sides of this system of consensus Hofstede sees to be mediocrity and jealousy. He critizes, too, that consultations nowadays only seem to hold up the face of cooperation and modesty while in fact they are only time-consuming.


Learn more about:

• Germany
• France
• Japan
• The United States
• The Overseas Chinese

back to overview

[p.21]
Enterprises are usually small and family-owned. When needed they undergo cooperations with other small businesses to which they are interrelated through personal networks. Hofstede sees them to mainly focus on one market/one product, aiming on a "growth by opportunistic diversification". The process of decision-making is usually centralized to the head of the family. Family members are absolutely loyal and wait till they get the chance to prove themselves in new ventures. Sons and sometimes daughters will be send to prestigious business schools abroad but are expected to return to the family business. The idea of management is based on Confucian values, such as loyalty, thrift (Wirtschaftlichkeit, Sparsamkeit) and persistence.
Hofstede describes the historical base for this idea of business and management as a "society, in which there were no formal laws, only formal networks of powerful people guided by general principles of Confucian virtue." Authorities and their opinions could change daily which made the family to be the only reliable institution. This effect is further deepened by the fact that the overseas Chinese in the respective countries always formed an ethnic minority.


Learn more about:

• Germany
• France
• Japan
• The Netherlands
• The United States

back to overview

[p.19]
Germany as Hofstede sees it, is much influenced by its mediaevel guild system which in modern times lead to the system of apprenticeship. In a number of fields on the shop floor as well as on the office level the apprentice gains an occupational certification. Along with the qualification comes an occupational pride. Consequently, managers are not needed for motivation. They are to assign tasks and to resolve technical problems.
Compared to British or French organization, Hofstede declares Germany to have "the highest rate of personnel in productive roles and the lowest number both in leadership and staff roles". He estimates two thirds of the population to have successfully undergone apprenticeship. At the same time there are no traditional business schools.
Hofstede understands the raise of the German economy as an example that "a strong concept of management might have been a liability rather than an asset."


Learn more about:

• France
• Japan
• The Netherlands
• The United States
• The Overseas Chinese

back to overview

In Japan Hofstede sees the core of every enterprise to be the permanent worker group. Those workers are hired for all practical purposes in general and strive for life-long employment. On the contrary there are non-permanent work groups which are easily laid off if necessary. University graduates would first join a worker group and wait to later be assigned to various other tasks. Payment is structured according to seniority (Dienstalter) rather than position. Decisions are made in group consultations. This might take rather long but proves implementation to be much easier.

Hofstede tells about the research done by J.Tobin, D.Wu and D.Danielson of the University of Hawaii. They filmed two pre-school classes, one in Japan, one in the States. While the ratio teacher-kids in the States amounted to 1:9, it amounted 1:29 in Japan. In both classes there was a troublesome kid. When a Japanese kid alarmed the teacher of the other kid's misbehavior the teacher was reported to have answered: "what are you calling me for? Do something about it?" The American kid, on the other hand, when behaving badly was put in the corner and thus punished by the teacher.

Hofstede picks this example up to show how early structures of hierarchy are already implemented. He concludes that in Japan control of situations is guaranteed by groups, respectively peers. Consequently the Japanese conducted their own theories about leadership. These base on the ideas of performance and maintenance by which the latter refers to maintenance of social stability.


Learn more about:

• Germany
• France
• The Netherlands
• The United States
• The Overseas Chinese

back to overview

Even though Hofstede does not dedicate a sub-chapter to the States, I want to summarize the points he made in contrast to France and Holland.

Based on d'Iribarne all business in America is based on the idea of the market. Employer and employee join interests in a contract: the worker is selling his/her labor for earnings and career opportunities. With the contract the employer is assigned certain privileges.

In the research conducted by Hofstede himself, the American students asked about their ideal job put an emphasis on the following:

• earnings,
• advancement,
• benefits,
• good working relationships with their boss, and
• security of employment.

Learn more about:

• Germany
• France
• Japan
• The Netherlands
• The Overseas Chinese

back to overview

I mean it is so obvious but still I was not sure if media or a web application in my case could actually help businesses to cross borders. It sure can! :-)

"Technology has permeated every aspect of organizations and has fundamentally redefined the meaning of work. Technology has simultaneously shrunk the world and expanded the boundaries of the organization. Businesses are able to effectively manage local businesses at the global level, and employees are able to participate in teambased work environments without ever leaving home."

[p.67 in: Gerald R. Ferris, M.Ronald Buckley, Donald B. Fedo. Human Resources Management - Perspectives, Context, Functions, and Outcomes. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002. 4th edition]

So, now I started to sort information I have about Poland. Every icon on the structure board will in the end be at least one page in the web application. Thus I try to collect which will be the content of these pages.

One will be on the model employee:


One will be on issues such as motivation and feeback:



I started some more but to all of them I will need to add much more content. So this is just to give an impression.