| The focus of this assignment is to draw upon your analysis of national culture of two countries in Assignment 1 to develop an assessment of similarities and differences in managerial processes and organisational culture which an international manager can expect to encounter in these two countries. Issues you may wish to examine could include how culture affects individualism versus group orientation, communications, decision-making, autocratic versus delegated leadership, superior-subordinate relationships and managing teams. In the report utilise appropriate academic theories about cross-cultural management to create frameworks to support your proposals. Utilise similar information sources that were utilised in Assignment 1.You may find some added benefit in obtaining information of the operations, and possibly any international activities, of major organisations in the two countries that are being compared. | |||
| Instruction: | the countries mentioned in the questions are america and japan The focus of this assignment is to draw upon your analysis of national culture of two countries in Assignment 1 to develop an assessment of similarities and differences in managerial processes and organisational culture which an international manager can expect to encounter in these two countries. Issues you may wish to examine could include how culture affects individualism versus group orientation, communications, decision-making, autocratic versus delegated leadership, superior-subordinate relationships and managing teams. In the report utilise appropriate academic theories about cross-cultural management to create frameworks to support your proposals. Utilise similar information sources that were utilised in Assignment 1.You may find some added benefit in obtaining information of the operations, and possibly any international activities, of major organisations in the two countries that are being compared. previous assignment Introduction The aspect of cross cultural management is critical within an organisational setting due to increased globalisation within working environments. Being culturally competent as a manager enables effective management by understanding the diversity among workers and their values (Browaeys and Price, 2008). It has been proven that the national culture that identifies an individual has profound impact on their values and behaviours which directly have an impact on how people relate at work. Most organization in the current twenty first century is operating at international markets and leadership dealing with diverse cultural variances (Kawar, 2012). A number of researchers and practitioners indicate that the effective leader of tomorrow is one who is flexible and culturally competent to be able to jump across boundaries and disciplines, while at the same time analysing cultural differences from a global perspective. This essay outlines the contrast between Japanese and American cultures and their theoretical implications as far as working environments are concerned. Cultural Concepts and Contrast of Japanese and American Cultures (Ralston et al., 2008). Notably, both American and Japanese cultures divulge a wide range of societal differences with Japan having an equally homogenous, middle class society, and the USA have diverse ethnic groups and disparities in income. The American culture can be characterised with the distinguishing features of having various subcultures that exist within the major culture of the society (Farmer, 2005). On the other hand, subcultures in Japan are minimal and distinct: generally, they are not as diverse as the ones found in the United States of America. Subcultures in Japan stand out as groupings in respect to age, gender, religion, ethic or country of origin, geographic area, and exceptionality in respect to abilities as a human being (Kawar, 2012). In every subculture, distinct aspects are common with the macro-culture with all Americans associating with various subcultures. Unlike America, Japan is not a nation where you will encounter immigrants making the subcultures to be maintained and thus homogenous. There is minimal ethnic, racial or religious variation in existence in Japan. According to Horiko (2009), the religious affiliation of most Japanese is unique with most of them being adherents of either Buddhism or Shinto which are the ancient and former state religion in Japan. In respect to racial diversity, amid the over 120 million individuals living in Japan, only less than 1% can be found to be not ethnically associated with Japan (Suh, 2014). Americans are common in using inductive reasoning, while relying on facts gathered, analysing the facts in logical, analytical and scientific manner (Browaeys and Price, 2008). In contrast, the Japanese are more into intuitive reasoning with their thinking style being characterised by meditative introspection, as well as contemplation (Ralston et al., 2008). In America, their cultural thinking style is tied to the emphasis on the achievement of an individual as opposed to the identification of a group, and the process is introduced early in the life of an individual at childhood. This ensures a person grows up moulded with a mind-set that aims at doing their best within the societal or organisational setting. The approach in America is to teach individuals to be responsible through provision of greater choice, hence giving the opportunity to an individual to diversely flourish (Farmer, 2005). Another feature that is common with American culture is philanthropy and individuals are known to have greater willingness to volunteer their time and resources for a number of political activities, civic, charitable, as well as religious reasons. The notable sense of individual efficacy, confidence and responsibility has greatly fostered a remarkably association to life in the country (Birgiel, Birgiel and Upson, 2012). Whereas ,Japanese culture highlights on the household system and extended family shifting focus from group membership and volunteerism (Suh, 2014). Majority of Japanese do not take part in volunteerism like in the American culture. In spite of intense modernisation and westernisation of Japan since World War II, the national culture of Japanese’s ways of life is very different in comparison to the American culture. A good example is the concerns to gender relations where in America, full-time housewife is considered rather demeaning for a career woman, whereas in Japan, women indicate fulfilment with the role and some terming it as the ideal lifestyle of a woman (Birgiel, Birgiel and Upson, 2012). However, with increased gender equity and the decreasing roles among couples due to low birth rates, women are becoming more career oriented in Japan rather than just seeing the full-time house career as an ideal lifestyle. With higher percentage of women in support of woman’s place is in the home compared to the US, inter-gender separation had been rampant in the Japanese twentieth century work environment (Birgiel, and Upson, 2012). On critically evaluating the national cultures of the two nations, one of the striking features of the American culture involves keen focus on the independence and individualism. The attributes of family ties though well entrenched in the American culture cannot be termed as strong as the Japanese ones (Taras, Steel and Kirkman, 2011). For example, an American kid becomes very independent once turning 18 years and rarely are parents monitoring their life, whereas this is not the in Japan where inter-connection is common within the family. In the Japanese culture elder relatives and family members are usually living in same house or close to each other; with family tie being maintained in tight-knit manner (Kawar, 2012). There exists a social understanding that the younger generations will cater for their elders just like their parents looked after them in their childhood. This makes the elderly to rarely depend on pensions or forcing one to save for retirement during their prime age. On the other hand, the American culture depicts the elderly mainly relying on their pensions and retirement benefits with the younger generation have no obligation to cater for their elderly like in Japan (Birgiel, Birgiel and Upson, 2012). This has resulted to increased presence of the homes for the elderly to cater for the older generations within an institution with social workers and healthcare professionals to look after them with relatives only coming for visits or even rarely making the visits. Looking at the culture of speech, in America, one core tenets of its culture is pegged in the freedom of speech and the basic right to question authority ensuring the rule of law is upheld (Service, 2012). This promotes governance and transparency ensuring individuals within the society have a role in shaping the aspects of governance and rule of law safeguarding their basic fundamental rights. On the other hand, the Japanese culture is majorly hierarchical with elders commanding great respect and their wisdom within the family of community set up being highly valued (Horiko, 2009). A good comparison in respect to communication is in respect to addressing to someone in authority or a senior member of the family; in America, talking to someone while avoiding eye contact is perceived to portray negative values or timidity, whereas the same in Japan is regarded disrespectful. With respect to the role of nationalism; in Japan, citizens are very nationalistic, but tend to avoid politics like the Americans. However, Japanese have a great sense of pride to their peaceful, post-imperialist culture (Hamamura, 2012). Finally, on evaluating the work relations and the attributes of discipline and punctuality to work; Japanese portray a remarkable work ethic. Majority of citizens are hardworking, self-driven and very punctual (Minkov and Hofstede, 2010). Looking at the transportation sector, trains are very punctual and travellers make their trips as scheduled. In the event of disaster like the triple disaster, looting and chaos never occur and people are always calm and line up effective to receive their food supplies while at the same time helping each other out whenever possible (Suh, 2014). Although these cultures in respect to discipline and punctuality can be compared to the American culture, Japan’s cultural set up stands out magnificently in comparison to the American culture. With increased modernisation, America seems to become more globalised and diversified, whereas the Japanese culture seems to maintain its values in the presence of increased industrialisation (Taras, Steel and Kirkman, 2011). The Japanese national culture seems incredibly resistant to external influence, whereby, amid borrowing from the West, Japanese national values and attributes are equally entrenched in the trending lifestyles and way of relating within the society and organisation context. Theoretical Frameworks in respect to the Cultural Dimensions Outlined Understanding the national cultural differences was promoted by both Japan and the United States of America after the Second World War (Hamamura, 2012). Critical understanding of national cultural differences brings about effective comprehension of how to manage working relations and impact employees amid their diverse differences. The Japanese and American Cultures indicate diverse array of societal disparities. On one hand Japan depict a fairly homogenous, middle class society whereas the American one is depicted by increasingly changing ethnic diversity and income inequality (Birgiel, Birgiel, and Upson, 2012). Japanese culture is depicted by the tendency to lead to over-stereotyping of cultures, with a focus on the extreme disparities instead of harmonies. In this regard, the need for understanding the dynamics nature of culture is inevitable, with more emphasis on the similarities between human experiences rather than dwelling keenly on the cultural differences observed. The American culture is diverse and hence managers in American organizations have found it necessary to embrace cultural diversity and competence to promote efficiency within work environments (Ralston, et al., 2008). However, in the presence of diversity between the cultural interplay of the two countries, there has been success and failures with respect to the attribute in consideration. The need to understand theoretical models touching on cultural dimensions is necessary with Hofstede’s cultural dimensions being perfect models to depict the aspect of culture and its values. Hofstede identifies five cultural dimensions that are very influential and are mainly referenced in respect to cultural differences in the world. According to Geert Hofstede, national culture involves a set of collective beliefs and values can effectively identify and distinguish people from various nationalities (Hofstede, 2010). In this regard, natural cultural aspects point to the values and features within a nation that are unique and stand out among the individuals therein serving a critical point of reference for the people of that country. The five cultural dimensions as outlined by Hofstede involves; power distance, individual collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity versus femininity and long term versus short term orientation (Service and White, 2012). Power distance involves the way society directly addresses to the issues of inequalities among people whenever they occur (Hofstede, 2003). The dimension describes the extent to which the less powerful members in an organization or institution come into acceptance and expect the power to be distributed unevenly. The American culture has been vibrant and dynamic with respect to addressing inequality among gender, race and ethnic groups (Farmer, 2005). However, gender equality seems to take precedent in both cultures with empowerment of both the boy and girl child starting early to ensure that both genders get equal opportunities to pursue their careers of choice or follow their dreams. The second cultural dimension as per Hofstede involves individualism- collectivism describing the extent to which people are integrated into groups (Birgiel, Birgiel and Upson, 2012). This dimension gives a measure to the degree to which culture values the achievements of individuals in comparison to the group’s achievements. Every individual within a group possess qualities and skills that propel them to perform effectively within a societal or organisational context (Kawar, 2012). Further, their contribution brings about success in a collective manner to the organization or society. This cultural dimension instils the need to embrace working goals where individuals are agents and independent of the organization, instead of the ones where individuals are just independent of the organization. The third dimension on uncertainty- avoidance reflects on the extent to which people within a social context feel threatened by the improbability (Minkov and Hofstede, 2010), hence trying to evade situations marred with uncertainties through providing inevitability and obviousness. Within an organizational setting, reduction of uncertainty occurs by establishing rules that are more formal, turning down ideas and behaviours that appear deviant, as well as providing workers with more stability in their profession. Both the American and Japanese cultures have been modernised by the need to expand the economic status of both nations to becoming world economic giants (Taras, Steel and Kirkman, 2011). In over five decades, both economies have seen tremendous growth amid the diversity and uniqueness in the national cultures. Thus, it is worth noting that cultural diversity only points to human diversity, but growth and development is not pegged upon the cultural attributes (Ralston et al., 2008), but rather how individuals inculcate their individual’s values to promote growth and development. The fourth dimension by Hofstede involves masculinity versus femininity and is basically a performance that is driven by culture with rewards and recognitions being the fundamental motivational factors for achievement (Hofstede, 2010). In respect to a culture that is masculine, individuals are expected to be ambitious, competitive, assertive and willing to take risks to meet target goals. This aspect clearly depicts both Japanese and American modern cultures where great innovations and development have been observed. On the other hand, feminine culture depict people who emphasise on the quality of while life rather than money, success and social status (Birgiel, Birgiel and Upson, 2012). The aspect of femininity can clearly be connected to the Japanese culture of majorly connecting quality of life evidenced with the teaching of values at the early stages of schooling and the large middle class individuals whose plight is to lead quality lives rather achieve wealth or social status (Hamamura, 2012). Finally, the last dimension involves long term versus short term orientation and refers to the extent to which a society displays a potential perception that is practical oriented instead of dwelling on very old and small perception.(Minkov and Hofstede, 2010). The dimension majorly dwells on the culture of employee devotion to work ethic, as well as the respect among employees to their tradition.). Conclusion In conclusion, cultural diversity is a critical aspect in the twenty first century with respect to ensuring effective management practices. The national cultural differences of Japan and the United States of America vary considerably but also have similarities as indicated by the essay. In context, the Japanese culture is homogenous and relatively slow to external changes, whereas the US national culture is diverse and changing with increased modernisation and immigration. In this regard, the main point to note with respect to cross-cultural management involves understanding the differences among individuals and minimising conflicts which eventually promote working relations and overall performance. References Birgiel, E.B., Birgiel, B.J. and Upson, J.W. (2012). Revisiting Hofstede’s dimensions: examining the cultural convergence of the United States and Japan. American Journal of Management, 12(1), 69-79,viewed on, 1 December 2015 Browaeys, M. and Price, R. (2008). Understanding cross-cultural management. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall viewed on, 1 December 2015 Farmer, T. (2005). Corporate culture defines a company and its future. American journal of Business, 20(2), 7-10, viewed on, 1 December 2015 Hofstede, G. (2003). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviours, institutions, and organisations across nations. London: Sage Publications, Inc, 1 December 2015 Hofstede, G. (2010). Cultures and organisations: Software of the mind. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill,1 December 2015 Horiko, N. (2009). How unique if the Japanese culture? A critical review of the discourse in intercultural communication literature. Journal of International in Business, 2(2), 1-14,4 December 2015. Kawar, T.I. (2012). Cross-cultural differences in management. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(6), 105-111,4 December 2015. Minkov, M. and Hofstede, G. (2010). Hofstede’s fifth dimension: New evidence from the world values survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(1), 3-14, 4 December 2015. Parboteeah, K.P., Cullen, J.B., Victor, B. and Sakano, T. (2005). National culture and ethical climates: A comparison of U.S. and Japanese accounting firms. 45(4), 45-489, 4 December 2015. Ralston, D.A., Hold, D.H., Terpstra, R.H. and Kai-Cheng, Y. (2008). The impact of national culture and economic ideology on managerial work values: A study of the United States, Russia, Japan, and China. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 8-26, 4 December 2015. Service, R.W. (2012). Leadership and innovation across cultures: CIQ-contextual effectiveness- as a skill. Southern Business Review, 37(1), 19-50, 4 December 2015. Service, R.W. and White, D. (2012). Leadership effectiveness for the rest-of-us. International Journal of Business Leadership, 1(3), 124-146, 4 December 2015. Suh, W. (2014). National culture and management control systems: An explanatory study on the implementation of foreign MCS in Japan. Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, 9(1), 25-44, 4 December 2015. Taras, V., Steel, P. and Kirkman, B.L. (2011). Three decades of research on national culture in the workplace. Organisational Dynamics, 40(3), 189-198, 4 December 2015. | ||
Need a Professional Writer to Work on this Paper and Give you Original Paper? CLICK HERE TO GET THIS PAPER WRITTEN
No comments:
Post a Comment