Home / Multinational Corporation

Cultural Diversity Within the Organization Itself


There is currently little empirical evidence to help us understand differences based on industry culture. Hofstede proposed the idea of ​​industry culture based on four dimensions as presented below:


 People orientation : concern focuses primarily on the people who share the work

 Locality: employees identify with the organization they work for

Maybe you are interested!

 Expanded system: many types of people can feel comfortable working for the organization


Cultural Diversity Within the Organization Itself

 Loose controls: codes of conduct allow for many variations and exceptions among employees

Job orientation : mainly focuses on how to complete the assigned work

 Specialization: staff

identify with the work they are involved in

 Closed system: only certain types of people feel in harmony with their organization, it takes a long time for employees to feel like the company is their home

 Strict control: written or unwritten rules or regulations that impose a strong influence on behavior


Although Hofstede's dimensions for describing industry culture differences have not been widely applied in empirical research, his work has reinforced the argument that cultural conflicts are more likely to arise in alliances formed from firms in different industries.

2.1.3. Differences in organizational culture

As with industrial culture, describing differences in organizational culture is not easy. There is little empirical research that provides insight into the origins of these differences and how they manifest themselves across countries. One popular system for describing organizational culture uses two dimensions to create a model of four cultural styles, each characterized by underlying values. In this model, one dimension reflects “management orientation


formal,” ranging from rigid to flexible. The second dimension reflects “focus of attention,” ranging from internal to external activities. When these two dimensions are combined, they form a model of four pure organizational cultures : bureaucratic , clannish , entrepreneurial , and market .

Based on research in 10 companies headquartered in three European countries, Hofstede proposed the use of six dimensions to understand and generalize organizational culture: process orientation versus results orientation; people orientation versus task orientation; locality versus industry orientation; open system versus closed system; loose control versus tight control; and normative versus pragmatic.

Using a third approach to conceptualizing organizational culture, the GLOBE project hypothesized that differences in organizational culture could be understood using the same three dimensions used to differentiate national cultures.

2.1.4. Cultural diversity within the organization itself

In any organization, differences in individual personalities and behavioral styles contribute to the diversity of the organization’s workforce. Other forms of internal diversity are associated with membership in different demographic groups. Regardless of the other forms of cultural diversity that exist within multinational corporations, internal cultural diversity is always an issue.

In the United States, the study of internal cultural diversity is based on the assumption that membership in a number of groups leads to socialization experiences that create recognizable subcultures within a nation. Gender, race, and age are characteristics that are often associated with cultural influences in the population. There is certainly evidence of group differences in values ​​and behaviors within groups.


different populations. Even in the North American context, gender differences in written and non-written communication, influence, interpersonal behavior, and leadership styles have been well documented. There are also age and clique differences in work attitudes and values. Clearly, differences in ethnic and linguistic groups within countries tend to reflect cultural differences between the host and native countries of that ethnic group. (However, over time, assimilation and adaptation may reduce these differences, and/or new ethnic-based cultural or linguistic differences may emerge.)

It is evident that visible differences between population groups within a country are shaped by and contribute to the construction of national culture. For example, gender differences are more pronounced in some countries than in others, as are the relations between women and men. Furthermore, in other countries, significant cultural variations are more likely to be associated with small population groups; for example, cultural differences due to religion may be more prominent, while those due to race and ethnicity may not be significant.

2.2. THE IMPACT OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN EPISODES

MULTINATIONAL TEAM

Scholars who study culture at different levels of analysis disagree about how to describe culture, the appropriate level of analysis for applying cultural concepts, and many other issues that are beyond the scope of this essay. We will now offer some simple hypotheses about the nature of culture.

One hypothesis is that understanding the consequences of cultural diversity in multinational work environments can still progress even without addressing the question of how best to assess the “capacity” of culture. It is not necessary to understand the cultures of


groups to explain how cultural differences shape behavior in organizations. That is, we assume that the structure of cultural diversity has predictable consequences, and that it occurs regardless of the amount of cultural diversity that exists in a particular international alliance.

We also assume that the influence of multiple cultures on an individual's behavior is linked to that person's membership and participation in a variety of social entities (such as unions, organizations, occupations, ethnic groups, etc.). This cultural diversity provides the individual with a range of value systems (not necessarily consistent with each other) for interpreting and responding to the environment. Depending on the social context, some of the value systems available to the individual become important and dominant, guiding behavior.

In the Davidson-Marley joint venture, the Dutch workforce hired to work in the assembly plant shared a common socio-cultural background, but the internal cultural diversity in various forms posed a real challenge. Recruitment and selection activities were deliberately aimed at matching the demographic diversity (gender, age, etc.) of the Dutch labor market in the plant. However, diversity was unintentionally increased, as employees were hired in two separate batches. All hires had to meet the same technical requirements, but different personal qualities were the criteria for the two separate batches. When selecting the first 100 employees, the joint venture looked for people who were willing to contribute to the firm in the pioneering phase. Problem-solving and problem-solving abilities were required. In addition, the joint venture aimed for internationally oriented employees, since these employees would have to travel to the United States or the United Kingdom for training. This first group of 100 employees worked in the early stages of the enterprise, and were closely involved.


into the way it operates. After the plant had been in operation for a while, the joint venture hired 200 more workers. In this round of recruitment, they looked for people who could easily accept and adapt to the growing business, and who were good at working in teams. The different working hours also corresponded to the different personalities of the employees. In addition, it made the two groups of employees feel that they were working under different contracts. Because of the difference in work experience, the first group was always assigned more complex and sophisticated tasks, and received higher salaries. The division of the workforce caused unforeseen conflicts, and in hindsight, the human resources manager realized that continuous recruitment would have been a much better option than two separate recruitments.

Conflict within a group is almost inevitable when cultural rifts occur, regardless of the values ​​and cultural norms that divide group members. Conversely, when differences are widespread or diffuse, the coordination problem becomes even more complex than the superficial clashes, especially in the early stages of a group's development. Given enough time, however, the most culturally diverse group, although initially completely unfounded in terms of nationality, once it has resolved these problems, will be able to outperform more homogeneous groups in the long run.

A multicultural environment in a company can influence the way people think and feel. Over time, their feelings and thoughts translate into observable actions. Attraction, distaste, admiration, stereotypes, perceptions of status and power – all are influenced by cultural diversity.

2.2.1. Impact on emotions

Regardless of the basis for distinguishing people as similar or different (for example, commonalities in nationality, occupation, organizational culture or cultural


(Racial) people feel more comfortable and think more positively about those they feel similar to. Loyalty and affection are common responses to those who are similar to them, while distrust and hostility are common responses to those who are different. The tendency to gravitate toward and favor those who are similar to us is so common that it occurs when people judge similarity based on completely meaningless information (like group membership).

At the level of groups and larger organizational units, feelings of liking for other members translate into the glue that holds the group together. The similarity-attraction-bond connection can have significant consequences for the emotional dimensions on which members of a multicultural coalition collaborate and work.

2.2.2. Impact on perception

Multicultural environments also help shape the cognitive side of multinational alliances. In order to simplify and bring a rich and colorful world under control, people naturally rely on stereotypes and stereotypes to judge, treat and infer the behavior of others.

Another psychological phenomenon that varies across cultures is the way people think about the influence of personality and the external environment on their own and others' actions. While North Americans tend to explain a person's behavior as a result of his or her nature, Hindus tend to see natural forces as important determinants of behavior. Another study found that North American cultures tend to attribute responsibility for each individual's actions to the individual, while other cultures attribute responsibility to the larger organization or group to which the person belongs.


The examples above show us that psychological phenomena such as these are not simply reflections of past experiences, but also affect aspects of the environment in which people participate, and guide our actions. Therefore, it can contribute positively, or hinder common activities. When cultural diversity creates diversity in psychological phenomena, misunderstandings between members of a group, or organization are more likely to occur. Therefore, it will take a lot of time and effort to prevent and repair the harm that such misunderstandings cause.

2.2.3. Impact on attitudes about status

Even in the most egalitarian and democratic social systems, some groups of people enjoy higher status than others.

There has been no formal research on status motivation to date, but some anecdotal evidence suggests that employees at acquired firms such as Chrysler (in the Daimler Benz acquisition of Chrysler) experience a sense of loss of status within the company, or of lower status.

Although status has different effects on behavior in different cultures, status differences can be found in all cultures.

Status also affects the functions and tasks in an organization, especially when individuals with lower positions have the necessary knowledge and professional skills for the job, while those with higher positions do not. Compared to their subordinates, those with higher positions often demonstrate more confident communication. They talk more, criticize more, make more requests, interrupt others, have more opportunities and try to create influence, and they actually create greater influence. Therefore, subordinates often participate less. Because the professional knowledge and skills of those with lower positions are not fully utilized, the difference


Status inequality limits creativity, contributes to loss, and hinders effective decision making.

Status personality also causes dissatisfaction and discomfort. Initially, group members behave more positively toward superiors. Lower-ranking members often receive negative reactions from others, and their low status, which they must accept rather than react and defend.

2.2.4. Impact on communication

Culture shapes the way people communicate in many ways. Every culture has its own language and communication style, so misunderstandings are inevitable when people from different cultures try to communicate. Despite careful planning, American engineers at Davidson-Marley’s Dutch plant sent blueprints measured in feet, inches, and gallons. This forced their Dutch counterparts to convert everything to the metric system before submitting the blueprints and contracts to government officials for approval. But communication inaccuracies and misunderstandings are not the only short-term manifestations of cultural diversity, nor are they the most important. Cultural diversity also shapes who speaks to whom, how often, and what.

In general, the structure of an organization’s communication network reflects the structure of cultural diversity, because when people are attracted to people who are similar to themselves, they spend more time talking to them. For example, formal and informal meetings between peers and direct reports are less frequent in ethnically diverse groups. Similarities in age and career experience among coworkers also correlate with the level of communication between engineers on a project.

Comment


Agree Privacy Policy *