Intercultural Psychology Course Book PDF

INTERCULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY DLBWPIPS01_E INTERCULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY MASTHEAD Publisher: IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH IU International University of Applied Sciences Juri-Gagarin-Ring 152 D-99084 Erfurt Mailing address: Albert-Proeller-Straße 15-19 D-86675 Buchdorf [email protected] www.iu.de DLBWPIPS01_E Version No.: 001-2022-0929 Christina Abdel Shafi © 2022 IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH This course book is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This course book may not be reproduced and/or electronically edited, duplicated, or dis- tributed in any kind of form without written permission by the IU Internationale Hoch- schule GmbH. The authors/publishers have identified the authors and sources of all graphics to the best of their abilities. However, if any erroneous information has been provided, please notify us accordingly. 2 PROF. DR. HEIKE SCHIEBECK Ms. Schiebeck is a professor and director of the master’s program in business psychology at IU International University. Her specializations are in the areas of competence management, burnout prevention, resilience, and self-organized teams. Ms. Schiebeck first worked as a training manager for the LEGO® Group’s Central Europe divi- sion. After earning her PhD in economic and organizational psychology at LMU Munich (Ger- many), she was the human resources manager of the Weltbild stores. Ms. Schiebeck has previously been responsible for public relations at an HR start-up. She is a certified business coach and Basic Agile Master, with an interest in issues around the topic of New Work and the transformation of the working world. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTERCULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY Module Director.................................................................. 3 Introduction Signposts Throughout the Course Book............................................. 8 Basic Reading.................................................................... 9 Further Reading................................................................. 10 Learning Objectives.............................................................. 13 Unit 1 Introduction to Intercultural and Cultural Psychology 15 Author: Christina Abdel Shafi 1.1 Concepts and Definitions of Culture........................................... 16 1.2 Cultural Dimensions as Comparison Categories................................. 20 1.3 Distinctions Between Different Subject Areas in Research and Application......... 27 1.4 Research Approaches and Methods............................................ 30 Unit 2 Intercultural Management 35 Author: Christina Abdel Shafi 2.1 Role, Influential Factors, and Requirements of Intercultural Management......... 36 2.2 Organizational Culture....................................................... 52 Unit 3 Diversity Management 63 Author: Christina Abdel Shafi 3.1 Definitions and Concepts..................................................... 65 3.2 Introduction of Diversity Management in Organizations.......................... 69 3.3 Chances and Challenges...................................................... 72 Unit 4 Values in the Context of Intercultural Management 85 Author: Christina Abdel Shafi 4.1 The Relevance of Values in Society............................................. 86 4.2 Values in the Context of Organizations......................................... 93 4 Unit 5 Intercultural Communication 101 Author: Christina Abdel Shafi 5.1 Challenges and Specifics of Intercultural Communication....................... 102 5.2 Intercultural Differences in Communication Styles............................. 111 5.3 Becoming a Culturally Competent Communicator.............................. 118 Unit 6 Intercultural Marketing 127 Author: Christina Abdel Shafi 6.1 Definitions and Assessment Tools............................................ 128 6.2 Intercultural Marketing Strategies and Concepts............................... 130 Unit 7 Intercultural Training 141 Author: Christina Abdel Shafi 7.1 Concepts of Cultural Competence in Education and Research................... 142 7.2 Developing Intercultural Competencies....................................... 147 Appendix List of References............................................................... 156 List of Tables and Figures........................................................ 171 5 INTRODUCTION WELCOME SIGNPOSTS THROUGHOUT THE COURSE BOOK This course book contains the core content for this course. Additional learning materials can be found on the learning platform, but this course book should form the basis for your learning. The content of this course book is divided into units, which are divided further into sec- tions. Each section contains only one new key concept to allow you to quickly and effi- ciently add new learning material to your existing knowledge. At the end of each section of the digital course book, you will find self-check questions. These questions are designed to help you check whether you have understood the con- cepts in each section. For all modules with a final exam, you must complete the knowledge tests on the learning platform. You will pass the knowledge test for each unit when you answer at least 80% of the questions correctly. When you have passed the knowledge tests for all the units, the course is considered fin- ished and you will be able to register for the final assessment. Please ensure that you com- plete the evaluation prior to registering for the assessment. Good luck! 8 BASIC READING Barmeyer, C., Bausch, M., & Mayrhofer, U. (2021). Constructive intercultural management: Integrating cultural differences successfully. Edward Elgar Publishing. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.51018&site=eds-live&scope=site Deresky, H. (2016). International management: Managing across borders and cultures (9th ed.). Pearson. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.28900&site=eds-live&scope=site Matsumoto, D. R., & Juang, L. (2017). Culture and psychology (6th ed.). Cengage Learning. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.51605&site=eds-live&scope=site Schneider, S. C., Barsoux, J.-L., & Stahl, G. K. (2014). Managing across cultures (3rd ed.). Pearson. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.50127&site=eds-live&scope=site Usunier, J.-C., & Lee, J. A. (2013). Marketing across cultures (6th ed.). Pearson. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.48045&site=eds-live&scope=site 9 FURTHER READING UNIT 1 Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.-J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Chapter 3 http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.28554&site=eds-live&scope=site Tung, L. T., & Verbeke, A. (2010). Beyond Hofstede and GLOBE: Improving the quality of cross-cultural research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(8), 1259–1274. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsjsr&AN=eds jsr.40863977&site=eds-live&scope=site UNIT 2 Barmeyer, C., Bausch, M., & Mayrhofer, U. (2021). Constructive intercultural management: Integrating cultural differences successfully. Edward Elgar Publishing. Chapter 10 http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.51018&site=eds-live&scope=site Javidan, M., & Dastmalchian, A. (2009). Managerial implications of the GLOBE project: A study of 62 societies. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 47(1), 41–58. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=36903 617&site=eds-live&scope=site 10 UNIT 3 Koellen, T. (2021). Diversity management: A critical review and agenda for the future. Jour- nal of Management Inquiry, 30(3), 259–272. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswis&AN=ed swis.ECON1764779606&site=eds-live&scope=site Fenwick, M., Costa, C., Sohal, A. S., & D’Netto, B. (2011). Cultural diversity management in Australian manufacturing organizations. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 49(4), 494–507. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsair&AN=ed sair.doi.dedup.....331790f0013f21c7ff9ae311766da085&site=eds-live&scope=site UNIT 4 Wieland, J. (2014). Governance ethics: Global value creation, economic organization, and normativity. Springer. Chapter 10 http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.51608&site=eds-live&scope=site Hillman, D. R. (2014). Understanding multigenerational work-value conflict resolution. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 29(3), 240–257. Available online UNIT 5 Matsumoto, D. R., & Juang, L. (2017). Culture and psychology (6th ed.). Cengage Learning. Chapter 10 http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.51605&site=eds-live&scope=site Usunier, J.-C., & Lee, J. A. (2013). Marketing across cultures (6th ed.). Pearson. Chapter 4 http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.48045&site=eds-live&scope=site 11 UNIT 6 Ghemawat, P. (2001). Distance still matters. The hard reality of global expansion. Harvard Business Review, 8(79), 137–147. https://eds-s-ebscohost-com.pxz.iubh.de:8443/eds/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=e382c781-67c 4-49d7-b107-3b783b56294e%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c 2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=5134712&db=bsu Usunier, J.-C., & Lee, J. A. (2013). Marketing across cultures (6th ed.). Pearson. Chapter 8 http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.48045&site=eds-live&scope=site UNIT 7 Barmeyer, C., Bausch, M., & Mayrhofer, U. (2021). Constructive intercultural management: Integrating cultural differences successfully. Edward Elgar Publishing. Chapter 11 http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN =ihb.51018&site=eds-live&scope=site Wolff, F., & Borzikowsky, C. (2018). Intercultural competence by international experiences? An investigation of the impact of educational stays abroad on intercultural compe- tence and its facets. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(3), 488–514. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=1286 56716&site=eds-live&scope=site 12 LEARNING OBJECTIVES In the Intercultural Psychology course book, you will learn about culturally conditioned differences and how to act and react appropriately during intercultural work interactions. To illustrate this, the unique features of intercultural teams and organizations are presen- ted. Other aspects include international cooperation and advertising in different cultural contexts. Following a brief description of various cultural concepts and theories, the different research approaches in cross-cultural psychology, intercultural psychology, and cultural psychology are introduced, and practical issues at organizations are addressed. The relevance of intercultural management, diversity management, value management, intercultural marketing, and intercultural training for the different business areas are dis- cussed. Special attention is given to the vital role of intercultural communication in corpo- rate and organizational environments. 13 UNIT 1 INTRODUCTION TO INTERCULTURAL AND CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY STUDY GOALS On completion of this unit, you will be able to... – define culture and discuss different concepts of culture. – differentiate between cross-cultural, intercultural, indigenous, and cultural psychol- ogy. – describe the goals of cross-cultural, intercultural, indigenous, and cultural psychology in research and application. – describe and apply different models of cultural theory. 1. INTRODUCTION TO INTERCULTURAL AND CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY Introduction Globalization trends across industrial sectors have pushed companies around the world to enter the international stage. Even small- and medium-sized enterprises have suppliers and customers worldwide. Globalization also increases employee diversity; employees have different cultural backgrounds, range in age, and differ in their education, world- views, religion, and work attitudes. Many companies outsource parts of their operations to other countries and continents. These developments have led to a variety of challenges. People need intercultural competence to interact with suppliers, business partners, employees, and colleagues from different cultural backgrounds, and such competence has therefore become a key skill for professionals worldwide. Since the middle of the twentieth century, various psychological disciplines, such as cultural, cross-cultural, and intercultural psychology, have facilitated these internationalization processes through extensive research and conceptual work. 1.1 Concepts and Definitions of Culture The term “culture” is derived from two Latin words. The first, cultura (culture), refers to crop cultivation and the cultivation of land in general. The second word, colere (to culti- vate), later became the French word cultiver and referred to all actions related to the care of mind, body, and soul, as well as the maintenance of our relationships with fellow humans (Bolten, 2007). In terms of semantic meanings, the word family of “culture” and the prefix “cult-,” which includes terms like national culture, pop culture, cell or bacteria culture, cultural heritage, and subculture, can be sorted into four categories, as shown in the figure. 16 Figure 1: Four Meanings for the Concept of Culture Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Bolten (2007, p. 39)& Bruenneman (2019). Humans intervene to change nature by each of these four meanings. The narrower con- cept of culture (1 and 2) relates to the creation of art, the admiration of cultural heritage, and actions of affection and worship. The expanded concept of culture (3 and 4) goes beyond that to include biological culture, such as the cultivation of fields and land and the creation of our living environment, including constructing buildings and designing living spaces. Within the various scientific fields that deal with culture, there is no single, agreed-upon definition of culture, but rather an intense scientific discussion around its meaning. One of the first definitions that gained broad support in the scientific community was proposed by British anthropologist Edward Tylor (1871): “Culture or civilization, taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by [an individual as a mem- ber] of society” (p. 1). To this day, scholars continue to try to define the concept of culture. The same applies to cross-cultural and intercultural psychologists. Three definitions relevant to this unit are presented in the following table. Table 1: Definitions of Culture Matsumoto & Juang, 2004, p.24 “Culture is a dynamic system of rules, explicit and implicit, estab- lished by groups in order to ensure their survival, involving attitudes, values, beliefs, norms, and behaviors shared by a group but har- bored differently by each specific unit within the group.” The authors also emphasize that culture is passed on from one generation to the next, and is subject to constant change. 17 Thomas & Peterson, 2018, p. 24 “Culture is a set of knowledge structures consisting of systems of val- ues, norms, attitudes, beliefs, and behavioral meanings that are shared by members of a social group (society) and embedded in its institutions and that are learned from previous generations.” Hofstede, 2001, p. 2 Culture is the “shared mental software, the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or cate- gory of people from another.” Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Hofstede (2001, p. 2); Matsumoto & Juang (2004, p. 24); Thomas & Peterson (2018, p. 24). The definitions come from the fields of psychology and intercultural management. Similar to Tylor (1871), Matsumoto and Juang (2004) and Thomas and Peterson (2018) used a set of categories to describe and compare cultures. Both research teams also emphasized cul- ture as something that is learned and transferred to us from our ancestors. Matsumoto and Juang (2004) stated that values, attitudes, beliefs, norms, and behavior patterns are part of a dynamic system, thereby acknowledging that cultures can undergo changes over time. Beyond that, psychologists have described culture as pertaining to our social sur- roundings and personal mindsets. Culture as an internalized concept is consistent with Hofstede’s (2001) idea of culture as a “shared mental software” of societal groups or cate- gories. It is the goal of intercultural, cross-cultural, and cultural psychologists to examine cognition patterns of thoughts and behaviors, as well as feelings: cognition: What are we thinking? How do we understand our surroundings? behavior: How do we act? What are our standard patterns of behavior? emotions: What are our feelings? How do we express them? Values, attitudes, beliefs, norms, and behavior patterns influence our own internal culture and our origin, language, nationality, ethnicity, gender, profession, religion, socio-eco- nomic status, education, and more. Those factors shape our identity, not only nationally but also within any group. This means that any group or category – for example, families, work teams, football clubs, and generations – can have its own culture. The same applies to geographic regions and even communities. At the national level, we find both unifying similarities as well as differences between regional cultures and cultures of different soci- etal groups. Countries such as Australia, Canada, and the USA are examples of multicul- tural societies that unite large groups of national cultures because of continual immigra- tion. Enculturation and Acculturation Both encultruation and acculturation are learning processes in getting acquainted with a Enculturation specific culture. Enculturation begins with being born into a specific culture and encom- Processes that relate to passes all learning processes that individuals undergo during their upbringing. Individuals the transmission of cul- tural values, norms, atti- are taught which behaviors are within the cultural rules and norms of their society and tudes, beliefs, and behav- cultural groups (families, schools, regions, countries). Culturally appropriate behavior is iors from one generation based on values, attitudes, and beliefs, and is transmitted by members of older genera- to the next are part of enculturation. tions, including parents, educators, teachers, and other adults, as well as by members of the same generation, such as siblings, friends, and peers (Berry et al., 2011). As a result of 18 this process, we become culturally competent, which enables us to act appropriately using our mother tongue, gestures, mimicry, and behavioral patterns. Moreover, this learning process influences our personal values, attitudes, and beliefs. Acculturation is the process individuals undergo when confronted with a culture other Acculturation than their own, through direct personal contact. This occurs when people move to Change processes that people undergo when another country for work, studies, or immigration. Intercultural psychology studies the confronted with a new way individuals handle themselves in encounters with people from the host culture, while culture – for example, acculturation research investigates how they adapt to live in the new cultural environ- integration or assimila- tion – are called accultur- ment. Berry (2001) proposed that people make two decisions in acculturation processes: ation processes. they decide to what degree to maintain cultural values, customs, traditions, and attitudes from their country of origin (dimension one); and they decide to what degree and how to engage with members of the host community in the new country (dimension two; Berry, 2001; Berry et al., 2011, p. 321). Based on those two dimensions are four types of acculturation strategies: (1) assimilation, or the adaptation to the host community culture and its values and norms; (2) integration, which is considered the ideal strategy, and means that people maintain their original cul- ture and identity while engaging with people from the new culture; (3) separation, whereby individuals do not really seek contact with people of the new host community and instead try to hold on firmly to their culture of origin; and (4) marginalization, which is rare, and occurs when people do not show interest in maintaining their own culture but also seek no connection with the people of the country they now live in (Berry, 2001; Berry et al., 2011, p. 321). From Multiculturalism to Interculturalism For decades, multiculturalism was presented as the ideal way to coexist in our heteroge- neous societies. However, since the 1990s, discussions have emerged among anthropolo- gists, political actors, sociologists, and cross-cultural psychologists about the necessity of focusing on interculturalism instead. Whereas multiculturalism only acknowledges the presence of people with a different cultural origin, interculturalism recognizes that those people and groups interact. In light of ongoing internationalization and globalization, the Council of Europe recently started a process and white paper discussion about intercultural dialogue. Bunjes (2013, p. 47) reported that participating delegations from 47 countries recognized diversity as an enriching element of modern societies. Furthermore, they presented the white paper Liv- ing Together as Equals in Dignity as a result of their discussion. Its contents represented a change toward intercultural dialogue and intensified the debate about multiculturalism and interculturalism among scientists. Bolten (2016, p. 134) developed a three-stage model of multiculturalism, as shown in the figure below. 19 Figure 2: Interculturalism as the Highest Form of Multiculturalism Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Bolten (2007, pp. 134–139) & Bruennemann (2019). The model refers to the societal level. The first stage is Multiculturalism I, which refers to societies that devalue other cultures, resulting in separation of the various cultural groups. Multiculturalism II allows the cultural groups to coexist and live side by side. Inter- culturalism represents the third stage and, thereby, the ultimate means of coexistence. In this third stage, members hold each other in mutual respect and acknowledgment, creat- ing a society that promotes inclusion and collaboration. 1.2 Cultural Dimensions as Comparison Categories In the 1950s, scholars began to develop concepts of cultural theory to compare national Cultural dimensions cultures. Cultural dimensions, values, and other variables were identified within that Variables or categories process. The first comprehensive and groundbreaking work was Kluckhohn and Strodt- that are used to (1) describe different aspects beck’s (1961) cultural theoretical framework with value orientations for cultural differen- of cultural groups and (2) ces. This framework entails three assumptions: (1) that there are common universal prob- compare national cul- lems and questions for people in all cultures, and all have to find answers and solutions; tures are called cultural dimensions. (2) that these solutions, although different in nature, are all within a certain range of possi- bilities; and (3) that although they are available to all societies, each society has specific preferences. Many cultural theories developed subsequently have been based on these three assumptions. Hofstede’s Model of Cultural Dimensions Geert Hofstede led the most extensive research to date in terms of the number of coun- tries and people surveyed. From 1967 to 1973, quantitative surveys about work attitudes, values, and other work-related topics were conducted in 72 countries (Barmeyer et al., 20 2021; Hofstede et al., 2010). As part of the research Hofstede conducted factor analyses, extracting the four dimensions of power distance, individualism versus collectivism, mas- culinity versus femininity, and uncertainty avoidance. In the early 1980s, a second team, led by Bond, conducted the Chinese Value Survey among students in China and other Asian countries (Hofstede et al., 2010). This team was able to confirm the first three dimen- sions; however, instead of uncertainty avoidance, the team identified another dimension that reflects people’s relation to time: short- versus long-term orientation. The model was completed in the early 2000s, when Michal Minkov (2007) analyzed data of the World Value Survey and extracted the dimension indulgence versus restraint, which then became the sixth dimension in Hofstede’s model (Hofstede et al., 2010). Figure 3: Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Model Source: Kangal (2022). Used with permission. 21 Power distance This dimension measures “the extent to which the less powerful members […] expect and accept that power is distributed unequally” (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 61). This applies to companies, organizations, educational settings, and societal entities. Anybody might ach- ieve status within these entities and within society more generally because of power, wealth, intellect, success, or strength. Power is exercised in homes by parents toward their children; in workplaces by managers or team leaders toward employees; in universities by lecturers toward their students; and at local, regional, and central levels of state adminis- tration by politicians and civil servants toward citizens. In cultures with high measured values for power distance, decisions are typically made at a central level. In contrast, a more participative decision-making process is typical for countries with low power dis- tance values. In managing companies or organizations, power distance is established through the organizational structure in the form of deep hierarchies, flat hierarchies, or even an egalitarian system. Countries with a very high-power distance index include Gua- temala, Malaysia, and Russia. The lowest values have been measured in Austria, Denmark, and Israel. Individualism versus collectivism Individualism predominates in societies where people prioritize their own interests, feel solely responsible for their own actions, and consider only their first- and second-degree relatives as family. In collectivist cultures, individuals are part of strong, cohesive in- groups and extended families that provide care and protection and to which they are loyal (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 92). The number of societies that have been shown to be collecti- vist is significantly higher than the number shown to be individualistic. On a personal level, this dimension is relevant for the formation of one’s identity. Whereas people with a more individualistic mindset are concerned with individual achievement and self-realiza- tion, those raised in collectivistic cultures will likely put group interests (e.g., of the exten- ded family, their friend group, or other groups to which they belong) before their own (Hofstede et al., 2010, pp. 119–121). Masculinity versus femininity On a societal level, masculinity represents clearly distinct gender roles and a society that thrives on achievement, competition, and success in work. Femininity stands for societies with overlapping gender roles. Individuals in feminine-oriented societies value modesty and care for others. They strive toward work–life balance and a high quality of life (Hof- stede et al., 2010, p. 140). Countries with very high indices of masculinity include Austria, Hungary, Japan, and Mexico. The lowest indices, and thereby the most feminine cultures, can be found in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, as well as in Chile, Costa Rica, and Thai- land. Middle Eastern countries and West African countries mainly score in the lower-mid- dle range (Hofstede et al., 2010, pp. 141–143). 22 Uncertainty avoidance This dimension measures the degree to which people tolerate situations of uncertainty and ambiguity (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 191). In cultures with higher uncertainty avoid- ance, such as Greece, Portugal, and Russia, people need regulations, laws, and written rules. Therefore, they rely on contracts and abide by them. In work environments, these individuals look for long-term employment, and change is not appreciated because “what is different is dangerous” (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 187). Almost the opposite is the case in countries with lower indices, like Jamaica, Singapore, or Sweden, where people believe in common sense and are reluctant to follow regulations and rules. Their work life is less for- mal, they prefer flexibility, and they rely on generalists (Hofstede, 2010, pp. 211–212). Long- versus short-term orientation This dimension, also called the dimension of Confucian dynamism, has been introduced to the model in light of the Chinese Value Survey. Conceptually, it refers to people’s rela- tion to time, and to traditions and society. High indices indicate societies in which people show patience and perseverance in achieving their goals, trusting that they will be rewar- ded in the far future. The same applies to wealth, which requires saving and thriftiness, perhaps over a long period of time. The other pole is associated with societies in which individuals seek short-term success and show “respect for tradition, preservation of ‘face,’ and fulfilling social obligations” (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 239). Data on this, now available for 93 countries, were obtained via calculations from factor scores of the World Values Sur- vey (Hofstede et al., 2010, pp. 254–255). Belgium, China, Germany, Japan, Taiwan, and Ukraine are among countries with the highest indices. Countries characterized by short- term orientation include those in Africa, Central and South America, and the Middle East, such as Argentina, Egypt, Ghana, Morocco, and Venezuela. Indulgence versus restraint Semantically, this dimension revolves around well-being and happiness. Minkov (2007) extracted it from the World Values Survey’s happiness dimension, which included items of life control and the relevance of leisure in life. High values, as found for Australia, Cyprus, Mexico, Nigeria, Puerto Rico, and Sweden (Hofstede et al., 2010, pp. 282–284), indicate that people allow themselves to be driven by their desire to enjoy life and have fun. The opposite applies to countries such as Bulgaria, Egypt, Pakistan, and Ukraine. These societ- ies desire social norms that restrain such gratification (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 281). The following figure shows the indices for five countries from different regions of the world on all six dimensions (Hofstede et al., 2010). 23 Figure 4: Comparison of Indices for Germany, Canada, South Africa, Brazil, and China on Six Dimensions Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Hofstede Insights (2022). Comparison to Other Models of Cultural Theories Since the late 1960s, many cultural-comparative studies have been conducted using vari- ous methods. Most researchers have used either values or cultural dimensions as catego- ries of comparison. Those dimensions have either been theoretically defined as part of the authors’ cultural theories or resulted from qualitative and quantitative data analyses. The table below presents the four most significant research projects in recent decades. There are similarities between the four cultural theoretical frameworks and their contents in some dimensions (e.g., individualism versus collectivism; power distance), while other dimensions differ. Table 2: Comparison of Cultural Dimensions Hofstede GLOBE Trompenaars Schwartz Individualism/collecti- Institutional collecti- Individualism/collecti- Affective and intellec- vism vism/in-group collecti- vism tual autonomy/ vism (two dimensions) embeddedness Power distance Power distance Equality/hierarchy Egalitarianism/hierar- chy Masculinity/femininity Gender egalitarianism/ Achievement/ascrip- Mastery/harmony assertiveness tion Uncertainty avoidance Uncertainty avoidance Neutral/affective 24 Hofstede GLOBE Trompenaars Schwartz Long-term orientation/ Future orientation Sequential time/ short-term orientation synchronic time Indulgence/restraint Humane orientation Internal orientation/ external orientation Performance orienta- Universalism/particu- tion larism Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Hofstede et al. (2010), House et al. (2004), Trompe- naars & Hampden-Turner (2012), & Schwartz (2004). The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) Study The GLOBE study is the most recent and comprehensive research project of those in the above table. It started in 1991 under the leadership of Robert J. House. The GLOBE study continued and extended Hofstede’s research. Five of its nine dimensions (see table above) show strong similarities to those in Hofstede’s study. At its completion, the GLOBE study included 62 cultures from 59 countries. Germany, Switzerland, and South Africa were each divided into two cultural groups. Participants in this extensive project included 160 sur- veyors and 17,000 managers from more than 950 organizations in several industrial sec- tors (House et al., 2004). Reviews of the study have recognized its efforts to differentiate between things as they should be, manifested in “cultural values,” and things as they are, shown in “practices” (Berry et al., 2011). Other scholars have criticized the convenience sample of middle managers, thereby questioning the generalizability of the data. Con- cerns have also been raised that large countries with significant cultural differences, such as India and the USA, were treated as one culture (Rothlauf, 2012). Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner The two conducted their research over 25 years through academic work and field research (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 2012). They compiled data from 30,000 respondents from more than 50 countries using structured questionnaires. Two of their dimensions show similarities in semantic content with Hofstede’s and GLOBE’s dimensions: individu- alism versus collectivism, and equality versus hierarchy. This implies that Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner were able to replicate those studies’ findings. The dimension for the human–time relationship (sequential versus synchronic time) relates to the culturally dif- ferent time orientations that Hall (1976) also identified. The dimension of internal versus external control describes humans’ regard for nature and the extent to which they believe they have control over nature and over their own lives. To obtain this latter data, respond- ents were asked whether their own actions determine the direction of their lives. Among countries that scored high on this dimension were Australia, Norway, Switzerland, and the USA. Other European countries, including Finland, Germany, and Greece, had medium val- ues. Lower indices, indicating that respondents believed they had little control over their lives, were found for China, Egypt, Russia, and Venezuela (Trompenaars & Hampden- Turner, 2012, p. 177). 25 Shalom Schwartz The Israeli social psychologist is known for his research on cultural values. He developed three bi-polar dimensions and collected data for 67 countries using a quantitative survey. The dimension of embeddedness versus autonomy, like the individualism versus collecti- vism dimension, defines the relationship between individuals and the groups to which they belong. Intellectual autonomy represents the possibilities for individuals to pursue their ideas and to value curiosity, creativity, and open- and broad-mindedness (Schwartz, 2004, pp. 43–73). Affective autonomy indicates pleasure and a varied life. In societies that prefer embeddedness, which is the other pole of this dimension, individuals identify with the groups to which they belong, share their way of life, and value their relationships with group members. Social order, obedience, wisdom, and security are highly valued. The concept of egalitarianism and hierarchy is similar to Hofstede’s power distance. The egali- tarian pole corresponds to values including equality and social justice. The third dimen- sion, harmony versus mastery, resembles the masculinity versus femininity dimension and describes people’s relationship with their surroundings. Harmony-oriented people strive toward life in unity with nature, their environment, and the people around them. People who are led by mastery want to control their environment, valuing ambition, suc- cess, and competence (Schwartz, 2004, pp. 43–73). Critical Reception of Cultural Dimensions Research Scholars in all scientific fields have recognized the usefulness of research on cultural dimensions and cultural values for describing and analyzing cultural groups, especially at the society and nation levels. Empirical results can provide an initial idea about any national culture. The comprehensive research projects of Hofstede, GLOBE, Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, Schwartz, and their respective teams have contributed insights into similarities and differences for many countries. All four models have been applied in theory and practice. A survey conducted in 18 German training institutions by Rothlauf and his students found that Hofstede’s and Trompenaars’ dimensions are popular content for culture-comparative training formats (Rothlauf, 2012, p. 70). The four models have also inspired a wave of replication studies in different regions and countries, while their dimen- sions and orientations have been used in cross-cultural psychological studies as reference values. Limitations of culture-comparative studies There are several limiations of cross-comparative studies. First, culture is dynamic and changes over time, which implies that culture-comparative studies only reflect attitudes, beliefs, and opinions within a specific culture at one point in time. Additionally, the age of the data is problematic. Hofstede’s first data collection waves took place from 1967 to 1973, so data sets for some countries are over 50 years old. Their validity should thus be reexamined, since some results might have lost their relevance (Tung & Verbeke, 2010). Second, the research and questionnaires for all of the above studies were designed by sci- entists from Western cultures, and this background influenced which topics they consid- ered relevant. Different findings may have been obtained if researchers from other regions 26 had been involved. The results of the study in Asian countries, which addressed this issue and introduced a new dimension (short-term versus long-term orientation), confirm this (Hofstede et al. 2010). Third, the samples used in most of these studies have been limited to specific societal groups. In the case of Hofstede’s study, the participants were International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) personnel; likewise, Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s par- ticipants were management trainees, the GLOBE group investigated middle managers, and Schwartz’s studies surveyed teachers and students. Therefore, caution should be applied when generalizing to national cultures because the samples might not have been representative of the general population. Fourth, using data sets as if societies were homogenous entities neglects the growing diversity within national cultures (Rothlauf, 2012; Tung & Verbeke, 2010). For example, it is likely that if the same index were to be used for all of the different ethnic groups across the 50 states of the USA, the results would be misleading. In their review of cross-cultural research, Tung and Verbeke (2010) called for more studies that examine intra-cultural vari- eties between regions and cultures. 1.3 Distinctions Between Different Subject Areas in Research and Application Cultural similarities and differences between people and groups are of interest to various psychological disciplines. Comparative research is utilized within several psychological fields. For example, developmental psychology and educational psychology are interested in the effects of different educational styles on children’s behavior and character develop- ment. Clinical psychologists research effective therapeutic methods in different cultures. Business psychologists are interested in topics such as job satisfaction, motivation, and performance orientation among employees across cultures. Driven by the enormous inter- est in cultural similarities and differences, various disciplines have developed that focus on the influence of culture on psychology and vice versa. The following sections elucidate how intercultural psychology is distinguished from related fields. Cross-Cultural Psychology Among psychological subdisciplines, cross-cultural psychology is still relatively young. According to Berry et al. (2011), this subdiscipline includes all studies “of similarities and differences in individual psychological functioning in various cultural and ethnocultural groups; of ongoing changes in variables reflecting such functioning; and of the relation- ships of psychological variables with sociocultural, ecological and biological variables” (p. 5). This definition implies that individuals from different cultures could behave either simi- larly or in different ways. In either case, their behavior is influenced by their thoughts and feelings, cultural context, biological factors, and sociopolitical and ecological environment (Berry et al., 1992; Matsumoto & Juang, 2004). Similarities and differences in behavior 27 based on thoughts and feelings are also expressed in attitudes, opinions, and motivations and shown in different means of personal interaction, language, and communication. Examples of research topics in cross-cultural psychology include national characteristics of power distance in France and Denmark and their influence on leadership styles. the effects of international work experience on cultural competence for managers in a multinational corporation. acculturation attitudes toward migrants from Romania, Syria, and Turkey among Ger- man university students. a comparison of correlations between work satisfaction and well-being in different European Amazon branches. the role of cross-cultural adaptation on stress levels among French expatriates. With its focus on universal and culturally determined psychological processes, cross-cul- tural research contributes to the goals of intercultural psychology. Intercultural Psychology Intercultural psychology is application-oriented. Embedded in the idea of intercultural- ism, it examines how individuals with different cultural backgrounds and psychological characteristics engage with and adapt to each other when living in culturally diverse soci- eties (Berry et al., 2011). The goal is to understand what happens during interactions between culturally diverse individuals or groups in organizational settings by focusing on the human factors and relevant contextual variables (Thomas & Peterson, 2018, p. 15). In organizations, institutions, and companies, cultural factors influence corporate functions such as operations management, finance and accounting, human resource management, information technology, and marketing. The goal is always to facilitate cooperation between individuals from different cultures based on respect and mutual understanding to create improved and sustainable business results (Bolten, 2016, pp. 113). Themes of intercultural psychology in work and business settings include understanding leadership styles in multicultural teams from the perspective of team leaders and team members in international organizations. developing trust between German service providers and Italian customers. marketing strategies for different cultural groups in the USA. understanding the impact of effective diversity management in two multinational cor- porations. In summary, intercultural psychological research, when applied to work environments, is concerned with all areas of intercultural management, including human resource management (as diversity management) in the recruitment of diverse personnel, development of multicultural teams, and personnel development in general. issues related to negotiations with international business partners or suppliers. intercultural marketing when promoting and selling products abroad. 28 Cultural Psychology Cultural psychology investigates the influence of culture on human behavior within one culture. Scientists in this field seek to understand how cultures develop and change, and how culture influences thinking patterns, emotions, and behavior patterns – and vice versa. Research into psychological and mental processes of cognition, problem-solving, planning, or memorizing, for example, often starts in one specific culture on the assump- tion of universal applicability. However, cultural psychology also acknowledges that psy- chological processes are determined by the cultural environments to which individuals belong and adapt. Therefore, results in these fields are often compared to research con- ducted in other countries and cultures, and thereby become part of cross-cultural research. Indigenous Psychology Indigenous psychology is a young discipline closely linked with cultural psychology, com- munity psychology, and anthropology. It deals with the knowledge and ideas that mem- Community psychology bers of a group or societal culture have about themselves (Kim et al., 2006, p. 4). There- As a psychological disci- pline, community psy- fore, any indigenous psychology research must be conducted in the context of this culture chology deals with the (Kim et al., 2006). Its goal is to understand and describe detailed inner views of cultures thoughts, emotions, and and explore people’s thoughts, feelings, and behavior (Helfrich, 2019, pp. 2–3). actions of individuals and groups at the community level. Research in this field starts with the basic assumption that psychological processes are culturally bound. Scientists use field research and interactive methods to identify topics that are of specific interest concerning localities and communities. In Mexico, for example, such topics of investigation include respect, affiliative obedience, machismo, and virginity (Berry et al., 2011, p. 450). Psychologists with focus on India have emphasized that indige- nous research there should go beyond topics of Western psychology and study, for exam- ple, the relationship between spirituality and health, and the relationship between Bud- dhism and Hinduism and behavior, in order to make it the psychology of Indian people in India (Berry et al., 2011, p. 451). Challenges in Cross-Cultural and Intercultural Research Research in all the cultural and psychological fields is interlinked and will continue to be so. The internationalization and global orientation of these research fields also give rise to several challenges, some of which have been discussed in previous sections but are of general relevance to research in these fields. Sample selection A challenge that researchers face everywhere in the world pertains to sample selection. To date, many multinational researchers have relied on convenience samples (see the sec- tion above on cultural dimensions). The most common group utilized in surveys is stu- dents, who are in many cases similar in age, educational background, social origin, and income levels (Lonner, 2000). The generalizability of study results using student samples is thus always limited. 29 Assumed homogeneity of cultures The second issue is closely related to the first and concerns the assumed homogeneity of cultures in research results wherever studies refer to country characteristics. Finding com- parable samples in several countries remains a challenge. Moreover, most countries today are multicultural, with various ethnicities, languages, religions, traditions, and world views (Tung & Verbeke, 2010). Future comparative studies need to better reflect these diversities. Western perspective Although psychologists from different parts of the world (e.g., Asia and Eastern Europe) have intensified their own cultural, cross-cultural, and intercultural research, psychology is still a scientific field in which the majority of concepts and models used originate from Australia, North America, and Western Europe (Blair & Bligh, 2018, p. 130). Scientists from those regions bring their education and heritage into their work, which often includes lin- ear- and dual-thinking processes, positivistic philosophy, and English as the preferred lan- guage. However, cognitive processes, perception, memory, and emotions might develop differently in, for example, Egypt, India, Nigeria, Vietnam, and other regions globally, and cross-cultural research has started to reflect on this in recent years. 1.4 Research Approaches and Methods In cultural psychological research, scientists use two approaches: emic and etic. These terms derive from two terms in linguistics – phonemic and phonetic, respectively. Phone- mic relates to aspects of sounds and sound production that are unique and apply to one specific language, whereas phonetic relates to rules of sound production that apply to all languages (Berry et al., 2011; Pike, 1967). A parallel distinction applies between the two research approaches in cultural psychology. 30 Emic and Etic Approaches Figure 5: Differences Between Emic and Etic Approaches Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Berry et al. (2011); Bruennemann (2019); & Helfrich (1999). Researchers applying an emic approach focus on one specific culture, often at the village or community level. They aim to consider an inside perspective and use qualitative meth- ods, such as interviews and participatory observations, to understand people’s values, motives, and how they live and work. Such researchers seek to actively avoid bringing their point of view into the cultural group they are observing. Instead, they attempt to understand the opinions and ideas of the individuals in question (Helfrich, 1999). Emic approaches originated in anthropology and can also be found in indigenous, cultural, and community psychology (Berry et al., 2011). Researchers taking an etic approach often study two or more cultures. Their goal is to compare these cultures and look for similarities and differences, which are measured using a selection of general rules. There is a wide range of comparative categories to be measured, such as cultural dimensions, attitudes, values, emotions, behaviors, and per- formance indicators. Researchers strive for objectivity and ideally want to uncover univer- sally valid psychological regularities (Helfrich, 2019). The etic approach is common in cross-cultural and intercultural research. Critics of this approach have pointed out the danger of a lack of objectivity, because (1) methods, models, and concepts are often developed based on Western cultures only (Hwang, 2014, p. 4) and (2) researchers tend to maintain the perspective of their own cul- ture of origin, since the etic view they work with is “imposed” (Berry, 1969, p. 124). 31 Neither method is superior to the other, and they are not mutually exclusive – researchers might thus decide to use both approaches in a complementary way. Quantitative and Qualitative Methods Intercultural psychology and cross-cultural psychology use both qualitative and quantita- tive methods. Early research into topics of culture and psychology was deeply rooted in qualitative research. In the early 1920s, Wilhelm Wundt proposed qualitative research as the preferred method in his Elements of Folk Psychology (Wundt & Schaub, 1921). Qualitative research is often conducted through field research in natural settings. It requires surveyors to interact with their subjects to obtain deep insights into the beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, or emotions of individuals or groups (Karasz & Singelis, 2009), which are then described and analyzed. Denzin and Lincoln (1994) defined a set of data collec- tion methods that allow the discovery of new phenomena specific to one culture. These methods include different types of semi-structured and unstructured interviews, such as narrative and explorative interviews or group-level focus group discussions. Other meth- ods that can be used in data collection include observations (participatory and non-par- ticipatory); analyses of documents, artifacts, and everyday objects; visual methods; and self-experience. Because data collection is conducted in natural settings, researchers have little or no control over events during their field visits but must “go along with them” (Berry et al., 2011). The subsequent analytical work includes organizing and preparing the information, coding, and categorization. In content analyses, researchers look for patterns and structures that characterize a specific culture. Qualitative methods are used in all research fields related to culture and psychology. Nonetheless, they are more relevant to indigenous and cultural psychology than to the other subdisciplines because, although thorough field research leads to the discovery of new and culturally specific phenomena, the data analysis is time-consuming and labor- intensive. The need to interpret information is associated with high subjectivity, which has been strongly criticized by scholars in the past, leading to the marginalization of this method for many years (Karasz & Singelis, 2009). Quantitative research in psychology generally follows methods used in the natural scien- ces. It has been the approach of choice in many fields of psychology since they developed into natural science disciplines. Cultural and psychological phenomena that are already known are examined through several steps: 1. Developing research questions or hypotheses 2. Testing hypotheses by applying standardized questionnaires on attitudes, values, emotions, cognitive dimensions, and other factors to one or more groups of partici- pants 3. Analyzing the data using various statistical methods, a step that has been rationalized in the past 20 years by the creation of sophisticated software packages, such as the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS; International Business Machines [IBM] Corporation, 2020), which make it easier to handle data for large samples 4. Comparing actual with predicted results and with findings from other researchers 32 The advantage of applying this process is that it yields reliable and representative results. Quantitative methods are relevant for all binational or multinational cross-cultural stud- ies. For example, in his cultural dimensions research, Schwartz (2004) used a value survey questionnaire that his team had developed in 1992. The survey included 57 items on social justice, humility, creativity, social order, pleasure, and ambition. It was translated into multiple languages and administered to university students and teachers in 66 coun- tries. Schwartz derived three bi-polar dimensions by applying factor analyses and regres- Bi-polar dimensions sions. Schwartz’s research has been ongoing for over 30 years. Conceptually, his studies When two dimensions are defined as opposite val- are very close to Hofstede’s research, and his early studies in particular can be considered ues (poles) on one scale, as validations of Hofstede’s work (Rothlauf, 2012; Schwartz, 1994). Semantic similarities they are considered to be exist, for example, between Hofstede et al.’s (2010) individualism/collectivism dimension polar. and Schwartz’s (2004) autonomy/embeddedness orientation. Critics of quantitative methods have questioned the representativeness of the data collec- ted because of the aforementioned cultural influence in models and the fact that items (questions and statements) in questionnaires carry the risk of translation errors. The sec- ond point of criticism is inherent to the research subject of culture and psychology. Schol- ars have warned that quantitative designs cannot capture how culture shapes psychologi- cal processes and outcomes in specific contexts (Karasz & Singelis, 2009) – this can only be achieved by also using qualitative methods. The way forward might be to use a mixed-methods approach (Berry et al., 2011; Creswell, 2009). In fact, during the past 30 years researchers working on large multinational studies have often combined qualitative and quantitative methods. For example, Hofstede et al.’s (2010) study on organizational dimensions used mixed methods. The team first conducted group interviews to obtain insights into corporate and organizational cultures. Topics included specific rituals, symbols, heroes, and values. The second, quantitative, phase included written structured questionnaires. SUMMARY The culture of a social group unites members’ common ways of think- ing, behavior patterns, and emotions. These are influenced and shaped by underlying assumptions, values, norms, and beliefs. Other influential factors include the overall social context, nationalities, world views, and religions. Scholars have developed cultural dimensions to describe and compare cultures. However, while these can provide an initial idea of cultural characteristics they cannot replace in-depth exploration of the national culture of interest. Research areas that explore the mutual influences of culture and psy- chology include intercultural psychology, cross-cultural psychology, indigenous psychology, and cultural psychology. Intercultural psychol- ogy, which is application-oriented, deals with intercultural relations and 33 interactions and attempts to identify ways to overcome cultural differen- ces. Cultural psychology explores how certain societal context variables shape thinking, acting, and feeling in a culture. Comparative research examines similarities and differences between two or more cultures. A unique role is played by indigenous psychology, which is mainly con- cerned with non-Western cultures. Here, researchers examine links between spiritual, religious, or historically rooted beliefs and human behavior in order to explain the knowledge, attitudes, and conceptions of cultural groups. In the cultural and psychological research fields, emic and etic approaches are used. In the emic approach, detailed information is col- lected about the cultural characteristics of individuals and groups from the scientist’s perspective using qualitative research methods. These qualitative methods make it possible to discover, describe, and analyze new phenomena. The etic approach examines cultures from the outside and strives for objectivity. The quantitative methods used allow for com- parative surveys across cultures. Although Western models, designs, and instruments continue to domi- nate cultural and psychological research, scientific communities in other regions have validated these via replication studies. Therefore, incorpo- rating approaches from different areas of the world is the way forward. 34 UNIT 2 INTERCULTURAL MANAGEMENT STUDY GOALS On completion of this unit, you will be able to... – explain the different tasks and requirements of intercultural management in organiza- tions and companies. – acknowledge the increasing importance of cultural differences in people’s work envi- ronments and professional lives. – deal with culturally influenced behavior reflectively and react appropriately in intercul- tural interactions. – evaluate opportunities and risks of universal and pluralist corporate cultures for inter- national joint ventures. – develop strategies for intercultural cooperation, select different management styles based on theoretical models, and use various culturally appropriate leadership styles. – analyze and describe corporate cultures. 2. INTERCULTURAL MANAGEMENT Introduction Today, the workforce in most countries is culturally diverse. As a result of globalization and steadily increasing worldwide migration, many of us have colleagues from different cultural backgrounds. Companies often have international links due to joint ventures or mergers, and many employees regularly meet colleagues from other countries. Multina- tional corporations frequently send employees abroad as expatriates. Differences in culture are also present when companies cooperate within one country, for example, with other regions, other industrial sectors, and different types of organizations. Even within a single company, different cultures exist across departments. Management Intercultural management is defined here as all management related to the leading of The oversight and super- employees and cooperation with business partners from within one’s own culture and vision of work processes in production, research from other cultures, thereby supporting a company’s strategic goals. Management facili- and development, finan- tates coordination processes concerning different departmental, organizational, and sec- ces, marketing, human toral cultures, and is relevant for overseeing and coordinating different industry and cor- resources, and customer service comprise man- porate cultures and cultural differences within a company, such as across departments. agement. 2.1 Role, Influential Factors, and Requirements of Intercultural Management The role of intercultural managers is to recognize and overcome cultural differences, use knowledge and methods of different cultures, and create synergies for greater efficiency and effectiveness in the work process. Intercultural management supports and contrib- utes to all corporate divisions and management areas, including finance, human resource management, procurement, production, and sales. Managers and team leaders must learn to understand and be aware of the relevance of cultural factors and the influence of these on all management areas. Managers’ and team leaders’ cultural competence helps them fulfill their roles and responsibilities within organizations – that is, to succeed in their work. “Surviving” is typically the first task in ensuring that cooperation in an international con- text will not be a disadvantage or lead to failures. It includes avoiding any faux pas in the early phases of cooperation when business partners are getting to know each other and holding their first meetings. For example, it is of the utmost importance in some countries (e.g., Germany, Japan, and Switzerland) to be punctual and to avoid making a potential 36 business partner wait. In Japan, it is essential to have a business card ready, and to hand it over with both hands. Following such country-specific business etiquette facilitates a smooth communication process and avoids offending prospective partners. For an intercultural business relationship to be successful in the long term, companies have to reach the stage of “thriving.” This goes beyond knowledge of business etiquette and entails identifying “elements” from both cultures to be integrated to create a “third culture” that leads to a higher-level, and therefore successful, long-term relationship (Caganova et al., 2010). The development from surviving to thriving involves a maturation process in intercultural management. As long as intercultural cooperation challenges are mastered and mistakes are avoided, management remains in the surviving strategy. Thriving can be achieved only when additional measures are taken that make the cooperation beneficial to all stake- holders. The role of intercultural management is to master cultural challenges, increase the organization’s efficiency and effectiveness at a global level, and thus contribute to the company’s success (Caganova et al., 2010, p. 53). Influential Factors and Areas of Activity Intercultural management is involved in all management areas and is influenced by many factors. In fact, intercultural management, all other areas of management, work processes in the organization, and all aspects of organizational culture mutually influence each other. The following figure provides an overview of influential factors. Figure 6: Influential Factors and Areas of Activities of Intercultural Management Source: Bruennemann (2019). 37 Leadership Leadership Styles of leadership describe how managers or team leaders act toward their team mem- The management of peo- bers to achieve the best possible results for their organization. This unit introduces three ple by setting goals together, monitoring their models of leadership that are relevant to intercultural contexts. The first is a one-dimen- achievements, and moti- sional model developed in the 1950s by Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958) for leaders who vating them is called want to improve or choose a leadership style for themselves. The second model, Blake leadership. and Mouton’s (1964) managerial grid was developed based on studies conducted by the Ohio State University and University of Michigan in the 1960s regarding the relation between people-orientation and results-orientation. The third model introduces six dimensions of leadership styles found in the Global Leadership and Organizational Behav- ior Effectiveness (GLOBE) study, the most extensive international leadership research project to date (Brodbeck et al., 2004). Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1959, 1973) discussed leadership as the relationship between the authority of team leaders and the level of freedom that team members have. The two poles are authoritarian leaders, who make all decisions independently; and autonomous leaders, who provide team members with the space to make decisions. All styles between these poles stand for different levels of authority and scopes of decision-making pro- cesses. Figure 7: Leadership and Decision-Making Processes Source: Dinibutun (2020). When evaluating the cultural influences on these leadership styles, Hofstede et al.’s (2010) power distance dimension can provide some guidance. An authoritarian style might be appropriate in countries that score very high on power distance, e.g., China or Malaysia. A paternalistic style is more common in countries with a moderate to high index, e.g., Iraq or Mexico. Delegating and autonomous leadership styles might be preferred in countries that score very low on power distance, e.g., Austria, Denmark, Israel, or Sweden. The preferred leadership style within each culture is not only defined by cultural factors; the size of a company or organization, the industrial sector, team members’ expectations of leadership, and the manager’s education and personality are also relevant. 38 Blake and Mouton’s (1964) managerial grid predicts that people-orientation and produc- tion results-orientation concern each leader to different degrees. Whereas some leaders emphasize the relationship they build with their team members, others are primarily con- cerned with achieving production goals. Figure 8: Leadership Styles Based on Concern for People and Production Source: Bruennemann (2019), based on Blake & Mouton (1964). Concern for people and concern for production are not mutually exclusive. Instead, differ- ent degrees of each lead to several different management styles. Ideal managers in this model give their full attention to both people and production, which results in team man- agement (9.9). When concern for both people and production is equally distributed but only reaches moderate levels, this results in middle-of-the-road management (5.5). When managers do not show much interest in either of the two options, it results in impover- ished management (1.1). 39 Cho et al. (2018, p. 10) used the managerial grid to examine preferences for leadership styles in South Korea, a long-term-oriented collectivist country with a high index for uncer- tainty avoidance and a medium to high index for power distance. They found a preference for team management (9.9), with a high concern for production and people, which is con- sidered the ideal management style by Blake and Mouton (1964). Del Maestro Filho et al. (2015) applied the model to a study in Brazil, a less collectivist country with higher values for power distance. The researchers found among 120 managers a preference for country- club management (1.9), the style with a deep concern for people and little concern for pro- duction. Differences were noted between women and men in their actual performance as managers: Women showed a stronger tendency toward production results, whereas men had a propensity toward the impoverished style. The declared preference corresponds to a patriarchal leadership style, which is typical for this region. The GLOBE study, the source for the third model, addressed leadership preferences as part of surveys conducted in 62 countries in different regions. Starting with 21 dimensions, fac- tor analysis revealed six leadership styles to be universally relevant: charismatic, team-ori- ented, participative, humane-oriented, autonomous, and self-protective (Brodbeck et al., 2004). As presented in the table below, each of these styles is associated with a set of behaviors. The data for this research were analyzed at a cluster level. The clusters were formed according to cultural indicators, and some therefore do not correspond to geographic areas. The ten clusters are the Anglo cluster (e.g., Australia, Great Britain, Ireland, and the USA), Northern Europe (e.g., Denmark, Finland, and Sweden), Germanic Europe (e.g., Aus- tria, Germany, the Netherlands, and German-speaking Switzerland), East Europe (e.g., Albania, Greece, Hungary, Poland, and Russia), Latin Europe (e.g., France, French-speaking Switzerland, Italy, and Spain), the Middle East (e.g., Egypt, Morocco, and Turkey), South Asia (e.g., India, Iran, Malaysia, and Thailand), Confucian Asia (e.g., China, Japan, and South Korea), sub-Saharan Africa (e.g., Namibia, Nigeria, and South Africa), and Latin America (e.g., Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, and Mexico; Brodbeck, 2016). Table 3: Six Leadership Styles According to the GLOBE Survey Behavioral attributes associ- Leadership style ated with this style Countries and regions Charismatic/ value-oriented Strong-willed, determined, Highly valued in all regions ready to take risks Ranked first in all regions Ability to inspire and motivate except Eastern Europe and Ready to work toward a com- the Middle East mon goal and vision while sacrificing personal interests Team-oriented Diplomatic but ready to face Highly valued in all areas discussions Ranked first in Eastern Europe Encourages teamwork toward and the Middle East a common goal Acts in favor of team-building and collaborative work 40 Behavioral attributes associ- Leadership style ated with this style Countries and regions Participative Participative and non-auto- Ranked second in Germanic cratic Europe Involves team members in Ranked third in Anglo cluster, decision-making Northern, Romanic, and East- Tolerates contradictions and ern Europe, the Middle East, questions from team mem- Sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin bers America Humane-oriented Empathetic, reserved, gener- Ranked third in South Asia and ous, and modest Confucian Asia Acts considerately toward team members and offers support Autonomous Autonomous, independent, Low-ranking in all regions and individualistic Lowest values in Roman Shows behaviors that make Europe, Middle East, and them unique and distin- Latin America guishes them from others Self-protective Status conscious, careful, Low-ranking in all regions avoidant, and bureaucratic Lowest values in Northern Complies to rules but also Europe competitive Does not take risks Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Brodbeck et al. (2004) & Brodbeck (2016). Results for all regions showed that the charismatic and team-oriented styles were consid- ered to best promote outstanding leadership. In contrast, the autonomous and the defen- sive styles impede outstanding leadership. Participative leadership, a preferred style in the Germanic Europe cluster, is also widely accepted in all other regions, except in South and Confucian Asia, where people prefer the humane-oriented style. The GLOBE surveys have been ongoing for the last 20 years and continue to provide detailed insights into work- related behaviors. Planning and Control of Work Processes in Organizational Settings National cultures strongly influence planning, controlling, and monitoring. All three are culture-bound processes and require adaptation to other cultures in cross-cultural coop- eration. One function of planning is reducing uncertainty; this is conceptually connected to Hofstede’s uncertainty avoidance dimension. Control is a way of exercising power and thereby correlates with power distance (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 315). Hofstede associated high indices for uncertainty avoidance (e.g., in Germany, Greece, Gua- temala, and Portugal) with planning processes that are (1) political rather than strategic, and (2) a personal responsibility of managers rather than formalized processes within the organization (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 316). 41 Countries with high power distance are characterized by less control at higher managerial levels and more formal authority at lower levels of companies (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 316). Managers are the ones exercising control, rather than control being standardized through established processes in organizations. In countries with lower power distance, there is more trust in team members and, therefore, less control. Harrison et al. (1994) conducted a quantitative study on companies from Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore, and the USA, investigating the correlations between Hofstede’s dimen- sions and organizational structure, planning, and control. The results, based on a ques- tionnaire completed by senior executives from all four countries, showed that planning and control were carried out in similar ways in each cluster (i.e., Anglo-American and East Asian), confirming the cultural influence on these processes: Australian and US planning and control followed decentralized processes under the responsibility of specialized units within the organizations and focused on short-term planning. Australia and the US used quantitative and analytical methods for control (e.g., produc- tion and inventory control, and appraisal of capital investment). Hong Kong and Singapore put greater emphasis on long-term planning and exercised group processes of decision-making. Trust Building a relationship of trust is relevant in business relationships as well as in multicul- tural working teams around the world. However, questions remain. Do people in different cultures rely on trust in the same way? Whom do they consider trustworthy? How impor- tant is it to businesspeople in other cultures to establish trust before signing a contract? Trust is so important for all cultures that it can be found in proverbs around the world. For example, the Chinese say that “when there is trust, no proof is necessary”; Germans say that “trust is good, but control is better”; and Italians say that “trust is good but not to trust is better.” To discuss trust from a scientific perspective, it is first necessary to look at its definition – of which, as with other psychological constructs, there are many. McAllister (1995) defined personal trust as “the extent to which a person is confident in and willing to act on the basis of the words, actions, and decisions of another” (p. 25). Mishra (1996) emphasized that when people decide to trust others, they also agree “to be vulnerable […] based on the belief that the [… other] is competent, open, concerned and reliable” (p. 265). In inter- cultural negotiations or within teams, trust (1) facilitates cooperative work, (2) promotes the sharing of information (even confidential information), and (3) allows business part- ners or team members to know that they do not have to protect themselves from one another. Javidan and Zaheer (2019) conducted a qualitative study by interviewing 400 managers and executives from Asia, the Middle East, and North and Latin America. They identified three factors that contribute to the trust-building process: (1) the right mindset (e.g., time and patience), (2) learning about colleagues’ cultural backgrounds, and (3) focusing on the 42 character of employees and the result of the trust-building process. The qualitative data collected in this study provided insights into the actual trust-building process in some regions. Middle Eastern managers, for example, reported that having a relative vouch for an employee’s integrity could speed up the trust-building process. In Asian and American countries, managers discussed their ways of earning their employees’ trust and their own commitment to their employees. Their responsibilities extended beyond the workplace to their staff’s personal, emotional, and financial matters (Javidan & Zaheer, 2019). Brett and Mitchell (2020) conducted a qualitative study, interviewing 82 managers from different industries and 33 countries in four regions: Europe, the Middle East, North Amer- ica, and South and East Asia. The topic of the interviews was the requirements for trust- worthiness when finding new business partners. As one result of their study, Brett and Mitchell (2020) developed a model incorporating two dimensions: “high” versus “low” trust, and “tight” versus “loose” cultures. In their understanding, a culture is considered tight when social norms regulate people’s behav- iors, social behavior is monitored, and violations of social norms have consequences. Figure 9: Comparison of Trust-Building Processes in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and the US Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Brett & Mitchell (2020) & Neeley (2018). 43 Latin American managers reported that they tested trustworthiness by building social relationships, which allowed them to check for similarities in values and behavior. Manag- ers from South Asia and the Middle East looked for business partners who respect their values to find them trustworthy. Social interactions were cited as a way to get to know potential partners. Managers from the USA and Europe often followed the principle of “trust but verify,” which means taking a leap of faith in their employees until proved wrong. Social relationships are not a condition for trust but correspond to the principle of separation of work and private life. East Asian managers’ trust-building process followed three steps: (1) seeking information about potential partners, e.g., via third parties, (2) meeting potential partners, and (3) engaging in activities to build a relationship, such as a meal after a business meeting (Brett & Mitchell, 2020). China and guanxi Chinese people are very concerned with trust in business relations. They use the term guanxi to refer to relationships in which individuals and parties benefit. Rothlauf (2012) referred to guanxi as “affective,” because it is based on emotional liking, and as being dif- fuse. It is based on a relationship that is not task-oriented but personal. Therefore, culti- vating business relations with Chinese partners is a slow process that requires empathy to build trust and develop mutual liking. If one wants to negotiate in China, fostering guanxi is a prerequisite. In psychology, a well-known theoretical concept of trust is conceptualized on two dimen- sions: (1) cognitive trust, which is based on rationality; and (2) affective trust, which is based on emotions. Several scholars have contributed to the discussion on each of these concepts. The following table provides a summary of the dimensions’ characteristics. 44 Figure 10: Cognitive and Affective Trust Source: Christina Abdel Shafi (2022), based on Zur et al. (2012). Owing to their very different content, cognitive and affective trust also have other func- tions in cross-cultural business relations and teams. Example A team from a furniture manufacturing company in Denmark is sent on a business trip to Italy to negotiate a joint venture to produce vintage-style furniture. The team is eager to close the deal while in Italy. Their prospective partners welcome them warmly and have scheduled two meetings to discuss the technical details and financial aspects of the con- tract during their three-day stay. However, the Danish team does not have enough time to cover all the topics they want to address and are surprised that the Italians seem to be in 45 no hurry for further discussions. Instead, they keep inviting them to lunch meetings and dinners. The Danish team leaves after the third day believing the deal might be off, although they did enjoy their stay. To their surprise, however, the contract is signed within a week of the trip. Trust-building processes vary across cultures, as do people’s preferences for affective or cognitive trust. Erin Meyer, a communication expert who works on intercultural interac- tions in business settings, emphasized that people from task-oriented cultures (e.g., Den- mark, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, and the USA) tend to separate both dimensions and rely on cognitive trust in their business relations. Relationship-oriented cultures (e.g., Brazil, China, India, and Morocco), on the other hand, connect both dimensions and prefer to include trust-building activities early on to build personal relationships (Meyer, 2016). Small talk in the office, extended lunches and dinners, field trips, and other activities are used to get to know one another and build trust. Results from international studies have found similar results. In multicultural teams of international organizations or international projects, trust is especially relevant. In the latter case, teams are often put together at short notice and team members have to trust each other from the start. Scholars have used the concept of Swift trust swift trust to describe these processes. Swift trust develops as cognitive trust and is Rapid trust-building based on facts and information that partners or co-workers have about assigned jobs, developed via a process in which team members educational attainments, and previous experience (Neeley, 2018). It corresponds to the grant each other a trust approach described for North America and Europe in Brett and Mitchell’s (2020) model. advance to quickly form Swift trust is needed, for example, by flight crews, rescue teams in emergencies (e.g., after functioning work teams is known as swift trust. natural disasters), film crews on coproduction film projects, and people working on inter- national projects brought in from different countries. The other pole, passable trust, was Passable trust Trust built through a conceptualized by Neeley and Leonardi (2018) in their analysis of cooperation in virtual process that is long-term- work teams. Passable trust develops over time and implies the development of a relation- oriented, has affective ship at the affective level. In virtual teams, people might chat and have private conversa- components, and has the goal of building a rela- tions over time, which increases their readiness to share knowledge with co-workers and tionship is known as pass- establish a connection. able trust. Different Concepts of Time How punctual are people in Brazil, China, or Switzerland? How committed are working teams in Italy, Poland, or South Africa to meeting their deadlines? What planning horizons do business partners have in other countries? During which days of the week is it most effective to communicate with customers in Brazil, Somalia, or Qatar, and at what time of day? When do people in Iceland, Russia, and the USA celebrate Christmas and Easter? Anyone planning to cooperate with a supplier, customer, or business partner in another country should investigate the partner’s official working times, including their working week, daily working hours, and public holidays. These differences must be included in any research conducted as part of a cultural, administrative, geographic, and economic (CAGE) analysis (Ghemawhat, 2001, 2007). 46 Such an analysis would reveal that people in Qatar and Somalia work from Saturday to Thursday. For people working in Europe, this would imply that cooperation with busi- nesses in these countries is only possible on four days a week, from Monday to Thursday, because of the different working weeks. It also implies that one should not contact Qatari partners on a Friday, because this is their weekend and should be respected as such. The same applies to the public holidays of people in other cultures, not only in countries with a different religion; these holidays can differ even if the religion is the same. For example, among the various Christian denominations, Catholics and Protestants celebrate Christmas and Easter on different days versus Orthodox Christians, and similar differences exist in other religions, too. Therefore, in any new cooperation, checking the country-spe- cific holidays is always recommended. Different time zones can be a challenge. When working in global teams, the relevant time zones are usually one of the first things that team members become aware of. For exam- ple, when people in Austria are finishing work, people in Mexico have just started their day. The same applies to Ireland and Japan, which are eight hours apart, and to many other regions in the world. Anyone working on a global team knows that it is difficult to be able to talk to colleagues only early or late in the working day. Management and distribu- tion of tasks have to be adapted to these time differences. Several research interests have evolved around time as a cultural concept. The first inter- est deals with people’s relationships to the past, present, and future and their planning horizon. House et al. (2004), in a multinational study, included these aspects as “fu

Intercultural Psychology Course Book PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue