Managing Internationalisation - Patricia Adam

Скачать книгу

on that.

      Typical characteristics of cultures with past orientation versus cultures with present or future orientation are listed in Figure 2-30.

      Figure 2-30: Differences of Past, Present and Future Orientation38

      The second aspect deals with the magnitude of the time horizon. This aspect considers how long people tend to plan ahead. Participants of the survey were asked to assign scores for the duration of past, present and future in order to indicate the relative time horizons. Scores ranged from 1 = seconds over 2 = minutes, 3 = hours, 4 = days, 5 = weeks and 6 = months to 7 = years. Thus, they calculated an average score per country as depicted in Figure 2-31. In a business environment, a long-term vision spanning decades stands in sharp contrast to a short-term thinking in quarterly reports.

      Figure 2-31: Average Time Horizon39

      The third aspect of cultural differences concerning time covers whether time is seen as a sequential process, expressed by a series of linear continuing events, or of a synchronic nature where many things can happen in parallel. People with sequential (or monochronic) orientation prefer to engage in only one activity at a time, they follow the original plans and favour to be evaluated based on goals to be reached by a certain time. These people schedule meetings and strictly keep appointments. Organisations with a sequential culture idealise the efficient, most direct route to reach their goals that could be symbolised by a straight line. In contrast, people with a synchronic (or polychronic) orientation have a more flexible and diffuse view of time. They subordinate schedules to relationships and are inclined to spend time with significant others although they might be expected at an arranged meeting. These people prefer to do several things at once and assess their own achievements in context of their whole history with the company and their future potential. Companies with a synchronic culture idealise the interaction of past experience, present opportunities and future potentials, which could be symbolised by an interacting circle. This aspect causes cultural clashes on the staff level, as sequential people judge others doing several things at once as being distracted, unreliable and chaotic whereas synchronic people judge the one-at-a-time maxim as narrow-minded, inflexible and restricting.

      Separating the aspect concerning the handling of schedules leads to the wider-ranging differentiation of clock time cultures (where punctuality and keeping schedules is cherished and time is money) versus event time cultures that “give time to time”.40

Inner versus Outer Direction

      The seventh dilemma deals with the relationship of people and the natural environment. The two opposing views constitute that nature should be (and is) controlled by people – men subduing the earth – or that humans are only a part of nature and therefore have to go along with its forces and laws. The belief that the environment can be controlled stems from a mechanistic world view that stresses the possibility to influence the outcomes and is therefore described as inner-directed perception in opposition to its outer-directed counterpart.

      Figure 2-32: Percentages Agreeing to What Happens to Me is My Own Doing41

      In order to find out about their inclination, people were asked to choose between “what happens to me is my own doing” and “sometimes I feel that I do not have enough control over the direction my life is taking”. As all people are quite aware that both positions hold true elements, having to choose between them poses again a dilemma that could be used to reveal their basic assumptions. Figure 2-32 provides the percentages of participants from selected countries opting for the inner-directed view.

Reconciling Dilemmas

      The seven dilemmas of culture are designed to help leaders to gain a broader understanding of the range of possible solutions to common problems. For a successful leadership practice, however, understanding these dilemmas is not enough. Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner postulate transcultural competence as the primary leadership competence in an international business environment and define it as the propensity to reconcile seemingly opposing values to a higher level. This propensity follows a three step approach from Recognition through Respect to Reconciliation as depicted in Figure 2-33. First, (inter) cultural issues have to be recognised as such, which requires an awareness of one’s own cultural perspective. This should be followed by respecting and appreciating the culturally different views without prejudice or minimisation. Finally, these differences have to be resolved in a reconciliation process.

      Figure 2-33: The Three-Step-Approach42

      The reconciliation of any kind of dilemma is an innovation process that requires the willingness to challenge and change existing solutions continuously until a higher level is reached. Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner depict this process in a two-dimensional map of cultural space (sometimes also called dilemma grid) where each axis represents one side of the dilemma. The differing positions of the two dilemmas are found at the highest point of each axis (position 10/1 or 1/10). A compromise solution that could be depicted as a point in the middle of the map (5/5) is not beneficial as only a very limited value would be achieved and both sides still feel that they gave up something precious. So a true reconciliation of both dilemmas should discover an innovative and truly unique approach that enables the involved parties to combine the underlying values of both positions to achieve a higher level (position 10/10). Such a solution is never made by a single decision but involves a continuous improvement process instead. This process will start from one perspective and requires an unremitting search for better ways to achieve the desired solution, moving in the direction of the opposing dimension (taking some ideas of this position and incorporating them into the existing processes or solutions) and then swinging back towards the original viewpoint. This development process is depicted as a spiral that moves upwards towards the 10/10 point. It could rotate clockwise when starting with the x-dimension or anticlockwise when choosing the y-dimension as starting point. A reconciliation of the classical business challenge of globalism versus localism based on the first Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner dilemma of universalism versus particularism is presented in Figure 2-34. This dilemma could be reconciled by creating an innovative solution that uses transnational specialisation – so that each nation (or subsidiary) within the global corporation specialises in a field where it excels. Leadership of these particular functions would then shift to the respective nation/subsidiary as a “transnational centre of excellence” that guides the global organisation in this defined field of expertise.

      Figure 2-34: Reconciling Globalism and Localism43

      The journey to reconciliation starts with an understanding of the complementarity of both seemingly opposing values, the use of humour to make dilemmas “digestible” to all participants and the deliberate use of language to pose the right questions. Practical advice provided by Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner concerning the reconciliation process includes mapping out a cultural space through interviews or questionnaires in order to find the basic dilemma in the problem provided. This helps to gain a deeper understanding. Other useful techniques include drawing meta frames of the dilemma with text and pictures, accepting waves and cycles as a natural way to resolve difficult issues and appreciate synergy of two values as mutually enhancing.44 Further examples will be discussed in the suitable chapters.

Скачать книгу