2 discussion post responses

Discussion posts  should reflect scholarly analysis and interpretation  of the topic as  well as supporting research. Follow APA formatting  guidelines (current  edition) to integrate your research and cite your  sources. Each post  (the response posts)  should be between  300-500 words in length.

JM week 3 responses

Minkov and Hofstede’s research presenting evidence in support of a difference of cultural orientation towards either the long or short term has elicited criticism (2012).

 

In spite of criticism around the naming of the metric on a cultural basis (as the original title of the research was “Chinese Values Survey”) and a temporal basis (suggesting that the values reflected were not rooted in present value preference), the results are largely unquestioned in spite of differing interpretations.   While long term orientation is expressed in a variety of ways, the authors found that the three most predictive factors of long term orientation are “service to others, thrift and perseverance” (Minkov & Hofstede, 2012).  These factors should each be considered as underlying social norms in countries that possess a particularly strong expression of long term or short term focus and as such, each should be investigated independently in order to better instruct the approach to leadership in each area however, in the interest of maintaining a manageable scope, only service to others will be explored in the following analysis.

                In the case of service to others, the most reflective business topic related to this ideal is corporate social responsibility.  While this topic can be addressed for those countries with high long term focus as well as mixed term focus, the economies with a short term focus have tend to be developing countries such as those in Latin America where, despite encouragement, the wide spread practice of implementing corporate responsibility into business culture has not taken hold in a statistically significant way (Grynspan & Kliksberg, 2008; Peinado-Vara, 2006).  Although comparable with regards to their observance of corporate responsibility standards, what is most telling when considering the difference between a sample of long term focus countries (Asian) and mixed term focus countries (Europe) is the cultural environment in which the concept of corporate responsibility is shaped.  In a survey of businesses in both sets of countries, the percentage of responding companies which have written policy on ethics is substantially higher in Asia than Europe (39.1% compared to 30.1%) which can be explained through the long term focus and the subjective nature of ethics from the view point of each country (

Welford,

2014).  When considering other measures of corporate social responsibility such as the treatment of indigenous people and child labor however, Asian countries score significantly lower than European countries as the culture has not developed in a way which places these aspects of CSR in the same regard. 

                When managing on the global level, service to others may seem a noble ideal to espouse but should be done so carefully with specificity and the understanding that the needs and culture of the group to which they speak may not be best served by the imposed norms.  It may be the case that in order to survive environmentally unsustainable activities may be required or due to religious observances it may be that the integration of women into the workforce may be undesirable as they could be put into harm’s way as a result.  A leader on the global level must always be mindful of these underlying considerations when implementing a culture of corporate social responsibility to ensure the program is generally beneficial and does not exert an untenable transition period for those other cultures.

 

Resources

Grynspan, R., & Kliksberg, B. (2008). Corporate social responsibility in Latin America: Not a waste of time or money. Foreign Policy, (167), B5,B8-B9.

Minkov, M. & Hofstede, G. (2012). Hofstede’s fifth dimension: New evidence from the World Value Survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(1), 3-14.

Peinado-Vara, E. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Latin America. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, (21), 61-69.

Welford,

R. (2004). Corporate social responsibility in Europe and Asia: Critical elements and best practice. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, (13), 31-47.

Bottom of Form

EB week 3 post response

Values and ethics that a person has, that start taking shape in early childhood, are beliefs of what is important, what is beneficial or what is harmful (Rose, Carausu, Crone, & Sengupta, 2014).  An organization, while an entity and not a person, cannot exist without the people that represent it; it is through this that we can view an organization’s sense of values and ethics.  These values and ethics that are adopted by an organization become their culture (Rose et al., 2014). 

            Geert Hofstede created a study of cultural consequences which has become one of the most influential works regarding cross cultural management (Fang, 2003).  In his studies, Hofstede defined four ways that cultures differ throughout the globe (Fang, 2003).  These for dimensions are: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, and masculinity (Fang, 2003).  These differences are very important to understand in today’s global business world.  For example, if a company in the United States were to reach out to a counterpart in China, for example, and tried to put together a deal that would benefit the CEO’s individually, more than the business, the American worker would find their request denied and perhaps a word from the Chinese business canceling business deals going forward.  This is an example of cultural differences that Hofstede discussed (Watling, Driessen, van der Vleuten, Vanstone, & Lingard, 2013).  China is a country that believes in putting the good of the group in front of the good of the individual because of the cultural aspect of the individual dimension (Watling et al., 2013). 

References

Fang, T. (2003). A critique of Hofstede’s fifth national culture dimension.  International Journal of Cross Cultural Management: CCM, 3(3), 347-368. Retrieved from https://saintleo.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/docview/221217275?accountid=4870

Rose, D., Carausu, D., Crone, B., & Sengupta, S. (2014). A cross cultural examination of the united states and Russia using multiple models. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 7(5), 459-470. Retrieved from

https://saintleo.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/docview/1652446177?accountid=4870

Watling, C., Driessen, E., van der Vleuten, C., Vanstone, M., & Lingard, L.  (2013).  Beyond individualism: professional culture and its influence on feedback.  Medical Education, 47(6), 585-594.  Retrieved from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/medu.12150/full

Bottom of Form