International businesses present managers with challenges concerning the workforce. To effectively work with the workforce and attain success, managers must understand the social orientations of people in these nations. Cultural differences in people are rooted in their sincere beliefs, norms, and values. Managers must understand how culturally their workforce is oriented. Managers wishing to motivate their employees or those wishing to inspire the workforce must ensure that they understand their workforce well. GLOBE’s project focused on 62 nations and 170 researchers, whereby the study was conducted in 11 years. During this study, the researchers obtained results of how different nations are culturally oriented. In these findings, some countries had high degrees of assertiveness, power distance, while others had lower degrees in these orientations. As a manager, one must understand the orientations in these nations. In this paper, the results obtained are discussed, making comparisons between the high and low degrees for every orientation. Additionally, comparisons are made between these orientations.
Keywords: Orientation, researchers, collectivism.
367 Two
GLOBE, as stated in Cornelius, (2010), conducted an eleven-year study involving 62 nations, and 170 researchers. Cornelius (2010), then gives a review of GLOBE’s findings on the various ways in which business values vary in different cultures and nations. GLOBE wanted to establish the differences and similarities, which exist between the diverse organizational cultures. In their study, the researchers used cultural orientations like; uncertainty avoidance, future orientation, collectivism, power distance, performance orientation, and humane orientation. Connectedly, this paper gives an analysis of the findings by comparing and contrasting them in the various nations.
Analysis
Uncertainty Avoidance
Cornelius (2010) states that uncertainty avoidance is highly critical in the analysis and determination of organizations’ cultures. Cornelius (2010) defines this aspect as the tendency of people within a community or society to depend on rules, procedures, and social norms. Uncertainty avoidance is a way of defining a society’s response to threatening factors in life (Cornelius 2010). Using the data obtained from GLOBE’s research, it is evident that Switzerland, Sweden, Demark, West Germany and East Germany, are the countries with the highest uncertainty avoidance, while Russia, Guatemala, Georgia, Brazil, and Argentina present the countries with low uncertainty avoidance (Cornelius 2010). People in the nations with high uncertainty avoidance emphasize rules, order, predictability, and structure, as stated in Harper, (2011). On the other hand, people in low uncertainty avoidance, people put little emphasis on these factors. Comparing Russians and Germans, it is evident that German’s within an organization are more likely to follow orders, structure, and predict the probability of occurrence of events.
Future Orientation
Harper (2011) defines future orientation as the tendency of a nation to encourage and reward behaviours that are focused towards the future. Cornelius (2010) explores these behaviours as delaying of gratification and planning. Societies with high future orientation save for the future, work on long-term achievements and are adaptive and flexible to changes. On the other hand, countries with low future orientation spend their resources on the current status and prefer gratification (Cornelius, 2010). From GLOBE’s research, Singapore emerged as the country with high future orientation, with Russia having exceeding low future orientation. A comparison between the two extreme countries in the research could imply that Singapore has more projects geared towards future success. At the same time, Russia encourages present projects that promise gains in the present time.
Power Distance
Power distance, as defined by Harper, (2011), refers to the behaviour of people to accept or oppose unequal privileges, authority, and power distribution. Societies with high power distance are characterized by differentiation in terms of class, limitation in resources, power is seen as a provider of social order. Wilby, Govaerts, Austin, & Dolmans, (2017) state that there is a limitation in upward social mobility and localization of information is shared. Cornelius, (2010) further explains that the low power distance communities contain large middle-class people, coercion and corruption are linked with power, sharing of information is done widely, all people have accessibility to resources, and social mobility is upward. From GLOBE’s study, Morocco has the highest power distance, while the Czech Republic has the lowest power distance score. According to Harper (2011), power, titles, and age are respected in countries with high power distance. Harper’s view on the study implies that Czech Republic citizens do not value age and power as compared to Morocco. Generally, religious countries have higher power distance as compared to low power distance countries.
In-Group Collectivism
Harper, (2011) defines this concept as to how people show loyalty, cohesiveness or loyalty in their organizations. Sweden recorded the highest while Greece recorded the lowest degree of in-group collectivism. In high in-group collectivism, life’s pace is slower while in low pace in life is higher. For higher in-group collectivism, there is a strong distinction between those in and out of groups, duties determine social behaviour, and relationships are highly valued. In contrast, in low in-group collectivism, social behaviour is characterized by personal needs, rationality is emphasized, marriages are characterized by great love, and there is no distinction between in and out-groups.
Humane Orientation
According to Cornelius (2010), the concept of humane orientation is defined as the nature of being friendly, generous, fair, altruistic, and caring. From GLOBE’s study, Zambia and West German are the countries with the highest and lowest humane orientations respectively. Harper (2011) shows that countries with high humane orientation embrace the well-being of other people, while in low orientation nations, the situation is different.
Performance Orientation
Harper (2011) states that this orientation is geared towards innovation, excellence, and high standards. From the study, it was established that Switzerland has the highest performance orientation while Greece has the lowest performance orientation. According to Harper (2011), nations like Switzerland have high regard for competition and materialism, while Greece values family relationships and harmony. Cornelius (2010) shows that high-performance orientation is associated with; development and training of people, explicit communication, and formal feedback, which are crucial in performance improvement. On the contrary, low-performance nations like Greece enhance subtle communication, and formal feedback is viewed as discomfiting and judgmental.
Institutional Collectivism
Tutwane (2018) defines institutional collectivism as the extent or tendency of organizations to encourage their members to join other groups. From GLOBE’s study, the Philippines has the highest degree of institutional collectivism, with the Czech Republic being the nation with the lowest degree of institutional collectivism. According to Cornelius, (2010), people in nations with high institutional collectivism assume that they are interdependent, value group loyalty, are rewarded by seniors, and make decisions collectively for their groups. On the contrary, Cornelius (2010) notes that members in low institutional collectivism nations assume they are independent of their organizations, individuals make critical decisions for them, rewards to them are promoted by success, and personal goal is encouraged.
Gender Egalitarianism
In his description of gender equality, Tutwane, (2018), views the orientation as the tendency to grant both females and males equal opportunities in society. In the GLOBE’s study, Hungary has the highest degree of gender equality among the nations involved in the study. South Korea, on the other hand, presents the country with the lowest index on gender equality. When comparing between high and low gender equality degrees, Cornelius, (2010) establishes that in institutions with high gender equality, women are common in authority, sex segregation in occupations is less, education does not favour one gender, and women are afforded rights to make critical decisions. On the contrary, in low egalitarianism, fewer women are in authority, occupation sex segregation is more, males are awarded more chances in education, and women are warded less decision-making opportunities.
Assertiveness
Harper (2011) describes assertiveness as the tendency of people to approach issues with confrontations, aggression, and force. From GLOBE’s study, Albania registers the highest degree of assertiveness, while Sweden registers the lowest degree of assertiveness. Cornelius (2010), indicates that nations with high assertiveness value success, progress, and competition. Additionally, these nations exhibit ambiguous communication, have control over the environment; calculation is used to build trust and subordinates are expected to take initiatives. On the other hand, countries with low assertiveness are characterized by warm relationships and cooperation, as indicated in Cornelius, (2010). Additionally, subordinates are expected to be loyal, predictability is used to build trust, they understand their environment, and indirect communication is witnessed.