-
http://ccm.sagepub.com
ManagementCross Cultural International Journal of
DOI: 10.1177/1470595806066325 2006; 6; 139 International Journal
of Cross Cultural Management
Adriana V. Garibaldi de Hilal Findings from a Multinational
Company
Brazilian National Culture, Organizational Culture and Cultural
Agreement:
http://ccm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/2/139 The online
version of this article can be found at:
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at:International Journal of Cross Cultural
Management Additional services and information for
http://ccm.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://ccm.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
http://ccm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/6/2/139SAGE Journals
Online and HighWire Press platforms):
(this article cites 13 articles hosted on the Citations
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
During the 1980s and 1990s, culture becamea widely discussed
subject in organizations,when western organizational scientists
became interested in the culture of theircountries and on the
links between cultureand organizational forms of life (Morgan,
Cultural Perspectives
Brazilian National Culture,Organizational Culture andCultural
AgreementFindings from a Multinational Company
Adriana V. Garibaldi de HilalFederal University of Rio de
Janeiro COPPEAD (Graduate School of Business), Brazil
ABSTRACT The present study looks into the organizational culture
of a Brazilian company,concentrating on its main Brazilian branches
as well as on its European, Latin American,Central American, North
American and Asian branches, making a total sample of 36 citiesand
1742 respondents. Results indicate the influence of national
culture on organizationalculture, as the dimensions found clearly
reflect the ambiguity and double-edged ethiccharacteristic of
Brazilian culture. This study also shows the importance of
hierarchy, and ofrelational networks, which stresses the relevance
of the cultural element in organizationalstructure and functioning.
In brief, understanding the double-edged ethic that
governsBrazilian culture helps us understand apparently different,
ambiguous or even contradictorybehaviors reflected in the
organizational culture practices of a Brazilian company
withinternational operations. Moreover, there is little empirical
research that directly deals withwhat combination of factors makes
individuals agree or disagree over their culturalviewpoints.
Consequently, we consider that this study attempts to deal with
that issue as thecultural clusters were obtained using a
multivariate approach, using demographic variablesand the
identified organizational dimensions. Thus results suggest the
organizational contextmay increase or reduce the probability of
nationality affecting the cultural agreement ofgroup members.
KEY WORDS cross cultural research cultural agreement Latin
American multinational national culture organizational culture
Copyright 2006 SAGE Publicationswww.sagepublications.com
DOI: 10.1177/1470595806066325
CCM International Journal of
Cross CulturalManagement2006 Vol 6(2): 139167
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
1997) in order to explain the superior perfor-mance of Japanese
companies as comparedto North American ones. Some authorsargued
that the key to competitiveness lay inthe possibility of
organizational culture (OC)change (Deal and Kennedy, 1982;
Ouchi,1981; Pascale, 1981; Sathe, 1985), with thefirst specific
studies dating back to the begin-ning of the 1970s (Clark, 1972;
Pettigrew,1973) and Schein (1985) formally articulatingthe
conceptual framework to analyze andintervene in the culture of
organizations.
Culture is treated as a variable in the perspective of popular
authors such as Petersand Waterman (1982), Deal and Kennedy(1982),
and Schein (1985). On the otherhand, culture is treated as a
metaphor in thesymbolic perspective expressed in the work
ofanthropologists like Geertz (1993), whosefocus is on meaning.
Other debate focuses onthe possibilities or not of measuring
OC.
Organizational symbolists advocate thedense description of
organizations, involvingqualitative in-depth case studies, as
opposedto qualitative but thin descriptions based oninterviews with
managers. However, it canbe argued that thick descriptions are
difficultto replicate and that the result is highly sub-jective, as
ethnographic researchers considerthat objectivity in organizational
research is amyth (Ott, 1989).
Within the quantitative approach, on theother hand, the biggest
advantage of the useof survey techniques to study OC is the
factthat the same methodology can be applied todifferent
organizations in the same way, thusproviding a basis for
comparisons or general-izations. One of the drawbacks is the fact
that there is no protection against over-generalization (Denison,
1984). Those whoprefer qualitative research argue that
culturalprocesses are the result of unique social con-structions
and that they are, therefore,impossible to measure with
quantitative stan-dardized measures (Cooke and Rousseau,1988).
Among the intercultural scientists (e.g.Laurent, 1983; Maznevski,
1994; Tromp-
enaars, 1993), Hofstede (1997, 2001) is one ofthe best-known
authors. He has an interme-diary position and argues that both
method-ological approaches have limitations and, asa consequence,
should be seen as comple-mentary.
According to Hofstede (1997), the core ofOC is in the practices
shared by its members.Consequently, national cultures would
differmainly on their basic values, while OCswould differ more
superficially in terms oftheir practices, which would be the
visibleparts of culture and could be manageablewithin certain
limits.
However, most studies on OC have con-sidered the organization as
a whole (Martin,1992). This kind of research emphasizes the
existence of a unique general OC andfocuses on harmony and
organizational consensus, instead of on conflict and sub-cultural
consensus (Martin, 1992). Althoughmost researchers accept the
existence oforganizational subcultures (Trice and Beyer,1993), they
have emphasized the homogene-ity of culture and its cohesive
function insteadof its differentiation potential
(Gregory,1983).
Given the perceived need for furtherresearch within
organizations that takes intoaccount clusters of ideologies,
cultural formsand behaviors that identify groups of peoplewithin
organizations (Trice and Beyer, 1993),the present study adopted a
sub-cultural perspective, perceiving the organization ascomposed by
a multiplicity of different sub-cultures. This perspective
emphasizes theexistence of differences, although it does notdeny
the possibility of the existence of con-sensus in relation to
certain values (Martin,1992). A critical factor that defines the
rela-tionship and the existence of sub-cultures ishow much they
reflect their own particularvalues. Here, possibilities offer a
spectrumthat can include great differences (which canimply deeply
rooted conflicts and cultureclashes) as well as groups that share
similarvalues and have similar ways of perceiving
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)140
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
and interpreting the organizational contextevents (which would
foster inter-group co-operation).
According to Kilduff (1993), organiza-tional members from
different nationalitieswill probably tend to develop specific
culturalperspectives while they modify and transformthe cultural
routines of the organization so as to adapt them to their own
cultural bias,possibly using different practical approachesto deal
with organizational problems.
Thus the complexity of the internal envi-ronment of
organizations with internationaloperations increases the
probability that theirculture tends to differentiation; that is,
multi-ple systems of meanings, and therefore ofpractices, tend to
coexist simultaneously. Thedifferent systems of meanings, or the
differentsub-cultures, usually greatly affect the opera-tions of
those organizations. Groups with different cultural viewpoints tend
to interpretand to respond to the same organizationalevents in
different ways accepting, modify-ing, questioning or even ignoring
the rulesand procedures that emanate from the dominant culture
(Jermier et al., 1991).Additionally, ethnocentrism, which is
thetendency to evaluate others according to ourown cultural point
of view (Rocha, 1991),increases the probability of
misunderstand-ings that can result in undesirable conflictlevels,
thus affecting the performance of theorganization (Gregory,
1983).
Moreover, in a relational society such as the Brazilian one, we
have to consider the influence of relational networks on
theorganizational culture and sub-cultures.Within the relational
perspective interactionamong actors can lead to a certain
homo-geneity of attitudes and practices, thus signifi-cantly
influencing the existence of culturalagreement (Burkhardt, 1994),
and thereforehelping to define OC clusters.
Consequently, based on Hofstedes frame-work for OC, the first
purpose of this studywas to identify the OC dimensions (i.e.
valuesand practices; where practices involve sym-
bols, rituals and heroes) of a Brazilian com-pany, concentrating
on its main Brazilianbranches as well as on its European,
LatinAmerican, Central American, North Ameri-can and Asian
branches. The second purposeof this study was to determine if
values andpractices are uniform in the sampled organi-zation or if
there are different organizationalculture clusters.
Organizational Culture
Authors such as Schein (1992) and Pettigrew(1985) present OCs as
implying shared values, and confusion derives from the factthat
such literature does not make a clear dis-tinction between the
values of the leaders andthose of the other members of the
organiza-tion. Hofstede (1997) defines OC as the collective
programming of the mind that dis-tinguishes the members of an
organizationfrom those of another, and he argues that the values of
the founders and of the mainleaders undoubtedly shape OCs, but
theways in which these cultures affect the ordi-nary members of the
organization would belimited to shared practices. Thus the valuesof
founders and leaders would become thepractices of the other members
of the organi-zation. In brief, what an individual has tolearn when
he or she joins an organization ismainly a question of practices,
as most valuesare developed and learned in the family andat
school.
Hofstede et al. (1990) empirically derivedsix independent
dimensions that describe thenumerous organizational practices: (1)
processoriented versus results oriented; (2) employeeoriented
versus job oriented; (3) parochialversus professional; (4) open
system versusclosed system; (5) loose control versus tightcontrol;
and (6) normative versus pragmatic.These six dimensions are
descriptive but notprescriptive: no position in each of the
sixdimensions is intrinsically good or bad. Whatis good or bad
depends on each case, on whatis desired for the organization and on
the
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
141
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
strategic options. Moreover, Hofstede pointedout that the OC
dimensions he identifiedwould not necessarily apply to any kind
oforganization in any country. OCs are gestaltsand their knowledge
can only be totallyappreciated by insiders. However, a concep-tual
framework allows us to make significantcomparisons between cultures
of differentorganizations, or between the sub-cultures ofdifferent
parts of the same organization.
Brazilian Culture Overview
Brazil is the only other country in the westernhemisphere that
has the continental propor-tions, the regional contrasts and the
demo-graphic diversity that can be compared to theUS and
Canada.
According to Hess (1995), Brazil, in spiteof its western-like
institutions, is a countrywhere western culture has mixed and
mingledwith non-western cultures for centuries. Thismixture of
western and non-western, as wellas modern and traditional, is what
Da Matta(1997a) has called the Brazilian dilemma, orwhat Brazilians
call the Brazilian reality. Brazilis a country where institutions
operatethrough personal relationships as much asgeneral rules.
Diversity is not the best word fordescribing Brazil and Brazilians;
mixture isbetter. Brazil is a nation of mixed races
(miscegenation), religions (syncretism), andcultures (diasporas,
borderlands).
In cultural anthropology and studies ofBrazilian national
culture, Da Matta (1997a,b) has influenced a number of scholars
(suchas David Hess, 1995; Roberto Kant de Lima,1995; Livia Neves
Barbosa, 1995; RosanePrado, 1995; and Martha de Ulhoa
Carvalho,1995) with his framework for interpretingBrazilian
culture.
Hess (1995) describes Brazil as the productof a particular
colonial legacy that includes aclass of wealthy landowners who
supported ahighly centralized Portuguese state. In turnthe state
imposed a latifundia, or plantationagricultural system in Brazil,
where the
plantations were controlled by patriarchswho exercised nearly
absolute authority overtheir dominions. According to Buarque
deHolanda (1995), the colonial legacy alsoincludes the origins of
the traditional LatinAmerican personalism,1 the lack of social
cohe-sion and the looseness of the institutions.Additionally, the
Tocquevillian legacy ofcomparative analysis influenced a number
of20th-century thinkers such as Louis Dumont(1980). Dumonts studies
focused on two keydimensions for comparing values and pat-terns of
social relations across societies: hier-archy and equality, and
holism and individualism.
In the ascribed form of hierarchy used byDumont, ones social
position is assigned atbirth or is limited by ones family position.
Ina traditional hierarchical society, laws applydifferently to
different groups of people. Ofcourse, there are remnants of the
ascribedkind of hierarchy even in the most modern ofsocieties, but
the legal recognition of suchhierarchy is considered an affront to
the fundamental value of equality.
The concepts of holism and individualismare closely related to
those of hierarchy andequality. In a hierarchical society
everyoneoccupies a definite position, and peoplesidentity is rooted
in their association with aparticular position in society.
Da Mattas approach to Brazilian culturedeparts from these key
concepts as developedby Dumont. Da Matta uses the term personsto
describe the category of identity, in whichone is defined by ones
position in the familyor in a hierarchically ordered social group.
Incontrast, in an individualistic society identity isrooted in ones
own life history and choicesand people are individuals linked by
the rulesof the game, which are assumed to applyequally to all (or
universally). Although in anindividualistic society people
certainly havepersonalistic loyalties, ones identity as an
individual rather than as a person tends toprevail. Likewise, in a
personalistic or relationalsociety, there are domains of society
thatoperate according to individualistic and egal-
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)142
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
itarian principles, but, in general, personalloyalties tend to
prevail.
Da Matta argues that Brazil is somewherebetween the two ideal
polar extremes (hierar-chical and holistic, and egalitarian and
indi-vidualistic). He rejects the model of twoBrazils, in which a
traditional culture locatedin the lower classes of the cities and
in therural areas is opposed to a modern Brazil inthe upper classes
and in the big cities, showinghow in societies like Brazil, Dumonts
distinc-tions can be applied simultaneously throughoutthe society.
Instead of working with an either ormodel, he opted for a both and
model, as bothtendencies are present in any number ofsocial groups,
institutions and practices. ThusBrazilians are constantly
negotiating betweena modern, egalitarian code and a traditionalone.
In some situations, modern practicespredominate. However,
frequently, hierar-chical and personalistic/relational
practicesencompass modern ones.
Thus Brazil is neither modern nor tradi-tional but both. Da
Matta also developed ananalysis of intermediary terms or symbols,
asin Brazil there is a tendency to move towarda middle ground of
mediation and ambiguity.Those mediating terms become sites for
theconflict of values and the encompassment ofthe modern by the
traditional.
This seems to apply to Latin Americancountries as a whole, as
Latin American history and social structure seem to imply.For
example, the injustices of the LatinAmerican authoritarian and
hierarchical sys-tem are blunted by the existence of a numberof
mediating institutions: extended kin net-works, nepotism, the
famous Brazilian jeitinhoor the Argentine gauchada (the art of
bendingrules), and all sorts of social practices thatwould appear
corrupt in North America andWestern Europe. In short, personal
relation-ships form the flip side of official
hierarchies.Personalism is more than a cultural system thatgives
people a social address in the hierarchi-cal society; it is also a
resource that peoplecan use to get around the official rules of
the
hierarchical society. Of course, personalismdoes not work the
same way for everyone.The networks of the weak are usually
smallerand less influential. As a result, although personalism can
be used as a resource to sub-vert hierarchy, as an overall system
it ends upreproducing the general hierarchical order(Hess,
1995).
Perhaps the most well known of DaMattas studies of mediation is
his discussion ofthe street and the home (1997a). The space of
thehome is identified with the hierarchical
andrelational/personalistic moral world, where-as that of the
street is egalitarian and indi-vidualistic. Of course, in Latin
America, andespecially in Brazil, the two worlds of homeand street
interact considerably. As a socialspace, the home, and institutions
modeled onthe home, such as the workplace, are placeswhere
relations among family members andservants or among superiors and
subordi-nates institute hierarchies of race, class, ageand gender.
The street is a different sort ofplace where those hierarchies are
suspended.The street is the place where the egalitarianand
individualistic principles of the market-place or legal system are
in operation. Thehome is the place where people find their
identity, while the street is the place of indi-vidual anonymity.
In certain situations thehome encompasses the street and all
mattersare treated in a personal, familiar domesticway; in others
the street encompasses the home:the domain of personal relations is
totallysubmersed and the axis of impersonal lawsand rules prevails.
There is, therefore, a double-edged ethic that operates
simultaneouslyand that determines different behaviors thatapply to
the street (where behavior is free ofthe sense of loyalty, free of
the meaning of us,ruled by the criteria of individualism, by
lawsand by the rules of the market) and to thehome (where behavior
is ruled by personalrelations, the sense of loyalty and emotions,by
reciprocity and friendship).
In brief, in a dynamic sense, behaviorscontinually oscillate in
Brazil in particular
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
143
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
and in Latin America in general: people canexpress apparently
different or even contra-dictory opinions and behaviors depending
onwhether they position themselves in the streetor in the home.
Methodology
The methodology used in this study wasbased on a research design
that combinedquantitative research with a qualitativeexploratory
procedure.
The research took place in a Braziliancompany that, owing to
issues of confiden-tiality, will be called company XYZ. Themain
criterion used in its selection was thefact that it has
approximately 81,500employees, thus allowing us to replicate
theresearch design used by Hofstede et al. (1990)in their OC study.
The field research wasdone in 36 cities, including 17 in Brazil2
aswell as the international branches located inEurope (namely
Milan, London, SecuritiesUK (also in London), Lisbon, Madrid,
Paris,Frankfurt, Vienna and Amsterdam); in LatinAmerica (namely
Buenos Aires, the capitalcity of Argentina, Asuncion and Ciudad
delEste both cities located in Paraguay Santiago, the capital city
of Chile and LaPaz, the capital city of Bolivia); in Centraland
North America (namely Panama, GrandCayman, Miami and New York); and
in Asia(namely Tokyo).
The qualitative exploratory researchaimed at collecting
information and trying togain some insights about the specific
featuresof XYZ in order to adjust the contents of thequestionnaire
to the specificities of this orga-nization, and as input for the
interpretationof the quantitative data. It consisted of sixone and
a half hour in-depth semi-structuredinterviews conducted in
Portuguese by theresearcher. For the interviews, six man-agerial
level employees were selected using asselection criteria the fact
that they werereputed to be communicative and had thenecessary
experience and knowledge.
The survey sample was defined in twostages. For the first stage,
involving the selec-tion of the cities or units where the data
werecollected, we used intentional sampling tocover the five
Brazilian geographical areas.The initial intention of using
stratified proba-bilistic sampling in the Brazilian units had tobe
discarded because the data collection hadto be tailored to the
needs of each regionaldivision to cause the minimum interferencein
the work flow. Consequently, in each ofthe Brazilian units we
selected an intentionalsample of, on average, 74 employees
(includ-ing, on average, 37 managerial employeesand 37
non-managerial employees per unit).In the European, Latin American,
CentralAmerican, North American and Asian units,as there were fewer
employees per functionalcategory, the research took the form of a
census and hence included all the managerialand non-managerial
employees present atthe time of the survey. The total
surveyedsample was of 1968 respondents. After elimi-nating the
questionnaires that were annulledor not returned, we were left with
a final sample of 1742 respondents (including, onaverage, 33
managerial employees and 33non-managerial employees per
Brazilianunit).
The survey consisted of 131 pre-codedquestions3 plus an open
question. Questionswere extracted from various publications
onHofstedes questionnaire on OC. However,certain questions were
developed based onthe results of the qualitative phase of thestudy.
The questionnaire also included fivequestions on demographics: sex,
age, numberof years working for the company, educa-tional level and
nationality. To assure thatthe questionnaire mostly reproduced
aninstrument already used by Hofstede et al.(1990), Geert Hofstede
was personally con-sulted and directly involved.
The anonymous self-administered ques-tionnaire was prepared in
several versions:Portuguese, English, Spanish, Dutch,
German,Italian, French and Japanese. Following
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)144
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
Adler (1982) we used back-translation. Afterbeing translated,
the questionnaire was pre-tested with a small group of retired
XYZemployees to check that the understandingwas the desired
one.
Following Robinson (1950) and Shweder(1973), in order to obtain
etic or comparableOC dimensions we prepared an ecologicalmatrix,
calculating the mean of each item orvariable for each of the 36
units.4 Subse-quently, we applied ecological factor
analysis(principal component) with orthogonal vari-max rotation to
provide a factor solutionexplaining the maximum share of variance
to the fewest number of factors. Moreover,ecological factor
analyses are characterizedby flat matrixes (matrixes with fewer
casesthan the number of variables).5 However, theoriginal database
had in fact 1742 respon-dents, and not just 36 cases, thus being
con-sidered adequate using Hofstede et al.s(1990) criterion.
Considering the fact that the question-naire mostly reproduced
an instrumentalready used by Hofstede et al. (1990) andthat the
small modifications introduced didnot affect its design or any of
the variablesheld to be key by Hofstede, we consideredthat the
constructs were already validated.Moreover, internal consistency
was also veri-fied based on the existing literature (such asBlake
and Mouton, 1964; Burns and Stalker,1961; and Peters and Waterman,
1982). Itshould be noticed that the six practicedimensions
identified by Hofstede et al.(1990) together explained 73% of the
vari-ance.
The first step was to calculate the 131 131 product moment
correlation matrix ofthe 20 mean scores for each possible pair
ofquestions, verifying that the matrix wasappropriate for
multivariate analysis as, onaverage, it presented mean
correlationsbetween the variables.
For analytic purposes we followed Hof-stede et al.s (1990)
recommendations. First,we divided the questions into three
categories
(57 questions on values; 61 on perceivedpractices and
typical-member scores; and 13on reasons for promotion and
dismissal) andconducted separate factorial analyses foreach
category. As the ecological correlationstend to be stronger than
individual correla-tions we expected to find high percentages
ofexplained variance. In order to avoid givingundue attention to
trivial things in ecologicalfactorial analysis, the number of
factorsshould be fewer than the number of casesand fewer than what
is technically possiblebased on eigenvalues larger than 1, only
taking into account variables with loadingshigher than 0.5 or
0.6.
Then the scores of each of the 13 identi-fied dimensions (4 on
values, 6 on practicesand 3 on heroes) were put in a 0100
scaleusing the formula: Final score (0,100) = (origi-nal score 50 /
3.090245) + 50 (in order tohave approximately 99.9% of the
observa-tions within the interval of the normal curve).Following
this scores were ranked to bettervisualize the relative position of
each unit inrelation to the others (with 1 indicating thehighest
score and 36 the lowest). It should benoticed that three scores
presented valuesoutside the 0100 range, and were consid-ered as
outliers: namely Amsterdam with ascore for factor V3 (work
centrality) of 12;Madrid with a score for factor P3
(indi-vidualistic relational) of 19; and, Frankfurtwith a score for
factor V4 (need for survival)of 106, indicating a strong
relationshipdirectly or inversely (depending on the valuebeing
positive or negative) linked to themeaning of the corresponding
factor.
Next we calculated the product-momentcorrelation matrix of the
13 dimensions plusthe 5 demographic variables for the 36 units,in
order to identify significant correlations atthe .05 level. In
order to identify clusters ofcultural agreement we submitted the 13
OCdimensions plus the 5 demographic variablesfor the 36 units to a
hierarchical clusteranalysis, using Ward Method and squareEuclidean
distance. From the resulting
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
145
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
dendrogram we selected four clusters. Toexplain the main
features of each cluster weused the option reports case summaries
(SPSS11.0 program), computing, for each cluster,the minimum,
maximum and mean value ofeach of the 13 OC dimensions and of the
5demographic variables.
Finally, in order to verify if the identifiedclusters were in
fact significant, we submittedthe original 131 variables (except
the demo-graphic variables as they had already beenused in the
cluster analysis), to MultipleDiscriminant Analysis MDA
stepwiseprocedure and Wilks Lambda Method, inspite of this
involving a certain degree of circularity.
Results
The first purpose of the analysis was to identify the OC
dimensions (i.e. values andpractices, where practices involve
symbols,rituals and heroes). The second purpose ofthis study was to
identify clusters of culturalagreement.
Based on the 131 survey pre-coded ques-tions, the 131131
product-moment correla-tion matrix showed that values
correlatedwith other values and also with practices; per-ceived
practices and typical-member scorescorrelated among each other; and
the reasonsfor promotion and dismissal correlatedamong each other,
but also with other items.
Before analyzing the value, practice andhero dimensions a word
of caution is neces-sary. In the Brazilian branches (PC4 toPC20),
almost 100% of the employees areBrazilian and the vast majority are
local,from the region where the unit is located.Exceptions are PCs
18 and 19 (namelyCampo Grande and Cuiab in the Center-West region
of Brazil) that only have 40%and 50%, respectively, of local
employees,the rest belonging to the other Brazilianregions.
However, the same situation is not necessarily true of the
non-Brazilianbranches, where the local employees reflect
the percentage of employees originally fromthe country where the
unit is located. Thusthe composition of local as opposed
toBrazilian employees in the non-Brazilianbranches has to be taken
into account whenanalyzing the value, practice and herodimensions.
Table 1 indicates the approxi-mate percentages of local and
Brazilianemployees in each of the non-Brazilianbranches. Moreover,
very few of theBrazilian employees belong to headquarters usually
only the top managers while allthe others are usually hired locally
accordingto local regulations, and are hardly evertransferred
between branches.
Value Dimensions
We obtained the following four independentfactors that together
explained 52.41% of thevariance:
V1 Need for securityV2 Need for authorityV3 Work centrality (the
importance of
work)V4 Need for survival.
Tables 2 to 5 show the variables with load-ings approximately
higher than 0.50 or 0.60that were considered to explain each
factor.It should be noticed that items with negativeloadings were
reworded negatively.
Factor V1 need for security which is acombination of
collectivism and elements ofuncertainty avoidance (see items in
Table 2)shows that in relational societies, people arepart of
personal networks from which theyderive their identity, thus
justifying theimportance given to good physical workingconditions,
to having training opportunities,to cooperation between co-workers
and tohaving a good relationship with the hierar-chical superior.
On the other hand, relation-al and hierarchical societies usually
justify thefact that it is not considered important foremployees to
be consulted by their directsuperior in decisions, or to have the
freedomto adopt their own approach to work.
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)146
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
147
Table 1 Percentage of local and of Brazilian employees per
branch
% of local % of Brazilian % of other TotalPC Unit employees
employees origin %
1 Santiago 90 10 1002 Asuncion 93 7 1003 Buenos Aires 88 6 6
100
21 Ciudad del Este 93 7 10022 La Paz 90 10 10023 Panama 76 18 6
10024 Grand Cayman 20 40 40 10025 Miami 19 70 11 10026 New York 28
42 30 10027 Tokyo 29 62 9 10028 London 58 35 7 10029 Securities UK
36 55 9 10030 Lisboa 88 12 10031 Madrid 45 55 10032 Paris 64 18 18
10033 Milan 86 14 10034 Frankfurt 75 25 10035 Vienna 50 40 10 10036
Amsterdam 85 15 100
Table 2 V1 Need for security (high)
Code Loading Description
OT9 0.840 Being consulted by direct superior in his or her
decisions not importantOT15 0.829 Having an element of adventure
and variety in the job not importantOT19 0.809 Having training
opportunities importantCG17 0.740 For young people to be critical
of their teachers is all rightOT8 0.734 Working with people who
cooperate well with one another importantOT7 0.707 Having freedom
to adopt your own approach to job not importantOT20 0.693 Having
good fringe benefits importantOT11 0.677 Having opportunities for
high earnings importantCG10 0.670 The employee that quietly does
his or her duty is not one of the greatest assets
of an organizationCG23 0.665 Both parties compromising a bit
best resolves conflicts with opponentsCG28 0.648 Large corporation
is a more desirable place to work than small companyOT5 0.633
Having good working relationship with superior importantOT4 0.626
Having good physical working conditions importantCG21 0.624 People
like workFV6 0.597 Would continue working if did not need the
moneyCG22 0.593 Parents satisfied when children become
independentCG16 0.568 Good personal relationships not more
important than high income
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)148
Table 3 V2 Need for authority (high)
Code Loading Description
FV1 0.723 Does not prefer consultative/participative managerCG19
0.710 Rules should not be brokenCG6 0.689 Decisions by individuals
are usually of higher quality than group decisionsOT12 0.664
Serving your country importantFV2 0.660 Own manager autocratic or
paternalisticCG9 0.651 Management authority should not be
questionedCG15 0.633 It is often necessary to bypass hierarchical
linesOT10 0.633 Making contributions to success of organization not
importantOT1 0.628 Having sufficient time for personal and family
life not importantOT13 0.610 Living in an area desirable to you and
family not importantFV4 0.599 Subordinates frequently afraid to
express disagreement with superiorsOT2 0.577 Having challenging
things to do not importantCG5 0.564 Main reason for having
hierarchical structure is that everyone knows who has
authority over whomOT18 0.552 Working in a well defined work
situation where requirements are clear is
importantOT6 0.520 Having security of employment important
Table 4 V3 Work centrality (high)
Code Loading Description
CG8 0.818 Parents should stimulate their children to be best in
classCG26 0.679 Having a job you like not more important than
having a successful careerCG18 0.638 The individual who pursues his
or her own interest makes the best possible con-
tribution to society as a wholeCG20 0.627 When people fail it is
often their own faultOT16 0.620 Working in a prestigious and
successful company importantCG12 0.599 Competition between
employees does not do more harm than goodFV7 0.580 Feel proud
working for this organizationOT14 0.525 Having opportunities for
advancement to higher level jobs importantOT11 0.520 2nd Having
opportunities for higher earnings important
loading
Table 5 V4 Need for survival (high)
Code Loading Description
CG25 0.618 Even a lousy job is better than no job at allFV5
0.607 Intend to continue working for this organization until
retirementCG1 0.557 Most people can be trustedCG27 0.528 Ones job
is more important than ones leisure timeCG3 0.516 Most
organizations would be better off if conflict could be eliminated
foreverCG7 0.509 A good manager should have precise answers to most
of the questions that sub-
ordinates may raise about their work
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
The need for security also justifies the factthat having an
element of adventure andvariety in the job is not important, that
alarge corporation is a more desirable place towork than a small
company, that havinggood fringe benefits and opportunities forhigh
earnings is important and that compro-mise is the best way to
resolve conflict withopponents.
However, the items that state that theemployees would continue
working even ifthey did not need the money, that parentsshould be
satisfied when children becomeindependent, that people like work
and thatgood personal relationships are not moreimportant than a
high income, all typical ofindividualistic and capitalistic modern
soci-eties, show an apparent contradiction withthe high need for
security. In fact those statements are representative of the traits
ofduality and ambiguity usually present inLatin American
societies.
In connection with V2 need for author-ity (Table 3) which
clearly relates to powerdistance, the following comments are
appro-priate.
The fact that it is often necessary tobypass the hierarchical
lines fits the famousjeitinho brasileiro or gauchada argentina;
that is,the Latin way of bypassing rules in order toget things
done, typical of relational societieswhere excessive formalism is
bypassed, inpractice, alleviating pressures and emphasiz-ing the
importance of personal relationships.That is in apparent conflict
with the item thatstates that rules should not be broken, typicalof
hierarchical societies. However, thosestatements are representative
of the traits ofduality and ambiguity usually present inLatin
American societies.
The item that states that making a realcontribution to the
organizations success isnot important shows a vision of the
organiza-tion as the street in opposition to thehome. According to
Da Matta (1997a), welive in a society where there is a
permanentstate of confrontation between the public
world of universal laws and the market andthe private universe
of the family, relativesand friends. Additionally, in connection
withthe preferred and perceived type of manager,which includes the
typology of autocratic,paternalistic, consultative and
participativemanager (key element of the classical powerdistance
dimension) our study indicates aclear preference for the autocratic
andpaternalistic types.
However, careful analysis of the scores ofthe 36 units makes us
realize that, while thosestatements would be mainly valid for
theother Latin American branches (which havethe highest scores and
therefore a higher needfor authority), the same does not apply to
anyof the Brazilian units, where the scores areconsistently below
the midpoint of the scale(50), indicating that both the preferred
andperceived managers tend to be consultativeor participative.
Moreover, it is worth men-tioning that sometimes the limited
experienceof the respondents can influence their percep-tion of the
type of manager they in fact have.One also has to consider that
managementtraining courses normally glorify consultativeor
participative management as being superiorand more modern rather
than more auto-cratic or paternalistic management styles,
notconsidering the cultural profile of the audi-ence. This could
suggest the existence of consultative or participative rituals,
without necessarily implying the implementation ofmanagerial models
that are actually consulta-tive or participative. From this
perspective,consultative or participative managementstyles might be
reduced to a ritualistic repre-sentation of participation just
because theyare perceived as the politically correct dis-course by
the managerial establishment.
The items that state that decisions byindividuals are usually of
higher quality thangroup decisions, that management authorityshould
not be questioned, that subordinatesare frequently afraid to
express disagreementwith their superiors and that the main
reasonfor having a hierarchical structure is that
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
149
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
everyone knows who has authority overwhom are typical of
societies with high powerdistance, justifying clear authority lines
andtraditional hierarchy.
Factor V3 work centrality which clearly relates to masculinity
(see items inTable 4), links the importance given to work-
ing in a prestigious company with icons ofmodern capitalistic
societies, such as thevalue attributed to competitiveness
(parentsshould stimulate their children to try to be thebest in
class, competition between employeesis not harmful, the importance
attributed toones career, and the fact that peoples failure
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)150
Table 6 Value scores and rankings
PC V1 V2 V3 V4 RV1 RV2 RV3 RV4
1 69 88 38 33 3 2 31 342 70 83 53 60 2 3 16 73 75 91 45 42 1 1
26 274 64 45 50 47 7 17 22 195 66 40 55 59 5 26 12 96 61 38 52 48
14 29 20 167 61 30 40 55 12 35 30 128 65 42 32 32 6 21 34 359 61 39
43 41 13 28 29 28
10 60 45 57 40 18 19 10 2911 62 41 54 62 10 23 14 612 60 39 45
47 16 27 27 1813 56 28 48 43 19 36 25 2414 60 37 64 59 17 30 6 815
61 37 60 46 15 31 8 2016 51 40 78 47 20 25 1 1717 63 49 52 46 8 16
18 2118 66 36 53 57 4 32 17 1019 63 41 59 36 9 22 9 3120 61 31 54
43 11 34 13 2521 41 72 67 56 25 5 5 1122 37 53 49 53 27 13 24 1323
36 63 37 42 29 7 32 2624 31 45 44 75 32 18 28 325 43 41 33 106 24
24 33 126 45 70 72 44 22 6 2 2327 15 57 70 51 36 10 3 1428 38 53 63
48 26 12 7 1529 28 56 55 40 33 11 11 3030 32 58 51 35 30 8 21 3331
23 44 49 45 34 20 23 2232 17 35 53 13 35 33 15 3633 32 49 52 64 31
15 19 534 43 51 16 74 23 14 35 435 48 76 68 77 21 4 4 236 36 58 12
35 28 9 36 32
Note: R indicates the ranking of the factor.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
is considered their own fault). This symbiosissuggests that the
desired values of work andcompetitiveness are inscribed in the
relationaluniverse, in permanence and tradition, wherethe prestige
of the organization grants pres-tige to its members, being the
basis of theiridentification system.
Factor V4 need for survival (Table 5) which contains other
elements of uncertaintyavoidance, shows how in relational and
traditional societies (where employees intendto continue working
for the organizationuntil retirement and where most people canbe
trusted), modern capitalistic values areencompassed (namely the
item that statesthat ones job is more important than onesleisure
time). Moreover, the fact that even alousy job is better than no
job at all clearlyindicates the specific difficulties of the
labormarket, frequently perceived as permanent.
The scores and rankings of Factors V1 toV4 are in Table 6. In
connection with V1 need for security it should be noted that
theapparent contradiction between the scores ofAsuncion PC2 and
Ciudad del Este PC21 both Paraguayan cities, could beexplained by
the fact that Ciudad del Este isa small town on the borders of
Paraguay,Brazil and Argentina, with immigrants of different
origins, which give the city a pecu-liar profile.
Practice Dimensions
Of the 12 independent factors obtained wedecided to keep the
following 6 that togetherexplain 71.25% of the variance:
P1 Employee oriented versus job orientedP2 Results oriented
versus process
orientedP3 Isolated versus relationalP4 Egalitarian versus
hierarchicalP5 Parochial versus professionalP6 Informal versus
formal.
Tables 7 to 12 list the variables with loadingsapproximately
higher than 0.50 or 0.60 thatwere considered relevant to explain
each
factor. In order to name the six dimensionswe indicated in bold
type the four items thatwe considered key to define each
dimension.The 24 key items (46) were submitted to anecological
factorial analysis of principal com-ponent using varimax rotation
and togetherexplained 82.35% of the accumulated vari-ance of the
mean scores between units. Thescores and rankings of the different
companyunits are shown in Table 13.
Factor P1 employee oriented v job ori-ented (Table 7) shows that
the organizationis perceived as interested only in the work ofthe
employees and not in their well-beingand, that in general,
important decisions aretaken by individuals. It also shows the
fasci-nation that Brazilian organizations have forhierarchy and
tradition, as indicated by theitems that state that decisions are
centralizedat the top and that changes are implementedby management
decree.
In such an environment of individuals,impersonal rules
substitute for relationships.Thus the fact that the organization
does nothave relevant links with the local communityand contributes
little to society could beexplained by the historical indifference
of theforms of association that imply solidarity, asstated by
Buarque de Holanda (1995). Toexemplify, in individualistic
societies, such asNorth American society, the concept of com-munity
is founded on the equality and homo-geneity of all its members. In
Latin Americain contrast, the community is
heterogeneous,hierarchical and complementary. Its basicunit is not
the individual, but relationshipsand persons, and groups of
friends. More-over, when employees become embedded inthe relational
networks, the perception of formal hierarchies would decrease, with
per-sonal relationships forming the flip-side ofofficial
hierarchies.
Factor P2 results oriented v process oriented (Table 8) shows
that the majoremphasis is on following organizational pro-cedures
correctly, and that following the correct procedures is more
important than
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
151
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)152
Table 7 P1: Employee oriented v job oriented
Code Loading* Description
PP30 0.848 No special ties with local communityPP49 0.841
Pragmatic not dogmatic in matters of ethicsPP26 0.797 Organization
contributes little to societyPP43 0.771 Decisions centralized at
topPP48 0.725 Changes implemented by management decreePP18 0.725
Job competence is what counts regardless of how it was acquiredPP32
0.718 Managers keep good people for own departmentPP23 0.697 People
only told when they have made a mistakePP28 0.648 Organization only
interested in work people doCT6 0.580 Typical member sloppyCT3
0.565 Typical member directPP25 0.562 Peoples private life is their
own businessPP6 0.550 Important decisions made by individualsPP42
0.526 Little attention to physical work environmentPP53 0.571 2nd
Each day is pretty much the same
loading
* Items with negative loadings are reworded negatively.
Table 8 P2: Results oriented v process oriented
Code Loading* Description
PP1 0.808 Major emphasis on correctly following organizational
proceduresPP21 0.770 People identify primarily with own branch or
locationPP53 0.690 Each day is pretty much the samePP3 0.686
Uncomfortable in unfamiliar situations people avoid taking
risksPP14 0.639 Many people wonder about purpose and importance of
their workPP11 0.635 Organization and people closed and
secretivePP45 0.599 Correct procedures are more important than
resultsPP41 0.565 Not aware of competition of other
organizationsPP37 0.516 Our branch worst of organizationPP6 0.505
2nd All important decisions taken by individuals
loading
* Items with negative loadings are reworded negatively.
Table 9 P3: Isolated v relational
Code Loading* Description
CT2 0.854 Typical member warmCT7 0.853 Typical member
relationalCT4 0.788 Typical member flexibleCT1 0.746 Typical member
initiatingPP29 0.708 Newcomers are helped to adapt quickly to job
and groupCT5 0.604 Typical member fast
* Items with negative loadings are reworded negatively.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
results. This factor also shows that the orga-nization is
perceived as a closed system as indicated in the items that state
that theorganization and its people are closed andsecretive and
that they are not aware of com-petition from other
organizations.
Yet, just like in a set of mirrors, thedimensions present their
own opposites asshown in Factor P3 isolated v relational(Table 9)
where the view of the home, ofthe relational axis is clearly
represented.XYZ is an organization that exists in a com-plex system
of social relationships, of linksamong its members. In the
Brazilian case, incertain situations the street is
encompassedinside the home, treating the organizationas if it were
a large family. The result is a dis-course where personal
relationships consti-tute the framework of the whole system. Inthe
street, society is encompassed by theaxis of impersonal laws,
hiding the domain ofpersonal relationships. Brazil can be read
orunderstood from both perspectives, and bothpossibilities are
institutionalized in the orga-nization.
Consequently, the ethic that appliesdepends on how the
organization is per-ceived (as the street or as the home, i.e.
iso-lated or relational), thus implying the conceptof a
double-edged ethic. There are interpre-tation codes and ways of
behavior that areopposite and that are valid only for
certainpeople, actions and situations.
Factor P4 egalitarian v hierarchical(Table 10) complements
factor P1 (em-ployee oriented v job oriented), also showingthe
fascination that Brazilian organizationshave for hierarchy and
tradition, describingan organization that could be interpretedusing
the code of the street, the code of lawsand of individualism, as
indicated by theitems that state that ordinary members nevermeet
their top managers, that top managersresent being contradicted and
that subordi-nates have to work according to detailedinstructions
from their superiors.
Factor P5 parochial v professional(Table 11) shows how long-term
planning,rational thinking and the fact that qualityprevails over
quantity can be embedded in aclosed system, represented by the item
thatstates that only very special people fit into
theorganization.
Factor P6 informal v formal (Table 12) shows formality in
discourse, in dealingwith each other as well as regarding the
dresscode. Such formality fits the hierarchicallyprocess-oriented
structure, as shown in theitem that states that subordinates have
towork according to detailed instructions fromtheir superiors.
All in all (Table 13), the analysis of thevalue and practice
dimensions appears todenote that the relational universe
providesthe appropriate environment that wouldfacilitate existence
in societies with high
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
153
Table 10 P4: Egalitarian v hierarchical
Code Loading* Description
PP50 0.730 Ordinary members never meet their top managersPP36
0.717 Meeting times only kept approximatelyPP47 0.708 People from
the right background better chance of being hiredPP2 0.683 Little
concern for personal problems of employeesPP54 0.649 Administrative
discontinuityPP20 0.597 Top managers resent being contradictedPP7
0.514 2nd Subordinates have to work according to detailed
instructions from superiors
loading
* Items with negative loadings are reworded negatively.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
power distance, reducing, in practice, the dis-tance imposed by
hierarchy and by bureau-cracy, offering alternative functional
routestypical of societies with a double-edged ethic.
Hero Dimensions
We obtained the following three factors thattogether explained
61.82% of the variance:
H1 Relational hero (impersonal v relational)H2 Moral hero
(pragmatic v moral)H3 Caxias6 hero (privileges v efficiency).
Tables 14 to 16 list the variables with load-ings approximately
higher than 0.50 or 0.60that were considered relevant to explain
eachfactor, indicating in bold the items selected toname the
dimensions. The nine key items(33) were submitted to an ecological
factoranalysis (principal components analysis usingvarimax
rotation) and together explained85.62% of the accumulated variance
of themean scores between units. The scores and
rankings of the different company units areshown in Table
17.
In relational systems, everything is trans-lated into personal
terms. Heroes are theparadigmatic figures of the social
world,either as an example to be followed or as amodel to be
avoided and banned. In DaMattas (1997a, b) perspective, in Brazil
people live more according to an ethic of vertical loyalty and
identity, rather thanaccording to the horizontal ethics
thatappeared with capitalism. Thus the identifi-cation with a
hierarchical superior is mucheasier than with an equal or
colleague, so fostering the existence of heroes. Two factorsare
always present in Latin American cul-ture: first, the need to
separate theory frompractice, and second, the realization thatthere
are two conceptions of what realityentails: the relational world
and the imper-sonal world, the moral world and the prag-matic
world, the world of work and efficiency
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)154
Table 11 P5: Parochial v professional (closed system)
Code Loading* Description
PP8 0.830 We think three years ahead or morePP46 0.821 Our top
managers only decide on the basis of factsPP40 0.704 We let quality
prevail over quantityPP16 0.657 Everybody is conscious of costs of
time and materialsPP34 0.642 Only very special people fit into our
organization
* Items with negative loadings are reworded negatively.
Table 12 P6: Informal v formal
Code Loading* Description
PP39 0.746 Style of dealing with each other formalPP10 0.693
Cooperation and trust between branches normalPP33 0.558 We always
speak seriously of the organization and of our jobPP51 0.536 We
always dress formally and correctlyPP7 0.536 Subordinates have to
work according to detailed instructions from
superiors
* Items with negative loadings are reworded negatively.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
and the world of privilege. The three herofactors also show the
ambiguity and contra-dictions typical of Latin American
cultures,where opposites are different sides of a mirror that
reflects society and its duality.
The analysis of the 13 dimensions suggests that Brazilian
branches, in general,are distinct from the other subsidiaries
withscores that vary around the Brazilian posi-tions. In general,
Brazilian culture is reputed
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
155
Table 13 Perceived practices scores and rankings
PC P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 RP1 RP2 RP3 RP4 RP5 RP6
1 53 61 57 84 69 56 16 5 10 2 6 112 67 59 49 89 58 57 6 6 20 1
10 103 61 55 81 45 79 50 14 9 1 21 2 204 45 33 53 53 47 45 18 34 14
17 22 245 33 44 50 43 55 44 32 23 19 27 13 256 35 48 39 58 47 31 27
19 33 10 23 337 35 40 47 39 56 47 29 29 21 29 12 238 39 51 44 61 49
39 24 14 28 6 20 329 35 50 45 58 50 42 30 15 26 8 18 30
10 35 50 50 53 58 50 28 16 18 16 9 1911 43 39 47 57 45 43 20 31
22 11 24 2912 40 41 41 58 39 44 23 28 32 9 26 2713 44 43 55 55 33
57 19 26 13 14 31 914 32 43 74 37 57 51 35 25 2 31 11 1715 33 40 57
45 51 48 34 30 11 23 16 2216 34 49 65 45 48 52 31 17 6 24 21 1517
40 51 58 54 50 41 22 13 9 15 17 3118 23 41 51 45 60 43 36 27 17 22
8 2819 36 51 52 62 38 44 25 11 15 5 28 2620 35 43 44 60 45 55 26 24
27 7 25 1321 65 55 61 69 86 61 9 7 7 4 1 822 78 12 26 50 74 65 2 36
35 20 5 723 66 46 69 44 78 76 8 22 3 25 3 224 33 97 68 37 30 89 33
1 4 30 33 125 49 55 42 41 53 51 17 8 30 28 14 1826 59 53 45 56 35
68 15 10 25 12 30 427 66 48 47 79 20 56 7 18 23 3 35 1228 62 47 47
27 51 48 12 21 24 34 15 2129 61 48 52 44 39 17 13 20 16 26 27 3430
70 35 38 52 38 66 4 33 34 19 29 631 41 80 19 33 76 52 21 3 36 32 4
1632 64 71 42 52 20 71 10 4 31 18 36 333 68 33 42 17 27 66 5 35 29
35 34 534 63 38 65 10 49 53 11 32 5 36 19 1435 82 51 59 55 31 7 1
12 8 13 32 3636 76 97 56 32 60 14 3 2 12 33 7 35
Note: R indicates the ranking of the factor.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
to be flexible and adaptable, apparently lessprone to extremes
and favoring solutions thatemphasize harmony instead of open
conflict(Da Matta, 1997a). This also suggests theimportance of the
relational universe and itsrole as a social amalgam, neutralizing
tensionand dissatisfaction.
Clusters of Cultural Agreement
The first purpose of this study was to identifythe OC
dimensions. The second purpose wasto determine if values and
practices are uni-form in the sampled organization or if thereare
different organizational culture clusters.In order to identify
clusters of cultural agree-
ment the 13 OC dimensions plus the 5demographic variables for
the 36 units weresubmitted to a hierarchical cluster analysis,using
Ward Method and square Euclideandistance. From the resulting
dendrogram weselected the following four clusters (Figure 1).
Cluster 1 Latin American cluster(Santiago, Asuncion, Buenos
Aires,Panama, Ciudad del Este and La Paz).
Cluster 2 Brazilian cluster (the 17Brazilian units: PC4 to
PC20).
Cluster 3 Asian American cluster (NewYork, Tokyo, Miami,
Securities UK,Grand Cayman and Madrid). It is worth
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)156
Table 14 H1 Relational hero (impersonal v relational)
Code Loading Description
MP1 0.879 Seniority with organization important for promotionMP5
0.804 Commitment to organization not importantMD4 0.756 Serious
conflict with superiors reason for dismissalMP3 0.750 Being politic
and knowing how to negotiate not importantMD3 0.661 Married
man/woman having sexual relations with subordinate reason for
dismissal
Table 15 H2 Moral hero (pragmatic v moral)
Code Loading Description
MD6 0.797 Appropriating without permission US$ 100,000.00 worth
of company propertyreason for dismissal
MD2 0.785 Not having relationships that protect you in case of a
lay-off is not reason fordismissal
MD5 0.631 Appropriating without permission US$100.00 worth of
company property reason for dismissal
MP6 0.511 Having a good relationship with those higher in the
hierarchy not important forpromotion
Table 16 H3 Caxias hero (privileges v efficiency)
Code Loading Description
MD1 0.756 Poor performance is reason for dismissalMP2 0.672
Proven performance important for promotionMP4 0.631 Diplomas and
formal qualifications not important for promotion
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
mentioning that in this cluster there aretwo European units,
namely SecuritiesUK and Madrid.
Cluster 4 European cluster (Milan,Lisbon, London, Paris,
Frankfurt,Vienna and Amsterdam).
In order to verify if the identified clusterswere, in fact,
significant, we submitted theoriginal 131 variables (except the
demo-graphic variables as they had already beenused in the cluster
analysis), to Multiple Dis-criminant Analysis and the results
obtaineddid not present any classification errors.
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
157
Table 17 Heroes: scores and rankings
PC H1 H2 H3 RH1 RH2 RH3
1 60 51 83 14 21 22 51 28 74 18 33 33 43 30 95 19 31 14 33 52 47
32 18 215 36 71 49 26 4 186 34 54 30 30 16 347 35 58 54 28 12 158
37 36 38 23 29 309 36 24 16 25 34 35
10 35 40 47 29 27 2211 34 37 48 31 28 1912 35 51 45 27 20 2413
36 57 50 24 13 1714 32 51 66 35 19 515 32 46 44 33 24 2516 37 56 59
21 14 817 31 51 41 36 22 2818 37 69 62 22 5 619 32 59 57 34 9 1020
40 61 60 20 8 721 83 54 68 1 15 422 63 59 41 9 11 2723 66 33 33 8
30 3224 55 48 38 17 23 2925 61 75 57 11 3 1226 66 29 57 7 32 1127
76 54 34 3 17 3128 67 45 57 6 25 1329 75 15 47 4 36 2330 62 19 43
10 35 2631 57 63 48 16 7 2032 69 65 15 5 6 3633 61 40 51 13 26 1634
77 82 59 2 1 935 61 59 55 12 10 1436 58 75 32 15 2 33
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)158
Figure 1 Dendrogram
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
According to some authors (e.g. Fine andKleinman, 1979; Van
Maanen and Barley,1985) social interaction is the essential
condi-tion for developing collective understanding.However, it
should be noted that for Hoggand Abrams (1988) the uniformity of
groupbehavior is the result of the individuals self-concept as
group members and not of theirinteractions. On the other hand, the
variablethat, apparently, best discriminates betweengroups is
nationality: as clearly shown by thedendrogram (Figure1).
Martin (1992) proposed that OCs couldbe studied from three
different perspectives:
1 Studies that follow the integration perspective describe OCs
as being universally accepted by all organizationmembers.
Integrative research typicallydescribes culture as the strength of
organizational solidarity.
2 Studies that follow the differentiationperspective focus on
the different culturalstreams that coexist in organizations. Itis
believed that cultural agreement onlyexists within the limits of
small subgroups,i.e. of organizational sub-cultures.
3 Studies that follow the fragmentationperspective state that
there would not beclear patterns of cultural agreement
inorganizations.
The differentiation perspective supportsthe belief that an OC
comprises a variety ofdifferent sub-cultures. Cultural consensusand
consistency would only exist within thelimits of each sub-culture.
Moreover, eachsub-culture would develop its unique mean-ing system
and there would not be culturalagreement between sub-cultures
(Martin,1992). The differentiation perspective thusdepicts culture
as a mosaic of homogene-ously colored pieces with clear
boundaries(Hannerz, 1992). Although we believe in theexistence of
sub-cultures, Greenberg (1999)argues that there are some
problematic features in their description. One of theseissues is
the existence of clear boundaries
between sub-cultures. Considering the factthat multiple factors,
and not only one factor,simultaneously affect the development of
cultural agreement, and taking into accountthat some of the
variables are correlated,then cultural consensus could develop
amongdifferent groups without having clear bound-aries. On the
other hand, the determinationof the factors or dimensions and their
com-ponents, which implies a relatively highdegree of researcher
subjectivity, would alsoaffect the boundaries that delimit the
differ-ent clusters of cultural agreement.
Another problematic feature is theemphasis on the fact that each
sub-culturehas a unique meaning system. That wouldsuggest that the
members of each group havedeveloped a unique shared
understandinginvolving all the cultural domains that formthe system
of meaning. However, it might bepossible that a sub-culture
developed culturalagreement in some domains but not in others. That
would imply that the clusters ofcultural agreement might not
develop con-sensus in connection with the complete system of
meaning. As Sackmann (1991,1992) demonstrated, differences
betweenclusters of cultural agreement can developaround some areas
of cultural knowledge butnot around others.
Although we consider that OCs can bedescribed in terms of
clusters, we agree withGreenberg (1999) that cluster
configurationis not a permanent characteristic, but thatdifferent
clusters of cultural agreement canemerge due to changes in the
organizationalcontext, or as different issues acquire rele-vance
attracting the attention of organiza-tional members to different
affiliations. Thissuggests that the three cultural
perspectivesmight be interrelated or interwoven insteadof parallel
states. That being the case, OCscould oscillate between the states
of inte-gration, differentiation and fragmentation(Greenberg,
1999). Consequently, as theorganization changed and the attention
of its members was focused on different view-
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
159
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
points, the OC could become more inte-grated, differentiated or
fragmented. Forexample, when an organization felt threat-ened by
competition, or in the specific case ofXYZ by privatization, it
could develop con-sensus in order to defend itself and survive.
On the other hand, in other circum-stances, such as an internal
issue involvingdifferences in benefits between new employ-ees and
those working for the company for alonger period of time (i.e.
before the com-pany was restructured), could foster the formation
of cultural agreement clustersbased on that premise. Once the issue
wasdealt with, or when another issue took prece-dence, new clusters
of cultural agreementcould substitute for the former ones.
Additionally, multiple factors, sometimesnot easily detectable,
can influence culturalagreement cluster formation in such waysthat
the organization could instead develop aweb of cultural agreement
that could lead itto a state of cultural fragmentation,
thusimplying the non-existence of clear patternsof cultural
agreement.
The possibility of the three culture per-spectives being
interrelated also suggests thatresearchers may have to reconsider
the depthof their OC definitions. Many researchershave defined OC
as dependent on sharedassumptions about values and practices (for
example, Peters and Waterman, 1982;Schein, 1992). According to
Hofstede (2001),deeply held assumptions in connection withvalues
are formed during the early stages oflife and are, therefore, very
difficult tochange. Consequently, if researchers believethat shared
understanding in an organizationcan oscillate between integrated,
differen-tiated or fragmented cultures, then it may beappropriate
to consider that OC exists at themore superficial level of
practices, as hasbeen argued by Hofstede et al. (1990).
Moreover, in hierarchical and relationalorganizations, social
interaction, throughrelational networks, is usually of great
rele-vance. In that type of organization, the
leaders can use social interaction mecha-nisms to coercively or
persuasively influencethe cultural understanding of group mem-bers.
In that context, organizational leaderscould use relational
networks to try to controlthe development of shared understanding.
Ifthe organization had only one powerfulleader, that individual
could foster the devel-opment of cultural agreement in the
entireorganization. On the other hand, if therewere multiple
leaders in the organizationalcontext (as seems to be the case in
organiza-tion XYZ, where power, is chiefly concen-trated in the
regional superintendencies)interacting with different groups, then
differ-ent sub-cultures could emerge, based on the various
directions signaled by those dif-ferent leaders. That would confirm
Pfeffers (1981) and Smircich and Morgans (1982)argument that
organizational leaders havemany opportunities to influence
sharedunderstanding and practices.
Conclusions
According to Motta and Caldas (1997) one ofthe key factors that
differentiates the cultureof one organization from the culture
ofanother, and probably the most importantfactor, is national
culture. The basic assump-tions, costumes, beliefs and values, as
well as the artifacts that characterize the cultureof an
organization, are always somehowencompassed by the corresponding
nationalculture. It is therefore impossible to study theculture of
organizations that operate in asociety, without studying the
culture of thatsociety. Thus the study of the organizationalculture
of a Brazilian company requiresunderstanding Brazilian culture. For
theseauthors, Hofstedes (1980) most importantfinding refers to the
importance of nationalculture in order to explain the differences
inwork-related attitudes and values.
Brazilians, no matter how differentiatedthey may be in their
racial and culturalmatrices and in their ecological-regional
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)160
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
functions, or in respect of being old settlers or recent
immigrants, have come to knowthemselves, to feel themselves, and to
act as asingle people, belonging to the one same andonly culture.
They are a national entity distinct from all others, speaking the
samelanguage, differing only in regional accents.They take part in
a body of common tradi-tions that is more meaningful for all than
areany of the existing sub-cultural variants, as isclearly shown in
the dendrogram (Figure 1)where Brazil forms an individual
separatecluster. Nevertheless, the cultural uniformityand national
unity must not blind us to thedisparities, to the contradictions
and antago-nisms that subsist beneath them as dynamicfactors of
major importance (Ribeiro, 2000).Lying hidden beneath Brazilian
cultural uni-formity is a profound social distance repro-duced in
organizations in the stratificationthat separates those with power
from theirsubordinates, where hierarchy, authority,privilege and
tradition mingle with modernforms of management, usually derived
fromindividualistic ideologies, revealing the ambi-guity and
duality of Brazilian culture.
For Sergio Buarque de Holanda (1995)Brazilians inherited their
characteristics fromthe Iberians: Hispanic arrogance and
Portu-guese laxness and plasticity as well as anadventurous spirit
and appreciation of loyaltyin both. The mixture of all those
ingredientsprobably resulted a certain slackness andanarchy, lack
of cohesion, disorder and indiscipline (as stated in item CT6
typicalmember sloppy of Factor P1 employeeoriented v job oriented).
From such percep-tion would derive the tendency towards hierarchy
and authoritarianism. On the otherhand, for Ribeiro (2000) those
defects arealso the source of the creativity of the adven-turer,
the adaptability of someone who is notrigid but flexible (see item
CT4 typicalmember flexible of Factor P3 isolated vrelational), the
vitality of someone who facesfate and fortune with daring and the
original-ity of an undisciplined people.
Thus Brazilian organizations usually present a high power
distance. The wayworkers and executives are treated seems, onthe
one hand, to be based on masculine typecontrols and use of
authority, and, on theother hand, on feminine type controls and
onthe use of seduction and favor typical of rela-tional networks.
Moreover, organizations areat the same time producers and product
oftheir culture. The OC cannot be considereda photograph of the
organization but aninterpretation of the complex
organizationalreality as perceived by its members. Conse-quently,
the dimensions identified in thisstudy partly reflect the OC
dimensions identified by Hofstede et al. (1990), but theyalso show
unique features based on the speci-ficities of the organization and
of Brazilianculture.
Organizations are symbolic entities: theyfunction according to
implicit models in theminds of their members, and these modelsare
culturally determined. In terms of valuesit is crucial to answer
the questions of whodecides what, and how can one be assuredthat
what should be done will be done(Hofstede, 2001).
In terms of the usefulness of the OC construct for management,
the researchapproach can be generalized to organiza-tions
elsewhere. However, the conclusionsand the 10 (6 on perceived
practices and 4 onheroes) dimensions cannot be generalized.This is
because demographic characteristicssuch as age, education and
gender, and per-sonality also play roles. Theories, models
andpractices are culture specific: they may applyacross borders,
but this should always beproved.
Results show the influence of nationalculture on organizational
culture, as thedimensions found clearly reflect the ambi-guity and
double-edged ethic characteristicof Brazilian culture in particular
and of LatinAmerican culture in general. This study alsoshows the
importance of hierarchy and ofrelational networks, which stresses
the rele-
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
161
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
vance of the cultural element in organiza-tional structure and
functioning. QuotingHofstede (2001: 377): The structure
andfunctioning of organizations are not deter-mined by a universal
rationality. There is nobest way that can be deduced from
technical-economical logic.
Also in connection with the importanceattributed to hierarchy is
the issue of powerredistribution, which includes all forms
ofempowerment such as consultative and participative forms of
management. In organizations with a high need for authority,if
power redistribution is imposed, it maybecome self-destructive
(because, accordingto Hofstede, 2001, if it succeeds,
continuedimposition would no longer be possible) or,for example, it
may just be reduced to a ritu-alistic representation of
participation becauseit is perceived as the politically correct
dis-course by the managerial establishment.
In hierarchical and relational organiza-tions, according to Da
Matta (1997a), oncepeople are positioned in a network of per-sonal
relationships they are automaticallytreated as friends and can be a
potentialsource of power resources and a means ofsocial and
political manipulation by reciproc-ity and favor.
In brief, understanding the relationaldouble-edged ethic that
governs Brazilianculture helps us understand apparently different,
ambiguous or even contradictorybehaviors reflected in the OC
practices of aBrazilian company with international opera-tions.
Furthermore, according to Stevensonand Bartunek (1996), most
organizationalculture studies that admit the existence of different
cultural clusters either focus ondetailed ethnographic descriptions
of the various sub-cultures that coexist in an orga-nization or
examine how those sub-culturesaffect the organization. There is,
therefore,little empirical research that directly dealswith what
combination of factors makes indi-viduals agree or disagree over
their culturalviewpoints. Consequently, we consider that
this study attempts to deal with that issue asthe cultural
clusters were obtained with amultivariate approach, using the 5
demo-graphic variables and the 13 identifiedorganizational
dimensions.
The results of this study suggest the internal organizational
environment can alsoaffect the extent to which the cultural
agree-ment of organizational members is influ-enced by nationality.
The situational contexthas the potential to strengthen or weaken
theidentification of individuals with their groupand the
internalization of their identity group values (Hernes, 1997;
Larkey, 1996).The organizational context may thereforeincrease or
reduce the probability of nation-ality affecting the cultural
agreement ofgroup members. In this sense, it should benoticed that
several of the non-Brazilianbranches have high percentages of
em-ployees of Brazilian or Latin origin.
Furthermore, monolithic organizationshave high levels of
occupational segregationwhere the senior managerial level
wouldbasically be composed of members of thesame nationality as the
head office (i.e.expatriates), while all other levels would
generally be occupied by local individuals,from the host country or
of the same nation-ality as the head office but locally hired
andthus subject to local employment regulations,as seems to be the
case in the non-BrazilianXYZ branches.
Additionally, Edstrm and Galbraith(1977) dealt with the issue of
how inter-national firms could extensively use person-nel transfers
to implement socialization pro-grams that would result in an
internationalnetwork of verbal information that wouldallow a higher
decentralization and foster amore open and positive attitude
towardsother nationalities and cultures, building oncommitment to
the organization as a whole,and thus favoring cultural
agreement.However, that practice does not as a ruleexist in XYZ,
where the transfer of locallyhired personnel from the
non-Brazilian
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)162
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
branches to the branches in Brazilian terri-tory is practically
non-existent. In such context, where the organization has a
mono-lithic profile and where transfers for social-ization are
non-existent, organizationalmembers tend to identify strongly with
theirlocal groups, and their interpretation of theorganizational
reality tends to be in agree-ment with the values and beliefs of
their local group, thus stimulating differentiatedpractices from
those of the home office.
Summing up, the analysis of organiza-tional culture is a key
factor in order to manage change in an organization, and, assuch,
its understanding requires the identifi-cation of values and
practices as well as theexistence of clusters of cultural
agreementand the possibility of coexistence of differentsystems of
meanings. Specifically in the caseof organizations with branches in
differentcountries with different national cultures, itmust be
noted that organizational valueshave to be legitimized by the
cultural valuesof the host society and cannot be studied as ifthey
were the exclusive production of organi-zations, as if
organizations operated in a vacuum. Thus, according to Hofstede
(1997),the core of OC is in the practices shared byits members.
Consequently, national cultureswould differ mainly on their basic
values,while OCs would differ more superficially interms of their
practices, which would be the visible parts of culture and could be
manageable within certain limits.
Finally, if managers understand the factors that lead to cluster
formation in theirorganization, they may be able to use
theinformation to prepare themselves to man-age across different
groups in order toachieve goals that involve the entire
organi-zations participation, as well as dealing withconflict
between groups by creating bridgesbetween the different
commonalities, thusproviding the organization with an impor-tant
leverage point for organizational culturemanagement.
Notes1 The term personalism is usually used for the
particular kind of holism evident in LatinAmerican societies
(also known as relationalsocieties, or collectivistic societies).
Romani andZander (1998) defined individualism as theprioritization
of the individual in relation tothe group and collectivism as the
prioritizationof the group. However, they distinguishbetween
elective and forced groups. Electivegroups, such as clubs, would be
those wherethe priorities of the individuals prevail as theycan
choose whether to belong to the group ornot. On the other hand, in
forced groupssuch as the family, the relationship
betweenindividuals would prevail. According toDumont (1966, 1980)
holism would be thepriority given to the social links
amongindividuals or to relationships, whileindividualism would be
the priority given toindividuals. In this sense, the opposite
ofindividualism would be holism and notcollectivism. Thus
individualism and collectivismwould be separate dimensions that
couldcoexist in the same individuals or groups ofindividuals. In
connection with this issue,Triandis (1995) argued that social
groupscould have, for example, very individualisticbehaviors at
work and very collectivisticbehaviors in the family. Consequently,
itwould be important to see how social groupsperceive their work
environment: if aselective or as forced groups. If theorganization
were perceived as an electivegroup, the fact that the group
privileges theinterests of the group would not necessarilydefine a
collectivistic attitude. In brief, theopposite of individualism
would be to prioritizerelationships (holism) and not to prioritize
thegroup (collectivism), as groups can be electiveor forced.
2 The following 17 Brazilian cities wereselected to make part of
the sample: SouthRegion: Porto Alegre, Curitiba andFlorianpolis. SE
Region: So Paulo, Rio deJaneiro, Belo Horizonte and Vitria.
NERegion: Salvador, Recife, Fortaleza, So Luisand Natal. North
Region: Belm andManaus. Center-West Region: CampoGrande, Cuiab and
Goinia.
3 Values: 22 items coded OT on workorganization, 7 items coded
FV with variousformats and 28 items coded CG on
generalbeliefs.Perceived practices: 54 items coded PP on
Garibaldi de Hilal: Brazilian Culture and Cultural Agreement
163
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
perceived practices and 7 items coded CT onthe behavior of a
typical organizationmember.Heroes: 7 items coded MP on reasons
forpromotion and 6 items coded MD on reasonsfor dismissal.
4 (a) Variables with 5-point importance scales(i.e. the 22
questions on work goals and the 7questions on reasons for
promotion) werestandardized to eliminate acquiescence. Forexample,
standardizing across the 22 goalsreplaces the scores with the
distance fromtheir common overall mean divided by theircommon
standard deviation. The overallmean of the standardized scores for
the 22goals for each group is always zero. As wewere interested in
eliminating acquiescenceas a group phenomenon, we
single-standardized group means across goals (firstcalculating
group means and thenstandardizing). In order to avoid
negativescores and decimal points we gave thestandardized scores a
mean of 500 and astandard deviation of 100; also their sign
wasreversed so that a very important goal wouldscore around 700 and
the least importantgoals would score below 300.(b) For the other
questions the answersshowed a clear midpoint (such as
undecidedbetween agree and disagree) so unit meanswere not
standardized. In this case, meanswere also inverted so that the
highest valuesindicated agreement and the lowest onesdisagreement,
using the following formula:100 (variable * 10) and thus
transformingoriginal values into two-digit values.(c) In ecological
analysis nominal orcategorical variables had their
frequencydistributions dichotomized at the mostmeaningful point and
the answerssummarized in percentages:FV1 preferred manager: we used
thepercentage of consultative manager +participative manager,
representing about86% of the preferences.FV2 perceived manager: we
used thepercentage of authoritative manager +paternalistic manager,
representing about52% of the perceptions.FV5 time that they intend
to work for theorganization: we used the percentage ofemployees
that intend to leave the companybefore retirement
(representingapproximately 57% of the intentions).Sex: we used the
percentage of men,representing 61% of the sample.
Nationality or percentage of local employees:For the Brazilian
units we computed thepercentage of employees from the region
theunit belonged to. For all other units wecomputed the percentage
of employees fromthe country the unit belonged to.
5 Hofstede (2001) argues that that instrumentsdesigned to study
culture have their reliabilitysupported by literature. In fact,
thecalculation of Cronbachs alpha or ofmeasures of sampling
adequacy such asBartletts sphericity test would be equivalentto
committing the reverse of the ecologicalfallacy, in the sense that
the individual andthe social levels of analysis should not
beconfounded (Hofstede, 2001).
6 Da Matta (1997b) presents a trilogy of heroes that coexist in
Brazilian society: thecaxias, the renouncer, and the rogue.The
caxias is named after the BrazilianDuke of Caxias, symbolizing
order, rules andhierarchy. The renouncer rejects the socialworld as
it is; he or she is emblematic of adifferent reality. The rogue
rejects formalrules, is of course excluded from the labormarket,
and is in fact totally averse to work.
ReferencesAdler, Nancy (1982) Understanding the Ways of
Understanding: Cross-cultural ManagementMethodology Reviewed.
Montreal, Canada:McGill University Press.
Buarque de Holanda, Sergio (1995) Razes doBrasil. So Paulo:
Companhia das Letras.
Burkhardt, M. (1994) Social Interaction EffectsFollowing a
Technological Change: ALongitudinal Investigation, Academy
ofManagement Journal 37(4): 86998.
Burns, T. and Stalker, G. (1961) The Managementof Innovation.
London: Tavistock.
Clark, A. (1972) Mutual Relevance ofMainstream and
Cross-cultural Psychology,Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology 55:46170.
Cooke, R. and Rousseau, D. (1988) BehavioralNorms and
Expectations. A QuantitativeApproach to the Assessment
ofOrganizational Culture, Group andOrganizational Studies 13:
24573.
Da Matta, Roberto (1997a) A Casa & a Rua:Espao, Cidadania,
Mulher e Morte no Brasil. Riode Janeiro: Editora Guanabara.
Da Matta, Roberto (1997b) Carnavais, Malandros e
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(2)164
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial
use or unauthorized distribution. at University of Oxford on July
21, 2007 http://ccm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
Heris: Para uma Sociologia do Dilema Brasileiro.Rio de Janeiro:
Rocco.
Deal, T. and Kennedy, A. (1982) Corporate Culture.Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
Denison, D. (1984) Corporate Culture andOrganizational
Effectiveness. New York: Wiley.
Dumont, Louis (1966, 1980) Homo Hierarchicus:The Caste System
and its Implications. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
Edstrm, Anders and Galbraith, Jay (1977)Transfer of Managers as
a Coordination andControl Strategy in MultinationalOrganizations,
Administrative Science Quarterly22(June): 24863.
Fine, Gary and Kleinman, Sherryl (1979)Rethinking Subculture: An
InteractionistAnalysis, American Journal of Sociology
85(1):120.
Geertz, Clifford (1993) The Interpretation of Cultures.New York:
Basic Books.
Greenberg, Danna (1999) DisentanglingCultures: Similarity,
Interaction and CulturalAgreement in the MultinationalOrganization,
Doctoral dissertation, BostonCollege, Carroll School of
Management.
Gregory, Kathleen (1983) Native-viewParadigms: Multiple Cultures
and CultureConflicts in Organizations, AdministrativeScience
Quarterly (28): 35976.
Hannerz, Ulf (1992) CenterPeriphery Relationsand Creolization in
Contemp